Total Posts:34|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Shroud of Turin could prove Resurrection

Truth_seeker
Posts: 1,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,575
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2015 8:13:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community...

No, they pretty much agree it's a fake.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Gentorev
Posts: 2,878
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2015 8:25:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

There is nothing in the bible to support the belief that Jesus was wrapped in a shroud. Peter saw the cloths (Plural) in which his body was wrapped and the cloth (Singular) that had been wrapped around his head, separate from the body cloths.

It is also written that Joseph from Arimathea and Nicodemus, took the body of Jesus, and with a hundred pounds of spices, a mixture of myrrh and aloes, they wrapped the body in linen cloths (No single shroud) with the spices according to the Jewish tradition.

No mention of any shroud mate.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
dee-em
Posts: 6,444
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2015 8:33:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion.

Lol.

The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

And in breaking news, the theories for Harry Potter flying on a broomstick being faked have been refuted. No man (or boy) can fly totally unaided. If it passes the test then it should prove that Harry Potter had to have ridden on a broomstick due to the impossibility of levitating in the air against gravity. Thoughts?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2015 8:37:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

It is fake. Turin scientists who age it that far in the past are being ridiculous. It is heavily contested because the people who look at the Turin are doing so as their job and are financed by interested parties. It is hard to disprove some of this stuff, because of the lack of skeptical literature, but it can still be disproven. I will never ever lose a shroud of Turin debate, that is a fact.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2015 9:19:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts? : :

It sure made a great religious story. I'm sure the Christian scientists have been busy on that shroud of Turin, hoping that it's the one that covered their false deity.
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2015 9:27:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The only peer-reviewed test says it is a forgery. The only "test" that says it is genuine was not published through peer-review, and it is unknown if that "test" actually happened.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2015 9:33:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The Shroud of Turin being the Shroud that covered Jesus would be like a small bone found in the desert by an archeologist who says it came from the biggest dinosaur ever.
Truth_seeker
Posts: 1,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 11:07:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 8:25:54 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

There is nothing in the bible to support the belief that Jesus was wrapped in a shroud. Peter saw the cloths (Plural) in which his body was wrapped and the cloth (Singular) that had been wrapped around his head, separate from the body cloths.

It is also written that Joseph from Arimathea and Nicodemus, took the body of Jesus, and with a hundred pounds of spices, a mixture of myrrh and aloes, they wrapped the body in linen cloths (No single shroud) with the spices according to the Jewish tradition.

No mention of any shroud mate.

lol i heard something about that, but i'll check it out reading the original Greek..
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 11:24:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 8:37:19 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

It is fake. Turin scientists who age it that far in the past are being ridiculous. It is heavily contested because the people who look at the Turin are doing so as their job and are financed by interested parties. It is hard to disprove some of this stuff, because of the lack of skeptical literature, but it can still be disproven. I will never ever lose a shroud of Turin debate, that is a fact.

lol.
Truth_seeker
Posts: 1,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 11:44:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 9:27:45 PM, SNP1 wrote:
The only peer-reviewed test says it is a forgery. The only "test" that says it is genuine was not published through peer-review, and it is unknown if that "test" actually happened.

Sources?
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 12:00:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 8:25:54 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

There is nothing in the bible to support the belief that Jesus was wrapped in a shroud. Peter saw the cloths (Plural) in which his body was wrapped and the cloth (Singular) that had been wrapped around his head, separate from the body cloths.

The shroud is actually made up of 2 pieces of cloths. I have attached a picture here:

http://www.debate.org...

The upper strip is clearly visible. This strip was originally part of the main body of the shroud and cut off. It was later sewn back on. The stitching style that that was used to sew the strip back on has only ever been found in the 1st century remains of the Jewish fortress of Masada.

Thus we have a direct link to the 1st century and something that is consistent with the gospels. There is one main linen in which the body was wrapped. The side strip is the right length to bind the main shroud around the body. Then there was also the cloth put over the face when the body was taken down from the cross. This would be the Sudarium of Oviedo. The wounds on the Sudarium correspond very accurately with the wounds depicted on the shroud.

Additionally, the linen on the shroud was manufactured on a Kosher loom. This loom was only used to make linen and never came in contact with wool. This was to abide by the Law about Jews not wearing ceremonial clothing of mixed materials. Non Jewish and particularly European looms would end up with mixed materials.

