New Evidence for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin

[HAZARD]

8 minutes ago, MadHermit said:

First, we must endorse all 3 Synoptic Gospels which agree that Jesus' corpse was wrapped in a shroud (Greek: "sindon," a large piece of linen like the Shroud of Turin (Mark 15:46; Matt 27:54; Luke 23:53).                                                             Second, according to John 19:40, the corpse was wrapped "according to the burial custom of the Jews."  Israeli experts on ancient fabrics marvel at how perfectly the creation of the Shroud of Turin employed strict rabbinic guidelines for the measurements and composition of such a shroud.  On this see the recommended YouTube video.                                  Third, "There is really no ancient papyrus support for understanding the term ("othonia" in John 19:40) to refer to strips of cloth, and there is no evidence that the Jews wrapped their corpses with bands or strips."                                     "The plural ("othonia") may be a plural of category designating no more than one object or a plural of extension indicating the size of a piece."  (I am quoting Raymond Brown's magisterial 2-volume Commentary on John who bases his assertions on scholarly research on this question, including Blass-Debrunner's advanced grammar of Koine Greek.)

This alone proves the shroud is fake.

The Gospel of John (20:7) tells us that the napkin, which was placed over the face of Jesus, was not just thrown aside like the grave clothes. The Bible takes an entire verse to tell us that the napkin was neatly folded, and was placed at the head of that stony coffin.

Early Sunday morning, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb to find that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance. She ran and found Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved.

She said, 'They have taken the Lord's body out of the tomb, and I don't know where they have put him? Peter and the other disciple ran to the tomb to see. The other disciple out ran Peter and got there first. He stooped and looked in and saw the linen cloth lying there, but he didn't go in. Then Simon Peter arrived and went inside. He also noticed the linen wrappings lying there, while the cloth that had covered Jesus' head was folded up and lying to the side.

 

Jesus was buried in the traditional Jewish way just as was Lazarus whom Jesus raised;

John 11:43-44;

V. 43, And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. 
  

V. 44, And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with grave cloths; and His face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him and let him go.  The fact that a face napkin was wrapped about Jesus head proves beyond doubt that the shroud is fake.

Why would Jesus Christ Himself want relics of Himself, His death and resurrection left behind when the Bible clearly teaches we must not bow down to relics, images or any other idol things? 

And this? The Veil of Veronica, which according to legend was used to wipe the sweat from Jesus’ brow as he carried the cross is also said to bear the likeness of the Face of Christ. Today, several images claim to be the Veil of Veronica. There is an image kept in Saint Peter’s Basilica in Rome which purports to be the same Veronica as was revered in the Middle Ages. Very few inspections are recorded in modern times and there are no detailed photographs. The most detailed recorded inspection of the 20th century occurred in 1907 when Jesuit art historian Joseph Wilpert was allowed to remove two plates of glass to inspect the image. It never ends with the RCC.

[MadHermit]

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 8:10 PM, HAZARD said:

Hazard: "This alone proves the shroud is fake.The Gospel of John (20:7) tells us that the napkin, which was placed over the face of Jesus, was not just thrown aside like the grave clothes. The Bible takes an entire verse to tell us that the napkin was neatly folded, and was placed at the head of that stony coffin."

Duh, the Greek word for your so-called napkin is "soudarion" or the face cloth.  This soudarion is likely the one housed in Oviedo, which was brought from Jerusalem to Spain around 400 AD.  Scientific tests show that its blood spatter is the same as the Shroud's and is the same rare blood type AB.  Scientists therefore conclude that this soudarion once covered the same crucified corpse as the Shroud.  So contrary to your claim, this face clothe supports the Shroud's authenticity rather than refute it!

Hazard: "Jesus was buried in the traditional Jewish way ("linen wrappings"--citing John 20:5-7) just as was Lazarus whom Jesus raised." 

