Posted on 02/24/2020 8:51:55 AM PST by annalex
[...]
Conclusion
So, here’s the evidence I have presented for why the Shroud of Turin is clearly a hoax:
All the evidence points to the inexorable conclusion that the Shroud of Turin is a late medieval hoax.
The fact that the Shroud of Turin is a hoax doesn’t make it any less interesting as a historical artifact; it may be a hoax, but it is still an extremely famous hoax that is probably around seven hundred years old and that can reveal a lot about the nature of religious hoaxes in late medieval France. The Shroud of Turin is worth studying, then, not as an authentic ancient relic, but rather as an authentic medieval religious artifact.
[...]
(Excerpt) Read more at talesoftimesforgotten.com ...
There is some science that seems to show that all old, degraded blood will show it’s AB. So that may be meaningless. Right now that finding is still being researched. There is other research that may show that AB was a much more common blood type in the past, but it no longer as common as migration and divergence of the populations changed the genotypes. Again, that is going to require more research.
Thank you for showing the Shroud.
Now that truly requires some scientific genealogical research to see where THAT came from and about. Scary.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses use it to take away the image of Yeshua on Earth. They won’t acknowledge Him so in all their writings it’s always BCE and CE.
1) the image isnt painted, nor burned into the fabric
2) The back side of the body shows no flattened imprint. When the resurrection occured, Christs body was suspended, That indicates an event horizon event that I’m sure no dumbass painting peasent would have thought of.
3) The image in the fabric is 3-dementional. Its not a 2-d painting or rendering.
4) No one it appears can replictate the imaged with even 1500 year old technology.
5) The wounds on the image match the Gospel wounds of Christ, from the crown of thorns, the blood from his wrists and feet, scourge marks, and piercing of his side
6) The veil of Veronica, said to have been the cloth Jesus whiped his face on his way to the cross, match the blood images in the Shroud.
Cranberry sauce
Soot can be washed off. There are other techniques to assure you are not testing atmospheric pollutants from fire or other problems. However, we know that was not the case here. The problem here was added material from a date potentially more than hundreds of years away from the targeted test subject. That contaminating material made up between 40% to 60% of the tested samples skewing the test report dates drastically. The problem was breaking the test sampling protocols, perhaps deliberately.
C-14 testing can be quite accurate IF one knows what one is dating, and uses it for confirmation purposes. Testing something unknown and does NOT know what is being tested and makes poor assumptions, one can be lead far astray by the results. With more material to test, the greater one’s degree of confidence—plus or minus—in the dating can be.
Dating things greater than about 14,000 years cannot be done using C-14, primarily because of the breaks in the dendrochronology any farther back than that, but there are other half-life elements that can be used for the purpose. Again, however, one needs to be careful of what and how.
Sometimes radiological dating, including C-14, is all pulling buggers out of one’s nostrils or digging lint from one’s navel, admiring it, and making a wild eyed guess that just as meaningless as staring into a crystal ball.
Even C-14 dating is only as good as the Dendrochronological checks in the area where you are going to use it. There are other events that can affect the amount of C-14 to C-12 and C-13 in the atmosphere locally that C-14 testing is based on. A volcano in the local atmosphere can throw off C-14 testing by throwing a huge amount of C-12 into the atmosphere and a solar flare can cause the C-14 to spike. . . As can that Volcano. All of these have to be accounted for.
Although likely not, even the Dendrochronology MIGHT be wrong. We make assumptions that tree rings ONLY represent annual seasons. We weren’t there for that time period and can only know what it is like NOW. Likely we are correct, but we have to realize that IS only an assumption that the past could have been different than what it is now.
Nor should they be as the Man on the cloth was not laying completely supine but was in Rigor Mortis. However, when aligned using computer anthropomorphic comparison software that makes the adjustments for the angles of the limbs and the distances, those complaints disappear.
Those who complain about the side-by-side comparisons of facial proportions fall into the same problems, thinking they are looking at flat plane images. They are not, nor is the image a one-to-one image. It is distorted by the medium it is imprinted on, due to the varying longitudinal tonal quality of the hank bleaching of the linen itself, thus changing the appearance of width of the face, making it appear gaunter and thinner than the face actually is.
Another issue is that skeptics cannot determine where the top of the head is. . . Many of the claim that the top of the front and the top of the rear are actually connected. That is not the case. What they interpret to be the top of the image’s head is actually a water stain. That causes them to claim the head is much larger than it is.
Some skeptics handle that by just claiming the “forger” really painted a normal painting but his paints just, over time, degraded into a negative of their original colors. . . Right. Sure.
I believe that’s totally ridiculous. It would be more believable that a person of type AB, A , or B might type as an O after many years due to degeneration of the antigen protein, but there is no way blood that lacks the A and B antigen somehow mysteriously develops it over time. That theory is a total reach.