It is also written that Joseph from Arimathea and Nicodemus, took the body of Jesus, and with a hundred pounds of spices, a mixture of myrrh and aloes, they wrapped the body in linen cloths (No single shroud) with the spices according to the Jewish tradition.

Yes and if you look at the timeframe they were rushing. Jesus died at 3PM. We know that he hung there for a while before the guards pierced him in the side. Additionally Joseph and Nicodemus had to go to Pilate, get permission, have a scribe write out the order, take it to the site, have the soldiers lower the cross, get the body, transport the body, wash and prepare the body, then apply the myrrh and aloes and wrap the body. This would have to be accomplished before 6PM (if I remember my Jewish customs properly). There would be no time for little strips. Additionally it is known that wealthy Jews spent good money on death shrouds.

No mention of any shroud mate.

Fully supported.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 12:28:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 9:27:45 PM, SNP1 wrote:
The only peer-reviewed test says it is a forgery. The only "test" that says it is genuine was not published through peer-review, and it is unknown if that "test" actually happened.

Actually that is not what it says. It says that the portion of the cloth tested was 691 years old "31 years. This means that it is between the years 1273 to 1288 with a 68% confidence and 1260-1390 with a 95% confidence.

Now oddly, there is the Hungarian Pray Manuscript which is dated to 1192 to 1195. This book has a drawing of the shroud therein:

http://www.debate.org...

This is a series of drawings in the manuscript. They show Jesus being laid on a burial cloth. With the body being removed you can distinctly see that the author showed the herringbone weave on the cloth, the blood of Jesus (denoted by red crosses) and the "poker holes". If you look below the right arm of the woman carrying the jar of ointment you will see 4 circles on the shroud in the herringbone area and you will see additional circles to the right and slightly down from that in blood area of the shroud.

The shroud contains damage that predates the large burn marks caused by a fire in 1532. These have been referred to as poker holes because they look as if they were formed by a hot poker on the shroud. It is believed that these are the result of dropped incense. Attached is an image showing the hole along with the relevant portion of the Pray Manuscript.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com...

So we have shown that there is very strong evidence that the shroud is older than the 95% confidence level of the C14 test.

The other thing that is baffling is that there is no known means (ancient or modern) of reproducing the image on the shroud in a manner that matches the physical and chemical properties.
bulproof
Posts: 25,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 2:36:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Here is a little experiment.
Cover your head in some skin friendly pigment and now drape a thin wisp of fabric across your face and head, so that the pigment is transferred to the cloth, now take that cloth and lay it flat on a table with the transfer facing up.
Tell me where you see the sides of the face and the ears, oh that's right they appear as WINGS to the face.
Got that on your shroud? No? It must be a miracle.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 3:19:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/1/2015 12:28:28 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/31/2015 9:27:45 PM, SNP1 wrote:
The only peer-reviewed test says it is a forgery. The only "test" that says it is genuine was not published through peer-review, and it is unknown if that "test" actually happened.

Actually that is not what it says. It says that the portion of the cloth tested was 691 years old "31 years. This means that it is between the years 1273 to 1288 with a 68% confidence and 1260-1390 with a 95% confidence.

Which would make it a forgery (they can't test the whole thing, they test parts of it).

Now oddly, there is the Hungarian Pray Manuscript which is dated to 1192 to 1195. This book has a drawing of the shroud therein:

http://www.debate.org...

Wow, the resemblance to the shroud is remarkable (sarcasm).

This is a series of drawings in the manuscript. They show Jesus being laid on a burial cloth. With the body being removed you can distinctly see that the author showed the herringbone weave on the cloth, the blood of Jesus (denoted by red crosses) and the "poker holes". If you look below the right arm of the woman carrying the jar of ointment you will see 4 circles on the shroud in the herringbone area and you will see additional circles to the right and slightly down from that in blood area of the shroud.

The shroud contains damage that predates the large burn marks caused by a fire in 1532. These have been referred to as poker holes because they look as if they were formed by a hot poker on the shroud. It is believed that these are the result of dropped incense. Attached is an image showing the hole along with the relevant portion of the Pray Manuscript.

And what is more likely, that the shroud was based off those manuscripts, that there was a story about the shroud that ended up making it to those manuscripts and the forged shroud, or that the shroud fits into the 5% and the manuscripts are based off of it?

I would say options 1 or 2 are much more likely.

Especially considering how a cloth found from the 1st century near Jerusalem had a completely different weaving pattern than the shroud.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com...

