Jerusalem Tomb Discovery Casts Doubt on Turin Shroud

  • Thread starter Thread starter Neil_Anthony
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Neil_Anthony

Guest
Jerusalem Tomb Discovery Casts Doubt on Turin Shroud

Israelis Archaeologists announced Wednesday they have found the first burial shroud from the time of Jesus.

Researchers found that fragments of the fabric are of a much simpler weave than that in the famous Turin shroud, which some believe to be the shroud that wrapped the body of Jesus himself.

full article…

😦
 
people lets put this problem to rest.

The shroud is really the shroud they wraped our Lord with. if you place the really divine mercy image the real one with the shroud the both fit perfectly

Regarding this image, Jesus said, “‘My gaze from this image is like My gaze from the Cross.’ (Diary, 326)” You will notice that the Image resembles the Shroud of Turin very closely.

the orginal image of divine mercy
chapletofdivinemercy.net/vilnius_version_image_of_divine_mercy.htm

and a picture of the shroud and the orinal image placed together scroll down to fin pic
our.homewithgod.com/divinemercy/images/

SO PEOPLE IT REALLY IS TRUE LETS SPREAD THE WORD AND FINALLY PUT THIS PROBLEM TO REST
 
so the logic here is, they found one burial cloth from the first century AD, and then concluded that all burial cloths are the same?

c’mon, doesn’t take a scientist to know thats a flawed logic

if 2000 years from now someone unearthed a Chrysler, would they conclude we drive really bad cars in the year 2000? or if they unearthed a Ferrari, they’d think we’re all speed freaks. is that the way it goes? one piece of evidence and then generalization?
 
I have trouble coming to the same conclusion as they did.

This was a shroud for a person with leprosy. The Field of Blood was a place reserved for paupers and foreigners. It stands to reason that a cheap simple cloth would be used to bury a pauper.

Joseph of Arimathea would most likely have been the one to provide the burial cloth for Jesus. I think he would have found something of better quality to wrap the body of his Lord.

A few fragments of cloth from one grave are not enough to make a case for this being the only kind of cloth used to wrap the dead of that time.
 
It stands to reason that you had both rich and poor in those days as you do now.
The burial shroud of a rich person would be of more finely woven and costly material that that of a poor person.i think they are barking up the wrong tree here.
 
Linda_Marie said:
I have trouble coming to the same conclusion as they did.

This was a shroud for a person with leprosy. The Field of Blood was a place reserved for paupers and foreigners. It stands to reason that a cheap simple cloth would be used to bury a pauper.

Joseph of Arimathea would most likely have been the one to provide the burial cloth for Jesus. I think he would have found something of better quality to wrap the body of his Lord.

A few fragments of cloth from one grave are not enough to make a case for this being the only kind of cloth used to wrap the dead of that time.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this explanation. Lepers were shunned from society. Joseph of Arimathea was well off for the time.
 
HollyDolly said:
It stands to reason that you had both rich and poor in those days as you do now.
The burial shroud of a rich person would be of more finely woven and costly material that that of a poor person.i think they are barking up the wrong tree here.
Click to expand...
The article says they believe the tomb they found was that of an important member of a Jewish priesthood, so this argument doesn’t really work.

However, I think that the scientists who are drawing the conclusion that the Shroud of Turin is a fake, based on finding one shroud from the same time period, demonstrates their bias.

I find this statement from the article very interesting, as I had not heard this before:
The newly discovered shroud is made from a two way weave, while the Turin shroud has a more intricate twill weave which textile experts say was introduced a 1,000 years after Jesus lived.
Click to expand...
That is a very simplistic statement, and quite possibly a flat out false one. This source certainly seems to say the opposite, although I am certainly not a textile expert.

sindone.info/TYRER1.PDF

And lastly, forgive me if I don’t have full faith in scientific findings from Hebrew University concerning the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. :rolleyes:
 
Neil_Anthony said:
Jerusalem Tomb Discovery Casts Doubt on Turin Shroud

Israelis Archaeologists announced Wednesday they have found the first burial shroud from the time of Jesus.

Researchers found that fragments of the fabric are of a much simpler weave than that in the famous Turin shroud, which some believe to be the shroud that wrapped the body of Jesus himself.

full article…

😦
Click to expand...
Hm… Funny, I remember the gospel sayingthe linen used was quite expensive. The gospel speaks of multiple linen cloths used, perhaps it’s another one used for his buirial?
 
I believe in it firmly without a doubt. I dare you to watch a documentory on it, preferably the one entitled “Shroud of Turin: New Evidence” it’s reeeaaaally good and you’ll learn alot.
 
MrZetterlund said:
I believe in it firmly without a doubt. I dare you to watch a documentory on it, preferably the one entitled “Shroud of Turin: New Evidence” it’s reeeaaaally good and you’ll learn alot.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard about this shroud, can you give me a good link so I can learn about it?
 
