The Religion/Spirituality Thread

[Dazey]

2 hours ago, Len Cnut said:

To be fair i was just waiting for the sing-song bits

Surely you’d whip something like that out for a DNA test.  Or to just prove its fuckin miraculous qualities...then again it could be freshly snipped eh?  Fuckin hell, still though, there’s a lot you could so with Gods cock sock surely.  I wonder what colour it is

God's cock?  Is that what the priests tell the little boys eh? Bend over sunshine, you're getting bummed by your lord and saviour! I'm not really a nonce. Honest!  

[DieselDaisy]

I do think the Crown of Thorns at Notre-Dame could be real. It is attested in Jerusalem as early as 409 AD. It found its way into Byzantium hands who then sold it to Louis IX of France in 1238. It has been in French hands ever since, surviving the secular iconoclasm of the French Revolution. Napoleon I handed it to the Church following the Concordat in 1801. 

Any doubtful existence only really exists for its first 376 years, that is from the Crucifixion to when it first is attested, which is a lot less than most relics; there is an unbroken accountability after that. The Turin Shroud for instance is only accountable from about the 14th century. Crucially the reeds have been scientifically tested as belonging to a bush, the jujube tree, which proliferates around Jerusalem!

That ornate reliquary is a modern thing.

It doesn't have any thorns left as the French monarchy would periodically break them off and give them away as presents as part of dynastic weddings and so forth (one of them found its way into the possession of Mary Queen of Scots and now in Stonyhurst College, England http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1369424/Jesuss-Crown-Thorns-goes-display-British-Museum.html). 

Edited February 19, 2018 by DieselDaisy

[Iron MikeyJ]

3 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I do think the Crown of Thorns at Notre-Dame could be real. It is attested in Jerusalem as early as 409 AD. It found its way into Byzantium hands who then sold it to Louis IX of France in 1238. It has been in French hands ever since, surviving the secular iconoclasm of the French Revolution. Napoleon I handed it to the Church following the Concordat in 1801. 

Any doubtful existence only really exists for its first 376 years, that is from the Crucifixion to when it first is attested, which is a lot less than most relics; there is an unbroken accountability after that. Crucially the reeds have been scientifically tested as belonging to a bush, the jujube tree, which proliferates around Jerusalem!

That ornate reliquary is a modern thing.

It doesn't have any thorns left as the French monarchy would periodically break them off and give them away as presents as part of dynastic weddings and so forth (one of them found its way into the possession of Mary Queen of Scots and now in Stonyhurst College, England http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1369424/Jesuss-Crown-Thorns-goes-display-British-Museum.html). 

That's AMAZING

[soon]

Crack open the Bible maybe.  It tells that the "crown" was woven from the vine.  No gold.  And no time to make gold anyways.  

Also, the foreskin is buried in dirt or sand by the Mohel.  Some sects bury it immediately in a bowl out of concern for the ritual.  In some cases a tree is planted with the foreskin.  It needs to be buried.  You think people with a million cleanliness laws keep bloody baby penis flaps?  Mary was selected by God for being pious.  This nonsense about the foreskin would undermine Marys piety.  Claiming it exists is the same as claiming God picked the wrong baby mamma.

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

That's AMAZING

Yes. Basically if the Crown of Thorns present at the Crucifixion is the same Crown that begins to appear in testimonies from 409 AD, then that is bona fide. Apparently it was at a church on Mount Zion from as early as 409 to as late as 870 - there are a lot of testimonies as to this, from pilgrims, crusaders etc. 

And if you want to visit/venerate it,

http://www.minorsights.com/2016/07/jesus-crown-of-thorns-paris.html

In brief, first Friday of every month and every Friday during Lent. 

[DieselDaisy]

2 minutes ago, soon said:

Crack open the Bible maybe.  It tells that the "crown" was woven from the vine.  No gold.  And no time to make gold anyways.  

