It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Shroud of Turin...confirmed as fake

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Al Davison

Originally posted by masterp
Why should it be that religion depends on a piece of clothing? why would God create such a piece that would bring doubt and disagreement amongst His children?

We are sitting here debating if a piece of clothing is for real while millions of men, women and children are getting slaughtered every year in the name of religion.

We should either ban all religions or finally prove one of them as the true one. This thing can't go on for long, or else humanity will destroy itself.


My, my! Such drama!

Actually, I don't think we are discussing religion = we are, in fact, discussing a piece of cloth. Actually, we're discussing the history of said cloth. The conspiracy relates to the authenticity of this historical artifact and whether it has been deliberately misrepresented.

The "Saving Humanity from the Evils of Religion" forum is 2 doors down to your right.


Yeap, the drama was intentional.

But we are discussing religion, although indirectly.

Because if this piece of cloth is truely what it is supposed to be, then chances increase that the story of Jesus was true, and hence the Bible is true and Christianity is the one true religion (tm).

But if this piece of cloth is a fake, then Christianity takes another blow.




posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 09:32 AM
link   
What is the stitching like? I've heard something like it was made thousands of years ago, and couldn't possibly have been done by a forger, lest the forger was a genius and was insane.
Can somebody clear that up?



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   
I don't see where the authenticity of the Shroud has any direct relationship on whether Christianity is the "one true" religion at all. While, if it is authentic, it might confirm that there was a Jesus and he did go through a crucifixion, the Shroud does nothing to confirm:
1) the divinity of Jesus
2) whether he died during the crucifixion
3) whether he rose from the dead (because maybe the crucifixion didn't kill him in the first place)

....and, the big, big, BIG ONE: was this Shroud ever actually in contact with Jesus or was it used on some other crucified indvidual (there were lots of them and many of them were "heroes" to certain groups) and there is a whole body of belief that Jesus and his followers used a "stunt double" during the crucifixion as it is portrayed in the gospels.

Still, it is a fascinating artifact!

there's more but, that's a pretty good start as an explanation as to why it is a lot less significant than many might assume.

The most convincing evidence that I have seen is that both the weave and the fibers used in the Shroud cloth were known and used in the region of what is now Syria around 2,000 years ago. However, one very interesting point is that this particular type of cloth was both rare and very expensive and would have never been used in a burial - not even for the wealthiest of Jews of that time (of which Joseph of Aramethia was certainly counted).

So, for me, this story has hundreds of plot twists and the possibility of multiple and intertwined conspiracies. None of them make me think any less of the followers of Jesus - in fact, they seem extraordinarily clever!

At the moment, I'm thinking that it was really just the Paulinists that got the story terribly wrong and bent the whole tale to try to make it fit better with OT Messianic prophecies.



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   
OK, I finally finished the book.

The authors conclusions are that the Shroud carbon-dating was intentionally (yes, a conspiracy!) manipulated by the RCC because they did not want the Shroud to be considered authentic!

Why? Well, the answer to that question is the basic premise of the book but, the short version is simply that the Shroud contains a great deal of evidence that the Man of the Shroud was not dead. So, if people were to believe that this was the actual Shroud used to cover the Christian Jesus in the tomb of Joseph of Aramethia, then it would be proof that Jesus did not die on the cross and was therefor never risen from the dead. That information, if confirmed, would rock the Christian world far, far more than any of the "DaVinci Code junk".

I mean, really, Christianity would not be threatened by some lineage of Jesus but, if Jesus did not die on the cross, did not rise from the dead, etc. then, Jesus did not die to save us all from sin, right?

OK, well, the thing is that nobody will really ever know whether the Shroud ever came into contact with the historical Jesus of the crucifixion but, the possibilities would shatter the RCC and most other branches of Christianity!

Again, I repeat, that I am only reporting the work of the authors of this book - not making any claims, myself.

Anyway, it's a very, very interesting read!



