Part of Notre Dame on fire.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

What evidence do you have to support that claim?

Boru

 Holy crap do you not listen.

I am NOT in denial that the crown exists. IT DOES.

I do not however buy any crap that a man magically survived rigor mortis while wearing that crown. And again, even with your earliest mention of 300 years after the fact, again, that still does not mean that humans have magic super powers.

It makes much more sense to me, that the crown was simply concocted to lend credibility to a legend.

I could give a shit less if we found the DNA of a person named Jesus, nobody survives the death story as that book of myth implies.

Crap, if Trump can get away with lying about his Electoral college win and inauguration attendance, certainly the marketers of bullshit in antiquity could concoct a prop to convince others a guy magically survived death, could easily con others.

I am not disputing the existence of the crown. I am saying it was manufactured to sell a story.

Holy crap, you cannot read.  The existence of the Crown isn't in dispute, it never has been, but you seem to think people are saying YOU are saying it doesn't exist.

I'll tell you again, I'm NOT claiming that the Crown has any impact whatsoever on anything supernatural. 

It makes more sense to me as well that the Crown is a pious fraud, constructed well after the purported events of the Gospels to give them a gloss of authenticity.

I never claimed that the Crown - if genuine - implies that Jesus or anyone else survived a crucifixion.

You might trying reading what I post before you spend time refuting claims I never made.

Do you understand the simple, declarative sentence, 'There is no evidence that the Crown of Thorns relic at Notre Dame cathedral is a fraud'? Do you further understand that this sentence says absolutely NOTHING about whether Christian theology is true or false?

Boru