Also, the foreskin is buried in dirt or sand by the Mohel.  Some sects bury it immediately in a bowl out of concern for the ritual.  In some cases a tree is planted with the foreskin.  It needs to be buried.  You think people with a million cleanliness laws keep bloody baby penis flaps?  Mary was selected by God for being pious.  This nonsense about the foreskin would undermine Marys piety.  Claiming it exists is the same as claiming God picked the wrong baby mamma.

The reliquary, glass case of gold and silver, is modern - nobody is lying about that. Look inside...

[soon]

Anyone up for a round of Hipster or Mohel? Are they a hipster or a Mohel?

 

1) 

 

2) 

 

3) 

 

4) 

 

5) 

 

6) 

 

7) 

 

8) 

 

9) 

 

10)

[DieselDaisy]

6 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Yeah...his murderers conveniently gave him a crown of thorns...made of gold? That makes a lot of sense. *rolls my eyes*

Again, you are just looking at the reliquary (which is a gaudy item - I agree).

Here it is in an earlier reliquary, demonstrating the thing unobstructed,

PS

Although that is a reconstruction with the thorns intact.

Edited February 19, 2018 by DieselDaisy

[soon]

3 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

The reliquary, glass case of gold and silver, is modern - nobody is lying about that. Look inside...

They wanted people to believe they had found a device used to torture Jesus and mock God, so they though to celebrate it by adorning it with gold?  Oh.  Thats way better then Id thought then...

[Len Cnut]

37 minutes ago, Dazey said:

God's cock?  Is that what the priests tell the little boys eh? Bend over sunshine, you're getting bummed by your lord and saviour! I'm not really a nonce. Honest!  

Well, you'd have to slip JCs foreskin on first...rinse it off and put it back after

[soon]

When the only penis your'e allowed to think well of is a petrified sliver of "jesus" foreskin:

 

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, soon said:

They wanted people to believe they had found a device used to torture Jesus and mock God, so they though to celebrate it by adorning it with gold?  Oh.  Thats way better then Id thought then...

It was in Byzantium possession before the French Monarchy obtained it in the 13th century. The (Gallic) Catholic Church never even had it in its possession until 1801 so you can not very well pin this entirely on them! If you are doubting its authenticity (which is fair enough) then that doubt should be over its accountability between c. 33 AD and 409 AD. There is a historic accountability from then on.

The reliquaries are a non-issue. They are gaudy I agree, but they are just a non-issue. There has been about three since Napoleon.

[soon]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It was in Byzantium possession before the French Monarchy obtained it in the 13th century. The (Gallic) Catholic Church never even had it in its possession until 1801 so you can not very well pin this entirely on them! If you are doubting its authenticity (which is fair enough) then that doubt should be over its accountability between c. 33 AD and 409 AD. There is a historic accountability from then on.

The reliquaries are a non-issue. They are gaudy I agree, but they are just a non-issue. There has been about three since Napoleon.

Okay, so all of them are ridiculous.  

[soon]

They also preserve the bodies of their "saints" to look at.

The following pics are, imo, disturbing.

Spoiler

 

 

 

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, soon said:

Okay, so all of them are ridiculous.  

It is this simple: it is either bona fide (Crucifixion, Calvary c. 33 BC) or it is a remarkably early forgery that was being venerated as early as 409 AD in Jerusalem. In neither scenario does the Catholic Church have much to do with it until it obtained it in 1801 - then, yes, they built a gaudy reliquary (which frustratingly obscures much of the object from view) but that is a non-issue.

7 minutes ago, soon said:

They also preserve the bodies of their "saints" to look at.

The following pics are, imo, disturbing.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

...a practice (ironically because they are atheists) imitated by communists for their leaders!!

 

[Iron MikeyJ]

@soon,

Those are Incorruptables.

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, Oldest Goat said:

I can think of nothing less remarkable than something that is obviously a forgery being a forgery. People have been lying and making shit up since time and memorial so the time and date are irrelevant.

That is fair enough but you cannot really blame the Catholics here as the Church of Jerusalem looked towards Constantinople, not Rome, and we are still well within the Early Church/Patriarch period.