So we have shown that there is very strong evidence that the shroud is older than the 95% confidence level of the C14 test.

The other thing that is baffling is that there is no known means (ancient or modern) of reproducing the image on the shroud in a manner that matches the physical and chemical properties.

You know, except there is. All you have to do is go to wikipedia (I usually don't, but am lazy right now) and see different hypotheses.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Truth_seeker
Posts: 1,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 3:21:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Yea peeps. The Shroud has nail prints compatible with the time period described in the Bible. The Romans drove nails through the wrists whereas Medieval portraits show him pierced through the hands. There's also signs of a typical Roman punishment. I also hear that the blood of a person is likely to be preserved on the cloth. Give it a few years and we might be able to analyze the blood samples to determine the virgin birth or see any abnormalities as to who this person is.
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 6:28:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
They say if you stare at the shroud at the right spot you can see Dogs Playing Poker, which has to be a miracle because 5 card draw never existed back then.
dee-em
Posts: 6,444
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2015 7:31:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/1/2015 3:21:53 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
Yea peeps. The Shroud has nail prints compatible with the time period described in the Bible. The Romans drove nails through the wrists whereas Medieval portraits show him pierced through the hands. There's also signs of a typical Roman punishment. I also hear that the blood of a person is likely to be preserved on the cloth. Give it a few years and we might be able to analyze the blood samples to determine the virgin birth or see any abnormalities as to who this person is.

Except that it's not blood but just a red ochre paint:

http://www.mcri.org...
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2015 1:24:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Sorry about taking so long to get back to you... easter and all.

At 4/1/2015 3:19:29 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 4/1/2015 12:28:28 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/31/2015 9:27:45 PM, SNP1 wrote:
The only peer-reviewed test says it is a forgery. The only "test" that says it is genuine was not published through peer-review, and it is unknown if that "test" actually happened.

Actually that is not what it says. It says that the portion of the cloth tested was 691 years old "31 years. This means that it is between the years 1273 to 1288 with a 68% confidence and 1260-1390 with a 95% confidence.

Which would make it a forgery (they can't test the whole thing, they test parts of it).

That is merely an assumption on your part. This test actually violates the procedures for C14 testing. Notice 95% confidence. This is merely another piece of evidence. All pieces of evidence must mesh to know the truth.

Now oddly, there is the Hungarian Pray Manuscript which is dated to 1192 to 1195. This book has a drawing of the shroud therein:

http://www.debate.org...

Wow, the resemblance to the shroud is remarkable (sarcasm).

Actually it is! It shows nails through the wrist where contemporary art showed it through the palms, it shows the right hand over the left, it shows the herringbone weave, it shows Jesus as naked (which is pretty much unprecedented in art), it shows the L-shaped burn holes, it shows the beard and long hair, it shows long fingers and no thumbs.

Professor Lejeune therefore concluded:

"Such precise details are not to be found together on any other known [Christ] image - except the Shroud which is in Turin. One is therefore forced to conclude that the artist of the Pray manuscript had before his eyes ... some model which possessed all the characteristics of the Shroud which is in Turin."

This is a series of drawings in the manuscript. They show Jesus being laid on a burial cloth. With the body being removed you can distinctly see that the author showed the herringbone weave on the cloth, the blood of Jesus (denoted by red crosses) and the "poker holes". If you look below the right arm of the woman carrying the jar of ointment you will see 4 circles on the shroud in the herringbone area and you will see additional circles to the right and slightly down from that in blood area of the shroud.

The shroud contains damage that predates the large burn marks caused by a fire in 1532. These have been referred to as poker holes because they look as if they were formed by a hot poker on the shroud. It is believed that these are the result of dropped incense. Attached is an image showing the hole along with the relevant portion of the Pray Manuscript.

And what is more likely, that the shroud was based off those manuscripts, that there was a story about the shroud that ended up making it to those manuscripts and the forged shroud, or that the shroud fits into the 5% and the manuscripts are based off of it?

There is no reason anyone making the shroud would've even looked at this obscure hungarian manuscript. It is not particularly telling. If anything they would've looked at the art in the eastern Empire. The Vignon Marks indicate that the pictures are all related to the movement of the shroud through the ancient world.

I would say options 1 or 2 are much more likely.

Especially considering how a cloth found from the 1st century near Jerusalem had a completely different weaving pattern than the shroud.