I just refuted your claim and you didn't even bother to give my post a careful reading .  Nor did you or other posters have the integrity to watch the recommended video  As ex0pected, to prejudge.  So I guess I'll just have to rub your nose in it. 

(1) I repeat: our first 3 Gospels all report that Jesus' corpse was wrapped in a "sindon,"  a large sheet of linen like the Shroud of Turin.  You contradict this consensus in favor of your interpretation of John 19:40 and 20:5-7.

(2) According to John 19:40, the corpse was wrapped "according to the burial custom of the Jews."  Talmudic terms for burial clothes are "sadin" (linen sheet") and "takritim" (plural,"shroud"). On the recommended YouTube video, an Israeli expert on ancient fabrics marvels at how perfectly the creation of the Shroud of Turin employed strict rabbinic guidelines for the measurements and composition of such a shroud.  Jesus' shroud was purchased by Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Sanhedrin (Mark 15:46).  As a jurist, he would be a stickler for following conventional rabbinic burial customs.  Not so the case of Lazarus's burial, which is irrelevant to the burial standard used by Joseph.  

(3) You overlook the crucial fact that the term used for Jesus' burial attire in both John 19:40 and 20:5-7 is othonia," a plural noun which like the aforementioned Hebrew "akritim" (also a plural noun) can simply designate a single cloth shroud.  As Johannine scholar Raymond Brown puts it, There is really no ancient papyrus support for understanding the term "othonia" (in John 19:40 and 20:5-7) to refer to strips of cloth."

So our first 3 Gospels support a large single-piece shroud and John is ambiguous on the matter.  There may be a contradiction with the other 3 Gospels or, more likely, John too envisages a shroud.  Either  way, you have no biblical grounds for rejecting the Shroud of Turin and your preference for one Gospel over the other 3 is dubious at best.

Hazard: "Why would Jesus Christ Himself want relics of Himself, His death and resurrection left behind when the Bible clearly teaches we must not bow down to relics, images or any other idol things?" 

Here is a standard scholarly view of Jesus' bodily resurrection: Roman soldiers routinely dump crucified corpses into a common hole or a field.  Jesus was placed in a nearby tomb to avoid profaning the Sabbath.  But as was their custom, on Saturday night Roman soldiers removed Jesus' body from the tomb and took it to the more ignominious site where the corpses of the other 2 thieves were dumped.  When believers started having hallucinations of Jesus' spirit, they wrongly concluded that He had risen bodily.  This is a more reasonable explanation than bodily resurrection!  But on this scenario, why would the soldiers leave the shroud and face cloth behind?  And why would they roll up the face cloth?  The Shroud has apologetic value to refute what would otherwise be a plausible way to explain away the missing corpse.

 

 

[Guest shiloh357]

4 hours ago, MadHermit said:

The Shroud has apologetic value to refute what would otherwise be a plausible way to explain away the missing corpse. 

Not really.  

All of the "explanations" that attempt discredit the resurrection can be answered and refuted without the shroud.

[HAZARD]

14 hours ago, MadHermit said:

 

Jesus rose bodily from the tomb. The Father raised Jesus. Gal 1:1, Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;) 

Luke 24: 34-39, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 
    35, And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread. 
    36, ¶ And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 
    37, But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 
    38, And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 
    39, Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 

Edited June 8, 2018 by HAZARD

[MadHermit]

Hazard: "Jesus rose bodily from the tomb. The Father raised Jesus."

Luke 24: 34-39, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 
    35, And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread. 
    36, ¶ And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 
    37, But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 
    38, And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 
    39, Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 

Hazard, this is an apologetics section.  That means it explores ways of rationally defending the faith.  So the pontifications of your prooftexts merely beg the question, since the scholarly consensus is (1) that the resurrection narratives are riddled with contradictions and (2) that none of the Gospel Easter stories can be traced to eyewitness testimony.  But thanks for teeing up my next planned thread on ADCs and NDEs (After-death Contacts and Near-Death Experiences).  As you will learn, ADCs and NDEs are often accompanied by physical verifications that  are even more impressive than Gospel reports about the Risen Jesus.  

