Shroud of Turin

[bippy123]

If Seraph would bring up that the image could be of anyone and that the evidence is circumstantial that isnt entirely correct . The fact is that no one in recorded history was crucified the way Christ and the man on the shroud were crucified. I challenge Seraph to bring me just one person in recorded history that was recorded as being crucified the same way . I tried for over 6 months at one point and just couldnt find one.

Well its not like one can just google "list of people crucified by the romans in 33AD". To say "there are no known people crucified this way in this time period" is just an appeal to ignorance in my opinion.

How diverse could cruxifiction be? I imagine Jesus was hardly the only one crucifed by piercing his hands and feet.

Seraph forget 33ad and give me one person before 1800 ad in recorded history that was crucified the way Jesus and the man on the shroud was.
There ya go, I just made is super easy for ya.
This is not even counting the amazing image itself of the connection with the mandylion .

[bippy123]

If Seraph would bring up that the image could be of anyone and that the evidence is circumstantial that isnt entirely correct . The fact is that no one in recorded history was crucified the way Christ and the man on the shroud were crucified. I challenge Seraph to bring me just one person in recorded history that was recorded as being crucified the same way . I tried for over 6 months at one point and just couldnt find one.

Well its not like one can just google "list of people crucified by the romans in 33AD". To say "there are no known people crucified this way in this time period" is just an appeal to ignorance in my opinion.

How diverse could cruxifiction be? I imagine Jesus was hardly the only one crucifed by piercing his hands and feet.

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't the Roman empire very good at recording these sorts of things and if there was a deviation from the norm it most likely would have been recorded somewhere?

I guess it is possible that someone was crucified the same way, but I find it unlikely or an extremely rare event.

Exactly Daniel, I'm not saying there wasn't a person that couldn't have been crucified this way but it's extremely unlikely.
Seraph, do you seriously believe what made Christ's crucifixion unique is that he was crucified through the feet and hands????
Please tell me a bit more about the crown of thorns that Christ was crucified with and why the man on the shroud's image gives even more detail on the crown of thorns then most people previous
Ya know. Seraph I want you to start researching this for yourself as the beauty of shroud is the wonder of discovery.
Once you start my friend, you could be in a for a long Antonacci . Everyone here knows what I mean by this
And like I said in my previous post The connection with the mandylion is a slam dunk.
I know seraph doesn't want to go near the mandylion

[Seraph]

Seraph forget 33ad and give me one person before 1800 ad in recorded history that was crucified the way Jesus and the man on the shroud was.
There ya go, I just made is super easy for ya.
This is not even counting the amazing image itself of the connection with the mandylion .

The two people crucified with Jesus for starters. Probably 100,000 others. Crucifixion by its definition is being nails to a cross by your hands and feet, what is so unusual about Jesus/the shroud mans method?



I don't look at that and see a definitive crown of thorns.

[Danieltwotwenty]

Well its not like one can just google "list of people crucified by the romans in 33AD". To say "there are no known people crucified this way in this time period" is just an appeal to ignorance in my opinion.

How diverse could cruxifiction be? I imagine Jesus was hardly the only one crucifed by piercing his hands and feet.

Seraph forget 33ad and give me one person before 1800 ad in recorded history that was crucified the way Jesus and the man on the shroud was.
There ya go, I just made is super easy for ya.
This is not even counting the amazing image itself of the connection with the mandylion .

The two people crucified with Jesus for starters. Crucifixion by its definition is being nails to a cross by your hands and feet, what is so unusual about Jesus/the shroud mans method?

What about the wounds from the crown of thorns, the spear pierced side, the scourge marks, the beaten face etc... etc.. the wounds on the cloth match exactly as it is described in the Gospels, I would hardly think every person would have these corresponding wounds, especially the crown of thorns.

Bippy does the cloth have evidence from the spear?

[bippy123]

Seraph forget 33ad and give me one person before 1800 ad in recorded history that was crucified the way Jesus and the man on the shroud was.
There ya go, I just made is super easy for ya.
This is not even counting the amazing image itself of the connection with the mandylion .

The two people crucified with Jesus for starters. Probably 100,000 others. Crucifixion by its definition is being nails to a cross by your hands and feet, what is so unusual about Jesus/the shroud mans method?



I don't look at that and see a definitive crown of thorns.

Seraph there are puncture marks all over the head, you might not be able to see it clearly in this photo but even the toughest shroud skeptics concede this. Your fighting a losing battle on the crown of thorns, Plus the difference here is that there are puncture wounds all over the head on the shroud and not just consistent with a literal crown of thorns.

Seraph your assignment is to find out why this fact bringsd even more accuracy to the crown of thorns historically.

