Proof of the resurrection

  • Thread starter Thread starter McCartney
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
does the Shroud show a man with a moustache or is that something else?
 
undead_rat said:
Sir, this statement is not correct. A great deal of scientific evidence indicates that the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Jesus.
  1. On 28 May 1898 Secondo Pia took the first photograph showing that the image on the Shroud is actually a negative image of impeccable photographic qualities.
  2. The blood markings on the Shroud are not paint. They are human blood.
  3. The image of the Shroud is not composed of paint, dye, or any other substrate. It is composed an extremely superficial degradation of the surfaces of individual fibers of the linen threads.
    The thickness of this degradation is less than that of a wave-length of light. There is no variation in the color of the degradation between fibers; where the color on the Shroud is darker, more fibers are discolored.
  4. Forensic pathologists have determined that the body image on the Shroud is that of a dead human.
  5. Dirt samples from the foot area of the Shroud are travertine aragonite. Its chemical signature has been analyzed and found to match the travertine from Jerusalem and nowhere else.
  6. Pollen studies prove that the Shroud was in all of the places that its history purports.
  7. The body image depicts a corpse that has died by crucifixion, and in addition has a wound in the right side of its chest from which a great amount of blood and pericardial fluid has exited.
  8. The weave and stitching of the linen cloth are known only from ancient times. More recent examples have not been found.
This is the STURP agreed upon statement of 1981:
“We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist.
The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and give a positive test for serum albumin.”

In addition to the science (the above list is by no means complete) the Shroud of Turin has a documented history going all the way back the sixth century in Edessa.
And it has a purported history to A.D. 33 when the disciple Thaddeus brought the Sacred Image to King Abgar V who was cured of his leprosy upon seeing that Image.

If the world had other burial shrouds with images of their dead bodies mysteriously imprinted on them, then we could not say for sure that the Shroud of Turin was the actual burial garment of Jesus. But there are none. The Shroud of Turin is unique.
Putting the scientific and historical evidence together, the conclusion is inescapable. The Shroud is authentic.
The question is not “Do the results of the C-14 date testing disprove the authenticity?” The authenticity has been proven way beyond any reasonable doubt.
No, the only legitimate question is: “Why are the dates of the C-14 tests so strange?”

The answer to that question is found in the Gospel of Matthew. Our Lord’s body disappeared from inside of a blockaded, sealed, and guarded tomb.
The undisturbed blood stains on His Shroud confirm that His corpse also vanished while still inside that piece of cloth.
I have said this before, but it bears repeating: when our Lord’s corpse disappeared into an alternate dimension, a very small percentage of His body did not vanish, but dissolved into its elemental particles: protons and neutrons.
As the linen cloth collapsed into the vacuum where the body had been, the thermal proton radiation degraded the surfaces of the linen fibers, and an image was produced. The thermal neutron flux caused some of the nitrogen in the linen to be converted into carbon 14. Parts of the linen closer to Our Lord’s body would have received more neutron radiation and, therefore, have a more enhanced carbon 14 content.

This is known as the “Historically Consistent Hypothesis” because it takes into account the events described in the Gospel of Matthew. This theory is the only one that accounts for both the image formation and the strange C-14 dating results.
It will be confirmed whenever a Shroud sample from the body image area is tested and found to have an impossible future date!
But until then, there is no need to withhold judgment. The great wealth of scientific and historical evidence proves the Shroud of Turin to be the burial cloth of Jesus beyond any reasonable doubt.

As to why the Catholic Church does not confirm the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, I do not know. I cannot pretend to speak for the Church, and no one else should either.
Perhaps the Church was waiting for the carbon 14 dating test as a final confirmation, and, when they didn’t get what they expected, were at a lose as to how to proceed.
But simply because the Catholic Church has not formally confirmed the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin does not mean that the Shroud is a fake. No one should believe that or even think for a minute that such is a possibility.

Ref:
THE SHROUD OF CHRIST, Vignon,1921
THE SHROUD OF TURIN, Wilson,1966
EDESSA ‘THE BLESSED CITY,’ Segal, 1970
REPORT ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN, Heller, 1983
THE BLOOD AND THE SHROUD, Wilson, 1998
THE SHROUD AND THE CONTROVERSEY, Stevenson/Habermas, 1990
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SHROUD OF TURIN, Wilcox, 2010
THE SHROUD OF TURIN, Whanger, 1998
THE TEMPLARS AND THE SHROUD OF CHRIST, Frale, 2011
THE SHROUD OF TURIN, Guerrea, 2001
FACE OF JESUS, Dollar, 2014
THE TURIN SHROUD, Wilson/Schwortz, 2000
THE IMAGE OF EDESSA, Guscin, 2009
THE SHROUD OF TURIN, Fanti/Malfi, 2015
UNLOCKING the SECRETS of the SHROUD, Lavoie, 1998
THE SHROUD, Wilson, 2010
TEST THE SHROUD, Antonacci, 2015
Click to expand...
The cloth has NOT, I repeat NOT, been carbon dated 2000 years old. Until you get the cloth to be proven to be 2000 years old then there is nothing.
 
