Turin Shroud 'is not a medieval forgery'

[Pimander]

This is one take on it all.

1. Man has the right to live by his own law—
    to live in the way that he wills to do:
    to work as he will:
    to play as he will:
    to rest as he will:
    to die when and how he will.
2. Man has the right to eat what he will:
    to drink what he will:
    to dwell where he will:
    to move as he will on the face of the earth.
3. Man has the right to think what he will:
    to speak what he will:
    to write what he will:
    to draw, paint, carve, etch, mould, build as he will:
    to dress as he will.
4. Man has the right to love as he will:—
    "take your fill and will of love as ye will,
    when, where, and with whom ye will." —AL. I. 51
5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights.

[The Seeker]

To all here: there is no disrespect, sarcasm, or ridicule implied or underlying or behind anything I choose to share...

at the moment of death I went from thrashing on the operating table in great pain as my blood pressure hit 280 over 270 and into cardiac arrest to suddenly being at ease, full of peace as i looked down at a man lying on a table as the doctors and nurses worked frantically on the still form; it was then I realized it was my meat suit they were working on, I was dead, and totally free...

all here will experience death, we all have many times...

enjoy the experience here, for it is school, we choose our bucket list of experiences each time through; do all things with love, from love, and give love...

all must choose their own path on the long journey; please respect others for their chosen path, and hope in turn they respect your choice as well...

we are all divine beings, all a part of creation, deliberately blocked from remembering the other side so it will not interfere with the experience each time...

even the Master Yasheuh ( Jesus to most) is reported to have said to follow no one, not even him, but to seek and find for yourself...

we are all on the journey together; all paths lead to the same place...


seeker

 

[zorgon]

This is one take on it all.

But do those rights not come with one condition?

...so long as you harm no other?
...or perhaps so long as you do not interfere with the rights of another?

Say I decide to live in your house... just move right in...

2. Man has the right to eat what he will:
    to dwell where he will:
    to move as he will on the face of the earth.

Say I decide I want to love your wife...

4. Man has the right to love as he will:—
    "take your fill and will of love as ye will,
    when, where, and with whom ye will." —AL. I. 51

5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights.

So yeah by those rights I guess I can kill you and take your wife and house I guess that is why we have guns in that old paper

[Pimander]

According to that belief system, you need to know your true will first, which will presumably be unlikely to involve moving into my house and winding up needing a crossbow bolt surgically removing from your abdomen.  Only kidding.  If you turned up here I'd fly over to your place and let you stay.

we are all on the journey together; all paths lead to the same place...

Perhaps some roads don't lead to the same place.  There are dead ends on real paths sometimes and other paths are nasty and dangerous.  If you go the wrong way down a path you will definitely end up somewhere different to me.

ETA:  This thread has drifted way off topic.  I notice none of the staff seem to mind.  I hope rdunk isn't offended.  Sorry.

[zorgon]

According to that belief system, you need to know your true will first, which will presumably be unlikely to involve moving into my house and winding up needing a crossbow bolt surgically removing from your abdomen.  Only kidding.  If you turned up here I'd fly over to your place and let you stay.

Wouldn't work Unlike the movies where arrows and sword belly cuts kill the guy who is wearing chainmaille, in reality that bolt would do nothing, maybe leave a small bruise . As for the house, it is protected by attack ferrets

Perhaps some roads don't lead to the same place.  There are dead ends on real paths sometimes and other paths are nasty and dangerous.  If you go the wrong way down a path you will definitely end up somewhere different to me.

Yup many dead ends and cliffs on some paths. The question however is.... If I know the path you are on leads off a cliff, do I warn you or let you go splat? 

ETA:  This thread has drifted way off topic.  I notice none of the staff seem to mind.  I hope rdunk isn't offended.  Sorry.

True that 

[Pimander]

Yup many dead ends and cliffs on some paths. The question however is.... If I know the path you are on leads off a cliff, do I warn you or let you go splat? 

I'm immortal apparently so take your pick?

Cool ferret pic.

[rdunk]

This thread has drifted way off topic.  I notice none of the staff seem to mind.  I hope rdunk isn't offended.  Sorry.

Of course not. In these forum discussions, a single related "on-topic" comment can easily take things in a different direction. And it seems such is especially true, when there is even a little of religious import involved.

In this case, the shroud is the shroud. It does exist in physical touchable form, as is not the case for a lot of things we discuss very seriously here. And its connotation of imprint (crucified male with very obvious wounds such as those of Jesus) takes it directly to evidentiary question of authenticity.

