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

The Mirror ^ | April 2, 2004 | David Edwards

[tallhappy]

World: Asia-Pacific
Birthday Buddha's tooth in Hong Kong

First class: The tooth arrives in Hong Kong

By Duncan Hewitt in Beijing

Jill McGivering reports for the BBC: "The tooth is one of only two which survived the cremation"

A tooth relic believed by Buddhists to be that of the Lord Buddha has arrived in Hong Kong where a special ceremony is to be held on Saturday to mark Buddha's birthday.

Senior officials from China accompanied the relic on a special flight from Beijing where it is normally kept out of sight in a pagoda.

High security surrounded the arrival

The relic, one of the holiest in Buddhism, is believed to have been found among the remains of the Buddha after his cremation.

A spokesman for China's Buddhist Association said it was being sent to Hong Kong at the request of the region's Buddhist community.

On Saturday it will be worshipped at a ceremony in a Hong Kong stadium to mark Buddha's birthday, which is being celebrated for the first time as a public holiday in Hong Kong.

Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa will be among dignatories in attendance.

China says the tooth is one of only two in existence, with the other in Sri Lanka.

The relic is one of the holiest in Buddhism

A third relic in the possession of a Tibetan monk caused great excitement when moved to Taiwan last year, but was angrily denounced by Chinese officials as a false tooth.

Beijing, which claims Taiwan as part of its territory, said there was no Buddhist scripture to prove its authenticity - a claim rejected as irrelevant by Taiwanese Buddhist leaders.

Sensitivity over the issue reflects China's desire to emphasise its influence over Chinese schools of Buddhism.

Beijing last year embarked on celebrations marking 2,000 years of Buddhism in China.

And senior Chinese religious officials will be in Hong Kong for the ceremony to welcome the tooth, which will be on display for a week.

[Badeye]

"Even in science there is really no such thing as "uncontrovertable" when it comes to something like this. You act as if Carbon-14 dating is the definitive evidence in this case. "

You misunderstand me. I'm acting as thought I have witnessed dozen's of "Churchs" deceive the various "flocks".

While I have seen the carbon 14 data related to this, my view is much more of a result of forty years of church scandals from across the entire spectrum that I have witnessed.

As I noted, I fully believe in God....how can anyone look up at the night sky and not?

I have a huge problem buying into the institutions of Man raised up in worship of God, however....for the obvious, well documented reasons.

I'm not besmirching anyone else's faith, or belief. Just staing my viewpoint.

[Mr. Jeeves]

"Ladies and gentlemen", he added, "scientific honesty compels me to say that this man was raised from the dead!" There was no clapping at the end of his presentation, you could have heard the proverbial pin fall on the floor.

Right...he's an "atheist" like the seminar callers on C-SPAN are "registered Republicans". There is no way that the scientific method could have led him to draw such a conclusion, though his faith certainly could have.

The Shroud is a proven fake - the kind of quackery that does harm to Christianity.

[Alberta's Child]

It's worth noting that the Shroud of Turin did not attract much attention around the world until the end of the 19th century. The reason for this is simple: the Shroud itself did not seem to be all that spectacular -- it was an ancient piece of fabric with what appeared to be the image of a man on it.

What changed all of this was the advent of photography. An Italian photographer named Secondo Pia received permission to photograph the Shroud during one of its rare public displays, and while he was developing the film he produced a negative that had far more detail than the original image (the image you see at the top of this thread is the negative, not the original).

The implication of this was immediately clear to Pia: The "negative" he was looking at was actually the real image, and the "original" image on the Shroud was actually the negative -- which meant that whatever process was used to produce that image was identical to a photographic process that the world had only discovered recently!

[leadhead]

Perhaps it's the Shroud of Bob, Jesus' brother. (Arrogant Worms Reference)

[Future Snake Eater]

...I will remain firmly on the side of those that say its the longest running hoax in history.

While the mountain of circumstantial evidence points to it being Christ's burial cloth, they cannot yet say "incontrovertibly" that it is His image. However, they do know for a fact that it is not a hoax. You can take that to the bank.

[Future Snake Eater]

Timely ping

[Alberta's Child]

The Shroud may actually be fake, but it certainly is not a "proven fake." As someone else pointed out on this thread, the Shroud cannot possibly be "proven" to be a fake until someone can figure out how the image got there. Even those scientists who insist that it was a forgery are at a loss to explain how someone in the 12th century could possibly have created something that human beings cannot even create today.