thistle said:
The cloth has NOT, I repeat NOT, been carbon dated 2000 years old. Until you get the cloth to be proven to be 2000 years old then there is nothing.
Click to expand...
Sir, I wonder if you are even reading my posts. No part of the Shroud of Turin will carbon date to any older than about 800 years. I have explained the scientific reasons for this.
To place everything on a carbon dating result that will never be obtained and ignore all of the other very legitimate (overwhelming, actually) evidence is a travesty in my opinion.

I assume that you believe in our Lord’s Gospels and therefore accept the account that Jesus’ corpse disappeared from inside of His sealed and guarded tomb.
That disappearance has to be taken into account when performing a test such as carbon dating on His burial linen.
I fail to understand why you so summarily reject this premise.

BTW, you may be interested to know that the scientists who so smugly presented the dates of “1260 to 1390” were not telling the whole story. The youngest date obtained was only 540 years old (1448), and the oldest was 795 years (1193).*
These dates represented a variance of 255 years, and that variance was too far outside of what was expected for a sample supposedly only about 600 years old. So the British Museum asked the labs to “average in” their outlying dates.
The 1448 date was obtained from the part of the sample that was closest to the image of our Lord’s corpse, and the 1193 date was from the part farthest away. The dates show a linear progression, i.e. getting younger as the part of the relevant sample gets closer to the image. This data is consistent with the theory that the disappearance Jesus’ corpse both caused the formation of the image and enhanced the C-14 content of the Shroud’s linen.

Sir, I’ll say this once again. If you are waiting for a carbon 14 dating of the Shroud that will yield a result of 2000 years old, you are waiting in vain. Such will never be obtained.
What we will get, if it is ever allowed, are progressively younger dates as samples move closer to our lord’s image until a present and then even a future date is obtained.

*TEST THE SHROUD, pg. 311
 
thistle said:
The cloth has NOT, I repeat NOT, been carbon dated 2000 years old. Until you get the cloth to be proven to be 2000 years old then there is nothing.
Click to expand...
I don’t know enough about carbon dating or the shroud but you claimed there is zero scientific evidence that the shroud is authentic. But all you keep going back to is carbon dating. There is still plenty of scientific evidence, whether it is proof or not
 
Logical and analytical thinking dictates that if Jesus earthly remains are nowhere on earth then He was Resurrected.😛
 
John_Yurich_USA said:
Because the man in the image is not disfigured in anyway. And the Bible states that Jesus was badly disfigured from being beaten nearly to death.😛
Click to expand...
You mean like having broken bones? What kind of disfigurement are you talking about?
 
7_Sorrows said:
You mean like having broken bones? What kind of disfigurement are you talking about?
Click to expand...
Broken face bones and total disfigurement in the form of severe lacerations on every part of Jesus skin from head to toe from being scourged and beaten. The man in the image on the Shroud of Turin has no disfigurement whatsoever.😛
 
John_Yurich_USA said:
Broken face bones and total disfigurement in the form of severe lacerations on every part of Jesus skin from head to toe from being scourged and beaten. The man in the image on the Shroud of Turin has no disfigurement whatsoever.😛
Click to expand...
Why would he have broken facial bones?
 
7_Sorrows said:
Why would he have broken facial bones?
Click to expand...
I was badly mistaken. I forgot that the Bible states that Jesus suffered no broken bones from being crucified. But Jesus face was still marred beyond recognition like the rest of His body was marred beyond recognition. And the man in the image of the shroud is not marred beyond recognition.😛
 
John_Yurich_USA said:
I was badly mistaken. I forgot that the Bible states that Jesus suffered no broken bones from being crucified. But Jesus face was still marred beyond recognition like the rest of His body was marred beyond recognition. And the man in the image of the shroud is not marred beyond recognition.😛
Click to expand...
How could his face have been marred beyond recognition?
Where does it say that in scripture?
 
I have a 1/2 size back-lite photo of the Shroud, and in this photo one may clearly see the terrible injuries that Jesus endured. His left eye is swollen shut, He has lacerations all over His body, part of His beard has been plucked out, He has, of course, the nail wounds in His wrists and feet, a oblong puncture wound is found on His right side, He has bleeding wounds on His scalp, and, finally, He has bruises on His shoulders and knees.

If anyone doubts that the man in the Shroud was a bloody mess, then they really need to see a back-lite photo of the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top