Now, with that said, one thing that I do find very interesting.............it does appear to me at least...... that every time I see the shroud being discusses/debated,  it usually seems far more important for the skeptics/atheists/non-Christian/etc to prove it a fake than for the believers to prove it authentic.

In reality, as has been mentioned earlier, authenticity of the shroud makes absolutely no real difference. While if proven authentic and directly related to Jesus, then it would be a significant Christian "artifact".
But an authenticated shroud would not/should not be the basis for having faith, nor for "coming to Jesus"- no more than finding the actual "cross of crucifixion", or finding the actual basket that held a few fish that was used to feed thousands......................"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God".

Now, directly to the shroud - in some ways it is very similar in respect to many other physical items on this earth that actually exist, but our knowledge about them is also limited. And they all get similar discussion and debate. Like the Nazca figures for instance. Or the pyramids, and etc. Many such have been discussed openly a lot longer than has the shroud, and we still,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,just don't know.

On the shroud, the OP article simply says in essence, they think they have narrowed the time of the shroud to include the years that Jesus walked on this earth, which is different than "prior dating".

Probably will not be the last we hear on the shroud, doncha think?? 

[Littleenki]

This thread has drifted way off topic.  I notice none of the staff seem to mind.  I hope rdunk isn't offended.  Sorry.

Rdunk is a tough cookie, with faith on his side..he will be OK!

Of course not. In these forum discussions, a single related "on-topic" comment can easily take things in a different direction. And it seems such is especially true, when there is even a little of religious import involved.

True as well, as varying forms of research take folks to passionate and wide ranging places, to discover things they never could believe or perceive.

In this case, the shroud is the shroud. It does exist in physical touchable form, as is not the case for a lot of things we discuss very seriously here. And its connotation of imprint (crucified male with very obvious wounds such as those of Jesus) takes it directly to evidentiary question of authenticity.

Very true as well, the shroud clearly shows the same marking we would expect from a crucifixion scenario. And anyone studying a small amount of religious history knows that during those years specified by the dating, tens of thousands of men were crucified the very same way the person now called Jesus was, and those folks were almost always wrapped in linens and such. Also we must realize that whoever was crucifed as the Christian saviour, was NOT named Jesus, but thats another path to explore for some here.....names can be important to an investigation...especially when searching for truth.

Now, with that said, one thing that I do find very interesting.............it does appear to me at least...... that every time I see the shroud being discusses/debated,  it usually seems far more important for the skeptics/atheists/non-Christian/etc to prove it a fake than for the believers to prove it authentic.

In reality, as has been mentioned earlier, authenticity of the shroud makes absolutely no real difference. While if proven authentic and directly related to Jesus, then it would be a significant Christian "artifact".
But an authenticated shroud would not/should not be the basis for having faith, nor for "coming to Jesus"- no more than finding the actual "cross of crucifixion", or finding the actual basket that held a few fish that was used to feed thousands......................"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God".

The crux of this matter is science versus religion, two close friends that parted ways millenia ago, and have now come to be enemies.... with religion basing all of their beliefs on distinctly non-provable events and myths, and science..looking for answers to a spiritual aspect they have no clue how to deal with.

Now, directly to the shroud - in some ways it is very similar in respect to many other physical items on this earth that actually exist, but our knowledge about them is also limited. And they all get similar discussion and debate. Like the Nazca figures for instance. Or the pyramids, and etc. Many such have been discussed openly a lot longer than has the shroud, and we still,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,just don't know.

The shroud is one of millions of ooparts and artifacts which raise discussion over the years. Fortunately a great deal of the other artifacts can be dated properly, due to their specific materials....various markings and stone engraved symbols and glyphs offer a defined origin, or purpose for many of them. Unfortunately for religion, the bible has been handed through many of the worlds sickest hands for almost two thousand years now, and it is not engraved in stone, nor can it ever be.

The shroud on the other hand, has no real basis except for the word of the folks who have kept it in high regard for centuries..and even then, it could be from ten thousand crucified men around the time the dating shows.

Perhaps if one day something happens to show us that Jesus was a son of a God..other than faith and heresay, many will realize they are missing out on something special which has been true and honest all along...my opinions differ on this matter, but that shouldnt stop those who believe the bible from following their dreams.

On the shroud, the OP article simply says in essence, they think they have narrowed the time of the shroud to include the years that Jesus walked on this earth, which is different than "prior dating".

Probably will not be the last we hear on the shroud, doncha think?? 

