Shroud of Turin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aslan10
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peregrinans said:
I have read papers and watched presentations by many of the STURP team, Shroud.com is run by one of them. In fact the reason he created the website was out of frustration that so much misinformation was being put out in the media. Things like it being a scorch. The team said it had the appearance of being a scorch, but then concluded that it wasn’t. Since then many test have been done to confirm that For instance there are actual scorch marks on the Shroud which were caused by various fires over the years. The is a certain light test that can be done only to show any scorch marks on the Shroud. When this test was performed all of the known fire scratches showed up…the image could not be seen at all. It is not a scorch.
Click to expand...
It is an amazing work of art I believe. Until someone can accurately refute the C14 tests I am inclined to go with science on this.
 
cjforJesus said:
So if Jesus blood was on the cloth why would the vatican have it vacuumed restored cleaned and a new backing cloth added?

I don’t think it was ever proven conclusively that human blood is on the cloth.
Click to expand...
That is not correct. It does have blood stains and that was proven conclusively. In fact DNA was pulled out of the blood stains (though it was too fragmented to be studied) and it was conclusively determined that it was human blood (with bilirrubin) type AB and that one of the blood stains corresponds to a death body while the other stains correspond to the bleeding of someone that was alive.

Seems then you are basing your conclusion of it being a work of art in lack of knowledge of all the tests that have been done on the shroud.
 
Peregrinans said:
I have read papers and watched presentations by many of the STURP team, Shroud.com is run by one of them. In fact the reason he created the website was out of frustration that so much misinformation was being put out in the media. Things like it being a scorch. The team said it had the appearance of being a scorch, but then concluded that it wasn’t. Since then many test have been done to confirm that For instance there are actual scorch marks on the Shroud which were caused by various fires over the years. There is a certain light test that can be done only to show any scorch marks on the Shroud. When this test was performed all of the known fire scortches showed up…the image could not be seen at all. It is not a scorch.
Click to expand...
Shroud.com was one place I occasionally wandered. I just took a look there, again. Saw at least half a dozen books that I own, listed. Good resources. And I note at least one inclusion of a skeptical nature, in the titles.

GKC
 
marymary1975 said:
That is not correct. It does have blood stains and that was proven conclusively. In fact DNA was pulled out of the blood stains (though it was too fragmented to be studied) and it was conclusively determined that it was human blood (with bilirrubin) type AB and that one of the blood stains corresponds to a death body while the other stains correspond to the bleeding of someone that was alive.

Seems then you are basing your conclusion of it being a work of art in lack of knowledge of all the tests that have been done on the shroud.
Click to expand...
I have read enough to be very suspicious of the claim of it being Jesus’ burial shroud.

. Based on the dating of the artifact and actual paintings done of it at the time it was displayed it is most likely a work of art.
 
cjforJesus said:
I have read enough to be very suspicious of the claim of it being Jesus’ burial shroud.

. Based on the dating of the artifact and actual paintings done of it at the time it was displayed it is most likely a work of art.
Click to expand...
Why would a work of art be painted with human blood in a manner to create a negative image? That seems absurd.
 
SteveVH said:
Why would a work of art be painted with human blood in a manner to create a negative image? That seems absurd.
Click to expand...
I do not believe it was conclusively proven the shroud contains any blood at all.
 
cjforJesus said:
I have read enough to be very suspicious of the claim of it being Jesus’ burial shroud.

. Based on the dating of the artifact and actual paintings done of it at the time it was displayed it is most likely a work of art.
Click to expand...
And how do you explain human blood stains (before/after death) in the shroud. How did the artist came up with that?
 
marymary1975 said:
And how do you explain human blood stains (before/after death) in the shroud. How did the artist came up with that?
Click to expand...
I don’t believe it was ever proven the shroud contained human blood. I cannot imagine why the vatican would allow the vacuuming and cleaning of an object that contains holy blood.It does not seem plausible.
 