Because yes the cloths used to wrap a poor leper would've been the same as that used to wrap a wealthy man... You know the ancient world had no trade and no differing quality in manufactured goods. It was like living under soviet communism - except that even under soviet communism there was differing quality of products for those who were high up in the regime. Palestine due to its geography was a key trade point in the ancient world.

This kind of weaving was practiced throughout the Roman Empire. This was particularly the case in the region of Tyra an Sidon, today in Lebanon, at the time of Jesus of Nazareth. Page 14:

https://books.google.ca...

Additionally, the bleaching process (which gives the darker lines on the shroud) is that of a 1st century palestinian linen and not a 13th century european linen. Linens from that time used a different process and thus were not subject to the lines visible.

Additionally the looms were different and gave a better weave than on the shroud.

So whomever "forged" the shroud somehow found an ancient fabric and used an unknown (and currently inexplicable) technique to create the shroud.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com...

So we have shown that there is very strong evidence that the shroud is older than the 95% confidence level of the C14 test.

The other thing that is baffling is that there is no known means (ancient or modern) of reproducing the image on the shroud in a manner that matches the physical and chemical properties.

You know, except there is. All you have to do is go to wikipedia (I usually don't, but am lazy right now) and see different hypotheses.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Except that there isn't. No one has been able to use any of these hypotheses to reproduce the image. They all fail (except the high intensity UV light - which we are unable to produce).
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2015 1:56:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/1/2015 7:31:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 4/1/2015 3:21:53 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
Yea peeps. The Shroud has nail prints compatible with the time period described in the Bible. The Romans drove nails through the wrists whereas Medieval portraits show him pierced through the hands. There's also signs of a typical Roman punishment. I also hear that the blood of a person is likely to be preserved on the cloth. Give it a few years and we might be able to analyze the blood samples to determine the virgin birth or see any abnormalities as to who this person is.

Except that it's not blood but just a red ochre paint:

http://www.mcri.org...

Lol. Let's look at what McCrone did:

McCrone was"Asked if he had treated them (purported paint samples) chemically, his answer was "I didn't have to." ...When one one of his colleagues exclaimed, "Do you mean you just looked through your microscope and, and without doing specific test for iron oxide, can proclaim it a painting?" McCrone confidently replied, "Yes."

http://tinyurl.com...

WOW, just so scientific that it blows one's mind... Let's just ignore those who says its blood and have done actual tests on it...
ThinkFirst
Posts: 1,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2015 2:11:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

So, someone found a piece of cloth that "almost meets" the criteria for being dated "around the time" of the claimed crucifixion, and this is a "refutation?"

That's akin to saying, "My claims can KIND OF be true, and it comes close, so you're wrong!" The shroud of turin has been debunked, by multiple authorities...

How is "coming close" to the time in ANY way indicative of something like a resurrection?

"All empirical evidence and logical reasoning concerning the shroud of Turin will lead any objective, rational person to the firm conclusion that the shroud is an artifact created by an artist in the fourteenth-century." --Steven D. Schafersman

Three independent testers were permitted by the vatican (the least trustworthy source of truth on the planet), and all of them placed the shroud's inception around the middle of the fourteenth century...
"Never attribute to villainy that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
-----
"Men rarely if ever dream up a god superior to themselves. Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child. "

-- Robert A Heinlein
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2015 2:33:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/10/2015 2:11:00 PM, ThinkFirst wrote:
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

So, someone found a piece of cloth that "almost meets" the criteria for being dated "around the time" of the claimed crucifixion, and this is a "refutation?"

That's akin to saying, "My claims can KIND OF be true, and it comes close, so you're wrong!" The shroud of turin has been debunked, by multiple authorities...

How is "coming close" to the time in ANY way indicative of something like a resurrection?

"All empirical evidence and logical reasoning concerning the shroud of Turin will lead any objective, rational person to the firm conclusion that the shroud is an artifact created by an artist in the fourteenth-century." --Steven D. Schafersman

Three independent testers were permitted by the vatican (the least trustworthy source of truth on the planet), and all of them placed the shroud's inception around the middle of the fourteenth century...

Nothing is debunked until you can reproduce it and explain the conflicting facts. All that you have is one fact that is in contradiction to every other fact gathered.
dee-em
Posts: 6,444
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2015 7:00:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/10/2015 1:56:34 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 4/1/2015 7:31:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 4/1/2015 3:21:53 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
Yea peeps. The Shroud has nail prints compatible with the time period described in the Bible. The Romans drove nails through the wrists whereas Medieval portraits show him pierced through the hands. There's also signs of a typical Roman punishment. I also hear that the blood of a person is likely to be preserved on the cloth. Give it a few years and we might be able to analyze the blood samples to determine the virgin birth or see any abnormalities as to who this person is.

