What are you reading tonight?

[TANGODANCER]

Oh, I don't offer it as evidence, just another chapter in Science versus the Miracle, if you will. I just watch with great interest. Up to now the Miracle seems to be holding its own

you really believe that or is this another Tango wind up? (just to be clear...)

This is an earthly thing, here amongst us. Man is involved so, who knows. Science is having a good go at explaining things, but it hasn't really solved the puzzle. Then again, I was brought up deeply Catholic which has some bearing. No biblical reference here, so no desires to turn it all into a religious debate. Besides, Dan Brown hasn't authenticated it yet.

[thebish]

Oh, I don't offer it as evidence, just another chapter in Science versus the Miracle, if you will. I just watch with great interest. Up to now the Miracle seems to be holding its own

you really believe that or is this another Tango wind up? (just to be clear...)

This is an earthly thing, here amongst us. Man is involved so, who knows. Science is having a good go at explaining things, but it hasn't really solved the puzzle. Then again, I was brought up deeply Catholic which has some bearing. No biblical reference here, so no desires to turn it all into a religious debate. Besides, Dan Brown hasn't authenticated it yet.

is that a yes - or a no?? I was brought up deeply confused (which might be the same thing)

(not surprised about the lack of biblical references - as the biblical accounts (not least John's gospel) I read seem to describe linen cloths and a separate face cloth - not one full-length body-shroud)

my opinion - and it is just my own - is that the Turin "shroud" is (like the Mandylion and "Veronica's" "Veil") an artifice with a two-fold purpose...

1. to provide impetus to the very profitable medieval relics/pigrimage trade;
2. to fuel the burgeoning renaissance art industry with a "true likeness" of Christ (and one that looks oddly non-Jewish and weirdly "European")

[Hoboh]

The first horseman

[TANGODANCER]

is that a yes - or a no?? I was brought up deeply confused (which might be the same thing)
(not surprised about the lack of biblical references - as the biblical accounts (not least John's gospel) I read seem to describe linen cloths and a separate face cloth - not one full-length body-shroud)
my opinion - and it is just my own - is that the Turin "shroud" is (like the Mandylion and "Veronica's" "Veil") an artifice with a two-fold purpose...
1. to provide impetus to the very profitable medieval relics/pigrimage trade;
2. to fuel the burgeoning renaissance art industry with a "true likeness" of Christ (and one that looks oddly non-Jewish and weirdly "European")

If you mean was it intended as a wind-up, then no. I did state I wasn't offering evidence, just interest at the "is it, isn't it" argument. Science versus the Miracle is an oft used term where anything Godly is involved as I'm sure you know.

I wasn't brought up confused about things, that only came later. I also take the point about "a true likeness" as art portrays many different faces for Jesus, from the iconic Greek offerings right up to Holman Hunt's benevolent hippie attempt. Although we drEw him at school as something from Robin Hood, the weirdest thing ever was Hollywood getting Jeffrey Hunter to play him in "The Greatest Story Ever Told" ( mind you, John Wayne as a Roman Centurion wasn't far behind)

I'll be very truthful now and say that the face in the shroud puzzles me as it looks more like my idea of a Templar Knight than how I'd imagine Jesus might look. I'll leave you with a laugh because (and not for the acting believe me) but Silvestre Stalone's Rambo is far nearer the mark for me, although Robert Powell made a very believable Jesus in the TV Story of the Passion.

The Shroud will never be proven or disproven I don't think as anything but periodic at best. The rest is what you choose to believe, although I'd love the date to be right just to deepen the mystery.

[Prufrock]

The first horseman

What, you've seen him? Is this still religious chat or is that a book?

Long and the short, are we f*cked? Were they right?

[Puskas]

Oh, I don't offer it as evidence, just another chapter in Science versus the Miracle, if you will. I just watch with great interest. Up tonow the Miracle seems to be holding its own

If you're not offering it as evidence, why are you posting it?

There is no "Science versus the miracle debate" anymore than there's a "round earth versus flat earth debate" - your mate seems to want to use (pseudo)science to verify his claims of miracles... Plenty of evidence suggesting it was paint.

Of course, you are welcome to believe whatever nonsense you like. I prefer to believe things backed up with evidence, however.

[Zulus Thousand of em]

Politics and religion. They're the two you should never argue about. (Fine subjects for discussion, of course.)

And yet some people, from both sides of the divide, just can't seem to resist.

[TANGODANCER]

Oh, I don't offer it as evidence, just another chapter in Science versus the Miracle, if you will. I just watch with great interest. Up tonow the Miracle seems to be holding its own

If you're not offering it as evidence, why are you posting it?
There is no "Science versus the miracle debate" anymore than there's a "round earth versus flat earth debate" - your mate seems to want to use (pseudo)science to verify his claims of miracles... Plenty of evidence suggesting it was paint.
Of course, you are welcome to believe whatever nonsense you like. I prefer to believe things backed up with evidence, however.

Because it belongs in the discussion. What "evidence" exactly have you provided? You claim "plenty of evidence" yet refute the claims of a scientist to the contrary? Oh, and thanks very much for allowing me to believe as I wish: That's very decent of you. I feel most humble. Very scientific of you also to dismiss anything you don't agree with as nonesense.

Maybe we should get back to the thread and books.

[TANGODANCER]

Politics and religion. They're the two you should never argue about. (Fine subjects for discussion, of course.)

And yet some people, from both sides of the divide, just can't seem to resist.

We're not really arguing Mr Zulu, just having a frendly tete-a-tete.

[Hoboh]

The first horseman

What, you've seen him? Is this still religious chat or is that a book?

Long and the short, are we f*cked? Were they right?

Nawwww some Jurno saves us at the last min! Spooky stuff though, makes one think were this pig flu actually came from along with a few others?

