The Shroud of Turin is the Greatest Gift given to Mankind

[Righteousone]

Without reading this whole thread, let me start by saying JESUS CHRIST is the greatest gift given mankind. I personally believe that the Shroud is the real deal, but my faith does not rest on it. There are persuasive arguements both pro and con as to it’s authenticity. Even if proven to be as old as it would need to be if it is the Shroud of Christ…there’s no way to CONCLUSIVELY PROVE it’s the shroud of Christ…unless God tells us himself.

God is telling us, that is why He has sent us the Shroud…

 

[kell0618]

I am unable to link directly to this article, so I paste it in its entirety below. Apologies to the moderators if this is a problem and please delete at your discretion. Thank you.

A New Era for the Shroud of Turin Interview With Expert Father Gianfranco Berbenni

By Paolo Centofanti

ROME, FEB. 15, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Leaked information about a BBC interview to air on Holy Saturday reports that Christopher Bronk Ramsey, director of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, thinks the 1998 tests on the Shroud of Turin should be re-evaluated.

The 1988 carbon-14 tests – done in the Oxford laboratories – dated the shroud in the Middle Ages, thereby negating that it could be Christ’s burial cloth.

ZENIT spoke with Capuchin Father Gianfranco Berbenni, professor of “Science and Theology Regarding the Holy Shroud” at Rome’s Regina Apostolorum university. In this interview, he comments on the long history of research on the shroud, as well as photographic reproduction made for display at this summer’s World Youth Day.

Q: How do you see these possible new elements related to the Holy Shroud and to a possible disproving of the 1988 carbon-14 analyses?

Father Berbenni: Going beyond the leaked information, I think that a new era of investigations about the Shroud is opening; 20 years have passed since those scientific studies.

Q: Did Ramsey form part of the 1988 analysis team?

Father Berbenni: He worked in the laboratory in which the analyses were done. We could say that this is a new generation of scientists who are joining the research on the Shroud. Many of the older generation have left us, even physically, and this new generation rightly is taking up again the investigations, also because of a refining of the methods and instruments for archaeological dating over these years.

Some have even spoken about a kind of conspiracy, as if the $1 million offered for verifying the non-authenticity of the Shroud could have motivated the scientists, let’s not say to falsify, but at least to direct the final results.

Perhaps this could be considered a bit of “scientific gossip.” Little credit should be given to rumors when they do not have serious proof. The problem perhaps is that both sides, the one favorable to the Holy Shroud and the other against it were very much in conflict. Perhaps both sides brought to the surface their best arguments in that period. Both probably need to historically review those events.

Q: Regarding your statement about “scientific gossip,” how do you evaluate the communication and information generally published about the Holy Shroud and up to what point do you think that at times it is used to make a circus of the information?Father Berbenni: One of the weak points, recently examined as well in the International Center of Turin, is indeed ensuring the quality of information related to the Holy Shroud. Because of this a good press office is fundamental in order to give journalists trustworthy materials. It is, therefore, more than anything, a task of organizing communication. Information, if incomplete, becomes more easily manipulated.

Q: Therefore the manipulation of information can even be involuntary?

Father Berbenni: About the willfulness of it, there are many hints, but beyond the hints, there are no proofs.

Q: What do you think about the photographic enlargement being made of the Holy Shroud to be displayed in Novara, Italy, and then for World Youth Day in Sydney? Do you think that it can run the risk of trivializing the Holy Shroud?

Father Berbenni: The essential thing is that this initiative of the enlargement maintains that elegance of communication that the Holy Shroud has always brought to its surroundings. Thus this is a very good initiative; the essential thing is that a non-superficial tone is protected.

Q: Is there anything new in the studies about the Holy Shroud?

Father Berbenni: Beyond the intervention regarding protecting the preservation of the Holy Shroud, in these days, I think the Church does not intend to accelerate, at least at the moment, new investigations. The essential thing is its optimal conservation, something that has been verified for almost 10 years with its placement in the new, and splendid chest.

