I thought the Shroud of Turn was debunked when its Carbon-14 date of manufacture was put medieval time, a classic time for pious frauds.
However the presence of the Turin Shroud in Lirey, France, is only undoubtedly attested in 1390 when Bishop Pierre d’Arcis wrote a memorandum to Antipope Clement VII, stating that the shroud was a forgery and that the artist had confessed.
I suppose you can pin your hopes on the Veil of Veronica (putatively a cloth on which Jesus wiped his face and left a magical image).Veronica is from the Latin Verrus and the word “Icon”.
I thought I had previously discussed the bible elsewhere in this thread, or at least recently.
Matthew and Luke seem to be unreliable (ie pious frauds) as they needed to use Mark as a reference, and then added stuff to it. John is a theological document, offering attestation to things to which the author had no chance to witness. I find the apostles letters interesting as a record of contemporary teaching, but not so much as a record of Jesus.
Which leaves us with Mark, written after the principles were safely dead, about the time of the fall of Jerusalem, as an attempt to separate Christianity from the Jews who were, you may recall, on the outs for rebellion. The Jews were forced to evacuate Jerusalem.
Writing it at that time makes its prophecy of things which take place before its writing a low risk effort.
OT prophecies I find unconvincing as people would go through the list of prophecies and then tailor their story (even if not modeling the actual events) to fulfill the putative prophecy.
I guess you [dm] don’t keep up with the latest developments then regarding the shroud and the face cloth [veil of veronica?] b/c the History channel had a very good [even by their stds] documentary on the carbon-dating and authenticity of both.
Worth a review - came out around Easter 2013.
Shroud of Turin
http://www.history.com/news/shroud-of-turin-not-a-medieval-forgery-according-to-new-book