Except that it's not blood but just a red ochre paint:

http://www.mcri.org...

Lol. Let's look at what McCrone did:

McCrone was"Asked if he had treated them (purported paint samples) chemically, his answer was "I didn't have to." ...When one one of his colleagues exclaimed, "Do you mean you just looked through your microscope and, and without doing specific test for iron oxide, can proclaim it a painting?" McCrone confidently replied, "Yes."

http://tinyurl.com...

That page is restricted to me so I can't verify the context. Dude, you're quoting from hearsay published in some book. It may or may not be accurate. The thing you ignore is that McCrone Research Institute provides the highest quality microscopy and microanalytical education and research. That's what they do and they are world renowned. Asking them to do a chemical analysis is an absurd strawman. Of course McCrone is not going to start dabbling In a field outside of his expertise. Lol.

In his area of expertise, what he sees under a microscope is paint. Get over it.

WOW, just so scientific that it blows one's mind...

Next time you go to the doctor ask them for tax advice. That's the equivalent of what you are asking. It's perfectly valid, even required, to confine yourself to your specific area of training and knowledge.

Let's just ignore those who says its blood and have done actual tests on it...

If you can't cite a reputable source, it didn't happen.
dee-em
Posts: 6,444
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/10/2015 7:20:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/10/2015 2:33:06 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 4/10/2015 2:11:00 PM, ThinkFirst wrote:
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

So, someone found a piece of cloth that "almost meets" the criteria for being dated "around the time" of the claimed crucifixion, and this is a "refutation?"

That's akin to saying, "My claims can KIND OF be true, and it comes close, so you're wrong!" The shroud of turin has been debunked, by multiple authorities...

How is "coming close" to the time in ANY way indicative of something like a resurrection?

"All empirical evidence and logical reasoning concerning the shroud of Turin will lead any objective, rational person to the firm conclusion that the shroud is an artifact created by an artist in the fourteenth-century." --Steven D. Schafersman

Three independent testers were permitted by the vatican (the least trustworthy source of truth on the planet), and all of them placed the shroud's inception around the middle of the fourteenth century...

Nothing is debunked until you can reproduce it and explain the conflicting facts.

Having to reproduce it in order to debunk it is BS. If that is the case then creationists have to be able to reproduce a human being from clay in order to debunk evolution. Lol.

Even so, your assertion is nonsense:

http://www.livescience.com...

Not only has it been reproduced but the original forger is known.

There's another very good reason to suspect that the Shroud of Turin is a fake: the forger admitted it. As Joe Nickell, author of "Relics of the Christ," noted, a document by "Bishop Pierre d'Arcis claimed that the shroud had been 'cunningly painted,' a fact 'attested by the artist who painted it.'" Not only did Bishop d'Arcis attest to knowing that the shroud was a fake in 1390, but even Pope Clement acknowledged the forgery. (The Catholic Church does not officially endorse the shroud as authentic).

All that you have is one fact that is in contradiction to every other fact gathered.

You have no facts, only the opinions of those with a vested interest in perpetuating this fakery to prop up their religious beliefs.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2015 4:36:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

I have heard it is a fake put together centuries after Jesus was a rotting corpse!
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2015 11:03:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/10/2015 7:00:02 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 4/10/2015 1:56:34 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 4/1/2015 7:31:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 4/1/2015 3:21:53 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
Yea peeps. The Shroud has nail prints compatible with the time period described in the Bible. The Romans drove nails through the wrists whereas Medieval portraits show him pierced through the hands. There's also signs of a typical Roman punishment. I also hear that the blood of a person is likely to be preserved on the cloth. Give it a few years and we might be able to analyze the blood samples to determine the virgin birth or see any abnormalities as to who this person is.

Except that it's not blood but just a red ochre paint:

http://www.mcri.org...

Lol. Let's look at what McCrone did:

McCrone was"Asked if he had treated them (purported paint samples) chemically, his answer was "I didn't have to." ...When one one of his colleagues exclaimed, "Do you mean you just looked through your microscope and, and without doing specific test for iron oxide, can proclaim it a painting?" McCrone confidently replied, "Yes."

http://tinyurl.com...