Q: Are there misunderstandings about the theological meaning of the Holy Shroud?

Father Berbenni: Sadly this is one of the weakest areas right now, in the popular and social perception of this cloth. In part because of the conflict that has sometimes marked it.

It is a splendid cloth, but is always at the center of aggravated discussions with a cultural character, and at times even about theological positions.

Q: Can you speak to us about the scientific or chemical theories about the way in which the image of the Holy Shroud could have formed?

Father Berbenni: Substantially there are two major schools. Our center in Rome, which is inclined toward accepting a normal physical-chemical formation, and the majority, at least presently, of the scientific positions, in which there are groups with hypotheses going from the mysterious, because they do not yet have demonstrated bases, to the esoteric.

Investigations about the formation of the image are very linked to the characteristics of the investigations of the STURP [Project of Investigation of the Shroud of Turn] from 1976 to 1988, but with some presuppositions.

The important thing is that they continue investigations without exaggerated positions of “scientific fantasy” but with freedom of investigation.

Regarding ourselves, we would suggest returning to much simpler, “normal” hypothesis, given that we always have available the high resolution photo of the negative of the Holy Shroud, which until 2002 was not analyzable except in small parts. It helps in that which refers to the technical aspects of formation of the image.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

[SIGN]Did anybody notice that
the shroud is a perfect negative image
(see post # 18)? [/SIGN]
I’d like to see some arguments about this. I can’t find much on the internet. Does anybody have any links?

 

[revelations]

AHEM I would say the greatest gift to man kind is the body and blood of our Lord present in the blessed sacrament, given up for our consumption.

The shroud is sweet an all, but c’mon…I’d rather be with the guy that was wrapped in the shroud than have the shroud… AHEM

On a more shroud-y note, the 3-D perfect negative is very perplexing. For those that don’t know, a 3-D bump map is a kind of code, that uses the shades of black and white to indicate elevation. These kinds of things are used in videogames, and must be created by computers.

The shroud exhibits these properties, and the image disposed on it maps a 3-D face. Very interesting considering we didn’t know about bump maps until the advent of computers…

 

[Valke2]

So far, it’s been IMPOSSIBLE to duplicate using even modern technology, much less that of the suppossed 13th century forger.

I don’t know. I read an article yesterday that said some guy in France had done it using medeival tech.

 

[ibkc]

I don’t know. I read an article yesterday that said some guy in France had done it using medeival tech.

A guy figured out how the image could have gotten onto the cloth using heated bas relief sculpture. His experiment was on the image only and did not take into account all of the other odd things about the Shroud; therefore, he did not duplicate the Shroud.

 

[Thing]

I am saying nothing as to whether it is a forgery or not. All I am saying is that your point that it matches the NT accounts would be true for either the real shroud or a reasonably competent forgery. Hence that particular point is not useful in deciding whether the Shroud is or is not a forgery.

rossum

I think the point is that a forgery is not possible, not in medieval times and not in todays computer-age either. Technology is not advanced enough to reproduce, in the same manner, the image on the shroud.

 

[Valke2]

Researchers of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem reported the presence of pollen grains in the cloth samples, showing species appropriate to the spring in Israel. However, these researchers, Avinoam Danin and Uri Baruch, were working with samples provided by Max Frei, a Swiss police criminologist who had previously been censured for faking evidence. Independent review of the strands showed that one strand out of the 26 provided contained significantly more pollen than the others, perhaps pointing to deliberate contamination

Another item of note is that the olive trees surrounding Jerusalem would have been in full bloom at the time, meaning that there should have been a significant amount of olive tree pollen on the Shroud. However, there does not seem to be any at all

In the winter of 2002, the Shroud was subjected to an aggressive restoration which shocked the worldwide community of Shroud researchers and was condemned by most. Authorized by the Archbishop of Turin as a beneficial conservation measure, this operation was based on the claim that the charred material around the burn holes was causing continuing oxidation which would eventually threaten the image. It has been labeled unnecessary surgery that destroyed scientific data, removed the repairs done in 1534 that were part of the Shroud’s heritage, and squandered opportunities for sophisticated research.

all from wikipedia. At the very least, the issue remains in dispute.

