Be theologian

Birmingham, UCL, SOAS, Aberdeen, Edinburgh.
SOAS wants 80% overall from Matura.
Birmingham same.

>Revealed knowledge
>making shit up

Nigger what? Revelation is accompanied by signs to verify it.

We have genuine, scientifically verified miracles to attest to the resurrection being a real event.

strangenotions.com/is-the-shroud-of-turin-a-genuine-miracle/

well, interpreting revelation is not the same as claiming you are receiving revelation. perhaps, and it is a common-place "argument", that Paul, Muhammad, and others, were indeed making shit up. Theologians, usually, don't do that.

>shroud of Turin
yeah, it would certainly be a miracle if cloth from 2000 years ago could be carbon-dated as less than 1000 years old.

you think you're making a joke here, but literary theory and hermeneutics absolutely had their origins in the study of sacred texts, and literary theory resembles mysticisms

Most tests date the cloth to around the time of Christ.

I'd be thrilled if you could tell me about these tests, seeing as how nobody else in the world knows about them.

The only test that I know of that was "positive, according to Wikipedia
>[has] been publicly disregarded by Mgr. Cesare Nosiglia, archbishop of Turin and custodian of the shroud.

What the fuck is it with religion that makes people this retarded

It's not that easy user

>implying the catholic clergy is/has ever been devout

being an agnostic is basically a requirement to get beyond bishop

Care to support this claim?

If true you're wasting your time because you're going to wash out hard. But if you want to spend the next 8 years in school pretending to be something you're not then have fun.

>according to Wikipedia

Found the fag.

lastampa.it/2013/03/26/vaticaninsider/eng/inquiries-and-interviews/new-experiments-on-shroud-show-its-not-medieval-BcGirYkQTPTiC5nP1t27eM/pagina.html

What is it about atheism that makes people this obtuse and adolescent.

>Vatican Insider
not biased at all

>Found the fag.
Heaven forbid I use a source that isn't dominated by Catholics.

>I'm too lazy to read the article. Or check the sources for myself.

huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/28/shroud-of-turin-real-jesus_n_2971850.html

80% from advanced maths is not so difficult unless you're really lazy or you're in shitty liceum
>t. fellow Polack

Itss like dbz fans making theories about powerlevels.

Yeah, I looked at that. That was the same study that the fucking bishop who is caretaker of the shroud said was bullshit

Most of German clergy atm isn't devout, Cardinal Casper essentially doesn't believe in God at all. Most of Francis supporters in the clergy are like that, they are actively trying to transform the Church into an NGO of sorts.
Is there a large non Catholic interest in Catholic miracles that I'm not aware of that pays for research on this stuff?

>Is there a large non Catholic interest in Catholic miracles
Probably not. I'm not complaining about the research being funded by the RCC, in fact I wish they would fund more research into miracles (of course they won't because they know it will lead to more being debunked, which means more disillusioned followers which means fewer dollars in the collection basket).

I just don't want to get the *interpretation* of the research from a source that is so clearly biased.

They have an entire institute for research of various miracles in Germany where they almost exclusively hire atheists.

Well if the evidence were so compelling, they wouldn't be able to hire people twice since they'd all convert!

The evidence isn't read by people and even if convincing and hypothetically true is too ideological and radical that it would be insane to assume people would accept it just like that.

how did this thread start with an edgy atheist post and end with the polar opposite retarded bible thumper posts

"scientifically proven miracles" kek

"Scientifically proven" in this case means "no current widely accepted scientific explanation". See: God of the gaps.

>Catholic seminary admitting someone because of visions
This is ridiculous. In real life they would send you to a Catholic hospital for a pysch evaluation

Most people with visions hide them, especially early on like st Faustina and Padre Pio.

>We have genuine, scientifically verified miracles

>even if convincing and hypothetically true is too ideological and radical

I love the humanities.

I don't, I hate them.
But as things are and were and probably will be, people believe what they want to believe as far as worldviews go, whatever doesn't fit it is rejected or transformed into something that does. How is this something humanities related? A nazi will always find enough reasons to claim that niggers are naturally inferior, a Catholic will always be open to the possibility of the supernatural, the Marxist will indefinitely find excuses for why every communist country was a shithole and every naturalist will reject metaphysics. It's very easy to grasp, even for new polfags such as yourself.

This.

The caretaker made a statement disregarding studies generally in response to that new study that dated it to around the first century.

>study gets results that side with a religion
>religious guy brushes it up the rug and you just side with him

It actually does not.
The term is oxymoronic.