Sorry, the Shroud of Turin Is Definitely a Hoax

http://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2020/02/24/sorry-the-shroud-of-turin-is-definitely-a-hoax ^ | Spencer Alexander McDaniel

[annalex]

[...]

Conclusion

So, here’s the evidence I have presented for why the Shroud of Turin is clearly a hoax:

• The forger who made the Shroud of Turin confessed and the earliest definitive mention of the shroud in any historical source is a record of his confession.
• The Shroud of Turin doesn’t match the kinds of funerary wrappings used in Judaea in the time of Jesus or the description of Jesus’s own funerary wrappings given in the Gospel of John.
• The linen of the Shroud of Turin has been securely dated using radiocarbon dating to between c. 1260 and c. 1390 AD—well over a millennium after Jesus’s death.
• The figure on the Shroud of Turin does not have anatomically correct proportions and much more closely resembles figures in fourteenth-century Gothic art than a real human being.
• The bloodstains on the Shroud of Turin are not consistent with how blood actually flows naturally and they instead appear to have been painted on.
• The fabric of the Shroud of Turin is made with a kind of weave that is known to have been commonly used during the Late Middle Ages, but does not seem to have been used for burial shrouds in Judaea in the first century AD.

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.

[...]

[annalex]

Opinion to the contrary: let's discuss.

Remember: it is not a matter of Christian faith nor theology. Please keep your posts factual.

[annalex]

?!

[Future Snake Eater]

The linen of the Shroud of Turin has been securely dated using radiocarbon dating to between c. 1260 and c. 1390 AD—well over a millennium after Jesus’s death.

Here the author illuminates his ignorance on the topic. No need to read any more.

[OrangeHoof]

The Shroud is an interesting piece of cloth but it has no bearing at all on my salvation. If it is a divinely created image, Hallelujah. If it’s some artist’s incredible fabrication, it does not change my faith one iota.

[Campion]

The forger who made the Shroud of Turin confessed and the earliest definitive mention of the shroud in any historical source is a record of his confession.

The source he cites claims that a forger confessed to having "painted" the image, but the image was not "painted". The "confession" is also third-hand hearsay.

[agere_contra]

The scientific evidence for the Shroud:

https://magiscenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Science_and_the_Shroud_of_Turin.pdf

[alstewartfan]

Did the “forger” explain how he created it? If so, let’s see a reproduction utilizing the tools of the time.
Mind you, the impressions are so faint that it took photographic imaging before any discerning person was impressed.

[lepton]

The bloodstains on the Shroud of Turin […] appear to have been painted on.

---

Regardless of the authenticity or age of the shroud, the author does not seem familiar with the actual research on the issue.

[treetopsandroofs]

Never heard this part before, would have been nice to include at least a photo of the actual letter:

“The case, Holy Father, stands thus. Some time since in this diocese of Troyes the Dean of a certain collegiate church, to wit, that of Lirey, falsely and deceitfully, being consumed with the passion of avarice, and not from any motive of devotion but only of gain, procured for his church a certain cloth cunningly painted, upon which by a clever sleight of hand was depicted the twofold image of one man, that is to say, the back and front, he falsely declaring and pretending that this was the actual shroud in which our Saviour Jesus Christ was enfolded in the tomb, and upon which the whole likeness of the Saviour had remained thus impressed together with the wounds which He bore.”

“This story was put about not only in the kingdom of France, but, so to speak, throughout the world, so that from all parts people came together to view it. And further to attract the multitude so that money might cunningly be wrung from them, pretended miracles were worked, certain men being hired to represent themselves as healed at the moment of the exhibition of the shroud, which all believed to the shroud of our Lord. The Lord Henry of Poitiers, of pious memory, then Bishop of Troyes, becoming aware of this, and urged by many prudent persons to take action, as indeed was his duty in the exercise of his ordinary jurisdiction, set himself earnestly to work to fathom the truth of this matter.”

“For many theologians and other wise persons declared that this could not be the real shroud of our Lord having the Saviour’s likeness thus imprinted upon it, since the holy Gospel made no mention of any such imprint, while, if it had been true, it was quite unlikely that the holy Evangelists would have omitted to record it, or that the fact should have remained hidden until the present time. Eventually, after diligent inquiry and examination, he discovered the fraud and how the said cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed.”

“Accordingly, after taking mature counsel with wise theologians and men of the law, seeing that he neither ought nor could allow the matter to pass, he began to institute formal proceedings against the said Dean and his accomplices in order to root out this false persuasion. They, seeing their wickedness discovered, hid away the said cloth so that the Ordinary could not find it, and they kept it hidden afterwards for thirty-four years or thereabouts down to the present year.”