That page is restricted to me so I can't verify the context. Dude, you're quoting from hearsay published in some book. It may or may not be accurate. The thing you ignore is that McCrone Research Institute provides the highest quality microscopy and microanalytical education and research. That's what they do and they are world renowned. Asking them to do a chemical analysis is an absurd strawman. Of course McCrone is not going to start dabbling In a field outside of his expertise. Lol.

In his area of expertise, what he sees under a microscope is paint. Get over it.

WOW, just so scientific that it blows one's mind...

Next time you go to the doctor ask them for tax advice. That's the equivalent of what you are asking. It's perfectly valid, even required, to confine yourself to your specific area of training and knowledge.

Let's just ignore those who says its blood and have done actual tests on it...

If you can't cite a reputable source, it didn't happen.

Illogical. failure to demonstrate an event occurred is NOT supportive that the event did not happen.

I can not show you any evidence that last year I wore a green shirt. you can not conclude that I did not wear a green shirt. I may have worn a green shirt and the evidence of such is no longer available.

Please refrain from passing your comments of as logical. It is disingenuous and destructive to a rational investigation of the matter.
dee-em
Posts: 6,444
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2015 7:21:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
There's a poster here who badly needs to take a course to learn what logic is before he makes pronouncements about what is and isn't illogical. Alternatively he can continue to make himself look foolish. Whatever.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2015 12:22:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/10/2015 7:00:02 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 4/10/2015 1:56:34 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 4/1/2015 7:31:49 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 4/1/2015 3:21:53 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
Yea peeps. The Shroud has nail prints compatible with the time period described in the Bible. The Romans drove nails through the wrists whereas Medieval portraits show him pierced through the hands. There's also signs of a typical Roman punishment. I also hear that the blood of a person is likely to be preserved on the cloth. Give it a few years and we might be able to analyze the blood samples to determine the virgin birth or see any abnormalities as to who this person is.

Except that it's not blood but just a red ochre paint:

http://www.mcri.org...

Lol. Let's look at what McCrone did:

McCrone was"Asked if he had treated them (purported paint samples) chemically, his answer was "I didn't have to." ...When one one of his colleagues exclaimed, "Do you mean you just looked through your microscope and, and without doing specific test for iron oxide, can proclaim it a painting?" McCrone confidently replied, "Yes."

http://tinyurl.com...

That page is restricted to me so I can't verify the context. Dude, you're quoting from hearsay published in some book. It may or may not be accurate. The thing you ignore is that McCrone Research Institute provides the highest quality microscopy and microanalytical education and research. That's what they do and they are world renowned. Asking them to do a chemical analysis is an absurd strawman. Of course McCrone is not going to start dabbling In a field outside of his expertise. Lol.

Very well. All you have to do to prove me wrong is to simply show me where McCrone did a chemical analysis to prove that the substance was Iron-Oxide... I'll wait.

In fact did you know that McCrone only published his findings in his own Journal?

The image on the shroud is thinner than a soap bubble (180-800 nm) and is only not he most extreme fibrils of the fabric. It cannot be painted that way.

Iron oxide is evenly distributed across the shroud and is not concentrated just under the image areas. In the retting process on linens, an ion of iron (Fe) is attaches to the flax from iron in the water. This explains and is consistent with the purity of the iron oxide found on the Shroud. The iron oxide present in "Jeweler's Rouge" as was claimed by McCrone is much coarser and also contaminated with other elements. Spectrographic and radiographic tests do not support his claims. Nor was there any evidence of a paint binder.

And yet the people who examined the shroud for days and did the chemical tests concluded:

No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography.

So what you have is one guy who made his mind up in contradiction to other experts in other fields who could prove his theory wrong.

In his area of expertise, what he sees under a microscope is paint. Get over it.

WOW, just so scientific that it blows one's mind...

Next time you go to the doctor ask them for tax advice. That's the equivalent of what you are asking. It's perfectly valid, even required, to confine yourself to your specific area of training and knowledge.

And if my doctor's colleagues show him other tests that he did not perform that are more conclusive in nature than his and he refuses to even consider any other explanation would you keep going to that doctor? I think not.

Let's just ignore those who says its blood and have done actual tests on it...

If you can't cite a reputable source, it didn't happen.

There are numerous tests that show the blood on the shroud. It is type AB and has high concentration of bilirubin. The bilirubin in the blood is a strong indicator of someone being exposed to lengthly torture.

