Evidence for God from Science

Ivellious wrote:haha I wasn't totally ripping your stance there. Just saying that his place as a lawyer shouldn't make his research more valid than someone else's

I don't know much about the shroud, personally. I know it's controversial, that's about it.

Also, my only real question would be this: If the cloth is real, why does Jesus look like a white, European male when there is zero chance that Jesus looked like that? It also does match the general medieval depictions of Jesus in Europe at the time...again, seems kind of odd if Jesus was absolutely not Caucasian. Just curious if there is any known reason for that?

Ivellious, this is where the pain is in the details.
1.No medieval forger would want to make a forgery of The lord with Nails going through the wrists and not what all medieval people saw on medieval images of Christ as having the nails go through the palm.

2.No medieval forger would know to make both the shroud and the sudarium match up so perfectly that forensic scientists today would be able to tell us that the nose of the man in the shroud and sudarium were both 8 centimeters.

3.No medieval forger would be able to put the blood stains in the way they were put with edema fluid and belirubin on the image and the sudarium, both indications that someone had gone through incredible torture. Also the flagrum markings all over the body match up perfectly with the roman whip.

4. No medieval forger could make what is basically xray qualities of an image of the hands, parts of the skull and mouth, and femur. This technology didnt exist.

5.No medieval forger could know the difference between type ab blood and type O or type A even. Why do both the sudarium and shroud contain type ab blood, and both containing the pollen of a thorny bush found only in the region of jerusalem and neighboring judea.

When all of the evidences are researched scientifically from a total view, the answer starts to become incredibly obvious.
The problem with the shroud is that almost all the evidences point more towards a much older date then medieval times.
The 8 centimeter nose fits perfectly with a middle eastern nose ( my nose is a testiment to that lol).

Folks I cannot stress enough for you to get the dvd The Fabric of time or u could watch parts of it on veoh.com or youtube.
Great info and its pretty much up to date except for the new ENEA tests.

The turin Shroud image is as a painting would be. it looks as if it has been drawn on. If a shroud is wrapped over a face it leaves an imprint that when the shroud is removed is stretched and NOT proportional to what the face would look like if it were painted normally . Why is the Turin shroud not a stretched out contorted image ? Did the cloth hover over the face in a straight line so that the image moved exactly to it like photons would to amirror?

thomasbryn wrote:The turin Shroud image is as a painting would be. it looks as if it has been drawn on. If a shroud is wrapped over a face it leaves an imprint that when the shroud is removed is stretched and NOT proportional to what the face would look like if it were painted normally . Why is the Turin shroud not a stretched out contorted image ? Did the cloth hover over the face in a straight line so that the image moved exactly to it like photons would to amirror?

Thomas the problem with your theory is that it was proposed about 20 years ago and debunked. the shroud is not a painting and not even the top artists in the world believe that much less the top scientists.. It is not even close to how a painting should be.

http://www.shroudstory.com/faq/

Artists readily notice that there are none of the signs of painting or drawing. There is a complete lack of any outline, brush strokes, or directionality from a tool used to create the image. Internationally renowned artist and an expert in practiced art Isabel Piczek stated "art always exhibits the mandatory use of outline, the event horizon in art."

Directionality, another characteristic in art, cannot be avoided unless an artist were to use a dot painting technique so precise as to be able to apply a colorant individually to top-layer fibers thinner than human hair. For deeper color the artist would need to touch more fibers in an area than in lighter areas. Furthermore, the image on the Shroud is so light and diffuse that the image cannot be seen from less than about six feet away. As Isabel Piczek and many scholars argue, an artist would have needed to work from a long distance, something that is really not possible.



and your statement about the stretched out contortion is correct if tyhe shroud had left an imprint in the normal way if the shroud had been taken directly off the cloth. This is just one piece of evidence as to why the evidence is juicy here.
There is no distortion and as world reknowed artist Dame isabel piczek also says, there is no distortion whatsoever on the backside of the shroud. Its a clean image that has almost no distortion that is also not a photograph because of the lack of directionality. On top of that the image itself has topographical 3d information. the technology to do this didnt exist in the medievil times. The problem gets even worse because the shroud and the sudarium of oviedo has been determined by forensic experts to have covered the same body (at very close intervals to within an hour mor or less) and the nose on both relics has been dtermined to be 8 centimeters. This is a huge problem for shroud skeptics and the now debubnked paint theory because it puts the shroud back to the 500's because the history of the sudarium is indisputable to at least the late 500's. Now this is only why I have only shown so far to debunk the paint theory, because there is a mountain of peer reviewed research and evidences in favor of authenticity.