[SkyDancer]

I went to a three day seminar on the Shroud and the consensus of all the scientists there concluded the Shroud real. The carbon dating was taken from a repair done in the 13th cent. and there is no way the technology of the 13th. cent could have produced it; one example is you can’t see any image unless you’re 18ft from it whereas the closer you get to a painting the more detail you see. You see no detail whatsoever the closer you get. Another thing. The image is on the fibers rather than IN the fiber as if it was painted. There’s more.

[alstewartfan]

There is an artist sketch from about 200-300 AD, if memory serves me, that contains a triangle of holes in the facsimile sketch exactly where they are in reality.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

How does this affect the authenticity of the tablecloth and matching dinner napkin set of Turin?

[Ann Archy]

This article is a Hoax!! NO ONE SAW Jesus's image UNTIL an X-RAY showed it!!!!

WHY would someone FAKE the Shroud image when NO ONE COULD SEE IT!!!

STUPID ANTI-CHRISTIAN CRAP.

[agere_contra]

If so, let’s see a reproduction utilizing the tools of the time.

I'd be interested to see a reproduction of the Shroud 'burn' image using even modern technology. Could it actually be reproduced?

[Ancesthntr]

I am Jewish, so I do not believe in the divinity of Jesus (or any other human being)...

...BUT...

...if someone depends upon an artifact for their faith, then their faith is not at all strong. I would LOVE for the Ark of the Covenant to be found - thrilled, beyond anything that I’ve ever felt - but its absence does not shake my faith.

The Shroud of Turin may genuinely be Jesus’ burial cloth, or it may not be. I kind of doubt that it is, but even IF it is and there was a miracle necessary to produce that image, a mere miracle does not shake MY faith - the Jewish Bible (Old Testament to you Christians) is full of miracles by or for the benefit of lots of non-Jews, but the Bible is CLEAR that performing a miracle (which, by definition requires G-d to actually perform) does not mean very much at all in determining Who is G-d and what He wants of us. I believe that whether one is Christian (any variant) or Jewish, G-d wants us to recognize and act in a manner consistent with our faith that HE is the Creator and Master of the Universe...and a big part of that is treating our fellow human beings of any faith (or none) in as decent a manner as we, ourselves, would like to be treated.

[Erik Latranyi]

I started writing a book centered around the shroud....people had become so agnostic that scientists decide to clone Jesus from the blood on the shroud....and they create the anti-Christ.

[Leaning Right]

> The “confession” is also third-hand hearsay. <

Yep. It’s basically some guy told some guy who told some other guy.

Sort of like me producing a letter from my grandfather where my grandfather writes that some guy told him that he heard that the Constitution is a forgery.

[kenmcg]

With all the fake news going around in this day and age, I reserve decision.

[SkyDancer]

Just to add:

I'm leaving it up to the experts to argue out the chemistry and physics of the Shroud. All I know from the debates are:

There's a barely recognizable image of a crucified man on it. You need to contrast enhance it to see detail. The only way the image can be seen is from a distance; up close it just disappears. In paintings the detail increases the closer you get.

There is no pigment used to form the image (the image formed at the top of this website is just an image with no detail whatsoever and it purports to show how the TS image may have been formed perhaps in a MA huge oven). There's even a website that infers the image was caused by an earthquake:

https://www.livescience.com/43276-ancient-earthquake-shroud-of-turin.html

If the image is supposed to have been produced by some MA artist which then begs the question as to why the nail imprints are in the wrist and not the hand where in all MA paintings/icons from that time forward show the nail prints in the palm of the hand.

There are traces of limestone silica on the bottom of the feet and elbow that only can come from the steps on where this man tread on his way to crucifixion. No where else in the world is this type of silica found. Did the person who created the TS in the MA sprinkle some of it there to help authenticate the TS? Was the pollen which is only found in that part of Jerusalem purposely placed there as well? How does one account for the incredible body detail that was medically unknown at that time?

There are so many websites out there on both ends of the argument each one showing how the image could have been created so it basically comes down to what you're convinced of.

-J-

[The Truth Will Make You Free]

The linen of the Shroud of Turin has been securely dated using radiocarbon dating to between c. 1260 and c. 1390 AD—well over a millennium after Jesus’s death.

The sensible explanation is that the cloth tested was not the shroud, but a patch applied later. Failure to acknowledge and address this explanation shows the author’s ignorance, one-sidedness, and opinion-orientation.