Resurrection Debate: Fact or Fiction?

[Kathleen18]

Thank you. You might perhaps be interested to know that more research has been done since 1988.

 

[undead_rat]

In 2002 when the Shroud was subjected to a “restoration” procedure, the C-14 sample area was very carefully inspected by textile experts for any sign of “reweaving.” None could be found, and this should have put to rest the “invalid sample” theories regarding the 1988 C-14 dating results. This is the only actual “investigation” after 1988 that I am aware of.

However a greater understanding of the strange C-14 dating results has been realized. Thanks to Mr. Antonacci’s persistent inquiries we now know that the actual C-14 dates ranged from 1195 to 1448.* This represents a 250 year dating variation on an artifact supposedly only about 700 years old, and that fact indicates that something which we do not fully understand is going on here. Rather than being a strike against the Shroud’s authenticity, the actual C-14 dating results support the idea that our Lord’s corpse disappeared from the inside of His burial linen.

The Shroud of Turin has been full of surprises, and more may be yet to come.

*TEST THE SHROUD, Antonacci, 2015

 

[HarryStotle]

Ah… so to convert a human body into the divine nature, one emits neutron and proton radiation… I see… No more Near Death Experiences! Bombard us with neutron and proton radiation! That’s how you go to heaven!

But it was the Resurrection and later Ascension of Jesus’ physical body. Are you going to suppose NO accompanying physical repercussions just undetectable hocus pocus?

 

[pocaracas]

pocaracas:

Ah… so to convert a human body into the divine nature, one emits neutron and proton radiation… I see… No more Near Death Experiences! Bombard us with neutron and proton radiation! That’s how you go to heaven!

But it was the Resurrection and later Ascension of Jesus’ physical body. Are you going to suppose NO accompanying physical repercussions just undetectable hocus pocus?

Was he wrapped in the shroud when he ascended? I doubt it… so… let’s not go there.
A resurrection would only require some biology, I don’t see how “neutron and proton radiation” would influence anything there… but yeah… feel free to buy into any claim, just because they use sciency words.

 

[Kathleen18]

Tell me please. What if anything do you believe in? Or are you an atheist? By the way…the human body has this thing…you may have heard of them, they are called “atoms.” There is your biology!

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

pocaracas:

Ah… so to convert a human body into the divine nature, one emits neutron and proton radiation… I see… No more Near Death Experiences! Bombard us with neutron and proton radiation! That’s how you go to heaven!

But it was the Resurrection and later Ascension of Jesus’ physical body. Are you going to suppose NO accompanying physical repercussions just undetectable hocus pocus?

Was he wrapped in the shroud when he ascended? I doubt it… so… let’s not go there.

Actually, the point of bringing up the Ascension was that he ascended bodily, which implies that he had the kind of body which could “ascend” (however that is to be understood.) clearly it wasn’t an ordinary human body that was resurrected because he could later “ascend” in that same body. Which means whatever “neutron and proton radiation” given off by ordinary human bodies would not be the kind of “neutron and proton radiation” which would have been given off by Jesus’ resurrected body.

By the way, even normal human bodies constantly give off radiation – mostly in the infrared spectrum, but also from the decay of strontium–90, iodine–131, potassium–40 and other particles.

 

[pocaracas]

Tell me please. What if anything do you believe in? Or are you an atheist? By the way…the human body has this thing…you may have heard of them, they are called “atoms.” There is your biology!

I’ll assume that was for me…
What do I believe in?.. many things, actually. For example, I believe you, a human being (I believe called Kathleen) wrote this on a computer (smartphones can be considered computers) connected to the World Wide Web, which I believe to be composed of millions of connected servers and clients (could just be a couple of them, for all I know and you lot could just be bots, but I believe you’re not)

Concerning the god belief question, yes I agree that the definition of atheist applies to myself.