I repeat: the Shroud of Turin is evidentially relevant for 2 reasons:

(1) To an impartial observer, the claim that the Roman soldiers did what they always did with crucified corpses is more credible than the unprecedented miracle of Jesus' bodily resurrection.  A conventional explanation of the empty tomb is that the Romans waited until Saturday evening out of respect for the Jewish Sabbath and Joseph of Arimathea's request and then removed Jesus' corpse to put it with the other 2 crucified corpses, so that the 3 bodies could be thrown into a criminal's burial pit or just left in a field to be eaten by vultures and dogs.  This was standard Roman practice and it provides a more credible explanation for the empty tomb than a bodily resurrection that no one witnessed.

(2) But as a Christian apologist, I want to defend Christ's bodily resurrection.  The Shroud of Turin is potentially helpful for such a defense in 2 ways.  (1) The soldiers would be expected to remove the corpse, linen shroud and all.  So the fact that the shroud is left behind and the head cloth is rolled up suggests that no soldiers removed the body.  (2) The fact that secular scientists can't replicate the Shroud image and admit that it seems to have been made by an unknown radiation energy suggests the possibility that the image was made the resurrection miracle.

Hazard, you have offered no defense in reply to my refutation.  So display some integrity and actually watch the video.  

(I

[HAZARD]

On ‎6‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 8:22 AM, MadHermit said:

Hazard: "Jesus rose bodily from the tomb. The Father raised Jesus."

Luke 24: 34-39, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 
    35, And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread. 
    36, ¶ And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 
    37, But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 
    38, And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 
    39, Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 

Hazard, this is an apologetics section.  That means it explores ways of rationally defending the faith.  So the pontifications of your prooftexts merely beg the question, since the scholarly consensus is (1) that the resurrection narratives are riddled with contradictions and (2) that none of the Gospel Easter stories can be traced to eyewitness testimony.  But thanks for teeing up my next planned thread on ADCs and NDEs (After-death Contacts and Near-Death Experiences).  As you will learn, ADCs and NDEs are often accompanied by physical verifications that  are even more impressive than Gospel reports about the Risen Jesus.  

I repeat: the Shroud of Turin is evidentially relevant for 2 reasons:

(1) To an impartial observer, the claim that the Roman soldiers did what they always did with crucified corpses is more credible than the unprecedented miracle of Jesus' bodily resurrection.  A conventional explanation of the empty tomb is that the Romans waited until Saturday evening out of respect for the Jewish Sabbath and Joseph of Arimathea's request and then removed Jesus' corpse to put it with the other 2 crucified corpses, so that the 3 bodies could be thrown into a criminal's burial pit or just left in a field to be eaten by vultures and dogs.  This was standard Roman practice and it provides a more credible explanation for the empty tomb than a bodily resurrection that no one witnessed.

(2) But as a Christian apologist, I want to defend Christ's bodily resurrection.  The Shroud of Turin is potentially helpful for such a defense in 2 ways.  (1) The soldiers would be expected to remove the corpse, linen shroud and all.  So the fact that the shroud is left behind and the head cloth is rolled up suggests that no soldiers removed the body.  (2) The fact that secular scientists can't replicate the Shroud image and admit that it seems to have been made by an unknown radiation energy suggests the possibility that the image was made the resurrection miracle.

Hazard, you have offered no defense in reply to my refutation.  So display some integrity and actually watch the video.  

(I

I have given what is written regarding Jesus and His body. If you don't like it or believe it, then thats your problem not mine.

Luke 24: 34-39, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 
    35, And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread. 
    36, ¶ And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 
    37, But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 
    38, And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 
    39, Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 

believe the Word of God, written in His book, the Bible. I don't need man made thoughts or video's to teach me anything.

Edited June 9, 2018 by HAZARD