It was posts like the one you were replying to that made me say "Some parts have aged better than others." That was a long night (getting the forum over 100,000 posts, IIRC).Pass me one bro. Drinking alone is unhealthy.
Edit: Sorry I just replied to a post from 2005
You seen those cameras which take extremely high quality high frame frequency videos? So the perfectly timed shot can just be plucked out of a series of 500 shots which occurred during a 2 second period. And they're indistinguishable from normal shots. Incredible tech.Is being a photographer a real job anymore? I mean, the camera does everything.
Yes, it is amazing. Makes the person rather unnecessary once we get our robot o erlords to carry the cameras around.You seen those cameras which take extremely high quality high frame frequency videos? So the perfectly timed shot can just be plucked out of a series of 500 shots which occurred during a 2 second period. And they're indistinguishable from normal shots. Incredible tech.
On my laptop, Xenforo scales to the width of the browser window, except if the window is very wide. Could you be zoomed out or have a screen width of much more than 1500 pixles?Not particularly related to anything but why is that today every (desktop) website seems to have only one fairly narrow column of various things and huge blank spaces on both sides?
I've got no experience of Serbia but my visits to Armenia and Georgia went fine despite practically no one there speaking English. Google is usually decent enough for getting around and translating various menu items and that's pretty much everything one needs to survive. Some situations might be awkward without common language but you won't be the only tourist around.How difficult would it be to get around Serbia (not just Belgrade) if you only knew English?
In my opinion at least young Serbs know English quite well, especially due to subtitles for almost every film The info tables are not only in Cyryliic, but also in Latin.
Thanks!I've got no experience of Serbia but my visits to Armenia and Georgia went fine despite practically no one there speaking English. Google is usually decent enough for getting around and translating various menu items and that's pretty much everything one needs to survive. Some situations might be awkward without common language but you won't be the only tourist around.
In order of the narrative, it sounds like the soldiers removed the robe and loincloth first....they crucified Him, and two others with Him, one on either side, and Jesus in the center. ...
Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments and made four parts, to each soldier a part, and also the tunic. Now the tunic was without seam, woven from the top in one piece. ...
Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!”
The IVP commentary says:"Also, while the historical documents pertaining to Roman crucifixion point to the usual case of the crucified's total nakedness, there was an allowance for concession given to local customs that would override this policy. The Mishnah (the first part of the Talmud) notes that opinions were divided as to leaving the stoned and hung totally naked or preserving a minimal sense of modesty, so it is possible that the loincloth remained on Jesus during His crucifixion."
Richard Hollerman writes:Normally the victim would be led naked to the place of crucifixion. The fact that Jesus' clothes were not taken from him until the point of crucifixion may suggest that he was allowed to retain some form of covering while on the cross itself (Brown 1994:2:953), perhaps out of deference to Jewish objections to nudity. Since, however, the normal undergarment was either a tunic or a loincloth, and Jesus' tunic was taken from him (v. 23; Brown 1970:902), it is perhaps more likely he was naked. Early Christian tradition is divided on the subject (cf. Brown 1994:2:953).
Randy Ingermanson writes:Edwards, Gabel, and Hosmer have written: “He [the crucified person] was usually naked, unless this was prohibited by local customs.” (“On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” Journal of the American Medical Association. Vol. 255. No. 11. 21 March 1986. 1459.). Although Roman crucifixion involved total nakedness, some (perhaps the minority) scholars suggest that in consideration for the Jews, Roman executioners would allow a loin cloth.
The Mishnah indicates that opinions among Jewish authorities were divided as to whether or not people should be stoned and “hung” naked (which often went together), or with just enough of a covering to provide a minimal amount of modesty (Sanhedrin, 6.4, 5). (puritanboard.com/f44/ were-those-crucified-1st -cent-naked-69863/).
Broadus points out that “the person of one stripped when about to be stoned should not be left wholly exposed; and though the Roman custom for crucifixion was otherwise, we may perhaps suppose that Jewish feeling was in this case regarded” (Commentary on Matthew, comment on Matthew 27:35).
There is also the question of whether the robe was scarlet or purple. Matthew says Scarlet, John and Mark say Purple.(In any event, when Romans crucified a man, they stripped him completely naked, so the loincloths in the paintings are not accurate. Crucifixions were all about total humiliation.)
What did Jesus wear? What color were his clothes, and what were they made of, and how were they made? Did he wear underwear? Was his hair long, like in all the pictures. And how do we know?www.ingermanson.com