There are very few that have thoroutghly and honestly researched the shroud with an open mind that have not been converted to it, so if your comfortable in your worldview stay away from the shroud:)

The recent ENEA report is amazing in that the scientists there tested theory after theory and found no way to recreate that image with all of its unique aspects, except for being able to recreate a few of its aspects by using ultra violet lasers at short pulses. They also determined that to recreate the full image on the shroud would take a laser the size of a building with the power of 33000 billion watts of power. We dont currently have a laser that powerful, in fact the most powerfull laser we have or can build right now is one with 2 billion watts of energy. Any open minded person will inevitably have to turn to one event and that is the only event that can make sense, The resurrection of Christ.

This doesnt even take into account the xray quality of parts of the image (the legs, fingers, and parts of the skull).

So far scientists cant even come close to duplicating the image
with all of its amazingly unique aspects.


dame isabel made the same point u made about the image not being distorted, and the onloy way it can be done with the evidence at hand by all of the top scientists is that the shroud was hovering above and below the body, at the moment the image was formed. This isnt the only problem here Thomas. Remember after the image was formed the shroud couldnt have simply dropped on top of the body because that would have caused distortion not only with the body but with the blood stains which also show no distortion. John jackson of NASA and antonacci believe that the only way for this to happen is for Jesus to dimensionally Phase rigtht through the cloth at the moment of the resurrection .

This is why I keep telling everyone that if they are sincere unbelievers who are of the touchy feeley type that need evidence that they could visually see the shroud is perfect, and this is why most atheist sites still cling to the now debunked c-14 dating and the debunked walter mccrone results (who couldnt pass one of his research articles on the shroud through peer review.

If your looking for a reason to believe, u should really start with the shroud.

Even in all of my posts I have given you just 1% of the research done on it. It is the most scientifically studied relic on earth.

Turin has a one year course for people to get to the advanced level of shroud research and I plan on one day taking that course as it will include a plethora of scientists that will be presenting there as well.

Thomas do as the former agnostic Antonacci did and start with the peer research. It took 20 years of research to convert Antonacci from agnost to christian and this was from the evidence of the shroud alone, his faith started building up later on. And this all started with an argument that he had with his christian girlfriend hehehe. She got him so angry that he wanted to prove to her that Christianity was a fable and instead he ended up converting to Christianity. What Irony hehe.

August wrote:I know this has been going back and forth a little, but the latest information on the shroud is that it is, well, inexplicable.

There has been no scientific explanation for how the image got on the shroud, and lately, a 3-d map of the shroud was also made, something that cannot be replicated from a layer so thin.

Thoughts?

I have studied the ongoing controversy of the Shroud and have watched a few videos , and I am very optimistic that the burial cloth is authentic and that it once contained Jesus' body based on the scientific evidence. I also believe that it was Gods desire that this Cloth be discovered and its authenticity verified as an additional credible apologetic to the historic Christian Faith . I trust that it has and will continue to stir much interest in the horrendous price Christ paid for us . It is a great tangible peice of history with enormous implications.

Dave I agree and I won't be surprised if some Christian philosophers start using the shroud as part of their debate material. Doctor Petrus Soons is currently working with a team of scientists I believe in Amsterdam. Soons believes that the shroud itself is a quantum hologram and they have started to find holographic information on it. If it is a quantum hologram that means that one day they will be able to create a whole image of the shroud using even the tiniest portion of any area of the shroud image. This would also mean that the resurrection was projected throughout the universe as a universal event.

Dame Isabel believes that the only explanation of what happened in that Tomb was a singularity cause the way that image was projected defies all known laws of physics.

It's as if God in his infinite compassion left a piece of the resurrection that would later be discovered for an unbelieving time. Just think, all of this didn't start happening until 1898 when segunda pio was commissioned to take the first picture of the shroud , and when he was developing the negative he almost dropped the plate in shock because what was supposed to be a negative image on the plate turned out to be a positive image.

