The Shroud of Turin

If this has already been discussed, please forgive me as I am a new member here.

Recently, I have gotten interested in the Shroud. The one question that plagues me is it's authenticity. I read that it was carbon-dated to be 13/14th century but I honestly wonder about that.

How would someone back then have been able to "forge" such an image with the light and dark contact areas in the appropriate places without the technology that is available today? Another thing that I wonder about is why the Catholic church is so very protective of this article if it were not the genuine article? It has been said by many that the Shroud of Turin is the genuine article and I would have to agree simply because back then it would have taken a powerful "flash" to have transfered the image onto the rough muslin. I believe that "flash" happened during the resurrection of Christ. How else could it have been transfered so very distinctly with shading in the proper areas? I have read that some believe that the Shroud of Turin may also be the Edessa Cloth from 1204. Could this also be true?

I am interested to hear some of your theories on this issue. As I stated before, I am just beginning to learn about the Shroud of Turin and find it fascinating. So, to you, is it authentic or not?

I watched a program about it once. It was said it was carbon dated about early 13th Century. On the program the group made there own shroud by someone rapping up in some type cloth, covered in some kind of sticky thing (sorry can't remember what it was called) and then laid in the sun for hours. After a few hours the sticky thing had made a inprint of his body on the cloth. The group successfully made they very own shroud. It looked the same as the one christ was meant to be rapped in. I think it is a forge mainly because i don't believe in christ or God.

[Edited on 11-8-2003 by infinite]

Here you go:

www.delayedreaction.com...

The Catholic Church is vehement in it's defence of the shroud but I'm afraid that I disagree with them and believe it's a fake.
The Carbon Dating that says it is only 700 years old is what sways me. Carbon Dating isn't a foolproof way of authenticating the shroud but until I see something else, I'm sceptical on this one.

At the end of the day though, even if you are religious, I can't see the significance of it.
If I were a Christian, I would worship Jesus. Not his sheet.

Sorry. Double post.

[Edited on 08/09/2003 by HoneyBunny]

Originally posted by Leveller

At the end of the day though, even if you are religious, I can't see the significance of it.
If I were a Christian, I would worship Jesus. Not his sheet.

You are correct. It is still a curiousity factor for me. I look at the Shroud as being rich in history. Can you imagine actually having an earthly remain of Christ? It blows me away to think of such possibilities! I know there are scattered remnants of His life on earth but to actually have possibly found one of many excites me and I like delving into the gears of processes to satisfy my curiousity. Many think it cannot be real but I have to wonder and I think the true answer is out there somewhere. We just have to find it.

BTW, thanks for the link.

A book you might find interesting is the Second Messiah by Knight & Lomas. They put forward an interesting theory as to how the shroud was made and who's face is actually shown on it.

The book has received mixed reviews, especially in the masonic world, but it does in my opinion give a decent explanation which allows for the shroud being dated to the 12th century or abouts

Well real or not this baby would sure be worth stealing

Could it have been another prophet even perhaps a decendant of Jesus?

According to the templars the head and the body are from 2 differend individuals. The body from a knight or soldier, and the head is John the Babtists,...
(havn't checked the net out on that but is was in a book I read, one of the MANY that declare to have the answer)

Originally posted by Leveller
Here you go:

www.delayedreaction.com...

The Catholic Church is vehement in it's defence of the shroud but I'm afraid that I disagree with them and believe it's a fake.
The Carbon Dating that says it is only 700 years old is what sways me. Carbon Dating isn't a foolproof way of authenticating the shroud but until I see something else, I'm sceptical on this one.

At the end of the day though, even if you are religious, I can't see the significance of it.
If I were a Christian, I would worship Jesus. Not his sheet.

So true... very well put.