[Iron MikeyJ]

A lot of Catholic bashing going on here. I have to wonder if a Jew, Muslim, or pretty much ANY other religion was being bashed like this if the MODS would allow it? It seems like it's discrimination to bash other religions, but openly ok to bash Catholism.

What about IF I were black, could my heritage be openly bashed like this? Or if I were a woman??? @downzy would be all over it. 

I'm all for an open discussion, but if I'm honest I'm feeling some HATE towards my religion going on.

[soon]

Or venerating a torture device used against Jesus is "hate" towards Christianity?

 

[janrichmond]

3 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

A lot of Catholic bashing going on here. I have to wonder if a Jew, Muslim, or pretty much ANY other religion was being bashed like this if the MODS would allow it? It seems like it's discrimination to bash other religions, but openly ok to bash Catholism.

What about IF I were black, could my heritage be openly bashed like this? Or if I were a woman??? @downzy would be all over it. 

I'm all for an open discussion, but if I'm honest I'm feeling some HATE towards my religion going on.

Gotta say i agree with you on this, although i have no beliefs of any faith, i will not mock others that do. Each to their own and live and let live.

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, Oldest Goat said:

I don't know any details like who that statue is etc. so I'm speaking more generally at this moment. Whoever is responsible is responsible and whoever goes along with it has no one else to blame but themselves.

Why dismiss so freely that the crown at Notre-Dame is a forgery? We have in our possession items that have survived from far earlier periods of human history than c. 4 BC C. AD 33 - which is comparatively recent really. I'm certainly not dismissing the fact that it may be a (very early and Jerusalem based) forgery but equally I cannot dismiss that it is authentic either. Judging the historical context and ideology of the earliest Christians, and human instinct, It seems perfectly plausible that Jesus's apostles and other associates would collect various items associated with Jesus of Nazareth for preservation soon after his death for (emotive/historic) remembrance and veneration, and preserve those items. It would seem less plausible if they had no interest at all, chucking the crown in the bin! It also seems plausible that they were eagerly preserved during the earliest period of the church. We know for instance that St Peter's bones were removed from the Vatican Hill and stored away safely during the Valerian Persecutions (they were later returned). 

I should point out that I believe many relics are forgeries, or at best very suspect. I personally believe the Turin Shroud is bollocks. The Notre-Dame crown however has a history of ownership which can be traced back to a much earlier period than most relics - and to Jerusalem. It also doesn't appear to have any rivals (unlike the various nails say).

I cannot dismiss completely that it is authentic. 

[soon]

This thread has been full of dissenting views against Christianity and faith in general.  Thats completely fine.  I think that for the most part, people of all perspectives have enjoyed the conversation, including when its been pointed or included mockery.  Theres been a sense of humour mostly.

Its interesting that calling Christianity "a load of bollocks" provoked zero response, but questioning the practice of keeping jesus foreskin (by undermining the Jewish customs associated with that possibility) prompted a call to live and let live.  

Its fine with me for someone to call my spiritual path a load of bollocks.  If that were an issue for me, I might not have as strong as faith as I project.

I actually feel that this threads differing views has nurtured 'relationships' across perspectives.

[DieselDaisy]

Here is another interesting relic,

The Pilate Stairs, now part of the Scala Sancta, Rome. Helena, the mother of Constantine the Great was believed to have transported the stairs of the Praetorium used by Pontius Pilate back to Rome around 326 AD - they are basically the stairs Jesus walked over when he went to be tried. They were incorporated into the Lateran Palace.

Martin Luther walked over them in 1510.

[Len Cnut]

1 hour ago, soon said:

They also preserve the bodies of their "saints" to look at.

The following pics are, imo, disturbing.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

Cool, a dead body, is it real?  That ain’t real surely!

Edited February 19, 2018 by Len Cnut

[soon]

Laura S Nasrallah's talk, The Pedagogical Image: The Gendered Body, Greco-Roman Statuary, and The Early Christian Imagination.  

She speaks, in part, to the incorporation of iconography and relics into early Christian practice and assumptions.  And how objects and images are used to claim and preserve power.

She takes the lectern around 4:05