Shroud of Turin

  • Thread starter Thread starter martino
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I realize it’s not necessary to believe in the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, but, based on my reading, I’m convinced that the shroud is the real deal. The primary reason is that no one can explain how the image became fixed to the cloth. Secondly, Carbon-14 dating is unreliable beyond certain date parameters. I highly recommend the 2000 book, *The Resurrection of the Shroud, *by Mark Antonacci. Also consult the writings on the shroud by physicist John Jackson. The writings of author Ian Wilson on the shroud are interesting and enlightening. He has devoted years of research in studying the shroud.
 
40.png
larryo:
I realize it’s not necessary to believe in the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, but, based on my reading, I’m convinced that the shroud is the real deal. The primary reason is that no one can explain how the image became fixed to the cloth.
Click to expand...
So because no one can explain this to your satisfaction, it must be proof of a miracle?

That’s not very good induction.
Secondly, Carbon-14 dating is unreliable beyond certain date parameters.
Click to expand...
The test involved 3 independent examinations… all 3 corroborated each other.
 
40.png
ArisSlatr:
I’d have to reluctantly agree with Hannibal.

Also, all the resources on most of the links for the Shroud are very biased. It seems to me that this shroud could have been made with blood, the blood was scorched and used as a writing tool.

This would explain why it is only on the surface, and why the blood is oxidized.

Im just saying there are ways to manipulate the cloth.

Also carbon dating is almost always called faulty when it doesn’t work in favor of the expected results from beleif.
Click to expand...
If what you assert is true, then why has no one been able to exactly reproduce the figure on the shroud? Also, what causes the 3-D effect of the shroud’s image as determined by Physicist John Jackson?
 
40.png
Hannibal:
Finally, the shroud was debunked as a fraud 600 years ago. That pretty much ends that.
Click to expand...
The reference you quoted stated:

“In 1389, the then bishop of Troyes dismissed the relic as a fake, and reported the confession of the artist who had “cunningly painted” the image.”

An individual bishop’s pronouncement is not infallible and it has been shown by all scientific tests that the image on the shroud is not from paint, pigment or other applied material. There is a book entitled, “The Resurrection of the Shroud” that presents tests from the examination of the shroud as well as the results of more recent analyses of data previously collected. If you are truly interested in evaluating all the data, you should consider reading it before dismissing the shroud based solely on the carbon dating and selected historical information. There is a lot more to assessing the accuracy of the carbon dating than simple fraud.

There are multiple lines of evidence that refute that the shroud was a 14th Century work. They include:
  1. anatomic and medical implications of the image, especially when one considers the limited knowledge of anatomy and medicine in the 14th Century;
  2. data from the image that support that the “victim” was actually crucified;
  3. the presence of 3-D data in the image that has not been replicated by any method used to create an image on cloth;
  4. the condition of the fibers that comprise the image - the surface has actually been “damaged” by an oxidative process that only affects the surface of the uppermost fibers that would have faced the “body”. Any medium added to the cloth to form the image would have penetrated to at least the back side of the innermost fibers.
  5. the chemistry of the bloodstains and the position/location of bloodstains with respect to the image itself. The oxidative effects on the fibers is absent where there are blood stains, indicating that the blood stains were present before the image was created -this creates a problem in lining up the image and blood stains properly.
  6. pollen data indicating the presence of species only found in the area around Jerusalem.
  7. residue of limestone imbedded in the area of the knee and nose that, through X-ray diffraction and chemical analysis, is comparable to the limestone prevalent in Jerusalem (used for building materials and road beds in ancient times).
Continued…
 
Continued from previous post…

I cannot possibly provide adequate details or references in a single posting. The book I reference presents sufficient detail and backup and does not resort to unsupported speculation. These independent lines of evidence are each compelling, but when combined provide substantial evidence that the cloth presents the image of a man who was crucified in the Middle East. The nature of the image or process that created it are not known.

I’m not saying conclusively that the shroud is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, but to dismiss it without considering all the lines of evidence available would be to fall under your own criticism.

