Do you believe the science?
- Thread starter Lamar Card
- Start date
*skips to end of video*
"So the forensic science tells us what? The man in the Shroud is Jesus. Not just beyond a reasonable doubt. Beyond any doubt."
Uhh, sure. I've always been intrigued by religious artifacts but something like the Shroud having the blood stains and burnt image of the Jesus (not Lebowski) will never be proven. That's why you have Faith. If you believe it's real, cool. If you don't, hey, it's still something incredibly old from the past, and that makes it neat as well.
William Friedkin was on Marc Maron's podcast several years ago and tells an amazing story about seeing the Shroud of Turin up close in a private viewing or something. He was so passionate about it and from what I remember went into great detail about the experience.
"So the forensic science tells us what? The man in the Shroud is Jesus. Not just beyond a reasonable doubt. Beyond any doubt."
Uhh, sure. I've always been intrigued by religious artifacts but something like the Shroud having the blood stains and burnt image of the Jesus (not Lebowski) will never be proven. That's why you have Faith. If you believe it's real, cool. If you don't, hey, it's still something incredibly old from the past, and that makes it neat as well.
William Friedkin was on Marc Maron's podcast several years ago and tells an amazing story about seeing the Shroud of Turin up close in a private viewing or something. He was so passionate about it and from what I remember went into great detail about the experience.
WildcatfaninOhio
All-American
The science of the shroud has been pretty incredible over the the the years. The pollen data proves it was in the Middle East near Jerusalem. The mainstream has been proven wrong time and again with this.
When a human bleeds the blood turns black as it ages. Other burial shrouds have black blood images, none have the red blood image or the secondary image of this shroud. The video explains why the blood on this shroud is red versus black.
Beyond the blood image is an image that has photo negative, xray, and hologram properties. After 2000 years, man has developed tools to allow the viewing these images. A 3D image has been produced.
There is a coin image on each eye that can be traced to the area and time that Jesus lived. Along with the image of the man on the shroud, there are images of flowers in the shroud. When these flower images were shown to experts they quickly identified them as flowers from the respective era and location.
There is also the pollen study and other other information. But I will try to explain a final oddity. The 3D image is based on the distance of the cloth from the body. It is a front and back image. It shows that the body was levitated when the image was produced and that it happened very quickly. They go into light frequency spectrum analysis that is beyond my understanding.
One last point, one of the leading men in the field of topographical study had to be convinced to participate as he is a Jew and thought this would be a waste of his time. His belief has been changed.
Three independent radiocarbon dating tests done in 1988, as well as a follow-up analysis done in 2020, showed that the shroud dated with 95% confidence to the medieval era, which just so happens to be when the shroud first appeared as a supposed relic.
This, although I didn't know about the analysis from 2020. I guess if you want to believe then your reasoning might be what we heard several years ago - the Shroud was repaired during the Medieval Age and scientists just happened to take a sample from the repaired part. True believers will find any excuse to disregard the science that says nay while jumping on any bit of science (or scientists who believe) and say yay.
FWIW, we don't even have an accurate painting of what Joan of Arc actually looked like, but we're supposed to accept without a doubt that Jesus Christ himself (a man who America has Americanized into a beautiful white man who resembles 1980's Kenny Loggins) was wrapped in this piece of cloth?
There are problems with that data. Partially that they only used one fiber and fibers were re-sewn in during the Middle Ages. Another deals with a fire in the 1400s.
Here’s my problem with the shroud. Let’s say it was perfectly scientifically proven to be from the time of Jesus (despite already been proven not to be already), the stains were proven to be blood and other bodily fluids that would be consistent with a man that was crucified. What does that prove? It doesn’t mean it was Jesus. The question of his existence doesn’t seem to be up for debate in this thread, nor does his death. The shroud has zero percent effect on my faith as it would be a stopping point before the most important part of the story, the resurrection.
The ‘face’ also seems to be the whitewashed version, common in the art of those medieval times in Europe.
The ‘face’ also seems to be the whitewashed version, common in the art of those medieval times in Europe.
That's where I've been on the Shroud as well Funky. I mean, crucifixion was not an uncommon punishment, so it stands to reason hundreds, and perhaps even thousands were killed in such a manner in that time frame. It literally could be anyone.......,or it could be a total forgery.
All alleged "problems" with the RC dating and alternate theories have been refuted, including the idea that they only dated a "medieval repair" portion of the shroud.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...oud-of-turin/8CC26C322198300E051C49A0BA5B96D9
I was able to open the full article using the "View PDF" option.
"The sampling of the Shroud of Turin in 1988 is stated by those present (e.g. D J Donahue, personal communication, 2010) to have been taken “from the main part of the shroud.” Those removing the samples at the time were aware of repair material. We conclude from our observations and the history of our sample, that our sample was taken from the main part of the shroud. There is no evidence to the contrary. We find no evidence to support the contention that the 14C samples actually used for measurements are dyed, treated, or otherwise manipulated. Hence, we find no reason to dispute the original 14C measurements, since our sample is a fragment cut on the arrival of the Arizona 14C sample in Tucson on 24 April 1988 by coauthor Jull, and has been in his custody continuously.
We assume that there will be future studies on the Shroud of Turin. Any such future sampling should include another sample of the shroud away from the previous area sampled. In our opinion, such a study would be useful to confirm the previous results and should include both textile analysis and 14C measurements."
Another link with useful discussion about possible CO contamination (presumably this is the fire contamination you referenced): https://c14.arch.ox.ac.uk/shroud.html.
Anyway, hopefully more un-biased research can be performed soon to put the matter to rest.