I was getting ahead of myself in this argument (my apologies). The image itself is made up of starches and saccharides (sugars) and may be evaporation impurities. The blood is real blood. The blood in under the image formation.

Here's a list of all the papers from the original STURP team:

https://www.shroud.com...
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2015 1:10:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/10/2015 7:20:28 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 4/10/2015 2:33:06 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 4/10/2015 2:11:00 PM, ThinkFirst wrote:
At 3/31/2015 7:58:52 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
So based on what i read, the Shroud of Turin is heavily contested in the scientific community but so far, it almost meets the criteria for being dated around the time of Jesus' Crucifixion. The theories for the Resurrection being faked have been refuted. No man could've escaped the tomb sealed shut with stone and guards on duty 24/7. If it passes the test then it should prove that Jesus did die and rose again evidenced by the lack of a body inside the bomb. Thoughts?

So, someone found a piece of cloth that "almost meets" the criteria for being dated "around the time" of the claimed crucifixion, and this is a "refutation?"

That's akin to saying, "My claims can KIND OF be true, and it comes close, so you're wrong!" The shroud of turin has been debunked, by multiple authorities...

How is "coming close" to the time in ANY way indicative of something like a resurrection?

"All empirical evidence and logical reasoning concerning the shroud of Turin will lead any objective, rational person to the firm conclusion that the shroud is an artifact created by an artist in the fourteenth-century." --Steven D. Schafersman

Three independent testers were permitted by the vatican (the least trustworthy source of truth on the planet), and all of them placed the shroud's inception around the middle of the fourteenth century...

Nothing is debunked until you can reproduce it and explain the conflicting facts.

Having to reproduce it in order to debunk it is BS. If that is the case then creationists have to be able to reproduce a human being from clay in order to debunk evolution. Lol.

When you are claiming something is man-made - one man must be able to recreate what another man has made. Especially when you are saying it was made 700-800 years ago. We can recreate a DaVinci right down to the finest detail.

Even so, your assertion is nonsense:

http://www.livescience.com...

Yay! The Garlaschelli thingy again. I love this one. Where to start. Well, the blood is under the image. His process of image formation would have destroyed the blood evidence underneath.

Additionally, his is formed using a paint which is not what the image on the shroud is. It has none of the detail that the shroud does.

Additonally, the shroud has no directionality to the image. In the creation process by Garlaschelli they rubbed the image on the person. This would've created directionality in the Garlaschelli image. Additionally this would've push the image deeper into the shroud than the top fibrils. Another fail.

So if you consider an image that neither matches the forensics on the shroud, the chemistry of the image, nor the physics of the image to be an accurate reproduction, then I guess you'll believe just about anything.

Not only has it been reproduced but the original forger is known.

There's another very good reason to suspect that the Shroud of Turin is a fake: the forger admitted it. As Joe Nickell, author of "Relics of the Christ," noted, a document by "Bishop Pierre d'Arcis claimed that the shroud had been 'cunningly painted,' a fact 'attested by the artist who painted it.'" Not only did Bishop d'Arcis attest to knowing that the shroud was a fake in 1390, but even Pope Clement acknowledged the forgery. (The Catholic Church does not officially endorse the shroud as authentic).

The Bishop D'Arcy letter was never signed nor was it ever sent, nor was the artist ever named. Wow that is strong proof there. The bishop didn't even believe what was on the paper enough to sign it and send it off. Could it be that the shroud was diverting pilgrims to Lirey (and thus donations away from he bishop's cathedral) and either the bishop or one of the people in his Chancery office drafted this letter? Yet there is no sign that this letter ever made its way to the Vatican. They keep excellent records, and it ain't there.

However, in June 1390, a papal bull is issued which grants new indulgences to those who visit St. Mary of Lirey and its relics. Sound like a resounding "acknowledgement of forgery" by the Pope... (as an aside I believe he may have been one of the anti-popes...)

All that you have is one fact that is in contradiction to every other fact gathered.

You have no facts, only the opinions of those with a vested interest in perpetuating this fakery to prop up their religious beliefs.

There is a massive amount of research on the Shroud - by people of many faiths and beliefs. Heck one of the biggest proponents of the shroud is a Jew! Not exactly the type of person most likely to blindly promote a Christian relic.

