Jump to content

christian forums

Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Forums

Welcome to Worthy Christian Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Another take on the Turin shroud

* * * * * 1 votes

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
9 replies to this topic

#1
OakWood

OakWood

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,414 posts

For discussion purposes only. Just want to see what others think

 

http://shoebat.com/2...l-christ-alive/

 

If I had to someday defend the Bible in a court of law, and at the end of the trial, after all of the evidence has been presented, witnesses and experts questioned here would be my closing arguments:

Your Honor, Opposing Council, Members of the Jury. To the point when the Opposing Council accused, argued and asked as to how can we believe in all the miracles? How do we prove beyond doubt that Moses tossed his staff and that the magicians challenged him to only have the staff-serpent of Moses gobble up all the fakes?

May I present the results of one DNA evidence titled “The Shroud of Turin”.

The Shroud, in a way, like the Staff of Moses, turned into a serpent since the story of that relic gobbled up whatever fake imitations and challenges all the naysayers, magicians, scientists and lawyers concocted.

Like the Staff of Moses, the Shroud was also called a fake by some scientists who scrutinized it, artists who tried to replicate it, yet they all failed miserably to discredit it.

It even tells the story of Jesus Himself; He too is called a fake, yet the Shroud tells of a story of His crucifixion and resurrection. The Shroud of Turin is the story of every slandered Christian, for I too was called a fake and a fraud to only withstand my accusers for years to come.

The opposing Council offered deceptive explanations even presenting a false premise that Leonardo da Vinci created the image with a primitive medieval room-sized camera, they stated that the chemicals needed to make photographs existed in Leonardo’s day. Yet when that was proven false since the opposing Council never presented any evidence that Leonardo Da Vinci or anyone during the middle ages knew how to use such chemicals for photography, they then claimed it was easily manufactured by attempting to create replicas through heated elements which all failed miserably since the pigment on the Shroud of Turin was never made by any heated elements.

If the Shroud of Turin was a fake, how come no man on earth was able to replicate it?

The attempts by modern magicians never stopped.

In 1988 they said it was a fraud after doing carbon-14 dating of scraps of the cloth carried out by labs in Oxford, Zurich and Arizona declaring it to be from 1260 to 1390, to later find out there was cotton in only the sample taken to be carbon tested and that there was no cotton in the rest of the shroud! As it appeared, the location on the shroud where the sample was taken are later repaired spots, the worst possible place they could have gotten the samples (1)

Newer evidence even shattered the “fake claim” when non-carbon-14 scientific tests on the Shroud of Turin which dates the cloth to ancient times, to the first century, debunking such earlier experiments that dated it only to the Middle Ages.

Then they said it was still a fake when a tomb discovery at Akeldama (Field of Blood) with a newfound first century shroud that was simply woven linen and wool textiles and by that they supposedly debunked the Turin Shroud which by contrast, is made of a single textile woven in a complex twill pattern claiming that this type of cloth was not known to have been available in the region until medieval times. (2)

Then that was debunked as the newly discovered burial textiles from the recently discovered “tomb of the shroud” at Akeldama typify those used in Jerusalem during the first century is over-reaching, without foundation and contradictory to other abundant archaeological evidence burial cloths with Twill-weave textiles, shroud fragments, and intact or nearly intact shrouds which have been excavated at various sites. One example were twill-weave textiles from the Cave of the Warrior near Jericho (produced 6,000 years ago), the Qumran caves, Masada, as well as in pieces of linen from Palmyra in eastern Syria, made during the 1st–3rd centuries AD (3) which were just as complex as the Shroud of Turin. That even the type of weave, the herringbone pattern of the Turin Shroud also existed, which absolutely nullify such objections and we know from the Gospels that Joseph of Arimathea was a rich man and it was he who provided the intricate Shroud used to bury Jesus (Mt 27:57-61). (4)

Then they said that Leonardo Da Vinci, a genius artist must have manufactured it, so the fake magicians concocted a new story to refute all this, to later be proven false. For Leonardo da Vinci or any medieval forger to concoct his prank, he would have to have known the weaves, textiles of Israel in the first century and somehow find one and send it on a fieldtrip to Jerusalem and stick to it 47,000 to 94,000 pollen grains, all of which included Gundelia tournefortii (an extremely fearsome-looking thorn used for the crown of thorns), Zygophyllum dumosum and Cistus creticus, which came from the very narrow geographical region of mere twenty miles between Hebron and Jerusalem.

The medieval forger would also have to obtain Spectrographic chemical analysis of travertine aragonite calcium, found on the Shroud’s fabric, which can only be found in a specific area in ancient tombs specific to only Jerusalem and no where else in the world (5)



#2
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,449 posts

There is no way to prove it is the burial cloth of Jesus.   But it can be proven to be a genuine article and it can be proven to be a photographic negative which only adds to the mystery of how the image came to be.   The imagery is not a medieval forgery or a modern forgery. 