Lets take a look at what an expert Coroner has to say here shall we?
//www.shroud.com/bucklin.htm

After an overall inspection and description of the body image, the pathologist continues his examination in a sequential fashion beginning with the head and progressing to the feet. He will note that the deceased had long hair, which on the posterior image appears to be fashioned into a pigtail or braid type configuration. There also is a short beard which is forked in the middle. In the frontal view, a ring of puncture tracks is noted to involve the scalp. One of these has the configuration of a letter "3". Blood has issued from these punctures into the hair and onto the skin of the forehead. The dorsal view shows that the puncture wounds extend around the occipital portion of the scalp in the manner of a crown. The direction of the blood flow, both anterior and posterior, is downward. In the midline of the forehead is a square imprint giving the appearance of an object resting on the skin. There is a distinct abrasion at the tip of the nose and the right cheek is distinctly swollen as compared with the left cheek. Both eyes appear to be closed, but on very close inspection, rounded foreign objects can be noted on the imprint in the area of the right and left eyes.

It is the ultimate responsibility of the medical examiner to confirm by whatever means are available to him the identity of the deceased, as well as to determine the manner of this death. In the case of Man on the Shroud, the forensic pathologist will have information relative to the circumstances of death by crucifixion which he can support by his anatomic findings. He will be aware that the individual whose image is depicted on the cloth has undergone puncture injuries to his wrists and feet, puncture injuries to his head, multiple traumatic whip-like injuries to his back and postmortem puncture injury to his chest area which has released both blood and a water type of fluid.

Now I dont know about you seraph, but Ill take the word of Coroners like Robert Bucklin who can spot puncture wounds easily over your unbiased eye
As well as other coroners like zugibe

[Seraph]

Alright then,

I concede that you clearly know more about research surrounding the shroud than I do. I do not know the details of how it is known that the carbon dating method from 1988 dating it to the middle ages was a fake, what the explanation is for the weaving technique being far too advanced for 2000 years ago in Israel, or how they know the image wasn't airbrushed by forgers, but I'm not going to be able to debunk the shroud in a convincing way,as I assume whatever I bring up is already acknowledged in the 53 pages of this thread, however biased I think the "evidence" for it may be.

It definitely seems to me that the scientific consensus is that it is a forgery, but anything I post is probably going to be countered by some source that says otherwise.

[Danieltwotwenty]

Hey Bippy wasn't there an imprint of a medallion with Hebrew writing on it? What was the significance of that?

[Danieltwotwenty]

It definitely seems to me that the scientific consensus is that it is a forgery

I don't think this is true, I think it is a 50/50 split, some scientists say it's fake, some say it's real and others say they just don't know yet.

[Philip]

If anyone says the Shroud is a fake, then they have to explain why the image has such astonishing detail, 3-D spatial imagery, etc., and why can't modern analysis understand how it possibly could have been faked by a pre-scientific age person? Did they travel from Europe to the Holy Land to also acquire the correct pollens, unique to the Jerusalem area? And why would they need to or even think to do so, as no one could have possibly seen or even known what pollens are on it? And how COULD it have been, as modern science has found no way to replicate it by ANY method?

And even IF an ancient or medieval period faker had a technique of creating it, why would they see the need to put such extraordinary detail into a fake, when a pre-scientific age public would have easily been fooled with something FAR cruder and much less detailed. A simple, bloodied corpse transfer or a painted image would have easily sufficed. Bottom line, no pre-scientific age faker would have had the extraordinary ability to produce what we see on the Shroud - nor do we have the ability TODAY. And let's not forget that centuries before anyone knew the extraordinary aspects of the Shroud, it was considered the burial garment of Jesus. What a coincidence, eh?

[bippy123]

Alright then,

I concede that you clearly know more about research surrounding the shroud than I do. I do not know the details of how it is known that the carbon dating method from 1988 dating it to the middle ages was a fake, what the explanation is for the weaving technique being far too advanced for 2000 years ago in Israel, or how they know the image wasn't airbrushed by forgers, but I'm not going to be able to debunk the shroud in a convincing way,as I assume whatever I bring up is already acknowledged in the 53 pages of this thread, however biased I think the "evidence" for it may be.

It definitely seems to me that the scientific consensus is that it is a forgery, but anything I post is probably going to be countered by some source that says otherwise.

Seraph, I do know the 88 c14 tests very well and so do most of the posters here. The 88 c14 tests were invalidated a long time ago by Agnostic Chemist Ray Rogers , senior fellow at los alamos labs, one of the ebst chemists in the country, and a man who stated he doesnt believe in miracles that defy the laws of nature.
This is his peer reviewed chemical analysis paper accepted in the european chemical journal Thermochimica acta http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF

The weaving technique was also done in those times as well. Do you really need us to debunk this claim as well. Rebecca jackson, former orthodox Jew and an expert in ancient jewish burial customs confirmed thsi as well as others. Its a 3 way herrinbone weave which means it was an expensive weave at that time, which corresponds perfectly with his burial being provided by a rich man (this was even predicted 100's of years before in the messianic prophecies).

The image wasnt airbrushed in any way. Sturp determined with their scientific testing that there were no added substances on the burial cloth, but some chemical change caused by some momentous event that changed the burial cloth chemically. There is Xay information in the areas of the hands, wrist, left femur, Jaw, teeth, Gums and head. Maybe a 1st century scientist got out his handy xray machine and started taking xrays of Jesus's Body . Anything is possible right seraph?