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/5/2/47
I have been involved with C14 analysis before. Collecting for, not doing the lab analysis of. OSL (Optically Stimulated Luminescence) is another method. I have collected far more samples for OSL. Not possible here.
It has been firmly established that the "Shroud of Turin" is a fake that was created in the middle ages. They did a good job of trying to replicate the times, but if you are Catholic and have actually been taught by the people at the higher levels, they know it is fake. But, if it makes you believe and be a better person all week, so be it.
As a Christian, it puzzles me why it matters. I certainly don't need the shroud to affirm my faith. Its an idol, of sorts, and a distraction.
Its existence simply doesn't mean anything one way or another. The historical record already proves Jesus existed.
Why does any Christian need for the shroud to hold the image of Jesus?
Its existence simply doesn't mean anything one way or another. The historical record already proves Jesus existed.
Why does any Christian need for the shroud to hold the image of Jesus?
I'm a Christian. The shroud is fake, but cool anyway. Even if it was real, that doesn't really change what I believe about Christ.
Tell me more about this being firmly established. I'm not a Catholic by the way. The original carbon-14 date was wrong from the beginning because the shroud existed in Constantinople well before the 1300s.
How was it created? Was someone crucified and then struck by lightning?
The shroud has pollen from India to the Middle East all the way to France. It has DNA from from the same region.
If it was created in France in 1330, how was it done?
I’ve known about the shroud before but reading this thread made me do some searches last night and I came across an interesting article. A firm believer in the shroud has offered $1M to anyone who can recreate it and the unique properties it possesses. He alleges since the scientific community calls it a forgery, that recreating it should be no problem with modern advances in technology compared to the tools available to the supposed “con” who did it in the 1300’s.
I don’t know if the shroud is authentic or not but if you’re in the camp that laughs at it, here’s your chance to make $1M. Have at it.
I don’t know if the shroud is authentic or not but if you’re in the camp that laughs at it, here’s your chance to make $1M. Have at it.
Where the two meet is what fascinates me. Biblical archaeology is fascinating. Although be mebtally prepared to have many things refuted, but also much supported.
It matters more to atheists, I think. They seem to need it to be not Jesus or a fake. The negative image is pretty incredible if faked in medieval times. But, I have not connected to any links in this thread, because I am not sure why it matters. The proof for Jesus’ existence is patent. The question is only whether you believe what is written about him and what he claimed in those writings.
If a person accepts complete ignorance as their founding principle in life then all else is possible. You can create your own reality by just believing in it despite all observational truth or testable objective evidence.
Science doesn't operate on belief, you do. Just because you decided something does not make it so. I know that is hard for the bible thumpers to come to terms with, but at the end of the day you are choosing simply to live in a child's pretend game rather than face the harsh reality of a natural evolving universe were your existence is essentially meaningless. Because it is.
You know what death is? Death is exactly like all that time that existed before you were born. You're going to return to that. No relatives in clouds walking over to greet you. Just the same empty blankness that was there before you were born. You're not "afraid" of all the time that existed before you were born, so why fear all the time that will be after you are gone? They are one in the same. You are more experiences at being dead than you are at anything else. You spent billions of eons dead already and that is exactly where you will return.
Thanks for proving my point. Nothing you just said is possible to prove empirically. You simply take it on faith while seemingly failing to realize that empiricism itself is not possible to prove empirically. The very foundation of your worldview is faulty. In fact, if what you believe is true you could never know anything at all because there would be zero reason to trust your reason.
Last edited:
Isn't it fun being talked down to by a pseudointellectual?
Last edited:
You think I have to prove nothing happens after you die in order for that to be reality? I think you've got that backwards. I can prove nothing happens by demonstrating no electrical signals are traveling through your brain (they may not be that many right now as a matter of fact) and that you are clinically medically dead. Pretty air tight case. The fact that you had to have that explained to you says a lot about your rational thinking.
Dead is dead. People have been doing it for hundreds of thousands of years. That is science. Your goofy fantasies about what happens after death if you don't dance too close to someone else and "sin" are your delusions, not mine. Not science. You simply choose to believe fairy tales because you're too weak to accept clearly demonstrable biological death as being final.
You must demonstrate something else outside known biology occurs after death. I simply have to show death as there is nothing left to demonstrate. You could be a primitive caveman and say a giant bird woman flies down and transports your "soul" to a brothel in Newark if you like, but just because you try to claim I can't prove that does not happen is not a legitimate argument to make, but of course that didn't stop you from trying.
Last edited:
Disagree on the atheist part and the thread has been pretty respectful (by Paddock terms), so I'm not sure why you're taking a shot at atheists. How many atheists do you know that on a regular basis think about or bring up the Shroud of Turin? What we're responding to is a linked video stating that "the forensic science tells us what? The man in the Shroud is Jesus. Not just beyond a reasonable doubt, beyond any doubt." It cannot nor will it ever be proven that's the case so to state with complete confidence what I just quoted is a little out there. No one can link what's burnt into the cloth to the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. If you want to believe, by all means, but it simply cannot be proven by science and as others have stated, what has been tested thus far came back as not from the same time period of Jesus. But even if it had been from the same period, it still cannot be proven that it was the body of Christ burnt into the cloth.
I wish the shroud had actually covered the body of Christ. I wish we knew exactly where Jesus had been entombed or that someone found a piece of wood that was part of the cross his body rested on. I wish it could be proven that the Crown of Thorns kept in Notre Dame Cathedral was the same "crown" that had been placed atop his head. You can have faith, you can have theories, but none of this can be proven. I mean, it is okay to say that.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Larry glover live kentucky insider founder stated- Latest: Elliott Tim
-
