[Sontagged]

What I like about this article is the primacy the author places upon the Word, and he knows his timeline.

[Sontagged]

My post to you on another thread was confusing. I asked what your thoughts were about this author’s take on the Shroud.

[knarf]

I never accepted TSoT because it was a perfectly folded, perfect image of a man that was not hastily entombed (as per the scriptures) but carefully placed, centered and no evidence of a round body that would have imprinted wider than the perfect image of a man.

[ifinnegan]

Don’t need CNN to tell us this.

[skr]

I don’t have to “believe” in the Shroud of Turin, but it’s very interesting, even more so if it’s genuine.

I’m fairly certain that laying a body down on a long piece of cloth and then folding over the feet or head would go much faster than wrapping strips around it. They were in a hurry, Sabbath was approaching; they still had to get to the tomb, place Him there, leave and be purified from handling a corpse. They only had to place enough spices to fit whatever minimum was required. In another gospel, the women brought spices on the third day, perhaps the balance to finish the ritual. In John 20:17, a head cloth is mentioned as folded neatly and in a separate area, so that would make two pieces of fabric minimum. For all we know, there might have been more layers, but they didn’t survive.

We are unlikely to know the truth on this side of Heaven. It’s all very debatable, so, no, don’t put your faith in the cloth. Jesus is where our faith belongs. If nothing else, the shroud certainly makes opportunities to talk about Him.

[MayflowerMadam]

“people would just read and believe the Bible, they would not so easily be duped by such falsely purported artifacts as the Shroud of Turin being Jesus’ burial cloth.”

1. In RC, the Bible (a) isn’t read much and, if it is, (b) takes second or third place, behind words from men.

2. All of the shroud stuff: More fantasy. Probably started as a revenue-generating scheme.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Posted that a long time ago. It’s a fraud.

[Swordmaker]

So, Jesus’ body and Lazarus’ body would have been prepared for entombment in the same manner. Both walked out of their tombs while still wrapped in grave cloths.

What do I think about this article? It’s why I don’t argue with religious zealots about the Shroud. I follow the science. You and he don’t bother with facts and mistake opinion for evidence.

I think that anyone who can make an entire argument about the grave clothes were LEFT BEHIND ON THE STONE NICHE of the tomb, and then say "Both walked out of their tombs while still wrapped in grave cloths" is lacking a few cogs in their logical machinery. Those are irreconcilable and cannot both be true.

Shroud of Turin Ping!

If you want on or off the Shroud of Turin Ping List, Freepmail me.

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

The results of the carbon-dating are the strongest suggestion that the shroud isn't genuine, IMHO, and ironically the one most casually dismissd by many people. I by no means completely accept the results for a variety of reasons but they are compelling enough for serious consideration. I would tend to say a 2nd round of dating should be conducted, but with the deification of science I wonder if any institution capable of sound carbon-dating would be willing to present results indicating authenticity. Also, I think I've read about Egyptian mummies being carbon-dated and the results being wildly wrong, in the range of 1000 years, from when that mummy/person is positively known from historical record to have lived? People often believe science to be infallible ("PROVEN SCIENCE! GLOBAL WARMING!") but it isn't. That said I'm not a scientist and cannot question the technical aspects, generally speaking.

There are many aspects of the shroud, ranging from the imprint itself to fibers that are from plants from the area of Israel, that lend credence to it's authenticity and don't add up with the results of the carbon-dating. It would have to be a darn good hoax, both technically and historically, even by modern standards, let alone medieval. Also remember, the shroud was documented as early as 500 AD, and throughout the early-mid medieval period by multiple sources. Different shrouds being conflated with the one in Turin? Maybe. Maybe not.

Much of this article isn't especially persuasive. Hinging your argument on the plural "wrappings" -- well, who is to say that one large piece that is wrapped around repeatedly isn't "wrappingS"? More so, who says that the Shroud of Turin was the only wrapping? It is slightly short (again, a very clever detail for a hoax circa 1350), and there could just as easily have been many other pieces of linen that were not preserved . The Shroud of Turin may have been just the first layer of wrapping. What I'm driving at, is most of the article is a bunch of conjecture and "says you".

Either way, the Shroud of Turin is not an article of faith, so it ultimately doesn't matter.

[cuban leaf]

I’ve never taken the shroud thing seriously. I categorize it with the “ancent aliens” documentary stuff of the 1970’s.

From my perspective, that’s not how the God of the bible does things.

[cuban leaf]

On a side note, I find it fascinating that Jesus tells a parable, and actually uses a name in it (Lazarus and the rich man), and in it, this happens in Luke 16:

---

27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’

29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

---

I find it fascinating for two reasons:
1. After he gave the parable, Jesus raised Lazarus from the grave.
2. Jesus, himself was raised from the grave.
3. The jewish leaders (represented by the rich man, hence the purple and fine linen) were not impressed by either.

The bible is layers upon layers of information and wisdom.

[TNoldman]

Ping

[dangus]

>> A single cloth the size of the Shroud of Turin with spices could not possibly have preserved a dead body as long as multiple cloths with spices could have. <<

1) Yeah, that’s why the women were going there. The body had been preserved in a hurry as the feast of the Sabbath was quickly approaching. Now, Sunday morning, the feast had concluded, and the body could properly be preserved.
Seriously, this guy knows the bible?

“It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. The women who had come with Jesus from Galilee followed Joseph and saw the tomb and how his body was laid in it. Then they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment.
On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb.” (Luke 23:43-24:1)

>> If Lazarus’ entire body had been wrapped with a single piece of cloth similar to the Shroud of Turn, he could not have walked out of the tomb. <<

Take a simple look at the Shroud. It’s folded at the head, with the open ends at the feet.

[robel]

There is certainly a place for science. However, what would be the scientific verdict on the resurrection?

[dangus]

>> We next read, “Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the cloth that had been on Jesus head, not lying with the linen wrappings but rolled up in a place by itself” (John 20.6-7). This report provides two physical evidences which clearly deem the Shroud of Turin a fake. First, Jesus’ body had not been been wrapped with a single grave cloth, as the Shroud of Turin; rather, the Gospel of John relates four times about “linen wrappings,” which is always plural, so that even the body itself, disregarding the head, had been wrapped with multiple clothes (John 19.40; 20.5-7). << This is trickier. In fact, I had to investigate why some translations use plurals, and others use singulars. The actual word, which is closer to "linens," is neither singular, nor plural, but collective. If a woman were putting on a dress, she might say she is putting on her clothes. The fact that there is one piece of fabric doesn't necessitate she use the singular. Neither, if I were to say, "throw that in with the linens," would you count to see if I had one bedsheet or two. In English, the use is ambiguous; a collective noun might look like a singular noun ("rain") or like a plural ("clothes.") In Greek, the ending "-ωn" indicates a collective noun, rather than a plural, such as "-a."

[faucetman]

I have yet to read this LONG post, but in my study over the years, I have become ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that the “Shroud of Turin is INDEED the burial cloth of Jesus, with the glory of His resurrection manifested as an image on it.

So, I am sure that I will find fault with this guy’s stance.

NOTHING can explain the image.

[faucetman]

I have yet to read this LONG post, but in my study over the years, I have become ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that the “Shroud of Turin is INDEED the burial cloth of Jesus, with the glory of His resurrection manifested as an image on it.

So, I am sure that I will find fault with this guy’s stance.

NOTHING can explain the image.

I just started to read the post. I had to stop because right away I found it full of inaccuracies and falsehoods.

Another “Hit Piece” on Jesus and Christianity.

[SouthernClaire]

Isaiah 50:6 & 52:14

[Jeff Chandler]

Sophistry.