 

[Righteousone]

Researchers of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem reported the presence of pollen grains in the cloth samples, showing species appropriate to the spring in Israel. However, these researchers, Avinoam Danin and Uri Baruch, were working with samples provided by Max Frei, a Swiss police criminologist who had previously been censured for faking evidence. Independent review of the strands showed that one strand out of the 26 provided contained significantly more pollen than the others, perhaps pointing to deliberate contamination

Another item of note is that the olive trees surrounding Jerusalem would have been in full bloom at the time, meaning that there should have been a significant amount of olive tree pollen on the Shroud. However, there does not seem to be any at all

In the winter of 2002, the Shroud was subjected to an aggressive restoration which shocked the worldwide community of Shroud researchers and was condemned by most. Authorized by the Archbishop of Turin as a beneficial conservation measure, this operation was based on the claim that the charred material around the burn holes was causing continuing oxidation which would eventually threaten the image. It has been labeled unnecessary surgery that destroyed scientific data, removed the repairs done in 1534 that were part of the Shroud’s heritage, and squandered opportunities for sophisticated research.

all from wikipedia. At the very least, the issue remains in dispute.

Valke, I already told you about the flowers that were found on the Shroud in another post by a Jewish man who proved it was the time around Pontius Pilate. Why are you saying this now?

 

[Thing]

Valke:

Another item of note is that the olive trees surrounding Jerusalem would have been in full bloom at the time, meaning that there should have been a significant amount of olive tree pollen on the Shroud. However, there does not seem to be any at all

Was’nt Jesus crucified around the time of the vernal equinox in March?
Don’t olives flower in May?

 

[Valke2]

Valke, I already told you about the flowers that were found on the Shroud in another post by a Jewish man who proved it was the time around Pontius Pilate. Why are you saying this now?

because this seems to contradict some of what you said. As to the flowers there are plenty of critics that say it is impossible to tell what type of flowers they are as the images are too blurry/blobby.

 

[Righteousone]

because this seems to contradict some of what you said. As to the flowers there are plenty of critics that say it is impossible to tell what type of flowers they are as the images are too blurry/blobby.

They proved by the newspapers in Israel that it was in fact flowers blooming at the time of Christ. Just like they confirmed the coins on his eyes are the time of Pilate. They already established this. Anything else is not true.

 

[chewchoo]

[sign]Did anybody notice that
the shroud is a perfect negative image
(see post # 18)? [/sign]
I’d like to see some arguments about this. I can’t find much on the internet. Does anybody have any links?

see post 59

 

[Thing]

[SIGN]Did anybody notice that
the shroud is a perfect negative image
(see post # 18)? [/SIGN]
I’d like to see some arguments about this. I can’t find much on the internet. Does anybody have any links?

One of the nice things about the Shroud image is its three dimensional quality.
If you take a portrait photo of somebody outside in the sunlight, there wil be shadows cast on different parts of the face, the side of the nose away from the light, the eyes and places around the lips would also be in shadow.

If you tried to make a three dimensional image from these photos it would not be possible, the shadowed areas lack information, no - or very little light is reflected back from a shadow and a three dimensional form could not be produced.

With the shroud even the areas which would be shaded in natural light and in photographs, (for example in the deeper recesses of the eye sockets), turn out to have also somewhat oxidized the linen. There is, in other words, continous information right across the face, in the ‘lit areas’ and in the ‘shaded areas’, in the parts of the face in direct contact with the cloth and in the areas of the face not in contact with the cloth.
The best analogy I can think of is as if the body of the man on the shroud uniformly lit up with radiation from the body, even just for a moment, allowing the deeper contours of the body to give continuous and as much information to the the cloth about its form as the higher contoured areas of the body the difference in degree of oxidization or shading on the image being proportional to the distance of that part of the body from the cloth.