There was a book I read back in the 1980's concerning the Shroud of Turin. It was the results of the first scientific study of the Shroud. I believe it was "The Shroud of Turin," Ian Wilson, Doubleday & Co., New York, 1978. The one listed in the web site linked above. If the Shroud is a forgery, the the forger was a real expert in history and knew a lot of stuff that was not generally known in the 1200's. Among which: Correct details for a victim of crucifixion - nail holes in the wrists and ankles, correct blood pattern, Correct hair style for a Jewish man of Jesus's time. Using computer enhancement of the image, the researchers concluded that silver coins had been placed over the eyelids (a common Jewish burial custom of the time). The researchers were also able to identify one of the coins to be used only during the governship of Pilate in Judea. If the Shroud is a forgery, then the man who forged it must be one of the greatest forgers of all time, because he got everything historical correct.

jagdflieger that was a negative image placed on cloth whoever made that image, he or she did much more than just suport history.

Indeed Toltec, I forgot to mention the negative image. Thanks for pointing that out. The point I was trying to make is that except for the carbon dating, everything else about the Shroud is convincing, correct details on anatomy, hair styles, burial customs, etc. The point, if the Shroud is a forgery, then the man who did it was definitely one of the greatest forgers in the history of mankind. He had knowledge of historical facts that even today few experts would know. It could not have been one of the guys in the "back room" of a bishop's cathedral. He had to be a historian, artist, physician.

What really makes me think it is real is what jag said. The wounds of Christ in the Turin are consistent with a real Roman crucifixion. In early art, his wounds are in his feet and hands but in reality, they would have been in his wrists and ankles.

[Edited on 12-8-2003 by maynardsthirdeye]

Actually the court still out on the hair style as well as the color/race in respect to facial characteristics. The technology needed to make the shroud simply did not exist 700 years ago (to my knowledge is does not exist today).

The ausumption that it did, brings into consideration what other technology existed which was supressed (which again does not exist today)?

I did a paper on the shroud while I was in college. Although I don't like "holy relics", and I feel that the Catholic church tends to promote iconic worship, I believe the shroud to be real. As Honeybunny stated, I believe the negative image was "flash set" during what must have been one awesome dose of energy at Christ's resurrection.

And they take Carbon-14 dating and stick in the WITD category...it holds about as much credibility with me.

[Edited on 12-8-2003 by Valhall]

Novelty & Religious Icon

actual burial shroud of the 'Annointed'

Knights Templar 'discovered' shroud...
(KT = identified with Illuminati...)

perped by Cardinals' back room croney--not likely
(Magicians, Astrologers, Alchemists, were the learned men of the day- chartography & history & science & pharmacia & homeopathy was their realm)

Advanced Technologies...PaShaW!
(the herbs, aloes, lotions, balms, used for burial prep.-
coins & relig. tradition also accounting for a seeming out-of-the -ordinary knowledge...this balm mixture, reacted with the radon gasses found in church basements where this icon/relic has spent most of its existance)

photographic negative image...not by design!!
(merely a SERENDIPITY, a fortunate happenstance)



--> Ya'll say it is improbable for a man to hoax shroud!!

Why must a 'MORTAL MAN' ,be or not-be, Responsible?
~~~~~

i will still appreciate the shroud, whatever is revealed.
art? icon?relic? ripleys next attraction....

How would someone back then have been able to "forge" such an image with the light and dark contact areas in the appropriate places without the technology that is available today?

I'm with infinite on this one...and it really was a rather impressive special, as were similar other programs on this.... As an artist myself, I see no reason this couldn't have been faked in the time mentioned....

It's as phony as the story ending it's based on....

People, it is said Leonardo made it. He could have made it. Besides, if it was as old as the church says it is, well, I'm sorry, it isn't. Besides, how can you take the church's word? According to them, world was flat, center, and it was ok to rape little boys in the bum unless caught by the media.

Get a more credible source.

I had found this site many months ago and just ran back across it when I was cateloging my recent site finds...:
www.dreamwater.org...
(It loads slow so bear with it)
Hope it helps...

regards
seekerof

[Edited on 13-8-2003 by Seekerof]