posted on May, 5 2013 @ 04:36 PM
reply to post by christina-66
Actually, your assertions have been documented to be utterly false.
You have obviously not examined the evidence of the Gospel narratives being quite historically accurate.
Atheist investigative journalist Lee Strobel's THE CASE FOR CHRIST: a Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus
THE CASE FOR THE REAL JESUS--Student Edition: A Journalist Investigates Current Challenges to Christianity
DEALS more than adequately, convincingly with the absurd and ill-founded claims about the Gospel narratives being changed e.g. by various scribes like
the children's telephone game . . . as well as the hokum of the "other 'gospels'."
This is the version for Curious Christians and Skeptical Seekers:
THE CASE FOR EASTER: Journalist Investigates the Evidence for the Resurrection
deals more at length with the topic of this thread.
= = = = =
You seem unaware that the bits of the shroud dated to the Middle Ages were taken from the PATCHES made in that era.. The shroud itself has been
convincingly documented to be from the first century CE.
It appears that your biases are so intense, however, that no amount of evidence would scratch your surface in the least. So, I won't waste my time or