Yes, the Human body has atoms, composed of neutrons and protons and electrons. Most atoms in the human body (or pretty much any biological entity) are Oxygen, Hydrogen and Carbon, all in pretty stable configurations… Harry, just below your post, even had to dig out some rare isotopes to have something to work with:

By the way, even normal human bodies constantly give off radiation – mostly in the infrared spectrum, but also from the decay of strontium–90, iodine–131, potassium–40 and other particles.

strontium–90 - Half-life: 28.79 years, emitting Betas and becoming Yttrium-90 which has another Beta decay, with a half-life of 64 hours and turning into the stable zirconium-90.
iodine–131 - Half-life: 8 days 0 hours, emitting Betas and Gammas and becoming the stable Xenon-131
potassium–40 - Half-life: 1.251(3)×10^9, emitting Betas or Gammas and becoming calcium-40 or argon-40 (electron capture and then emits a gamma), respectively.

It seems none of those emit protons or neutrons.
But do keep throwing sciency terminology at the shroud and most folks will buy it.

 

[Kathleen18]

I apologize for my callous wording in the last few sentences of my post to you. Please forgive me.
As an atheist…why are you here on Catholic Answers Forums? (Not that you are unwelcome.)

 

[HarryStotle]

It seems none of those emit protons or neutrons.
But do keep throwing sciency terminology at the shroud and most folks will buy it.

The point being made was that if Jesus’ body was resurrected, and since ionizing radiation is one known method for repairing of cells, that kind of radiation or something of the sort might be a plausible explanation for the “burning” effects left on the shroud, a side effect of whatever it was that enlivened the dead cells in Jesus’ body.

 

[pocaracas]

I apologize for my callous wording in the last few sentences of my post to you. Please forgive me.
As an atheist…why are you here on Catholic Answers Forums? (Not that you are unwelcome.)

Why?.. good question…
Originally, I guess I was mostly trying to understand the mindset that my wife shares, but can’t verbalize properly.
Then I ended up getting in trouble with the authorities… maybe I was still thinking “how can these guys not see the obvious reality around them?!!”…
So I took a while off… the wife went off the deep end with Opus Dei and I’m not going in there…
Anyway… I was recently reminded, on another forum, that this one existed… I dropped by to see if my account was still working - YES! - and am now poking around… why?.. I don’t know… just providing my point of view on these issues, or on some supporting reasons that people present to justify their replies to the OP (I hope this bit was understandable).
it seems to me that much of what goes on here could do with a lot less woo and some more reality. The protons and neutrons that supposedly caused whatever to happen to the Shroud are the perfect example of such woo.

As someone coming from a catholic background, I’ve always accepted the religion to be a neat self-contained non-contradicting block. If you accept a relatively small set of things that go beyond our experience of reality, everything makes sense… but, still, some people manage to blow holes in the block… And I don’t mind trying to make people question those things they need to accept on nothing but faith

 

[HarryStotle]

And I don’t mind trying to make people question those things they need to accept on nothing but faith

So your position is that every theist is a mindless, unthinking, credulous moron who believes what they do “on nothing but faith?”

 

[pocaracas]

pocaracas:

And I don’t mind trying to make people question those things they need to accept on nothing but faith

So your position is that every theist is a mindless, unthinking, credulous moron who believes what they do “on nothing but faith?”

At least one basis that informs your reasoning is taken on nothing but faith.
The rest are your words, not mine.

 

[HarryStotle]

That would be true of all reasoning since the axiomatic or supposed “self-evident” nature of all grounding or proposed as grounding premises is to be taken on the basis of faith in something, be it acuity or accuracy of perception, the reliability of logic, the quality and applicability of scientific findings, etc., etc.

What you fail to recognize is that merely because you assume a believer or theist appears to begin from a specific “faith” grounding that they haven’t arrived at that grounding using reasoning which is at least as well-thought-out as yours.

 

[pocaracas]

Yeah… loads of people say it’s well thought out, but when I see the thought processes, they all fail to acknowledge the argument from ignorance that they apply.
Ultimately, it stems from ignorance about the origin of the Universe… why is “we don’t know” such a difficult thing to acknowledge?

 

[HarryStotle]

At least one basis that informs your reasoning is taken on nothing but faith.
The rest are your words, not mine.

That would all depend, by the way, upon what your working definition of “faith” actually is.

I gather yours would be something like “belief despite the absence of any evidence or rational grounds.”

In that case. No. Nothing that “informs my reasoning” is taken on that kind of faith.

 

[HarryStotle]

Yeah… loads of people say it’s well thought out, but when I see the thought processes, they all fail to acknowledge the argument from ignorance that they apply.
Ultimately, it stems from ignorance about the origin of the Universe… why is “we don’t know” such a difficult thing to acknowledge?