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 06:51 AM
link   
For me, the radiocarbon test results basically settled the matter--the Shroud is a (very well-done) fake. The idea that the bits of cloth taken for the tests are from later repairs and thus invalidate the radiocarbon results have never been anything but conjecture and sound to me like a case of "special pleading". And we should believe that ALL the samples came from "repaired" sections of the Shroud? Come on!! AND--suppose I'm wrong, suppose the radiocarbon dating is off by about 1400 years, suppose it really is the winding-cloth of a man who died in the Middle East from crucifixion in the first-century AD--just exactly how does that lead us to Jesus Christ as being the person wrapped in this particular Shroud??? Do you have ANY IDEA how many men of that time and place died from Roman crucifixion? So even if it is a genuine burial cloth from the right time and right place and from a death by crucifixion---how on EARTH can anyone tie it to Jesus?! Do you have Jesus's DNA by any chance? Because if not, what good is it as proof of anything?! Much less the divinity of Jesus!!



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by abovereproach
Do you have Jesus's DNA by any chance? Because if not, what good is it as proof of anything?! Much less the divinity of Jesus!!


Even with DNA, do you think it would prove his divinity?

If we were sitting and having tea, would I be looking at your cup of tea as proof you exist? The point is, if you are looking for Jesus, he's alive right now and promises a personal relationship. Revelation 3:20, "Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him and he with me." So why are we looking at a piece of cloth again? Sounds to me someone is lacking that personal relationship if they're looking for remnants. Don't have that personal relationship but want it? Send U2U for details.



posted on Nov, 29 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by abovereproach
For me, the radiocarbon test results basically settled the matter--the Shroud is a (very well-done) fake. The idea that the bits of cloth taken for the tests are from later repairs and thus invalidate the radiocarbon results have never been anything but conjecture and sound to me like a case of "special pleading". And we should believe that ALL the samples came from "repaired" sections of the Shroud? Come on!! ...


The authors have a great deal of documentation - eyewitness accounts, notes, video, etc. as well as a lot of conjecture and suspicions about the samples. All in all, it's pretty extensive and more than enough to create serious doubt that the pieces of cloth that were carbon dated did not come from the Shroud at all. Oh, by the way, if you look into the way this was done, at all, you will find that, yes, absolutely, all the samples that were dated from the 3 labs were, at best, using pieces of a single strip cut from the edge - that's on the Vatican's own video tape and is highly documented. So, the question/challenge that these authors are making is whether those pieces of that strip of cloth were the ones that were actually given to the labs for dating - there was this weird, mysterious thing where after cutting the strip for the samples in front of many witnesses and the video taping, the samples were taken into a secret room where there were no witnesses (except the Vatican's own 2 guys) and then placed into the containers for distribution to the labs. Now, why on earth would they do that? After making such a big show about doing all of this in the open and well-documented, the last thing they did was all done behind closed doors and totally secret?!

I'm not taking one side or the other, here. I'm just saying that the Vatican destroyed the credibility of this test by handling the evidence in the way that they did. So, it was a huge production to try to settle this once and for all but, they blew it - destroying the credibility by that last step done in secret. The first question is "why?" The next immediate question is "what really happened with the samples?"

No one, not the authors or me or anybody else interested in this, is questioning the work of the labs. Everyone accepts that the cloth that was tested by the labs was proven to be the age that was reported. Now, the question is "what cloth was tested?"


Finally, you should actually read this book before commenting on the validity of their research. The authors do NOT say that this Shroud every actually touched Jesus - they do not have enough evidence to decide one way or another.

[edit on 29-11-2005 by Al Davison]



posted on Dec, 5 2005 @ 01:58 PM
link   
One of the biggest giveaways that its a fake is the fact the features of the face not only are European as opposed to jewish, but also resemble medieval portrayals of jesus, which were not based on fact. But theres all the other evidence as well.

I never understood the big deal with the shroud anyway. Arent Christians supposed to focus on Jesus and god, and not worship material objects or revere them?



posted on Dec, 5 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Awww...you're taking all the fun out of this!

I don't believe the Shroud ever touched the body of the Christian Jesus, either.

But, the fun part is how the Vatican got caught trying to switch the samples for the carbon dating because they were afraid that people might believe it was authentic and then, they would have a helluva time trying to explain the clear evidence that the "Shroud Guy" wasn't dead when he was placed in it.

FWIW - the book's authors take up your argument and make a decent attempt to refute it by claiming that the face is not very European and that the European artists were copying the image of Jesus from earlier works that were painted from folks looking at the Shroud.

Also, it can't be too hard to believe that the authors do a lot better job than I have at presenting their evidence.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
Yeap, the drama was intentional.

But we are discussing religion, although indirectly.