I think it’s pretty well established that the Shroud of Turin was fabricated in the middle ages…
 
arthra said:
I think it’s pretty well established that the Shroud of Turin was fabricated in the middle ages…
Click to expand...
You might want to provide the evidence for this comment. What evidence do you have that “pretty well established that the Shroud of Turin was fabricated in the middle ages”?
 
cjforJesus said:
I do not believe it was conclusihtml

proven the shroud contains any blood at all.
Click to expand...
This is a false statement.

shroud2000.com/FAQs.html

Here you can read the PDF that contains the immunological review done to the blood stains in the shroud.

www.shroud.com/pdfs/kearse.PDF

Paper from the University of Iowa that contains the details of the forensic test done to the blood stains:

public.iastate.edu/~rhetoric/105H17/ahersey/cof.html

There has been about 20 different forensic test and all have concluded that there are blood stains.

If you say that it is not conclusive is because you don’t know enough about all the tests performed on it and seem to think that the C14 is the only test ever performed on the shroud.
 
marymary1975 said:
This is a false statement.

shroud2000.com/FAQs.html

Here you can read the PDF that contains the immunological review done to the blood stains in the shroud.

www.shroud.com/pdfs/kearse.PDF

Paper from the University of Iowa that contains the details of the forensic test done to the blood stains:

public.iastate.edu/~rhetoric/105H17/ahersey/cof.html

There has been about 20 different forensic test and all have concluded that there are blood stains.

If you say that it is not conclusive is because you don’t know enough about all the tests performed on it and seem to think that the C14 is the only test ever performed on the shroud.
Click to expand...
Sorry Mary,but I do not believe the vatican or the shroud custodian would have allowed the vacuuming of holy blood.
 
cjforJesus said:
Sorry Mary,but I do not believe the vatican or the shroud custodian would have allowed the vacuuming of holy blood.
Click to expand...
So you are basically suggesting that all the scients, forensics and Universities (most of them comoletly secular sources by the way) that conclusively determined that there is blood on the shroud and that DNA resulta that were done again by a secular source are lying based solely on one particular behavior that you personally believe the Vatican had?

Also where you present there watching to accurately represent that the blood was vaccummed?
 
steido01 said:
Got an easily-accessible recommendation for a cursory overview? No need to dig too deep, if not.
Click to expand...
As others have stated, I would definitely check out shroud.com. It is maintained by the original photographer of the STURP team and he is very measured in his approach in providing information.
 
cjforJesus said:
I don’t believe it was ever proven the shroud contained human blood. I cannot imagine why the vatican would allow the vacuuming and cleaning of an object that contains holy blood.It does not seem plausible.
Click to expand...
Sorry, there is definitely blood on the Shroud. Here is a snippet from an article by John C. Iannone explaining what has been found and by who. The fact that there is real blood is not one of the controversies.

“The blood on the Shroud is real, human male blood of the type AB (typed by Dr. Baima Ballone in Turin and confirmed in the U.S.). This blood type is rare (about 3% of the world population), with the frequency varying from one region to another. Blood chemist Dr. Alan Adler (University of Western Connecticut) and the late Dr. John Heller (New England Institute of Medicine) found a high concentration of the pigment bilirubin, consistent with someone dying under great stress or trauma and making the color more red than normal ancient blood. Drs. Victor and Nancy Tryon of the University of Texas Health Science Center found X & Y chromosomes representing male blood and “degraded DNA” (approximately 700 base pairs) "consistent with the supposition of ancient blood.”
 
Aslan10 said:
Do you believe that the Shroud of Turin is the real burial shroud of Christ, a forgery, or are you agnostic on the matter?

I am personally agnostic about it. However, I am starting to take a great interest in it. I’ve known about it for a while but it has never interested me really till now for some reason.
Click to expand...
I voted yes based on the books I have read, documentaries I have seen, speakers I have heard…

There are too many similarities to the story provided in the Bible to discount it and no artist could paint a negative image.

Also, the Oviedo cloth really helped nail it for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top