This was the starting point that lead scientists to flock to the shroud in droves.

Thank you for your reply. you certainly have looked into this. I am , I admit intrigued , but find the arguments against the c-14 dating a little disjointed. As for your explanation of the manner in which the body of CHRIST transmuted /phased ( sorry can't rememebr your phrase) through the shroud in order to make it , that would be a good way of explaining it's clearly 2 dimensional image as opposed to the elongated effect and many wrinkles one would expect if it truly was wrapped around the body. It does however seem less plausible than simply being painted as most believe and I will need to look into that a little more if I am to get to the bottom of this.

Here are my two points regarding the 'passing through of CHRIST' as he ressurected.
If we are taking the Bible literally for a moment ( something I reluctantly do due to the early copyist errors that abound in the New testement and the additions and amendments within after the PAULINE christinaity eventually wins over the Adoptionists and the other rman versions of early christianity) we must assume that THOMAS , (my name sake and man of similar doubt!!)placed his hands in the wounds and that in fact JESUS was RESURECTED AS FLESH. In the explanation that the shroud was passed through are you suggesting that JESUS walked around for a period as a ghost and not as flesh?

SEcondly, and here I claim no knowledge , just intrigue. What does the Bible say about the shroud / cloths at Christ's burial. is there anything in the text ( unrelaible as it is 0 that even remotely mentions this item and if not one has to ask why not?

It does seem that the Cloth was meant for such a technological time as this , perhaps because in this day and age the populace places such a large amount of trust in our many sciences. Once the cloth is scientifically authentized (entirely), the only excuse for not believing will be of an apriori-philosophical commitment to personally reject God at all costs due to sheer arrogance and pride .

thomasbryn wrote:Thank you for your reply. you certainly have looked into this. I am , I admit intrigued , but find the arguments against the c-14 dating a little disjointed. As for your explanation of the manner in which the body of CHRIST transmuted /phased ( sorry can't rememebr your phrase) through the shroud in order to make it , that would be a good way of explaining it's clearly 2 dimensional image as opposed to the elongated effect and many wrinkles one would expect if it truly was wrapped around the body. It does however seem less plausible than simply being painted as most believe and I will need to look into that a little more if I am to get to the bottom of this.

Here are my two points regarding the 'passing through of CHRIST' as he ressurected.
If we are taking the Bible literally for a moment ( something I reluctantly do due to the early copyist errors that abound in the New testement and the additions and amendments within after the PAULINE christinaity eventually wins over the Adoptionists and the other rman versions of early christianity) we must assume that THOMAS , (my name sake and man of similar doubt!!)placed his hands in the wounds and that in fact JESUS was RESURECTED AS FLESH. In the explanation that the shroud was passed through are you suggesting that JESUS walked around for a period as a ghost and not as flesh?

SEcondly, and here I claim no knowledge , just intrigue. What does the Bible say about the shroud / cloths at Christ's burial. is there anything in the text ( unrelaible as it is 0 that even remotely mentions this item and if not one has to ask why not?

There is a brief mention of it in John 20:6-7

Thomas it seems that you've been reading a little too much Bart Ehrman, who claimed in his book that there were over 200,000 copying errors in the new testament,but what he fails to tell you is that none of those copying errors effect the foundational message of Christianity and William Lane Craig even caught him on this in a video in which he describes a good Bart ehrman who knows this and the bad Bart ehrman who is trying to make money by pulling this deception over the eyes of laymen. Reasonablefaith.org explains this fully and also talks about why the historicity of the new testament is greater than the historicity of any ancient document ever.

Now as for your statement that Jesus's body passing through the cloth being less plausible than the shroud being a painting that is incorrect because it allready has been proven not to be a painting by the top scientists and artists. The only person on the sturp team that thought it was a painting was the atheist microscopist Walter Mccrone who broke protocol with the sturp team by not sharing his findings with them, using less sophisticated equipment than the other scientists had, and he couldn't even get his research to pass peer review.


As for the bible talking about the shroud, yes it does. It talks about both the shroud and the sudarium.

CallMeDave wrote:It does seem that the Cloth was meant for such a technological time as this , perhaps because in this day and age the populace places such a large amount of trust in our many sciences. Once the cloth is scientifically authentized (entirely), the only excuse for not believing will be of an apriori-philosophical commitment to personally reject God at all costs due to sheer arrogance and pride .

