Interesting article

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091005/sc_nm/us_italy_shroud

I�ve always thought the Shroud of Turin was an interesting curiosity, but I�ve never ascribed any religious significance to it. Even if it was the burial shroud of Jesus, what difference does that make, and what religious significance would that be? It would be historically priceless, but religiously worthless because, as it has, it borders on idolatry. Still, I find it interesting.

It is interesting. Doubt if anything can be proven one way or the other but I suppose they'll keep trying.

Yeah they will...kinda pathetic if you ask me.

Not to mention that there were two pieces of the linen that wrapped Jesus. One for his body and one around his head.

John 20:7

And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

Jesus wore a two piece.

This shroud of Turin is a one piece.

Photoshopped.

An icon designed to to lure those who choose to worship idols. Nothing more. Nothing less.

BP...

Can it be????

no chit? wanna guess why its a fake?

Spooky . . . . . . .

I like the fact that a 13th century man was able to outsmart 20 & 21st century scientist. And they still don't know if they are right.

It did take a long time for modern science to figure it out. It is scorched into the fibers of the fabric and when digitized it make a three dimension figure. Those ancient folks were a whole lot smarter the we new-fangled guys.

It has to be a fake, ringworm says so and he knows everything.

Define "fake"...

It may be a genuine shroud but just not that of Jesus..

I think "fake" should really only equate to "forgery" but even if it was a true forgery, its still very interesting....

I agree Pete, it is interesting. I once knew a Jesuit who was part of research project. He was septic before going but was a trained scientist and came home without being able to explain the shroud as anything but a mystery.

I do not pretend to understand what it is or if it is the real shroud of Christ. It does not a big deal to me either way but science has taken a long time without forming a complete opinion.

Garlaschelli received funding for his work by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics but said it had no effect on his results.

Always follow the money trail.

[quote=Scott F]I agree Pete, it is interesting. I once knew a Jesuit who was part of research project. He was septic before going but was a trained scientist and came home without being able to explain the shroud as anything but a mystery.

I do not pretend to understand what it is or if it is the real shroud of Christ. It does not a big deal to me either way but science has taken a long time without forming a complete opinion.


That man shouldn't be doing research, he should be in a hospital!

For every detractor, there are 10 plus standing on a possiblity that it is Christ. I have seen and read so much material against this detractor, establishing facts, like plant species embedded in the shroud found nowhere in the world but Israel near Jerusalem.

Does it really matter to a believer that much?

Whether it is or not, it will not change my belief about Jesus.

The figure in the shroud has abnormal arm and leg lengths, definitely not a typical human.

I kind of always thought it probably was, but it's OK if it's not him.

His face was so beaten by the Romans before the crucifixion that he was not recognizable as Christ, yet the shroud does not demonstrate this. It may have been the glorified body of Christ, thus explaining the face, cured and perfected and miraculously imprinting the shroud.

We don't have to have the shroud, but it sure is interesting.

My reading is that someone has figured out how the shroud could have been faked, not that it in fact was. There is other evidence that calls the shroud into question, but there are so many caveats that I doubt it can positively be proved one way or the other.

As far as bias, that is what peer review is for. Other scientists - experts in the field - will scrutinize the work, the data and to conclusions. There have been doubts about its origin for hundreds of years. In 1389 the local bishop of Troyes denounced the Shroud claiming an artist had confessed to forging it. The latest finding will have little impact on those who venerate it.

Pope John Paul II stated in 1998, "Since we�re not dealing with a matter of faith, the church can�t pronounce itself on such questions. It entrusts to scientists the tasks of continuing to investigate, to reach adequate answers to the questions connected to this shroud."

While I'm not a believer in the Shroud, I don't think this guy proves anything.

Let's see....the shroud is made from cloth that is 1300 years younger than Christ, didn't "appear" until centuries after his death (interstingly just about the age of the cloth), has been proven to be possibly faked using methods available at the time, and at least on man has claimed HE faked it.

Yeah.....I'd say the shroud is REAL.

After all, since it is GOD who is responsble, it wouldn't be all that big a trick to obtain cloth that didn't exist at the time (1300 years too young). Think about it....GOD can do anything! The confusion over the years and multiple explainations actually does sound like the kind of tricks GOD is fond of.

Sort of like when he had his literal words written by dozens of different people over hundreds of years so that mankind would know the way to salvation and truth........but wrote the damn thing in code so it would require htree shamen and a priest to tell anyone what it actually says (5 different interpretations, by the way). Then he hid the writings, threw in a few "red herring" to confuse things and even "appeared" to multiple different holy men over the years giving each the "official" word of GOD.....but none of the "words of GOD" match.

Yeah, shroud seems just like the kind of practical joke GOD would pull.

It seems there were much younger threads woven into the sample taken, as a repair. So once again, there is a fly in the ointment. In any case, the Church's preoccupation with artifacts does bother me. Does faith require proof? I dunno. I would like to think it does not. The problem is that this plane of existance is not the only one, and we may not understand until we have passed to the next one. Probably won't make complete sense unless we are on the other side, looking back. Hard to prove stuff like that.