Because if this piece of cloth is truely what it is supposed to be, then chances increase that the story of Jesus was true, and hence the Bible is true and Christianity is the one true religion (tm).

But if this piece of cloth is a fake, then Christianity takes another blow.


The question of whether or not Jesus was real, has pretty much been settled over the years, beginning with the historical documents written by Flavius Josephus. But, proof that Jesus was really a man who lived in the first century does not prove any religion to be the "one true" religion - nor does it disprove others. It just means that a revolutionary teacher once walked this Earth. Beyond that, you must rely on your faith.

Now, for the topic at hand.

I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread, and never was really covered. Dead bodies do not bleed. I'm not saying Jesus wasn't dead, because I believe he did die.


John 20:33 (NLT) - But when they came to Jesus, they saw that he was dead already, so they didn't break his legs.


However, wasn't the practice of the day to clean the body and wrap it? If they had cleaned the body before wrapping, beings he was dead, no blood would have come out of the wounds.

Now, I'm not saying they DID in fact clean him, as it is not mentioned in any of the scriptures. And if that is the case, I can see how the blood would have transferred to the burial cloth.

My opinion - as much as I'd like for it to be real, I believe it to be a well made forgery.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Not really sure what to make of the shroud, but have read a couple of good books on the subject. This site below has alot of info regarding the shroud even though it is not up to date.

www.historian.net...

Also Esoteric Teacher made mention of Jacques De Molay, the Last Grand Master of the Knights Templar.

Robert Lomas and Christopher Knights book 'The Second Messiah' is an interesting read regarding the shroud and the perspective they take on it.

De Molay after being tortured by the Holy Inquisition was wrapped in a shroud mainly because of his mockery towards it. He was alive after his torture which is said to be likened to that of Jesus Christ.

Anyways, without getting too much into the book it does explain or at least give credence to some of the findings on the shroud.

Regardless of who was in the shroud, either way it is certainly an interesting relic.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by VeeTwin60

[...]


John 20:33 (NLT) - But when they came to Jesus, they saw that he was dead already, so they didn't break his legs.


However, wasn't the practice of the day to clean the body and wrap it? If they had cleaned the body before wrapping, beings he was dead, no blood would have come out of the wounds.

Now, I'm not saying they DID in fact clean him, as it is not mentioned in any of the scriptures. And if that is the case, I can see how the blood would have transferred to the burial cloth.

My opinion - as much as I'd like for it to be real, I believe it to be a well made forgery.



the way i read the account, was that the persons that put the dead body in the tomb, had to very quickly 'annoint' and cover the body...as sundown was fast approaching and the religious laws of the day said that no-one can work or travel on a Sabbath day ~ a 'day' extends from sundown-to-sundown~

the faint, & reversed/negative, image on the shroud does not capture any appearance that the fabric was 'wrapped' around any torso or body of man.
the image that remains on the shroud is more like a flat 'photograph'

which brings to mind....recently the 'Discovery' channel, on or about 1 March 2006, during mid-day or maybe 3PM had a segment of a show and the shroud was discussed.
It appears to have been 'made', probably by Leonardo DaVinci,
and just might be an attempt to create the first 'photograph'

using a lens, and the (magnificent for the times) camera obscura
and after many pioneering tests of a smaller scale...
he and perhaps two other 'illuminated' individuals were experimenting with light sensitive chemicals and combinations which would react to the intense and focused images of the lens & camera obscura...and to
'capture' the most accurate portrait of a person or face...in all of history!

my guess is that the image on the shroud, was not intended as a Fake or a Hoax...it was intended as a representation...and working in secrecy
(probably because of the powerful church) Divinci himself was the model for the 1st 'photograph' in history...using the most significent event in history as the 1st drama to be recorded .

to him it was both a scientific and spiritual discovery & achievement,
a Eureka moment, which would never be claimed by himself but left to be categorized as a 'miracle' by the church & the masses....

for this he was happy...and beaming that Mona Lisa smile (as some researchers claim that the Mona Lisa is a mirror image of Leonardo with a feminine fascasde')

~its worth delving into, imho,
when i get the time~
caio



posted on Apr, 19 2006 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Just an idea,
What if the shroud was the shroud of Christ,
When his body ascended some sort of radiation was emmited,
The cloth was "stained" in negative much the same as the shadows of people left on the ground after an atomic blast?

The image was done in negative, a technique not known about till the past few hundred years.