There are many facts that you don't care to actually examine. You should, you could learn something.
dee-em
Posts: 6,444
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2015 3:39:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/13/2015 12:22:57 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 4/10/2015 7:00:02 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 4/10/2015 1:56:34 PM, Geogeer wrote:

That page is restricted to me so I can't verify the context. Dude, you're quoting from hearsay published in some book. It may or may not be accurate. The thing you ignore is that McCrone Research Institute provides the highest quality microscopy and microanalytical education and research. That's what they do and they are world renowned. Asking them to do a chemical analysis is an absurd strawman. Of course McCrone is not going to start dabbling In a field outside of his expertise. Lol.

Very well. All you have to do to prove me wrong is to simply show me where McCrone did a chemical analysis to prove that the substance was Iron-Oxide... I'll wait.

What part of "he's an expert on microscopy" don't you understand? Lol.

In fact did you know that McCrone only published his findings in his own Journal?

What choice did he have? His papers for STURP were rejected for not toeing the preferred line, so he had to publish them himself and write a book on his findings.

The image on the shroud is thinner than a soap bubble (180-800 nm) and is only not he most extreme fibrils of the fabric. It cannot be painted that way.

So your expertise exceeds his? I'll go with the real expert, thanks.

Iron oxide is evenly distributed across the shroud and is not concentrated just under the image areas. In the retting process on linens, an ion of iron (Fe) is attaches to the flax from iron in the water. This explains and is consistent with the purity of the iron oxide found on the Shroud. The iron oxide present in "Jeweler's Rouge" as was claimed by McCrone is much coarser and also contaminated with other elements. Spectrographic and radiographic tests do not support his claims. Nor was there any evidence of a paint binder.

Again, you are not an expert. Neither am I. I'll opt for the professional opinion.

And yet the people who examined the shroud for days and did the chemical tests concluded:

No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography.

Which prople? Are you shy about citing a source? Lol.

It wouldn't even matter if it was blood. Whose blood was it if the material of the shroud dates to the 14th century? Lol.

So what you have is one guy who made his mind up in contradiction to other experts in other fields who could prove his theory wrong.

I am giving you a name and a reputation. You are giving us "other experts". Please, get real.

In his area of expertise, what he sees under a microscope is paint. Get over it.

WOW, just so scientific that it blows one's mind...

Next time you go to the doctor ask them for tax advice. That's the equivalent of what you are asking. It's perfectly valid, even required, to confine yourself to your specific area of training and knowledge.

And if my doctor's colleagues show him other tests that he did not perform that are more conclusive in nature than his and he refuses to even consider any other explanation would you keep going to that doctor? I think not.

You miss the point. You were asking for a chemical analysis from an expert in microscopy. Please don't create a strawman about getting a second opinion. That was never the issue.

Let's just ignore those who says its blood and have done actual tests on it...

If you can't cite a reputable source, it didn't happen.

There are numerous tests that show the blood on the shroud. It is type AB and has high concentration of bilirubin. The bilirubin in the blood is a strong indicator of someone being exposed to lengthly torture.

Still haven't cited a source. It didn't happen.

I was getting ahead of myself in this argument (my apologies). The image itself is made up of starches and saccharides (sugars) and may be evaporation impurities. The blood is real blood. The blood in under the image formation.

Here's a list of all the papers from the original STURP team:

https://www.shroud.com...

Useless:

The STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) group of scientists examined the shroud in 1978. Unfortunately almost all of these scientists were deeply religious, many were not specialised in the field they investigated and they were actively trying to prove its authenticity. In their book 'Debunked!', physicists Georges Charpak and Henri Broch noted that STURP consisted of 40 scientists, made up of 39 devout believers and 1 agnostic. Knowing that the proportion of believers to agnostics is much different in scientific circles than it is in the general population, they calculated that the odds of selecting a group of 40 scientists at random and achieving this high ratio of believers is 7 chances in 1,000,000,000,000,000. In other words the makeup of this group is stacked and very biased towards authenticating the shroud, and therefore you must take their claims with an extremely large grain of salt. In fact before they even examined the shroud, STURP scientists went on record with statements such as:

"I am forced to conclude that the image was formed by a burst of radiant energy --- light if you will. I think there is no question about that."
"What better way, if you're a deity, of regenerating faith in a sceptical age, than to leave evidence 2000 years ago that could be defined only by the technology available in that sceptical age."
"The one possible alternative is that the images were created by a burst of radiant light, such as Christ might have produced at the moment of resurrection."
"I believe it through the eyes of faith, and as a scientist I have seen evidence that it could be His shroud."


http://www.sillybeliefs.com...