Zundrah said:
I’ve heard about this shroud, can you give me a good link so I can learn about it?
Click to expand...
LOVE TO! But I can’t right now since I’m on my school’s computer. ^_^" Maybe this afternoon, k?
 
MrZetterlund said:
I believe in it firmly without a doubt. I dare you to watch a documentory on it, preferably the one entitled “Shroud of Turin: New Evidence” it’s reeeaaaally good and you’ll learn alot.
Click to expand...
It is an entire field of study, and some of the results are astounding…The shroud was hidden for a period of time by the Templars according to new information revealed by the Vatican in the last year
 
I attended a presentation on the Shroud of Turin a few years ago. The presenter claimed that the shroud could have been the table cloth from the Last Supper since it appears to have food stains on it. (Awesome presentation, by the way, with life sized images of the shroud.) Perhaps, it could have been grabbed in haste and used as the burial cloth since it was the only thing available in a hurry. They may not have had time to cut/rip it into strips as the program suggested.

In any case, as a scientist myself, it is very poor science to make a sweeping generalize on anything based on one piece of evidence as the program the other night did.
 
joeflow said:
The article says they believe the tomb they found was that of an important member of a Jewish priesthood, so this argument doesn’t really work.:
Click to expand...
If this person had been an important member of the priesthood, he would have lost all that status when he contracted leprosy. Lepers were outcasts with NO status whatsoever, no matter who they had been before. The archeologists base their assumption on the fact that this tomb was next to the tomb of Annas. Unfortunately, they say it was just as close to where Judas committed suicide, ie - the Field of Blood. IMO, these 2 conflicting proximities make any hard conclusion about who was buried there difficult. There would have to be more evidence in the tomb to suggest that this was a person of importance before one could come to that conclusion, but they do not say that they found anything of the sort. No person with leprosy at that time was of any importance.

This was another leap to conclusion just as specious as the conclusion that their fragment of cloth proves the Shroud of Turin could not have been the burial cloth of Jesus.
joeflow said:
And lastly, forgive me if I don’t have full faith in scientific findings from Hebrew University concerning the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
👍 Quite so.

here is another news story about their discovery with a few more details:
Discovery of AD burial sheet suggests Turin Shroud could not have covered Jesus

and a link for information on the Shroud and the Sudarium (on same site).
Plus this article:COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE SUDARIUM OF OVIEDO AND THE SHROUD OF TURIN
 
Why? I was completely convinced by the forensic evidence. It wasn’t customary to give peopl who were crucified a proper buarial back then. That’s one of the things that made Jesus an acception, who else crucified would have been buiried? (I know I’m spelling that wrong.)
MFTM said:
I attended a presentation on the Shroud of Turin a few years ago. The presenter claimed that the shroud could have been the table cloth from the Last Supper since it appears to have food stains on it. (Awesome presentation, by the way, with life sized images of the shroud.) Perhaps, it could have been grabbed in haste and used as the burial cloth since it was the only thing available in a hurry. They may not have had time to cut/rip it into strips as the program suggested.

In any case, as a scientist myself, it is very poor science to make a sweeping generalize on anything based on one piece of evidence as the program the other night did.
Click to expand...
Well those “food stains” were actually blood. We have blood samples taken from the Shroud. They didn’t grab a whole bunch of linen in a haste, they bought expensive linen to wrap the body. They had plenty of time since they had permission.
 
If you believe the Should is genuine, you must believe this geunine:

The Holy Prepuce, or Holy Foreskin (Latin: præputium or prepucium) is one of several relics attributed to Jesus. At various points in history, a number of churches in Europe have claimed to possess Jesus’ foreskin, sometimes at the same time. Various miraculous powers have been ascribed to it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Prepuce

In the village of Calcata, 30 miles of Rome:

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2009-8/1345110/foreskin-relic.jpg
 
Well those “food stains” were actually blood. We have blood samples taken from the Shroud. They didn’t grab a whole bunch of linen in a haste, they bought expensive linen to wrap the body. They had plenty of time since they had permission.

No, the food stains were separate stains from the blood. And no they did NOT “have plenty of time” since Jesus died in the late afternoon and had to be buried before sunset since it was the eve of the sabbath.
 
Please check the Shroud website of Barrie Schwortz. He guested on George Noory’s Coast to Coast show on Dec. 17 for 3 hours. There are indeed hoaxes concerning the Holy Shroud, and they are created by those who have purported to reproduce the cloth, as an artist might have done. It is my view that Shroud doubters consist of those who lack information, as well as those who REFUSE to believe the avalanche of evidence supporting its authenticity. Yours, Bob 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top