It is often claimed by Atheists that they simply lack belief in God and what's more they are apparently "rational" in doing so.  In this episode we examine whether such people have a reasonable disbelief in God or are espousing an irrational Atheism (as per the Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism/Atheism).

I guest star on Robert Stanley's Right to Reason Podcast on the logical coherence of the Trinity & Incarnation and we get into some other off-topic issues as well. 

The Atheist host of S&S, David J., is a radical hard-core Jesus Mythicist, but he wants to argue that perhaps the Mythicist movement should include more  than simply those that profess disbelief in an historical Jesus figure, but instead anyone who doesn't believe in the full Jesus of Christianity.

In the first part of my study on the Shroud, we shall provide a brief introduction to what the Shroud of Turin is and address issues pertaining to the historical provenance of the Shroud. In the first place, we shall assess whether the Shroud date of origin is even relevant to the truth of Christianity and then we shall follow up with an assessment of the single scientific test that has caused most people to think the Shroud is nothing more than a “medieval hoax”, much to the consternation of pro-Shroud enthusiasts; the infamous 1988 Carbon 14 Dating test.

Continuing on in our final S&S Shroud Wars Debate series, we come to Round 4 whereby, once again, Shroud skeptic Hugh Farey will have to battle it out against a Pro-Shroud expert, this time around we are joined by Joe Marino to discuss 3 major topic areas.  The topics include; i) Discussion of the dating evidence for the Shroud (includes Joe Marino’s notion of the invisible re-weave hypothesis to explain the 1988 C-14 dating & both the textile evidence and Pontius Pilate coins which are purported to put the Shroud firmly in the 1st century A.D.), ii) Discussion of the evidence showing the Shroud is or is not an artistic image from the medieval era, and iii) The anatomical, forensic and medical evidence proving (and/or disproving) that the Shroud’s image formation involved an actual human corpse.

Buckle up for another wild ride in the 4th and final installment of the Shroud Wars quadrilogy!

Well folks, its that time again!  Round 2 of our Shroud Wars series.  The topics include; i) Contra-Medieval Evidence #1– The Argument from Art History/Numismatic Coins via the “Odd Features” & other Points of Comparison (6thcentury A.D. or earlier), ii) Contra-Medieval Evidence #2– The 3 Physical Tests Conducted by Fanti (FTIR, Raman Spectroscopy and Tensile Strength of the Flax tests- combined c. 33 B.C +/- 250 years with a claimed 95% degree of certainty) & the Micro-Chemical Comparison Tests conducted by Ray Rogers (c. 250 B.C.-70 A.D.), iii) Contra-Medieval Evidence #3– The Argument from the Link to the Sudarium of Oviedo (6th or 5th century A.D. or earlier) and iv) Contra-Historical Jesus Case– Alan establishes that the Shroud probably did not belong to the historical Jesus and/or a Jew form the first-century A.D.

In the final part on the question of Shroud historicity in our series on the Shroud; I present some of the evidences both for the Shroud dating back to 1st century Judea and also provide interesting links with the historical Jesus himself.  Furthermore, I try to fairly represent the Shroud-skeptics’ many claims that the evidence from the Shroud suggests that it can’t date to the first-century and/or have belonged to the historical Jesus (a Jewish man). 

Part 2 in our Shroud study outlines the Pro-Shroud case for the historicity of the Shroud of Turin, here we provide 3 major “historical anchor evidences” which can be used to conclusively establish that the Shroud very probably dates back centuries prior to the medieval era- taking the Shroud all the way back to the 6th century A.D.

These 3 prominent “anchor evidences” include the evidence from; i) The Hungarian Pray Manuscript/Codex (1192-1195 A.D.), ii) The Art History & Numismatic (Coins) Dating Arguments (early-mid  6th century/ 540-550 A.D.), and iii) The Sudarium of Oviedo (400-570/614-711 A.D.)- the strongest evidence

In Part 5 of our Shroud study, we will finish off discussion of the final two “Minimal Relevant Features” (MRF’s) which will be used in evaluating the various image-forming mechanisms in Criterion B (upcoming Podcasts).  This episode, we look at some of the various anatomical accuracies and bloodstain features present on the Shroud Man’s images, while also surveying 7 Additional “MRF’s”.  In addition, we tackle various Skeptical Counter-features related to these features as well as overall Counter-facts.

This will be the first of two Podcasts discussing what I call the Shroud images’ “Minimal Relevant Features (or MRF’s for short), whereby I will discuss the first 5 such features which are relevant to the question of what mechanisms can account for how the images might have been formed.