So, yours is not an “argument from ignorance,” but rather an “argument despite ignorance.”

I don’t see much difference, except that you take a slightly different ideological attitude towards ignorance. At worst both you and the believer move about in the shadow of ignorance.

Perhaps, the only difference is that you, like the drunk searching for keys under a lamp post, can claim, “The light is better over here!” Sure, but are the keys actually to be found there?

 

[HarryStotle]

Yeah… loads of people say it’s well thought out, but when I see the thought processes, they all fail to acknowledge the argument from ignorance that they apply.
Ultimately, it stems from ignorance about the origin of the Universe… why is “we don’t know” such a difficult thing to acknowledge?

At the risk of being pedantic, it isn’t clear to me that merely because you as a denizen of the Internet claim the capacity to determine how “well thought out” the beliefs of “loads of people” actually are, that you have any kind of credibility with regard to critiquing the rational grounds that intelligent theists can actually have for their faith.

I can think of a number of theists, present and past, who have written formidable works defending theism. The mere fact that you strike a posture on an Internet forum doesn’t, in itself, provide you with instant credibility.

 

[thistle]

In 2002 when the Shroud was subjected to a “restoration” procedure, the C-14 sample area was very carefully inspected by textile experts for any sign of “reweaving.” None could be found, and this should have put to rest the “invalid sample” theories regarding the 1988 C-14 dating results. This is the only actual “investigation” after 1988 that I am aware of.

However a greater understanding of the strange C-14 dating results has been realized. Thanks to Mr. Antonacci’s persistent inquiries we now know that the actual C-14 dates ranged from 1195 to 1448.* This represents a 250 year dating variation on an artifact supposedly only about 700 years old, and that fact indicates that something which we do not fully understand is going on here. Rather than being a strike against the Shroud’s authenticity, the actual C-14 dating results support the idea that our Lord’s corpse disappeared from the inside of His burial linen.

The Shroud of Turin has been full of surprises, and more may be yet to come.

The Shroud is not evidence of anything. It cannot be used to support the resurrection. Even the Church has not declared it to be authentic because it does not know.

 

[undead_rat]

Sir, with all due respect to the Catholic Church, the Vatican does not have the last word on this subject. The miraculous nature of the Holy Image on the Shroud is not something that is determined by a Vatican pronouncement, but rather by scientific analysis. How many years after Copernicus did it take the Vatican to sign off on the idea that the sun was the actual center of the solar system?

The 1978 STURP investigation involved over a hundred thousand man hours of data recording and analysis by a team of volunteer scientists who had no agenda. These people believed that in just a day or two they would solve the mystery of the Image and go home. That didn’t happen. In the end their conclusion was that they simply could not determine how the Image came to be imprinted on the linen. Furthermore, the Image is that of a human being in a state of rigor mortis. The blood stains are human blood. The travertine aroganite dirt on the Shroud is from Jerusalem. In short, as the team stated, they found nothing in this intensive scientific analysis that would preclude the Image on the Shroud being that of Jesus.

With all due respect, sir, your opinion is not supported by the facts.

 

[thistle]

Sir, with all due respect to the Catholic Church, the Vatican does not have the last word on this subject. The miraculous nature of the Holy Image on the Shroud is not something that is determined by a Vatican pronouncement, but rather by scientific analysis. How many years after Copernicus did it take the Vatican to sign off on the idea that the sun was the actual center of the solar system?

The 1978 STURP investigation involved over a hundred thousand man hours of data recording and analysis by a team of volunteer scientists who had no agenda. These people believed that in just a day or two they would solve the mystery of the Image and go home. That didn’t happen. In the end their conclusion was that they simply could not determine how the Image came to be imprinted on the linen. Furthermore, the Image is that of a human being in a state of rigor mortis. The blood stains are human blood. The travertine aroganite dirt on the Shroud is from Jerusalem. In short, as the team stated, they found nothing in this intensive scientific analysis that would preclude the Image on the Shroud being that of Jesus.

With all due respect, sir, your opinion is not supported by the facts.

It is very simple. The cloth has NOT been verified as being 2000 years old. Catholics are free to believe it is genuine or not but please do not tell me it is proven. That is just untrue. It cannot serve as evidence for anything.