FRESH CLUE SHOWS TURIN SHROUD MAY BE GENUINE BURIAL CLOTH OF CHRIST

The Mirror ^ | April 2, 2004 | David Edwards

[GadareneDemoniac]

A few years ago, I heard a speech by someone ( a Doctor, I think ) who saw a woman who was at Hiroshima when the bomb was dropped and who survived. This lady was wearing a silk, floral dress and the images of the flowers were permanently imprinted on her skin by some radiological effect of the bomb.
I personally don't think that the shroud can be scientifically proved or disproved, although the arguments on this thread make me believe that it is real.
As in all matters of faith,
"You either will or you won't,
You either can or you can't,
You either is or you ain't"
What is more real than any physical object is the reality of God's grace to us.

[Mr. Jeeves]

The image on the shroud is of a brutally beaten, scourged, crucified and spear-pierced man.

Or a thirteenth century "performance artist" who let his accomplices paint him up with a blood-like substance to mimic Christ's wounds. There was big money to be made in selling Holy Relics even back then.

The Russian "scientist" who called the 1988 testing flawed just got ruthlessly exposed as a fraud in the latest issue of Skeptical Inquirer.

[cyncooper]

Or a thirteenth century "performance artist" who let his accomplices paint him up with a blood-like substance to mimic Christ's wounds.

The blood on the shroud and the head wrapping in Aviedo both are typed AB, not a "blood-like" substance.

[the OlLine Rebel]

An x-ray is a frequency level of light, a type of energy. A negative is simply a reverse image, apples to oranges talking of energy types. Perhaps the person made a mistake (since it sort of looks like our typical x-ray image formats).

[Snowy]

The blood on the shroud and the head wrapping in Aviedo both are typed AB, not a "blood-like" substance.

Hmmm... Rare blood type. According to my Google results, 4% of the population is AB+, and 1% is AB-. Does anyone know if DNA tests are planned?

[the OlLine Rebel]

I haven't looked at the Bible in a while. Where does it specifically say anything about Mary's ancestry? Besides the assumption about the Judah tribe.

[SkyPilot]

ping

[Alberta's Child]

You missed the point completely.

Sure, it could be duplicated in theory, but this does not mean that any test could possibly be done to validate it. If you sit a monkey at a typewriter and let him type away from dawn 'til dusk every day, and then check every night to see what he's typed only to find that he hasn't typed the Declaration of Independence, then there are only two conclusions you can reach:

1. He is incapable of typing the Declaration of Independence; or

2. He is capable of typing the Declaration of Independence, but simply hasn't done it yet.

The validity of Point #2 cannot be tested using any scientific means -- i.e., you will never reach a point in time where #2 could be "proven" to be demonstrably false, even if you have ten million monkeys typing simultaneously and none of them ever types the Declaration of Independence. Because it is beyond any kind of scrutiny, this theory cannot be considered "scientific" in any way and therefore must be relegated to the annals of "unfounded speculation."

[the OlLine Rebel]

I am not, altho I wonder why the Bible's endless genealogies seem to focus on men w/occasional footnote mentions of the women (son of this, son of that, son of etc [brother to Ruth]), if it's "passed thru the mother"? Why so much emphasis on the males if that is the case?

[mtbopfuyn]

As I have said above, this will never be done. What if the DNA is a match?

I'm not disagreeing with you at all. It would throw the whole celebacy thing out the window and cause too many to question the Catholic Church and it's teachings. Not that I think it should be such an earth shattering revelation as it would bring Him more in line with family and the every day man, but many would would totally freak. The Bible had many more books before Constantine got his panties in a wad so who knows what information has been locked away or lost forever. Of course the NT was written from a man's view and even more so from men with ideas and traditions that excluded women. The story is that Mary and Mary M. fled so it would be plausible that to keep any supposed decendants safe that the writings would not mention it. I dunno, I wasn't there, but that story has been around as long as the Shroud and I suspect no one really wants to prove or potentially disprove either.

[SuziQ]

The Shroud is a proven fake

Obviously not proven, or there would no longer be any questions raised about it's authenticity.

I had heard right after the Carbon 14 testing that there were problems with the sample taken. There were folks on that study commission on both sides of the fence; some wanted to prove it was the burial cloth of Jesus, some wanted to prove it was a fake. The ones leaning to the fake side got their 'results' from the Carbon 14 testing, and don't want to possibly be proven wrong, but science CAN answer some of the questions remaining. Maybe further testing can't prove that the Shroud wrapped Jesus, but might prove that it COULD have.

