I'm not reading Wiki...If you believe what you read on that then you're an idiot.
I'm not claiming that Jesus did not exist or that he wasn't crucified, very few people claim this, (apart from Muslims). What I'm saying, is that his resurrection is a myth. the best way to understand this is to put the claims regarding Jesus in a historical context. Claims of resurrection and the dead walking around were very common during this period, so you would need a good reason to claim that Jesus' resurrection is true but hundreds of other weren't. Indeed, there are 100's of stories throughout religious history that bear a striking resemblance to the story of Jesus.
Also, the turin shroud is a fraud. Radiocarbon testing has dated the shroud's origin at aroun 1,200 years after Jesus' death. Either way, the existence of the turin shroud wouold only prove Jesus' existence, which most historians already agree on.
What are you talking about Jay? I don't watch tv...and I haven't read or believed a word that's been said on wiki ever since my little sister changed something on the rainbow birght or something 'bright' wiki page...if a 12 year old has the power to change someone's opinion like that, then I can't even imagine what extremist wrote. So you can believe that page that you pulled out of your ass...because we both know you couldn't find anything else.
And you're welcome, smart ass.
The Muslims do not claim this. They believe that Jesus tricked everyone by only pretending to die. In their view, he climbed down from the cross, only to live out the rest of his life, hiding in the countryside. They also make the audacious, ridiculous assertion that there was never a Jewish Temple on the site of the Temple Mount. The Western Wall is where Mohammed tethered his horse. :P In the meantime, they have busied themselves with the destruction of mountains of first century artifacts to "substantiate" their politically motivated claims. They are systematically obliterating a precious, irreplaceable archaeological heritage that should belong to all of mankind. It is a bloody travesty.
Also, the piece of shroud removed for the purpose of radiocarbon anaylsis was taken from a corner that had been repaired by medieval nuns who rescued it from a fire, and painstakingly interwove the new fabric into the original. This was explicitly demonstrated microscopically by the fact that the houndstooth pattern of the linen used for the repairs is consistent with examples of linens from the medieval period, and does not match the original, which is similar to other first century linens. If the Vatican would release the shroud from their deathgrip, scientists could subject it to more rigorous testing. :P
And how might one explain the photographic negative on the shroud? Scientists TODAY cannot replicate this effect- and not for a lack of trying! Who in medieval Europe could have produced such an elaborate hoax- complete with blood, lash marks only visible on the negative image, and pollen native to the area in Israel where Jesus was crucified? An obvious, logical explanation for this phenomenon would be that the negative image was produced by the light emitted by the resurrection.
I am not one easily swayed by relics, and my first impulse was to categorically dismiss the shroud as another forgery, until I examined it more closely. That is the problem with accepting pat answers, without conducting one's own research: we end up regurgitating tidbits like "the shroud is a hoax", or "Muslims believe that Jesus was a myth".
Interested parties can peruse up-to-date information concerning the shroud of Turin at the following website:
http://www.shroud.com/examine.htm
We could debate back and forth ad infinitum, but I do not expect to ever convince anyone by means of logic that the Bible is authentic, or that Jesus was who he claimed to be. I make no assertions of certainty, nor can I offer scientific proof of God's existence. Faith is a very personal matter. For me, it is a matter of hope.
Besides, it's Friday night. Can we drop all the Bible talk, already? :P