[old-ager]

> Jesus is out of the House of David, right?
> Are there any Jews living today that can trace their lineage that far back?

I have been told that no records survived the final destruction of the temple in 70 A.D.

[Adder]

"This is not a miracle," he says. "It's a physical object, so there has to be a scientific explanation. With the right conditions, it could happen to anyone. We could all make our own Turin Shroud."


Go right ahead, Dr....let us know when you produce one.

[trad_anglican]

which meant that whatever process was used to produce that image was identical to a photographic process that the world had only discovered recently!

"Identical" may be an overstatement. How about similar?

[mtbopfuyn]

As far as anyone knows, Jesus was the only victim of crucifixion that wore a crown of thorns and had his side pierced

"As far as anyone knows..." Ah, but there's the rub. Just a couple weeks ago there was a discussion here about a rabbi stating he had proof Jesus was thrown from a building to his death and I was chastised for even questioning the rabbi statements. Everyone claims they have proof but never have DNA or the full documentation to back up that proof. It would be interesting to take DNA samples of the supposed decendents of Jesus in England and France and compare the results to the head wrap and shroud. And about that head wrap, the shroud doesn't show the wrap.

[VadeRetro]

[H]e introduced himself as an atheist who had joined the team in order to prove the shroud was a fake... "Ladies and gentlemen", he added, "scientific honesty compels me to say that this man was raised from the dead!"

Did he jump up out of his wheelchair, announce that he was cured, and start dancing?

[tiamat]

Bummer.

Thanks anyway!

[sneakers]

bump!

[mtbopfuyn]

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.

[RS]

"It contains blood from the rare AB group found on the shroud."

I wonder why the "official" site does not mention this ?
... and if they have enough to be able to type, they surely have enough for a DNA test.

[theFIRMbss]

>The shroud devotees should read their bibles. Particularly John 20: 6-7 Obviously, that was NOT Jesus' shroud.

The "burial cloth"
may have been "around His head"
and down His body.

I don't see this quote
as obviously proving
the shroud to be false.

John 20:3-7 --

"So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen."

[RightOnline]

As some of you may know, I have attended several presentations on the Shroud that were given by Dr. Tom D'Muhalla here in Raleigh. Tom was the leader of the original STURP team that analyzed the Shroud in 1978 and has stayed extremely active in Shroud research, etc. ever since. His most recent presentation was given just a couple of weeks ago.

What he said this time is what he has told us in previous presentations. The carbon dating fiasco was a joke for MANY reasons. Example: when the Turin diocese agreed to allow a sample to be taken for carbon dating, the scientific team said "fine..........but whatever you do, do NOT take the sample from this one area on the Shroud; it's clearly a piece that was added much later and does not match the rest of the Shroud". Well, boys and girls.......guess where the sample was taken from? You got it; the ONE place on the Shroud that they explicitly said NOT to touch.

As usual, his presentation was fascinating and he alluded strongly to some very new research that will "set the world on its ear".

Here's a link to a thread from one of his previous presentations:

Shroud of Turin Presentation Update

[Alberta's Child]

OK, let's call it "similar." Has anyone ever found any artwork, relics, etc. from that time period that was created in the same manner?

Perhaps the most compelling evidence in favor of the Shroud's authenticity is the evidence surrounding what is known as the "four-finger" phenomenon on the image.

While most artwork from the Middle Ages depicting the Crucifixion shows Christ nailed to a cross with nails driven through his hands, the image on the Shroud does not show this. Instead, it clearly shows nail wounds in the wrists, which is exactly how a person would have been nailed to a cross -- because nails driven through the middle of the hand would not support the weight of a human body without tearing through the hand. Point #1: If someone in the 12th century was intent on making a realistic forgery of Christ's burial shroud, then why would he depict the crucifixion in a manner that did not match the prevailing view of how the crucifixion occurred?

More importantly, the hands shown on the image appear to only have four fingers -- leading to speculation that perhaps the person whose image was on the Shroud had his thumbs cut off before "burial." The reality is that the image is anatomically correct, because driving a nail through the wrist between the two bones of the forearm (the radius and the ulna) damages one of the key nerves in the wrist and produces a reflexive reaction in which the thumb is drawn across the palm in such a way that it is not visible from the back of the hand.

Point #2: I find it extremely unlikely that a forger in the Middle Ages would have known such minute detail about human anatomy that he would have been able to replicate the results of this reflexive action.