Also, if it's a fake or a forgery why aren't there more?
When you counterfeit money you do more than just 1 bill
When you counterfeit art you make more than just one copy

You make as many as you can and you sell them for as much as you can because they are the "real" thing and you know because you said so!

Personally I think theres a good chance it is actually real.
Does it affect my life in any way shape or form? No.



posted on Apr, 19 2006 @ 08:55 AM
link   
MrJones brings up a valid point about the number of copies. There are stories that there were more copies made of the Shroud but they are unsubstantiated because they have not been recovered.

The business of recreating icons and relics has been around since the first Crusaders showed up in the Middle East with an appetite for souvenirs. Some say that there are enough pieces of the "true cross" to build a good-sized house. There were dozens of documented stories about Europeans coming home with the real "Spear of Destinity", the actual "Veronica's Veil", and enough bones of Saints to rebuild a few hundred of them, etc. In fact, there are at least 3 churches aournd the world displaying the "one, true Veil of Veronica" and pilgrims go there to pray in front of it.

The thing is, we'll probably just never know...

I still find it fascinating that the Vatican went to so much effort with the Shroud dating tests but got busted on the chain of evidence thing. Mostly, it is very curious as to why they would do that. Theories abound but, they are likely to remain just theories.



posted on Apr, 19 2006 @ 09:53 AM
link   
here is a thought. If the figure depicted on the shroud had indeed died
in an upright position as would seem is the case according to canonical accounts. All body fluids would drop to the lower extremities as soon as the
heart stopped pumping. That is ALL the lower extremities.

Kind of gives a new meaning to the true wood of the cross huh? this however does not seem to be reproduced ( pun intended) in the shroud.



posted on Apr, 19 2006 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Tony238
how the h_ell can you get an imprint on sheets with a flower


*sigh*
Just the same as the imprints of the coins on the eyes.
Imprints that you can actually see dates on the coins.
Items do indeed leave imprints on cloth and 'sheets'.
Especially items that have been through a high temperature situation.
Remember the sailors on the ships when the Nukes were tested in the
south pacific?
They had imprints on their bodies of change in their pockets, of necklaces,
of bottons ... Japanese people who were in the nuclear blast in Hiroshima
had imprints of stripes if they were wearing stripes, of prints on their
clothing ....

If Christ was in the shroud when He rose from the dead, it could indeed
have included a high temperature situation. Anything on or around the
shroud would have left an imprint. That's one theory ... high temperature.

So yes, Tony, it is very possible and actually rather probable that the
imprints of flowers would have been left, just as the coin imprints were
left.

Science ... it's an amazing thing when you understand it.




Whaaaa?!?!?!?!? Radiation??? Probable??? Science?!?!?!?! *Rips out chunk of hair* GAAAAHHH But...how..and the....?!?!?!?!


*breathes into brown paper bag* ook ed calm down, breath, in..and out..

Alright, sorry for freakin out there.

First off, are you saying that the negative image was caused by the intense heat and nuclear radiation caused by the resurection, yet the shroud is unscathed and intact, and you call that science?

Your last sentance, "Science...it's an amazing thing when you understand it." Are you claiming to understand it? If so, then um, not trying to attack you or anything, but, well, you've got a lot to learn.

That could have been vaguely scientific, if not for the resurection part.

Lets be rational here, a shroud of cloth would not withstand that much heat or radiation. And the fowers would have surley shriveled in the heat and radiation . The coins should also be melted if they were in direct contact with jesus when he put off that heat and radiation, which, if the shroud was not already destroyed, the moltent metal would have melted thru. Or is the shroud not flamible. But of course it is it was partly burned in a fire in 1532!

Next time you have a thought, think it thru before you present it, otherwise, keep it to yourself.




Actually, this makes sense. Christ died upright. The blood flowed and
dried while he was upright. Even the blood in his hair. I have no doubt
that it should hang as standing.


Was jesus wrapped in an upright position? Seriously, I don't know.

Even though the blood flowed and dried in his hair, with long hair like that it would not make his hair stick in that position, so when the body was moved into a supine position, the hair would not hang how it did when in an upright position.


I'm not a scientist or theologist, I'm just using common sense. Seriously, try it some time.



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Thank God for science pun intended! If it wasn't for science I would have a harder job to discredit faith! j/k If science did find proof of something godly or paranormal than what would they ever do.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join