I had a pint in a bar once with the Grim Reaper was actually a nice guy, although I wouldn't have called an 18 stone 6'6 with muscles upon muscle and more tats than winehouse (wearing a feckin' denim waistcoat nowt else and it was about -20) anything but nice!!

[Puskas]

At the risk of getting the thread back on track (since, let's face it, it's going nowhere...)
Baudolino, by Umberto Eco.

Which seems fun, so far.

[TANGODANCER]

At the risk of getting the thread back on track (since, let's face it, it's going nowhere...)
Baudolino, by Umberto Eco.

Which seems fun, so far.

Read and enjoyed Foucalt's Pendulum. Give Baudolino a review when you've read it will you?

[Prufrock]

Democracy in America By De Tocqueville. Read exctracts before but never the whole shebang. Surprisingly easy to read for an historical and political piece of non-fiction. Only a bit in so don't know whether it's much cop.

[thebish]

Democracy in America By De Tocqueville. Read exctracts before but never the whole shebang. Surprisingly easy to read for an historical and political piece of non-fiction. Only a bit in so don't know whether it's much cop.

bloody hell! I bet most people are actually reading Agatha Christie - or Readers Digest..

[Prufrock]

Democracy in America By De Tocqueville. Read exctracts before but never the whole shebang. Surprisingly easy to read for an historical and political piece of non-fiction. Only a bit in so don't know whether it's much cop.

bloody hell! I bet most people are actually reading Agatha Christie - or Readers Digest..

Might as well read it whilst I find it interesting, before I become old, jaded and cynical, much like this.

Ploughed through Commie Manifesto last year, that is hard work, comparatively this is a doddle, and hinteresting so far.

[William the White]

Slow progress being made on the shelf of shame.

Am currently halfway through ABSURDISTAN by Gary Shteyngart, which has a set of ecstatic reviews that look like they've been written by his best friends and his mother, but are actually from Guardian, FT, Indy, Times all proclaiming its hilarity - funniest novel of the century so far, irrepressible, fiery, hilarious etc etc.

Well it's taken me a month to get this far.

it's got the right targets - the greed, corruption and violence of Post-soviet society and the souless greed and corruption of capitalist USA. It has a nicely greedy and corrupt but almost likeable protagonist - an obese Russian Jew desperate to get back to the USA (where he was 'educated') who is as corrupt as the rest but tempted persistently by the urge to do good and the need to have sex.

i'm turning the pages, but not eagerly... I won't be allowed to buy another book for three years at this rate... averaging six pages a day and barely more than one genuine laugh and two smiles...

[clapton is god]

Having just read Antony Beevors D-Day, which I found enthralling but slightly stuffy and more than a little controversial for the sake of it, I moved straight on to Andrew Roberts 'The Storm of War'.

This is a full account of the second war from start to finish. This book is packed with little nuggets of information [1] that are new to me. A fantastic account that moves along at a cracking pace, easily read and highly recommended if you are at all interested in this area.

[1] For example, in 1938 the last two Generals in Germany that just might have been able to control Hitler and prevent what was to follow were fitted up with a prostitute and a Berlin rentboy (who later retracted his evidence). With them out of the way Hitler appointed himself War Minister. The war followed and, as Roberts says, all because of a prostiture and a mendacious Berlin rentboy

[Lord Kangana]

Slow progress being made on the shelf of shame.

Am currently halfway through ABSURDISTAN by Gary Shteyngart, which has a set of ecstatic reviews that look like they've been written by his best friends and his mother, but are actually from Guardian, FT, Indy, Times all proclaiming its hilarity - funniest novel of the century so far, irrepressible, fiery, hilarious etc etc.

Well it's taken me a month to get this far.

it's got the right targets - the greed, corruption and violence of Post-soviet society and the souless greed and corruption of capitalist USA. It has a nicely greedy and corrupt but almost likeable protagonist - an obese Russian Jew desperate to get back to the USA (where he was 'educated') who is as corrupt as the rest but tempted persistently by the urge to do good and the need to have sex.

i'm turning the pages, but not eagerly... I won't be allowed to buy another book for three years at this rate... averaging six pages a day and barely more than one genuine laugh and two smiles...

Sounds familiar,Bill. Bought that on the strength of praise, and frankly, I think its sh*t. Some things were just meant to stay on the shelf to prop up the more worthy reads.

[superjohnmcginlay]

Democracy in America By De Tocqueville. Read exctracts before but never the whole shebang. Surprisingly easy to read for an historical and political piece of non-fiction. Only a bit in so don't know whether it's much cop.

bloody hell! I bet most people are actually reading Agatha Christie - or Readers Digest..

Might as well read it whilst I find it interesting, before I become old, jaded and cynical, much like this.

Ploughed through Commie Manifesto last year, that is hard work, comparatively this is a doddle, and hinteresting so far.

You have far too much time on your hands.

[Zulus Thousand of em]

Having just read Antony Beevors D-Day, which I found enthralling but slightly stuffy and more than a little controversial for the sake of it, I moved straight on to Andrew Roberts 'The Storm of War'.

This is a full account of the second war from start to finish. This book is packed with little nuggets of information [1] that are new to me. A fantastic account that moves along at a cracking pace, easily read and highly recommended if you are at all interested in this area.

[1] For example, in 1938 the last two Generals in Germany that just might have been able to control Hitler and prevent what was to follow were fitted up with a prostitute and a Berlin rentboy (who later retracted his evidence). With them out of the way Hitler appointed himself War Minister. The war followed and, as Roberts says, all because of a prostiture and a mendacious Berlin rentboy

If you enjoyed that I strongly advise you to get a copy of William Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich." I've mentioned it on here before. First published in 1960 it still is, for me, the definitive work.