What scientific consensus could you possibly be talking about Seraph? Most scientists who have studied the shroud know the evidence is extremely strong for its authenticity, but how about you study the shroud for yourself if you believe you can debunk it? Or maybe seraph the problem is that you know deep down inside that you cant debunk it

Seraph, most of us here have researched teh shroud for at least a few years (im going on 5+) and the reason why most are confident about its authenticty is because we have looke dthrough the research and the peer reviewed papers written about it.

I told you beforehand that you didnt know what you were getting yourself into. Many pro Shroud scientists were originally skeptics about the shroud and it was only through very meticulous study that they had changed their minds. A real seeker armed with even a bread crumb of evidence would not be able to put the shroud down. I suspect Ken is starting to get intrigued by it, but it seems to me that you dont even want to start digging deep into it. Maybe the problem isnt the evidences for the shroud or the biases for or against it, maybe the problem is within you. Maybe its something that needs to be hased out between you and God?

[bippy123]

Hey Bippy wasn't there an imprint of a medallion with Hebrew writing on it? What was the significance of that?

KInd of Daniel, we have an amulet that (a solid object) under his chin and what is said on there is a subject of debate among pro shroud people. Professor petrus soons believes that the letters on the amulet mean THE LAMB. Stephen Jones's research is saying it means "You will come out" which could have been the very words Jesus said when he spoke to lazurus to come out of his tomb.
http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/20 ... hroud.html

I then found in one of my Hebrew lexicons that tse'w was an imperative imperfect plural masculine verb of the Hebrew root yatsa' (yodh-tsade-'aleph). Yatsa' in turn means "to go out, come out, exit, go forth" (Davidson, 1966, pp.638,336; Strong's Concordance 3318; Tregelles, 1949, pp.359-360; Harris, et al., 1980, pp.1:393-394). And according to R.K. Harrison's, "Teach Yourself Hebrew," 1955, p. 69, the meaning of yatsa' in the imperfect plural masculine, i.e. tse'w, would be, "you will come out." So this may well be the very Hebrew or Aramaic word that Jesus used when He commanded Lazarus to "come out" from the tomb (Jn 11:43)!

[bippy123]

It definitely seems to me that the scientific consensus is that it is a forgery

I don't think this is true, I think it is a 50/50 split, some scientists say it's fake, some say it's real and others say they just don't know yet.

If you actually polled the scientists that actually researched this deeply in every way I think u would see a significant leaning towards authenticity of the shroud.
And please do us a favor Seraph bring us the reasons why those anti shroud'ist believe the shroud is a fake and I bet you anything that they will come from the anti-theistic atheistic camp of whome most have not studied the peer revierwed research on the shroud.

Maybe Seraph for some subconscious reason doesnt want the shroud to be real and im starting to suspect that this may be the problem with seraph, but I dont believe for some second its something Seraph is doing on purpose.

[bippy123]

If anyone says the Shroud is a fake, then they have to explain why the image has such astonishing detail, 3-D spatial imagery, etc., and why can't modern analysis understand how it possibly could have been faked by a pre-scientific age person? Did they travel from Europe to the Holy Land to also acquire the correct pollens, unique to the Jerusalem area? And why would they need to or even think to do so, as no one could have possibly seen or even known what pollens are on it? And how COULD it have been, as modern science has found no way to replicate it by ANY method?

And even IF an ancient or medieval period faker had a technique of creating it, why would they see the need to put such extraordinary detail into a fake, when a pre-scientific age public would have easily been fooled with something FAR cruder and much less detailed. A simple, bloodied corpse transfer or a painted image would have easily sufficed. Bottom line, no pre-scientific age faker would have had the extraordinary ability to produce what we see on the Shroud - nor do we have the ability TODAY. And let's not forget that centuries before anyone knew the extraordinary aspects of the Shroud, it was considered the burial garment of Jesus. What a coincidence, eh?

This is the crux of it all Philip, its ridiculous for any honest seeker to believe that a forger would go through all this trouble top fool people of his time. Thinking so just strains credulity, but most pseudo skeptics are willing to hold onto any reason (no matter how unreasonable it is) to deny the impressive array of evidences for the shroud's authenticity.

Most atheists choose to ignore the shroud because it really gives them major headaches . Can you Blame them Philip?

[Danieltwotwenty]

Maybe Seraph for some subconscious reason doesnt want the shroud to be real and im starting to suspect that this may be the problem with seraph, but I dont believe for some second its something Seraph is doing on purpose.

Hey Bippy please lets not presume Seraph intentions or how they do or do not feel, I don't think it's very nice or conducive to healthy discourse.

Cheers

[bippy123]

Maybe Seraph for some subconscious reason doesnt want the shroud to be real and im starting to suspect that this may be the problem with seraph, but I dont believe for some second its something Seraph is doing on purpose.

Hey Bippy please lets not presume Seraph intentions or how they do or do not feel, I don't think it's very nice or conducive to healthy discourse.

Cheers

Your right Daniel, my apologies to Seraph . I really hope and pray that it all works out for him