Established proof for the Shroud of Turin

[Bluedragon]

On 4/3/2019 at 8:29 AM, Billiards Ball said:

There's more!

* At a microscopic level, we can see the fiber weaving pattern--like a checkerboard. INDIVIDUAL SQUARES ARE DARK OR LIGHT ON THE SHROUD. It would take an electron microscope and a microscopic "brush" to "paint" the shroud.

I've watched and listened to many of the scientists that were the team that did the work on the Shroud. The Carbon dating cannot be completed with accuracy because there was a fire in the church in the Middle ages. The smoke penetrated and contaminated the results of those tests. 

 

The weave of the cloth is exactly the style and type of the period. There are pores of pollen that existed only in Israel. If this had been a middle ages creation.....and here's the killer. The wounds on the wrists and ankles would be where the translated Greek says they would be. Not the actual location of the fossilized remains of crucified individuals as is shown on the shroud. Every Middle Ages artist painted and created sculpture wrong because there is no word for wrist in the period Greek. Wrist was a part of the hand. Look at every crucifix. According to the mistake in the Middle Ages. The lance wound in the side. The wounds on the back exactly what is to be expected from scourging. 

The mystery of the entire shroud. How did an artist make a three D figure in a piece of cloth and exactly how was it done without paint or pigment? 

[Bluedragon]

Just finished reading a scientific challenge to the evaluation team of the original study. 

There was a curious point to this study. Part of the challenge concerns the Church and exactly what the team was approved of doing. The Carbon Dating Academy requested three examples from three different locations on the shroud. The Church allowed one sample. That sample is defined as being Rao's Thread. The sample has cotton fibers in the thread. This means the sample was taken from a scrap of material used by nuns to repair the shroud after the fire and the damage done to the artifact. If that sample came from nuns trying to repair the shroud ....that further satisfies the claim that the same was corrupted and is not from the base of the shroud. 

Further evidence. Every Medieval Artist has serious flaw in every painting and every sculpture. The Greek translation of the time concerns the lack of a word for wrists. Thus the nails in the palms of the hands. A mediaeval forgery would have the wrist wounds in the palms of the hands. Every Architectural sample found in tombs through the region specifically  has the nail wound's between the bones of the wrists. Even Mel Gibson fouled this up in his film, when he placed his hand on the cross depicting the nail being driven. His rendition shows the nail in the palm of his hand. 

[Deadworm]

Recent modern dating techniques have dated the Shroud to the time of Jesus (200 BC -200 AD).  The face cloth of Oviedo, Spain (John 20:7) has the same rare blood type AB as the Shroud and was brought to Spain from Jerusalem.

3 reasons why evangelicals should care about the question of the Shroud's authenticity:

(1) Jesus' tomb was near Golgotha and his body was placed there to avoid profaning the Sabbath.  Nowhere do the Gospels mention the removal of the corpses of the other 2 victims from their crosses.  So skeptics argue that when all 3 were dead, Roman soldiers did what they always do--they removed the other 2 corpses and then retrieved Jesus' corpse from the nearby tomb, put all 3 in cart, and took them away to be dumped in a pit.  No Christian witnesses were present to say it didn't happen that way.

If the Shroud is genuine, then the linen cloth and burial ointments brought by Joseph of Aramathea are a recognition of nobility and the Roman soldiers may have left Jesus' corpse in the tomb out of respect for Joseph's status as a Sanhedrinist, who owned that tomb.  Skeptics reject the Gospel claim that Joseph was a closet disciple because no believer was present to witness his conversation with Pilate.  Extraordinary claims like Jesus' bodily resurrection require extraordinary proof.  So the authenticity of the Shroud would have extraordinary apologetic value.

(2) Scientists can't replicate how the Shroud's image was made.  The consensus is that it was created through some sort of radiation, but not heat.  The energy created by the bodily resurrection comes to mind! 

(3) To judge by the common evangelical reaction, you'd think they trivialize the redemptive role of Jesus' shed blood.  If the blood on the Shroud is Jesus' blood, then the Shroud deserves as much veneration as it can get.

[JohnR7]

On 7/2/2022 at 10:35 PM, Bluedragon said:

Just finished reading a scientific challenge to the evaluation team of the original study. 

I have done a lot of research also, and I believe the shroud is real. But even if it was a work of art all the more we should be amazed.  Forensic Science is very advanced. The American Medical Association had an article on the Shroud back in 1986. Also there are two, one of the head and one for the body and they match. 