Rick,

I think perhaps you're putting a bit too much faith in the carbon dating of the shroud. One of the caveats to the carbon dating is the error rate associated with the shroud. At one point in time, the shroud was in a fire and such things can drastically change the carbon content of the shroud. Remember, carbon 14 dating is dependent upon the ambient carbon levels remaining at a constant, and there's just no way to know for sure if carbon levels have been constant for the life of the shroud. Atmospheric carbon levels have changed many times in earth's history. So you have to take carbon 14 dating for what it is and undersand that at times, it can have a very high error rate, and at times it can be very accurate.

Still, I personally doubt it's the shroud of Jesus and since there was a good deal of fame and money to be had back in the day, there's a good chance it could be a fake.

Still, it's an interesting piece of antiquity, even if it turns out that it's a fake.

I don't personally care, but the age of the cloth dating to the middle ages has already been shown to be dating of cloth used for repairing the shroud. It was also felt that this sample may have been taken deliberately as a way of discrediting the shroud in the first place some 20 years ago.

I just like people's arguments to have merit.

Dan

this is an actual relic.
a half eaten stack of pancakes w/ sausage. this was eaten by jesus as his last meal.
prove me wrong.

Has anyone ever said that the shroud of Turin WAS the burial cloth of Jesus? I don't think so. Many have said it could be. The RC church has never insisted it was the actual shroud, and Pope John Paul II said, "Since we�re not dealing with a matter of faith, the church can�t pronounce itself on such questions. It entrusts to scientists the tasks of continuing to investigate, to reach adequate answers to the questions connected to this shroud."

I find it amusing that some people want to discredit it as the shroud of Jesus and thus somehow discredit faith, when it doesn't have any official credit that it is the shroud of Jesus. All anyone has ever been able to say is "Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Hard to say."

Steve

If the carbon-14 dating is anything like accurate, the shroud is contemporary with a bunch of medieval attempts to revise the Bible. There were, for example, several "recently discovered" documents that were claimed to be "lost" books of the Bible or parallels to the Bible record.

Many Biblical hoaxes are well known as such. One, for example, is the fake "Pilate's report to C�sar." Another well known hoax is a fake account of pre-Eve creation � claiming simultaneous creation of Adam and Lilith. One famous Biblical hoax (I forget which one) was conclusively proved to be an inept copy of lines from General Wallace's novel Ben-Hur.

I'll bite.

As you know, one cannot prove a negative hypothesis. However one can make certain observations that suggest the claim in dubious.

1. Sausage contains pork, thus being not kosher. Of course we have no evidence that Jesus kept kosher.

2. While peaches were believed to be relatively common throughout Asia minor BCE, the Raspberry was not cultivated until after the first millennia, with the first written mention in 1548 in an English book on herbal medicine. The are not native to the middle east, originating in China and north American.

3. Forks we not in use in the middle east until the late 6th century, and were only used by the wealthy until about the 11th century.

4. The first reported use of maple 'syrup' was in a paper presented to the Royal Society in 1685. The Sugar maple itself is only found in New England, the Lake States, Mid-Atlantic states, and several Canadian provinces

Thus, while the claim cannot be absolutely refuted, it seems highly unlikely.

it was a miricle.
being the son of god he had control over time/ space. he went forward to in time to 1992 IHOP and had them make it special.
praise be unto him.

I have been to IHOP. The food doesn't look like that.

There is a fact we can agree on!

Ringworm, Tod you guys are funny.

Here is what I know is true:
Jesus is the one true messiah. He came on this earth for us. He died on the cross for us, and on the third day he rose for us. He is coming again and I believe it because the Bible told me so. Plus after all he has done for me and the healing he has gave to me tells me he's real. I can't see him and I can't hear him. But I see what he has created and I hear the wonderful sounds of my kids and that is proof enough. I have the faith!

Whether the Shroud if real or fake who cares. It doesn't take away from the fact that God is Real.

And the most important part. I don't care what Obama thinks. He is not the messiah and he will never be so he should just pack his bag and that commy wife and move in with Chavez.

Kique

they try harder when your the messiah.

some believe in ghosts, UFO's, Big Foot etc. and will buy a piece of toast off ebay with a claimed picture of the Virgin Mary on it.
First off no one even saw a artists rendition of either person till several century's after they were dead.
I wonder how the artist knew what either looked like? They didn't.
The pictures sure don't don't look anything like people from that part of the world then or now. All that long flowing golden brown hair, gimme a break!

Why is it surprising folks think this "shroud' is real?
After all pet rocks sold well.

What a joke.

Starting with the assumption that Jesus resembled a typical peasant from 1st century CE Palestine, Richard Neave, a medical artist retired from the University of Manchester in England, and a team of researchers "started with an Israeli skull dating back to the 1st century. They then used computer programs, clay, simulated skin and their knowledge about the Jewish people of the time to determine the shape of the face, and color of eyes and skin." 2 Mike Fillon followed the research and wrote an article about the portrait in "Popular Mechanics" magazine. 3 He said during a CNN interview that: "There are very strong rabbinical laws in Israel that you cannot tamper with a skull or any bones, so they needed to reconstruct the skull. Using a cat scan, which is very common in hospitals, they were able to recreate the skull precisely and make a cast of it. Then they put small wooden pegs, based on anthropological data, to figure out what the muscle structure and the skin would look like, and so they layered that on using clay-like substances." 4

The result is shown in the left portrait above: a person with abroad peasant's face, dark olive skin, short curly hair and a prominent nose. His height would have been on the order of 5' 1"; he would have weighed about 110 pounds. Alison Galloway, professor of anthropology at the University of California in Santa Cruz , said that: "This [portrait] is probably a lot closer to the truth than the work of many great masters."