Blood types generally have ethnic specificity. Asians tend to be type B, Eastern Europeans type A, and those of Jewish descent AB - totally consistent with authenticity of the Shroud and another strike against forgery How would the forger know the common blood type of a Jewish man when the ABO grouping system was not identified until 1901?
Super interesting. Thanks for the info
Everytime I hear about the Shroud or Juan Diego’s cloak I am put in mind of Life of Brian: https://youtu.be/Ka9mfZbTFbk
“It doesn’t flow; it congeals at the lowest point of the body.”
My error in not being more specific and complete.
What I meant was that blood doesn’t flow out of wounds, on the upper side of the corpse, as it would when pumped by an active heart. It settles/flows/congeals at the lowest point. If there was a wound at the lowest point, it would, of course, leak/flow out until most/much blood was emptied from the body.
As I understand it from my religious Bible OT/NT teachings, Jesus had hand and foot wounds from being nailed to the cross, and a spear wound on one side of His chest, from a Roman soldier’s lance.
I’m guessing that a lot of blood drained from His feet wounds, and when taken down from the cross, that... well, I wasn’t there, so to guess and suppose about Jesus and the Shroud, timelines, body positions etc, is pointless.
Hey, how ‘bout those Cubs?
We used to get them all the time. They were usually African-America, then there were white folks and this last time they were Oriental Asians.
Since I'm a practicing Catholic I never had much time for them but they and I were pleasant.
They are an, um, er, interesting group of people, aren't they?
The second bullet point is the burial practices.
That problem only arises when you read the Gospel in English. When the Gospels are read in the original Greek, and then read and understand the Jewish Mishnah, the written record of the oral traditions, about the “manner of Jewish Burial Customs” that problem goes away. The English Translations misuse the Greek word for BINDINGS as “bandages,” which is a secondary Greek meaning for the Jewish usage of small ropes or pieces cloth as bindings to tie the wrists, arms, ankles, legs, to keep them from flopping akimbo, and jaw closed in death, and to place a potsherd on the eye lids to keep the eyes closed. Some people put a small coin on their dead relative’s eyes as a heavier weight.
People assumed on reading that transliterational use of “bandages” incorrectly assumed then that the manner of the Jews meant they buried their dead like their neighbors to the Southwest, the Egyptians, especially when thousands of mummies were being found in the 18th century, and being shipped to Europe—did you know that mummies were actually used as cordwood fuel for heat?—swathed in yards and yards of tape-like bandages. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Although several Jewish cemeteries have been excavated, not a single one has ever been found where there were bodies found where there were traces of swathed, bundled bodies such as those described by the skeptics. The only one where there has been a body in a niche found, was one found at the end of the last century, in a 1st Century Jewish Cemetery in Jerusalem, where the niche had collapsed in an earthquake before the bones had been removed, and they found the body covered by the remnant of a full body covering sail.
There was literally NO TIME for such a burial practice among the Jews nor would they want to. The Jews had to put their dead into the tomb before sundown. The body had to be ritually washed as much as possible, annointed, and placed in the tomb. Doing such wrapping is a tedious, long process. Then, they have to also see to their own ritual cleansing. In addition, one year later, that body’s bones have to be cleared from the tomb’s stone niche and placed either into a communal bone pit, or the family’s ossuary bone box, readying the niche for use of the next occupying body. They would not want that necessary task complicated by entangling masses of rotting bandages intertwined with the bones. For the Jews, the idea was not to preserve the body, but to allow it to reduce to bones so they can be “gathered unto their ancestors.”
Scripture tells us that Jesus had His bread plucked out.
The image on the shroud has one, and does not bear marks and blood stains one would expect from someone who have been tortured, beaten, and crucified.
Absolutely!!!!!
Their faith is then not in the God they claim to believe in but in an object they can see and touch.
At which point, it ceases to be faith.
John 20:6-7Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus' head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself.
There are many things that the ancients could do that we know about and yet cannot reproduce.
Not being able to reproduce it does not mean it’s genuine.
Actually no. Anthropomorphic data on the Man on the shroud of Turin shows he stood about 5’ 10” tall and was only one sigma taller than the average height of the males of his area. This is based on a census done of male skeletons of several 1st Century Jewish Cemeteries in Jerusalem performed in the last half of the 20th Century which found that the average height of Jewish men of the period was 5’ 8 ⅜” tall. Compare that to the average American male of today who is 5’ 8 ⅝” tall, only ¼” taller. In the Jerusalem study, one sigma taller includes males up to 5’ 10 ½” tall, which would include the Man on the Shroud. He would not have been that unusual, nor stood out in a crowd.
These measurements were based on measuring the tibias and femurs of the male skeletons found in those cemeteries and then plugging those lengths into standard human length ratio calculations.
Similar studies of Roman cemeteries of Roman soldiers’ bones found that the conquerors of the Judean area averaged only 5’ 5 ¼” tall. They were shrimps compared to the natives.
Again, actual researched science trumps the popular myth-conceptions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.