[HAZARD]

The shroud is a fake. I have seen it. The face alone proves it's a fake.

Gods Word says it's a sin for a man to have long hair.  1 Corinthians 11:14 rhetorically asks, “Does not even nature teach you that it is a shame for a man to have long hair?” 

So, would Jesus go against His Holy Word and walk about with long hair?

He also said, they pulled out His beard;

Isaiah 50:6, Christian Standard Bible
I gave my back to those who beat me, and my cheeks to those who tore out my beard. I did not hide my face from scorn and spitting.

The shroud shows a man with long hair and a full beard. FAKE, I have personally seen it for myself!

 

 

 

[HAZARD]

Three D model of Jesus based on the shroud of Turin. (National Catholic Register),

More proof that its a fake. Jesus never had long hair and He had His beard ripped off.

 

[Roymond]

On 1/3/2018 at 6:58 AM, Quasar93 said:

You might be interested in the notes Joel [Not the prophet! ] took from the documentary The Case for Christ's Resurrection. Whether the scientists involved were biased or not is unknown, but you can at least google for rebuttals to each of these and judge for yourself.

The case against the authenticity of the shroud:

1. The Carbon 14 dating test placed the sample taken to be woven between 1260 and 1390 - consistent with the earliest known record of the shroud in 1353.
 

The C14 testing had so many errors made there was no way they were going to get an accurate reading.  It included cloth from a patch, in an area with smoke stains, so the C14 was coming from three distinct times:  the year the patches were done, the year the smokestains happened, and the original material.

[Roymond]

On 3/1/2019 at 6:58 PM, simplejeff said:

Any disobedience , transgression of TORAH,  any tiny thought opposed to Yahweh, 

 

if any part in the heart or will is rebelling, if there is ANY "I WILL"('I don't care if it is sin'), 

then it is sin deserving death.

"Transgression of TORAH"?

Not according to the Holy Spirit in Acts 5; He reduced the entire Old Testament down to four items.

[Roymond]

On 3/2/2019 at 5:53 PM, simplejeff said:

Those are not skipped, but acknowledged,  without pulling it out of the rest of Scripture, without ignoring plain Scripture that you apparently deny and don't accept.

The theory espoused by those who think they can sin freely without repentance are part of several different versions of false gospels,  by several different groups perpetrated all over the world, deceiving billions of souls.

Requiring obedience to the Laws of the Old Testament is false and is no gospel at all.

Paul plainly says the Law cannot make anyone righteous, and that we are dead to the Law.

The Holy Spirit reduced the entire set of requirements to four things -- it's in Acts 15 -- which means the rest of the Law doesn't apply.

And Jesus said He fulfilled the Law, i.e. He filled it full.  When you have a barrel of wine, and someone comes and tops it off right to the rim, do you keep adding wine?  No -- because it's already full.

[Roymond]

On 9/10/2022 at 7:24 PM, HAZARD said:

The shroud is a fake. I have seen it. The face alone proves it's a fake.

Gods Word says it's a sin for a man to have long hair.  1 Corinthians 11:14 rhetorically asks, “Does not even nature teach you that it is a shame for a man to have long hair?” 

So, would Jesus go against His Holy Word and walk about with long hair?

He also said, they pulled out His beard;

Isaiah 50:6, Christian Standard Bible
I gave my back to those who beat me, and my cheeks to those who tore out my beard. I did not hide my face from scorn and spitting.

The shroud shows a man with long hair and a full beard. FAKE, I have personally seen it for myself!

 

 

 

Your approach here requires a time machine: Paul wrote well after Jesus was crucified, so the verses don't apply.  The appropriate source would be the Old Testament, along with Jewish customs of the day.  In first century Judiasm, there were several reasons a man might keep his hair long -- Paul did more than once, a fact that has to be considered when pondering what he wrote.  Paul wore his hair long in accordance with a vow, and Jesus may well have done the same.  It wouldn't be at all surprising if at the point when "He set His face to go to Jerusalem" He made a vow to not turn back, and that vow could well have been signified by allowing His hair to grow.  Such a vow would likely have included His beard, though it would have been kept tidy.  As for sideburns, those were kept barely tamed by Jewish men, many of whom bore them proudly as a sign that they were Jews, in contrast to the Romans. 

So nothing about the Shroud makes it impossible for it to be Jesus.