[the OlLine Rebel]

Also known as statistical probability (= very very low and thus, not likely to happen).

[the OlLine Rebel]

Oh come on guys, you really think the power of either the Church (such as it is)/followers' wishes is any stronger than all the PC power around today, who just love to bring down anything which is close to the great bogey man, white-heterosexual-Christian-American-male?

Nothing is much more powerful than today's PC critics of anything Western - including Christianity. They'd JUMP at the chance to "tear it down" (whatever they think that means).

[shroudie]

Actually, that may not be a completely valid argument. There is some debate as to whether blood types of ancient blood are valid.

The bloodstains are from real human blood. Different scientists (Adler, Heller, Pellicori, etc.) working independently conducted immunological, fluorescence and spectrographic tests, as well as Rh and ABO typing of blood antigens that prove it beyond any doubt. And several experts in forensic medicine (Zugibe, Bucklin, etc.) and blood chemistry conclude that the stains were formed by real human bleeding from real wounds on a real human body that came into direct contact with the cloth. Many of the stains have the distinctive forensic signature of clotting with red corpuscles about the edge of the clot and a clear yellowish halo of serum.

What is significant about the Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud is the pattern matching of the bloodstains. Mark Guscin writes: "There are many points of coincidence between all these points and the Shroud of Turin - the blood group, the way the corpse was tortured and died, and the macroscopic overlay of the stains on each cloth. This is especially notable in that the blood on the Sudarium, shed in life as opposed to postmortem, corresponds exactly in blood group, blood type and surface area to those stains on the Shroud on the nape of the neck. If it is clear that the two cloths must have covered the same corpse, and this conclusion is inevitable from all the studies carried out up to date, and if the history of the Sudarium can be trustworthily extended back beyond the fourteenth century, which is often referred to as the Shroud's first documented historical appearance, then this would take the Shroud back to at least the earliest dates of the Sudarium's known history. The ark of relics and the Sudarium have without any doubt at all been in Spain since the beginning of the seventh century, and the history recorded in various manuscripts from various times and geographical areas take it all the way back to Jerusalem in the first century. The importance of this for Shroud history cannot be overstressed."

Shroudie

[mtbopfuyn]

If the Shroud was proved for a fact to be an item proving the resurection--Free Will would vanish.

No it wouldn't. We all have the free will to choose to believe in any or no religion at all and proving the Shroud was of Jesus or not will not change that.

[Netizen]

Again, I'm not attacking anyone that believes The Shroud story. More power to them. I'm just not one of them.

Brief series of events and question:

Mark 15
46 And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre.

Mark 16:1
And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

John 19
39 And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.
40 Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.

I was wondering. Would they use the same dirty cloth that he was originally wrapped in after preparing the body? It looks like Nicodemus does his thing that evening, but that the women do theirs after the sabbath. Wouldn't a clean cloth have been used after the body had been prepared?

[mtbopfuyn]

I hadn't heard of the woman in the floral dress, but have seen pictures of shadows or images left on the ground or buildings of people.

[Lakeside]

genealogy of Jesus Christ through Joseph: Matthew 1:1-16

genealogy of Jesus Christ through Mary: Luke 3:23-38

Compare--both were of the house & line of King David.

[Antoninus]

Did you forget that DaVince was playing around with photography way back then? No, please don't get started on the DaVince Code because this was known before the book was written.

The "camera obscura" was not photography, if that's what you're talking about. I suppose you saw the 48 Hours/Dateline/60 Minutes hokum piece about the camera obscura being the real source of the Renaissance masters being able to paint so beautifully. Of course, that piece was completely bogus--they only presented the arguments for without mentioning the obvious arguments against.

[shroudie]

Speaking of PC. This is a quote from, yes believe it or not, the PBS website (yes the PBS website):

"The latest evidence suggests that the Shroud of Turin, Christianity's most treasured relic, does, indeed, date from the time of Christ. This program examines the shroud in light of new bacterial clues plus a recently discovered style of stitching previously seen only once before -- amid the ruins of the Jewish citadel of Masada, a town destroyed by the Romans in 74 A.D."

I don't agree with the bacterial clues, favoring, as I do the explanation that the C14 samples were from a medieval patch (as chemistry proves). I do agree with the stitching from cloth fragments at Masada by Flurry-Lemberg. Those fragments are ca 40 BC to 73AD.

Yes, PBS, is even opening up to possibilities.

Shroudie