 

[paarsurrey]

One of the nice things about the Shroud image is its three dimensional quality.

Hi

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

How would you explain about the blood spots on the cloth drenched / soaked / saturated with blood of the man in the shroud?

Could the cloth be saturated with blood if the man was dead already when wrapped in the cloth?

If not, then why or why not?

Any information on this , please.

 

[Thing]

Hi

Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

How would you explain about the blood spots on the cloth drenched / soaked / saturated with blood of the man in the shroud?

Could the cloth be saturated with blood if the man was dead already when wrapped in the cloth?

If not, then why or why not?

Any information on this , please.

Hi,
Well I can’t do any better than give you a pathologists report, in his own words:

Upon examining the chest, the pathologist notes a large blood stain over the right pectoral area Close examination shows a variance in intensity of the stain consistent with the presence of two types of fluid, one comprised of blood, and the other resembling water. There is distinct evidence of a gravitational effect on this stain with the blood flowing downward and without spatter or other evidence of the projectile activity which would be expected from blood issuing from a functional arterial source. This wound has all the characteristics of a postmortem type flow of blood from a body cavity or from an organ such as the heart. At the upper plane of the wound is an ovoid skin defect which is characteristic of a penetrating track produced by a sharp puncturing instrument.

There seems to be an increase in the anteroposterior diameter of the chest due to bilateral expansion…

---

“For over 50 years as a Forensic Pathologist, I have been actively involved with the investigation of deaths which come under the jurisdiction of a coroner of Medical Examiner. During that time, I have personally examined over 25,000 bodies by autopsy to determine the cause and manner of death.”

shroud.com/bucklin.htm

---

…It may be remembered that when His side was pierced both blood and water flowed from the wound.

 

[Righteousone]

Thank you Thing for that info…

 

[Thing]

Thank you Thing for that info…

:tiphat:

 

[paarsurrey]

One of the nice things about the Shroud image is its three dimensional quality.
If you take a portrait photo of somebody outside in the sunlight, there wil be shadows cast on different parts of the face, the side of the nose away from the light, the eyes and places around the lips would also be in shadow.

Hi

I know as you have stated that the image/photograph is three dimensional. Can you tell us if it is coloured as well. If so; could you please tell us features of Jesus from the shroud with accuracy? Colour of his eyes etc.

Thanks

 

[Stephen0]

May I put in my two bits? There was an exhibit centered on the Shroud in my area. As a person trained as an artist, I was interested on observing it to find out how I might as an artist have created a forgery of this relic. After studying the associated scientific information, I came to just a few of the conclusions that impressed me and made me realize that no medival forger could have created this image.
First, whoever would have forged it at anytime before the 19th century would not have known that Christ was pierced through the wrists, instead of the hands. Second, the imprint within and upon the flax can’t be done by staining, painting, or even heating a metal sculptural image and placing the cloth over it, but only through some sort of radation technique, which didn’t exist prior to the 20th century. Third, naturally the reverse image discovered in the 19th century could not have been done before the time of photography when reverse imaging was developed. Fourth, a forger of this one’s virtuosity would have wanted to portray Christ’s crown of thorns puncture wounds but didn’t. Why? Because this “forger” buried them so that it was only possible to discovery them on the latest scientific examination of the skull area. Moreover, the crown of thorns blood stains on the shroud do not form a ring as all artist throughout the ages would have depicted, but instead form a skull cap which would have been the most logical form to maintain the crown’s position on the head but the most illogical action for a forger to commit to convince a gullible audience. Besides this would have been a waste of his valuable time.to hide the marks.
So in conclusion, though my faith does not rest on the Shroud, I can’t believe that a gifted forger could have been the author of this masterpiece, and instead find that it only deepens my faith.