#3
ayin jade

ayin jade

    Royal Member

  • Platinum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,459 posts

I saw on unsolved mysteries once an episode where they showed someone using a painting technique that was known at a certain time period. This person painted a shroud and it looked identical to the shroud of turin. (Except facial features were different because the person they used as a model looked different.) But the unique features of the shroud of turin were identically reproduced by this painting method. 

 

I dont know if the shroud is truly of Him or not. I dont think it matters. To those who need proof, no proof is good enough. To those who dont need proof, the shroud doesnt matter. There is a face cloth too in a different church that is supposedly the face cloth that was on His face. 

 

http://en.wikipedia....arium_of_Oviedo



#4
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,449 posts

I don't think it could be painted as they have already tested for that.   And it could not be medieval forgery since the figure on the shroud is anatomically correct and the nail prints are in the wrists whereas conventional wisdom during the middle ages showed in paintings that the nails went through the palms. 

 

If it is Jesus or not, it doesn't really matter.



#5
Sevenseas

Sevenseas

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,912 posts

I don't think it is genuine and I have prob seen any program presented on it one way or another

 

So, my personal conviction is that it is not Christ but should I be wrong, it really doesn't matter

 

Bottom line for me:  it does not produce evidence for fact while the Bible records many first hand experiences with Christ.

 

During medieval times, enough fragments of the cross were sold as to make a small forest......and other relics were also available.  These relics have fallen

out of favor but people still visit Jerusalem.

 

What am I saying?  Some people believe by simple faith as drawn by God...others, well the 5 senses demand some sort of explanation while really, only the Holy Spirit

knows the things which belong to God and makes them known to believers.  These are things grasped by faith and not by things seen other than changed lives

 

Before I become too philosophical, I'll stop



#6
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,449 posts

I think it is only "genuine" in the sense that it can't be a forgery created to be deceptive.  The evidence against a modern or medival forgery is just too great.

 

I don't think it it is a genuine portrait of Jesus.



#7
Sevenseas

Sevenseas

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,912 posts

I turned on the TV last night while having a late supper and low and behold...what was on?  A special on the shroud....go figure...



#8
MorningGlory

MorningGlory

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,586 posts

I saw on unsolved mysteries once an episode where they showed someone using a painting technique that was known at a certain time period. This person painted a shroud and it looked identical to the shroud of turin. (Except facial features were different because the person they used as a model looked different.) But the unique features of the shroud of turin were identically reproduced by this painting method. 

 

I dont know if the shroud is truly of Him or not. I dont think it matters. To those who need proof, no proof is good enough. To those who dont need proof, the shroud doesnt matter. There is a face cloth too in a different church that is supposedly the face cloth that was on His face. 

 

http://en.wikipedia....arium_of_Oviedo

 

That show would be woefully out of date and misleading.  The shroud contains a negative image; no paint can be found on the cloth.  It is similar to a photo negative.



#9
ayin jade

ayin jade

    Royal Member

  • Platinum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,459 posts

 

I saw on unsolved mysteries once an episode where they showed someone using a painting technique that was known at a certain time period. This person painted a shroud and it looked identical to the shroud of turin. (Except facial features were different because the person they used as a model looked different.) But the unique features of the shroud of turin were identically reproduced by this painting method. 

 

I dont know if the shroud is truly of Him or not. I dont think it matters. To those who need proof, no proof is good enough. To those who dont need proof, the shroud doesnt matter. There is a face cloth too in a different church that is supposedly the face cloth that was on His face. 

 

http://en.wikipedia....arium_of_Oviedo

 

That show would be woefully out of date and misleading.  The shroud contains a negative image; no paint can be found on the cloth.  It is similar to a photo negative.

 

 

It used a mineral that left no trace and it was a method of negative painting that had all the unique features of the shroud. But I dont know if that is how the shroud was done. Or if the shroud is a genuine artifact of some kind rather than a crusade hoax. What matters to me is that no amount of proof would be good enough for unbelievers anyway.



#10
FresnoJoe

FresnoJoe

    Royal Member

  • Worthy Watchman
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 42,393 posts
The medieval forger would also have to obtain Spectrographic chemical analysis of travertine aragonite calcium, found on the Shroud’s fabric, which can only be found in a specific area in ancient tombs specific to only Jerusalem

 

~

 

I think it is only "genuine" in the sense that it can't be a forgery created to be deceptive.  The evidence against a modern or medieval forgery is just too great.

 

I don't think it it is a genuine portrait of Jesus.

 

:sherlock:

 

The Manufacturer (?) Seems To Have Forgotten

That The LORD's Head Was Wrapped Separately

 

And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself. John 20:7

 

Poor Fellow Must Have Worshiped

Someplace Where All The Bibles Were Chained Up, You Think?

 

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Romans 10:17






Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Message Boards - 1999-2014 part of the Worthy Network