The problem for the average person is - how does one deal with the implications if the shroud is not a 14th Century fraud, but a relict from the 1st Century? Even if there was a possibility that it was the burial cloth of Christ, it would have huge implications for all those who do not believe the accounts in the New Testament. Those who do not believe in God won’t even consider this possibility. Those who are faithful Christians don’t need this type of proof. That’s why the Catholic Church appears indifferent when it comes to scientific proof of the supernatural. It reminds me of what Jerry Lewis said about his telethons, “For those who understand, no explanation is necessary. For those who don’t, none will suffice.”
 
40.png
martino:
Sorry for the typos folks, I cant figure out how to edit my post!!!
Click to expand...
Tipe n MSword thin kut annd paste et hear. It werks evrie tyme!:rolleyes:
 
40.png
JimG:
Yes, I think it’s likely the authentic burial cloth of Jesus, with the image not made by human hands. The findings of the Shroud of Turin Research Project some years ago further convinced me. Plus I’m skeptical of the results of the C-14 dating.

JimG
Click to expand...
I’m with you, JimG on the C-14 dating.

Its a man-made test after all, and falliable.

I seem to remember at one time a group claiming the Shroud to be fake, and then another group years later, proving its not.

So it seems even our best scientists can’t agree upon it.
Which makes me now understand how wise the Chruch was in not saying one way or the other upon it.
 
Yes, I remember reading an article in the Catholic comic book “Treasure Chest” (anyone remember that?) about the shroud. That inspired me to go into archaeology.

Yes, carbon 14 is not infallible, but should be used with other tests. I remember reading the actual report, and that the secular press reported the results wrong; delibertly falsifying the results.

A previous poster mentioned all of the things that, together, make the Shoud authentic, (or, at least not a fake). The carbon 14 dating, the existence of polen, even the type of cloth used. (It was the type used in the 1-st. -3rd century. A forgerer must have gone to a lot of trouble to find such a cloth.) also 2 scientists at the Air Force Academy found that the image itself is 3 dementional . A Jesuit priest from Chicago, a nuministic expert was able to find the “coin of the tribute” on the eyes (the one that Christ explained to the crowd about “give unto Ceaser”).

But most facinating of all is: We Byzantine Catholics, in most of our churches, on the ceiling have a mosaic or painting of the "All Seeing Christ. This painting resembles the Shroud in about 36 different points, ie. the little lisp of hair on the forehead, the fold of the garment at the neck, the big eyes, (due to the coings being placed on the eyes), and other things. If the Shroud was a 14th cent. forgery, how did the idea for this model come about in the 4th-6th century when these paintings of Christ were being made?

According to police records you need only 6 points to match, and here there are more than 30. Interesting.
 
Was the Shroud radiocarbon dating ‘a Freemasonry plot’?

An astonishing claim from Cardinal Ballestrero, the Shroud’s custodian at the time of the 1988 radiocarbon dating

According to the German paper Die Welt, dated September 5 1997, Cardinal Ballestrero made some remarks which appear surprising in the light of the declarations he made in 1988 backing the results of the dubious C14 dating test. In particular, Die Welt says the following: The Turin Shroud is, in Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero’s opinion, authentic. The laboratory tests conducted in the 80s, which dated the cloth back to the Middle Ages, would appear to have been performed without due care, declared Ballestrero in an interview. At the time, the cardinal had himself published the results of this research. After the publication of these results, criticism was swift to follow. Under the title (translated from the Italian) “A masonic plot against the Holy Shroud?”, Corrispondenza Romana, dated September 20, provided additional information. The main outline of this article is given below. Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero, the former archbishop of Turin, in an interview with his private secretary, Father Giuseppe Cavaglia, which appeared in the latest issue of the Carmelite review and was reproduced by the paper Avvenire (September 4, 1997), declared that he strongly suspects freemasonry of playing an important role during the scientific research which led to the surprising announcement of October 13th, 1988 which denied the authenticity of the Holy Shroud.

The Cardinal declared himself convinced that at the time proper care was not taken in the set procedure “With the examinations that I had myself authorized, as soon as the solemn exposition (of 1978) was over, science became unleashed and centres for study of the Shroud shot up everywhere, for the most part in Protestant countries. This context gave rise to the most insistent requests for an examination to be conducted using carbon 14. At the same time, vicious calumny about the Church was purposely being spread around, accusing it of being the enemy of science because it feared the truth and was frightened of losing the relics from which it made money.” At this point, Father Cavaglia asked Cardinal Ballestrero whether freemasonry had not played a certain role in all this campaign. “Without question,” came the cardinal’s reply.