Honestly, I think the wide range of dates offered by this examination, actually damages the verification process of it, due to the huge segment of time in which it could have been used, and for the massive number of crucified men, who could possibly be the one who laid in it.

Still, we see the dogma of science versus religion.....the neverending battle epic.

[rdunk]

LE, thanks very much for your thoughtful comments.

i do wonder if there are any actual remnants of "blood" within the fibers of the shroud?? Well, with only a little "looking" I answered my own question. One source says:

BLOOD EVIDENCE (vs PAINT THEORY)

The blood on the Shroud is real, human male blood of the type AB (typed by Dr. Baima Ballone in Turin and confirmed in the U.S.

Here is a somewhat interesting point related to the shroud: Crucifixion as punishment was applied between the 6th century BCE and the 4th century AD/ CE. It has been terminated by the decree [Mediolanum Edict] of Emperor Constantine I the Great issued at 313 AD/ CE for the tolerance of the Christian religion (from wiki answers)

While no "proof" for the shroud, if the shroud does depict an actual crucifixion imprint somehow made, then I suppose it would have had to be done during the crucifixion period noted above. Thus the latest date for a Roman crucifixion shroud would be around the year 313 AD.   

LE said, "Very true as well, the shroud clearly shows the same marking we would expect from a crucifixion scenario. And anyone studying a small amount of religious history knows that during those years specified by the dating, tens of thousands of men were crucified the very same way the person now called Jesus was, and those folks were almost always wrapped in linens and such.

Well LE, I just have never "studied religious history", except for what the Bible teaches us. But, don't you think that with "tens of thousands of men were crucified the very same way", that there would be similar crucifixion "shroud relics" all over the place??

I do assume that when you say "crucified the very same way", you are just meaning the basic terrible crucifixion"? I ask that because the crucifixion of Jesus did involve many different and very specific treatments that supposedly were not the norm for the basic crucifixion.

For sure, I am no expert on the Shroud of Turin, nor on crucifixions - enough so on crucifixions to know that I certainly do not want one for myself, but "I am eternally thankful that my Jesus did"!

Just for interest, here is a link to a long read I found, that does give much information and insight into the possibilities/probabilities of the shroud being the authentic shroud of Jesus.

http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2008/11/rethere-is-compelling-evidence-it-is.html

[Pimander]

Regarding the previous comments about folks feeling compelled to prove or disprove an artefacts authenticity....

As a scientist, I am interested in proving or disproving claims quite often but not for spiritual reasons in a case like this.

In terms of religious artefacts though, I think they are irrelevant and based on the more superstitious end of spiritual faiths.  EVEN IF I BELIEVED JESUS DIED TO SAVE ME FROM SINS THAT I HADN'T DONE WHEN HE WAS CRUCIFIED, ( ) the authenticity of the shroud makes no difference whatsoever.  Spiritual matters and beliefs surely do not depend on physical objects.  It's just idolatry isn't it?

Even if it is the shroud of Jesus or whatever, the central tenet of Christianity still makes no sense on any level.  Jesus may have been a good man.  He may have been much more than that too but a cloth don't make the faith legitimate for me.  Likewise, for a guy with faith in Christianity like rdunk, the shroud is not the reason for his faith.

In other words if it were a cheese cloth, the shroud of Jacques de Molay or the shroud of Christ - rdunk has faith and I think most religion is nonsense regardless.

[rdunk]

Hey Pimander! You really boiled this down to a nutshell, and you and I are pretty much together on this. Your points made are important, but simply the truth, relative to the shroud, and how it should be regarded.

If the shroud is authentic, the imprint on it was digitized upon it by the resurrection power of God, then the shroud might be regarded to be on a level similar to the ark of the covenant, if it were to be found. But, either way, these would not be pieces to be worshiped.  Things such like do represent some of the history of God's interaction with "his man". (Yes, said from my Christian point of view) 

Thanks!

[Pimander]

Hey Pimander! You really boiled this down to a nutshell, and you and I are pretty much together on this.

We may not share faiths but we're bound to agree on some things.

[Littleenki]

You know Rdunk, the fact that this shroud is available and able to be examined in itself is a step towards it having a better chance of being the actual shroud of Jesus, considering the fact that when the other thousands of people were crucified and wrapped, they remained in the ground forever, so we dont see the shrouds they were wrapped in due to their disintegration by the time the bodies are exhumed and studied.

So, if this shroud is so intact, does it mean who was wrapped in it was removed from their grave or tomb within a short time after their burial? Id say just that issue, raises suspicions of it being the real shroud more than many other clues theyve presented. Good point Rdunk, indeed!

