Scientists Say Shroud of Turin Shows Jesus Was Crucified in 'Very Painful' Position

reply to post by windword


Well that's good to hear because it means you won't have any more reason to frequent these threads. Right? I'm sure that's what you meant. Right?

reply to post by DeadSeraph


I remember watching a show where the carbon dated it and it was not old enough.. then theyb found out the part they cut and tested was a piece repaired later on. Also it implicated that the stated age might be correct because the data showed it would be older and that the difference fit perfectly with the time the believe it was mended. Of course they couldnt get another sample because it was hard enough to convince the church to let them cut a piece off.

So it was inconclusive because they cut a piece off that was a mix of the old original material and the added interwoven repair material.

reply to post by deadcalm

Ahh yes, I am well aware of the carbon dating fiasco.

Are you aware though that there is serious doubt about the actual sample they dated now? There is a new theory that suggests that the sample was a repaired section and textile experts have agreed that it looks like the fibres are interwoven with old and new cloth.

I'm at work now, so I don't have time to find you a source, but I'll find one for you later

I'm at work now, so I don't have time to find you a source, but I'll find one for you later

reply to post by markosity1973


No need...I am well aware of it and if you read my previous posts...it is in there somewhere.

But thanks anyway.

reply to post by ketsuko


What?!

And miss your OH so insightful, loving and entertaining posts? I wouldn't dream of abandoning you and the ilk!

reply to


Jesus suffered Pain in Life ,as well as Death - as commanded by God

Many (but not all) experts find that the evidence that this is the burial shroud of Christ to be quite convincing:
www.shroud.com...

I'm not sure what this post is saying exactly. Is it supposed to be a Y shaped cross? I'm confused. Anyways, a Y shaped cross would not function as it is intended to function. The whole idea of the crucifixion is to support someones weight on a T shaped beam. In doing so this causes gravity to act on the front upper part of the persons body, pulling them forward and down. If a person allows their arms to go limp they would immediately start to suffocate, as the arms are being pulled behind and back. This does not allow the persons lungs to expand in the way they normally do. The fact they used nails in the prime weight application spots (hands and feet) makes it all the more excruciating, as the person pulling upwards with their shoulders and chest to apply relief to the not being able to breathe would cause the weight of their body to act directly upon the wounds in the hand and feet...

It is the cruelest form of punishment ever devised by man. A person being crucified would constantly be in a state between suffocation and excruciating pain until he/she became to weary to pull themselves up anymore and would suffocate to death. This is not news. Every time the person got sick of feeling the pain in their hands in feet their body would go limp and would form a Y shape. If the cross was Y shaped they would survive for days as this is the natural position of your arms. You would basically have to wait until they starved to death. It is something everyone should consider, as it makes me feel bad as a human that we are capable of these types of things. Especially considering the implications if He was in fact the Messiah(which I am utterly convinced). I've read on here in other posts He is compared to a homicidal psychopath and other terrible things. People take time out of their lives to belittle His word and pervert His teachings. And He willingly gave Himself to this for you.

reply to post by pleasethink

It is the cruelest form of punishment ever devised by man.

Believe it or not, mankind is capable even worse forms of torture than crucifixion.

'Tis the season! Enjoy!

Fraud it defenitively is not. But if it is Jesus, is then up to speculation.

The evidence is strong

Surely Jesus Himself would not approve this idolatrus turn of events over the shroud of turin.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


This is where, I'm more than proud to say the skeptics any and all
must come to terms with the facts. There is no explaining the shroud.
Period.

SnF

reply to post by pleasethink


I posted some pictures on page 3 that sort of demonstrate what the implications are. The Y shape would be the shape of Jesus body, with his arms outstretched upwards, where the T shape would be his body with his arms straight out. The shape of the cross itself isn't discussed in this particular study.

The significance of this finding is that in medieval times, Jesus was usually depicted in works of art with his arms straight out, which would indicate that if the shroud is a fake, it's a very sophisticated fake, and whoever was responsible must have done a significant amount of research. The alternative is that these facts could cast doubt on the idea it was a medieval forgery. Personally, if it's fake, the only man I could see being brilliant enough to create it at the time would be Leonardo Da Vinci. But there are other issues that cast doubt on the forgery theory as well. Certainly, it was not painted, and as someone else pointed out, produces a negative (which indicates it was formed via some sort of high energy burst).

There was recently a theory proposed that an earthquake was responsible for the image which you can read about here if you like.

reply to post by DeadSeraph

Position of the corpse? or the blood flow contained on the linen. Forget all of this. Take a blood sample from the turin and give it to one of two of the best genetic laboratories of collection of types in the US; Brigham Young or the University of Arizona. Find out Jesus blood type (genetic componants) run for fun through their copious extensive blood DNA databases and see who of us may be related to the Jesus bloodline or the 'holy grail' as some would call it. Why has this not been done already (oh because Jesus had no children, or parents from this earth?).

windword

This isn't new news, it's old news revitalized for the Easter Season when Christians love to fantasize about the pain and barbaric methods by which Jesus could possibly have been tortured and killed by the Romans, and finding proof for their fascination. That's what you're capitalizing on in this thread and its title.

edit on 8-4-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)

Mate, I sense you're trying to criticize and mock Christians, and that's fine and fair, but I must point out to you that, by openly displaying with post like the one above how you just don't get Christianity, you're only making yourself look bad.

DeadSeraph

My issue with the shroud is the length of the face.

It just doesn't look real.... it looks far more like a model or sculpture than an actual human face.

I don't know how it was done... but i'm willing bet it's a fake.

Peace,

Korg.

The sheer desperation of some religious folks to cling to anything that just may back up their belief.
Jesus was not wrapped in this sheet, it just did not happen, it is not possible.
Firstly the image just would not look like that, it is not possible.
Secondly the date does not match, even if it did there is nothing linking it to Jesus whatsoever, other than hearsay.

The Turin Shroud is weekly world news level of stupid

reply to post by DeadSeraph


I had a run in with a Jehovah's witness not long ago and he was telling me that the T shape and the Y shape are both possibly wrong. They seem to believe that his hands were both nailed above his head or on a stake without any T but just an I.

reply to post by stargatetravels

Jesus was not wrapped in this sheet, it just did not happen, it is not possible.

Well, that settles it then.

reply to post by ~Lucidity


That would seem more logical because the Greek word for 'cross' actually means tree or pole.

Since the Greek word (stauros) that is translated as "cross" literally means "tree" or "pole" (see Acts 5:30) why do most Bibles render this word as 'cross'? Is it likely that the cross, which was in use centuries before Christianity (see crux ansata), is a pagan symbol that was later incorporated into "Christianity" by Constantine?

I would agree with the above because apparently Christians prior to Constantine apparently didn't use the crucifix as a means of worship.