Dave exactly my point, and also why Atheist hate the shroud so much and rarely discuss it without some conspiracy theories that have been debunked a million times before. Atheism isn't a logical but an emotional rejection of God.
The fact that the marks on our lords body on the shroud match up so perfectly is another point in favor of the new testament and Christianity, but for the life of me I can't understand why anyone would reject all of this evidence against what our Lord offers to us in favor of a worldview that offers no ultimate hope, no ultimate meaning and no ultimate purpose as well as no true love. It boggles my mind lol.

Thomas the evidence against the c-14 dating is from ray Rogers and it's peer reviewed. The part that was taken from the shroud was proven to be of a different chemical composition then the image area, and this was when Rogers found the cotton from the invisible reweave.

This is the first piece of evidence against the c14 dating.

2. The sudarium of Oviedo was shown by forensic experts to have covered the same body as the shroud at extremely close time intervals.

3. The Hungarian pray codex has a pic of the shroud with the rare herringbone weave and the poker holes and that's from the late 1000's.

I don't get what is disjointed about that . The evidence debunks the c14 dating. Its about as clear cut as you can get. Now if you choose not to believe that is up to you. Thomas saw and he believed
The evidence has been given to you, and if you want ignore it and lose the chance at the greatest relationship in the universe that's your choice. God loved us enough to give us that choice.

Anyways you can check out all the peer reviewed research on shroud.com where I spent a few years dissecting it (OCD power lol) and follow the evidence where it leads you.

Good luck and remember what is at stake here

Something else really neat I saw the other day was this hour and half long lecture by Russ Breault called the "Shroud encounter". The lecture is in seven parts. It also contains a lot of other details that so far I haven't seen on this thread so whoever wants to check it out might learn some new stuff. I know I did. Here are the links to the first two parts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P93I7JQY ... plpp_video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA69OB9Y ... plpp_video

Will definately check those out as well.

This is an interesting article as well - about the Italian discovery that was in the news recently.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomch ... st-writes/

DRDS wrote:Something else really neat I saw the other day was this hour and half long lecture by Russ Breault called the "Shroud encounter". The lecture is in seven parts. It also contains a lot of other details that so far I haven't seen on this thread so whoever wants to check it out might learn some new stuff. I know I did. Here are the links to the first two parts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P93I7JQY ... plpp_video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA69OB9Y ... plpp_video

Great find, I watched Russ's video presentation a while back, and highly recommend it because of the extensive historical detail that he goes into about the shroud, plus he also goes through the sudarium too, I really respect him for including the sudarium in the video. Some video presentations tend to forget about the sudarium as it's not the hot relic because it doesn't contain an image, but it's invaluable as one of the relics to tie the shroud to a much earlier date in history.

Silvertusk wrote:Will definately check those out as well.

This is an interesting article as well - about the Italian discovery that was in the news recently.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomch ... st-writes/

Silver good find for a few reasons. The research on the shroud performed by these scientists show that a source of radiation or light can cause some of the aspects of the image without causing any deep penetrational damage to the shroud which is another evidence in the mountan of evidences in favor of the shrouds authenticity, and the fact that no other natural explanation for the image can be found is another breadcrumb.

Another reason why I like this article is that it confirms the bias and deception that the author of the telegraph has against the shroud. It shows clearly by the fact that he chooses to interview professor Ramsey from Oxford , the guy who did the original carbon dating, which has been clearly debunked by now by the late Ray Rigers the agnostic chemist at the los alamos laboratory. Professor Ramsey still insists that this piece is representative of the rest if the shroud.

http://www.shroudstory.com/

In January, 2005, things changed.  An article appeared in a peer-reviewed scientific journal Thermochimica Acta, which proved that the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was flawed because the sample used was invalid. Moreover, this article, by Raymond N. Rogers, a well-published chemist and a Fellow of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, explained why the Shroud of Turin was much older. The Shroud of Turin was at least twice as old as the radiocarbon date, and possibly 2000 years old. 

How can professor Ramsey say that reweaving was highly unlike even today when this was shown by Ray Rogers , talk about a man in denial

Part 2 coming