Like Pimander said, we are bound to agree on some things, and thats what this forum and such is about, learning our differences so we can bring mankind together again, one step at a time.

Cheers!
Le

[space otter]

and another voice in the debate


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/turin-shroud-global-dna_561d252de4b028dd7ea52ccd


Lee Speigel
Reporter, The Huffington Post
Posted: 10/19/2015 11:03 AM EDT | Edited: 10/19/2015 07:54 PM EDT

Shroud Of Turin DNA Indicates Global Origins

Genetic material suggests the shroud may have been created in India.

There's a surprising new wrinkle in the story of the celebrated Shroud of Turin.


A group of Italian researchers have found that the 14-foot-long garment -- believed by some to be the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, even though science has proven that's not the case -- contains DNA from plants found all over Earth.


"Here we report the main findings from the analysis of genomic DNA extracted from dust particles vacuumed from parts of the body image and the lateral edge used for radiocarbon dating," Dr. Gianni Barcaccia, a plant genetics and genomics professor at the University of Padova in Italy, wrote in a paper co-authored with his colleagues about the DNA results.


After sequencing the DNA of pollen and dust found on the shroud, the researchers discovered several plant groups native to the Mediterranean, RealClearScience.com reported. Other groups were linked to Asia, the Middle East, or the Americas, but must have been introduced at a time later than the Medieval period, according to the researchers.


Scientific Reports. Barcaccia, et. al.

An overview of the various plant DNA found on the shroud and their centers of origin. (Click caption for larger image)


The findings, published in the journal Scientific Reports on Oct. 5, suggest that the cloth may have been manufactured in India and then was transported from the Near East to its current home in Turin, Italy.

The linen shroud appears to show a double image of a bearded man "who suffered physical trauma in a manner consistent with crucifixion after being beaten, scourged and crowned with thorns," the researchers wrote. But whether this man was the historic Jesus Christ has been the subject of decades of scrutiny, speculation and controversy over its authenticity and origin.

In 1988, carbon-14 testing performed on the cloth by an international team of researchers, dated shroud fibers back to between 1260 and 1390. (That's a bit more than 1,000 years after the crucifixion, which means, of course, that the shroud can't be the relic that some Christians claim it to be.)

But a 2005 study by a retired chemist from Los Alamos National Laboratory dismissed that finding, arguing that the material tested in 1988 came from a patch applied to the shroud in medieval times. The 2005 study put the age of the shroud at 1,300 to 3,000 years.



This story has been updated with more information about the age of the shroud.



See up-close photos of the shroud below.


The Negative Shroud Face
There is plenty of scientific evidence that the Shroud is a burial cloth from first-century Palestine, evidence without all of the problems of the 1988 carbon-dating. For instance, pollens lifted from the cloth fibers indicate that it was once in Israel; a seam used in the manufacture of the linen is identical to one found only on a first-century cloth from Judea; the wound-marks are composed of real blood; and an alternative, peer-reviewed test of the age of the cloth found that it was over 1300 years old.




The Face of the Shroud
This image cannot be a medieval fake: the image does not match the style, technique, or concepts of medieval imagery, and it cannot be a painting or a rubbing. Skeptics have suggested various weird and wonderful ways in which it might have been produced; they all contradict each other, and none is remotely plausible.






The Full Frontal Image of the Shroud
It may be difficult for us to grasp, living in a scientific age, but two thousand years ago people really did think that images, especially natural images like shadows and reflections, were somehow alive. This instinct is known as animism. So the shadow-like Shroud image would have been seen by Mary Magdalene and the disciples as a living double of Jesus appearing after his death -- a resurrected Jesus.




The Full Frontal Image of the Shroud in Negative
The Shroud was first photographed in 1898, revealing that it is an astonishingly realistic negative image. This unequivocally proves that the Shroud cannot be a medieval man-made forgery, for no one knew how to produce such an image in those days - or would have wanted to. And no, Leonardo couldn't have either - apart from anything else, he was born a century after the Shroud is first documented in France.





 
Miniature By Giovanni Battista della Rovere
A miniature by Giovanni Battista della Rovere, painted between 1625 and 1630. Rather than a forgery or supernatural phenomenon, the image on the Shroud could have been formed naturally when chemicals from Jesus' decomposing body reacted with starch deposits on the linen fabric to produce a unique stain via a Maillard reaction (the type of reaction that makes bread crust turn golden brown). This makes sense in relation to the Biblical record of Jesus' burial