[Reproduced from the CIELT journal Revue *Internationale Du Linceul de Turin which published this article on page 28 of its issue no 6, Autumn 1997]
 
OK, I have read each and every post and it is time to chime in. I really believe that this cloth is not only the table cloth from the last supper, but the authentic burial cloth of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

If some day science proves me wrong, no biggie.

Do I believe that Jesus would do something like this? No doubt.
 
40.png
thincritter:
Three INDEPENDANT labs did the test. I hardly think any error
is possible.

skepdic.com/shroud.html
Click to expand...
Independant lads!!! directed by people with theirown agenda.
Error is indeed possible and probable - The scientific community is always looking for a way to disprove that God is there, they take any opportunity, please educate yourself on things and do not fall for the old ----The Scientist Said – remember 99.99% of the guys who show up on TV wearing lab coats are not really scientists or doctors, but someone presenting a false image to promote their own agenda
 
40.png
Susanm:
Independant lads!!! directed by people with theirown agenda.
Error is indeed possible and probable - The scientific community is always looking for a way to disprove that God is there, they take any opportunity, please educate yourself on things and do not fall for the old ----The Scientist Said – remember 99.99% of the guys who show up on TV wearing lab coats are not really scientists or doctors, but someone presenting a false image to promote their own agenda
Click to expand...
Correct, you can’t believe everyone that shows up on TV. But
the Carbon tests where done by REAL scientists who were
honestly looking for the truth. There is no conspiracy here. Just
a whole lot of insecure believer’s who cannot move on from their limited mind sets.
 
40.png
Oscar:
I am a 100% believer in Jesus and His Church, however, I do not regard the Shroud of Turin to be the burial cloth of our Savior.

The reason should be obvious to all. The figure in the cloth is clearly of a man of European descent. Jesus was of Semitic descend who would not have resembled the man in the cloth.

Oscar
Click to expand...
It should also be noted that the accepted facial features
of Jesus are highly generic. Artists throughout the times have
simply followed each others lead.

The reality is that we do not and cannot know what Jesus looked like.
 
REAL Scientists with their own agenda!!!
The so-called scientific community has been faking it for many many years and people continue to believe - because a REAL scientist said it… yeah right !!!
Clearly you did not read the attached links…
Now thats ignorance!!!
 
Also carbon tests are subjective to the individual who does the test.
Please inform yourself about the errors of Carbon testing…the internet is full of data. Also, I am not just passing along things that I have read, I have a PHD in engineering, so not too stupid.
Carbon testing is based on the fact that carbon has been degrading at the same rate since the beginning, it is a guess, a theory, a sample must be pure to even have any possibility of being accurate, even then its a guess…an agenda
 
40.png
Susanm:
Also carbon tests are subjective to the individual who does the test.
Please inform yourself about the errors of Carbon testing…the internet is full of data. Also, I am not just passing along things that I have read, I have a PHD in engineering, so not too stupid.
Carbon testing is based on the fact that carbon has been degrading at the same rate since the beginning, it is a guess, a theory, a sample must be pure to even have any possibility of being accurate, even then its a guess…an agenda
Click to expand...
Even if the laws of physics have not been the same all the time
and radioactive rate of decay can change, it would be over
Billions of years, not a couple of thousand. The laws of physics
have been constant throughout the earths history. Any high school
kid can tell you that.

I think you and I both know that Graduate accreditation
is awarded on a thesis of a SPECIFIC topic. Did you do
your PHD year on the errors of Carbon Dating? or are you hiding behind an irrelevant accreditation? I’m betting it’s the latter. I too
have professional engineering qualifications, so don’t insult my intelligence.

The carbon tests are not the only evidence damning the Shroud
as a fake. It is claerly obvious that the image is painted on. If you really want to make a case. Take it over to
the JREF forum and see how you fair with that lot. I have included the link below. I’m betting you wont though.

randi.org/vbulletin/
 
Clearly you are doing nothing but repeating what you have heard, are you protestant!!
I suspect your engineering background is limited, this is evident by your reply. Please look into things and educate yourself on topics, not just what is in vogue at the time
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top