I don't believe it, Jesus looks human? Say it isn't so!!!!

OK. I don't believe it's so. That is, I don't believe the man Jesus was even that decent looking of a man. My Bible tells me He had no beauty that we should desire Him. But when He began speaking, then He was mezmerizing.

The shroud of Turin is confirmed irrelevant to me. YSMV

Have read considerable about the shroud.

Lots of intrigue. Hardest to explain away is pollen trapped within it that is not found in France, but only in the Middle East region.

That said...

One author made a good case for the image possibly being that of Jacques De Molay, last Grand Master of the Knights Templars. Carbon dating of shroud is consistent with the era in which he was first brutally tortured and then burned at the stake...by King Phillip of France, and with the blessings of the Pope.

In any event...

I always find it interesting that, whenever something shows up that may actually physically prove the existence of Jesus, the Vatican inevitably blows it collective brains out trying to have it certified as fake.

In that vein, I tell my Christian friends that it's a pretty much given that, should Jesus ever return, the Vatican and Christians will be the first to deny Him, and label him some kind of kook.

Just sayin'...

He may well walk among us now and frequently throughout history and has felt the denial and labels you mention. But I believe when He makes his promised return He'll come with an entrance and entourage that will be undeniable. There will be no need for a label as He'll already have one on His clothing and on His thigh, not that it will be needed. Everyone will know who He is and the day that has arrived.

How about cleaning up your breakfast?

He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!

If he was so mesmerizing when he spoke, we'd have the Olympics coming to Chicago! Just ask the libs.

Dan

Which shroud? Seems that burial shrouds in Europe have a common denominator. They all seem to be from the same period of time (abut 1400-1600 ad)They ll seem to be from the same process. They were all reported to be heirloom relics of some religious figure.

Of the countless photos I have seen, there is one that is not shown often. A photo of the area with the image of the penis. That shows a male penis that is clearly uncircumcised. I guess this figure of Christ somehow missed the Jewish tradition of the custom of male circumcision?


Like many here, I wondered for a long time, until I saw this seldom seen photo of the shroud.

news flash for you spring. catholics are christians. so watch how you phrase things. we don't need someone else here showing their anti-Catholic bias.

Medieval times also gave us the halo (borrowed from the pagan) and medieval artists' agreement of how to portray Jesus.

The long, effeminate hair is especially an anachronism. Samson's long hair was a notable exception to cultural custom, and Paul wrote in another era that "if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him."

Then again he may look at the mess he created down here and
by-pass this planet for one more favorable. Maybe one with a lot of hot babes.

There are the Christian arbitrators on here who have made a judgment that Catholics aren't Christians. You need to check with them before you make a statement like that.

I have a piece of papyrus that jesus used to clean his crack with. I'll let ya touch it for a dollar. Prove that thy turd stain is not that of thy holly one.

The logic of the claim is deeply flawed.

Just because it is possible to fake an object does not mean that original is a fake. Or there'd be no such thing as a real Colt SAA.

By your own logic, if I just tell you your wrong, it is true. Yes?

Have they just made all of the colt SAAs disapear in a puff of logic??

I for one an deeply saddened by the loss of one long time Campfire member, one who was extremely knowledgeable and willing to share his many years in the outdoor fields. He left us because he was weary of those who beat up Catholics. He is one man who lives his faith every day not just by words but by every breath he breaths. It is often correctly stated that Christians kill their own and there is proof of that statement in the way he was treated here. It makes me ill.

IIRC, our host is a devout catholic as well. I may be wrong.

If you believe in the Christ of the bible, I don;t see him returning with a huge entourage. As noted, many 'Christians' would probably demand the humble and anti-materialistic Jesus be locked up or worse. I mean the guy preached forgiveness, a simple life, love your enemies, don't judge, feed the hungry, clothe the poor and finance same by selling off all your worldly possessions. Sounds like some sort of liberal hippie freak.

You would be correct in the above statement.

There are only a handful left who have been here longer than I have so I think I am safe in the following statement. Rick has been a gentleman the whole history of the Campfire and has done nothing to show he is anything but a Christian who lives his faith every day.

I too am a Catholic,devout,, no, but nonetheless a Catholic. I have personally never really believed the Shroud was Christ's image on cloth. Just MY personal feelings,,, fact,,,, true or otherwise.
There is only ONE subject I generally don't argue with people about, Religion... because, you just ain't gonna succeed, just pizz them off fighting them regardless of WHAT THEY believe trying to change them.

Wisdom, true wisdom.

BTW I believe it just may be. But it don't matter one way or the other to me.