The Shroud Of Turin Real or fake???

[talse 0]

the shroud doesn't serve any tangible purpose that i see of though. it's at best a representation and reminder of an idea. that man can rise above the grade and care for others in a selfless way, without ungodly amounts of blood shed(thank you very much, mel gibson, now go rot). so whether or not it's authentic shouldn't matter. seeing as it represents an idea of +20 intangibility.

[lasto i glemyr 0]

There is another possible explanation for the inaccurate carbon dating.Scientists believe that, back in the 15th century, the shroud suffered some fire damage, which is why it has the holes and burns in it today. They believe that the fire could easily have deposited some newer carbon atoms on the cloth, thus throwing off the results of the carbon dating tests.

[adamsgi 0]

k22 Posted Feb 24 2005, 09:49 AM   I don't know if it's a fake or not, but the Vatican have created many fake

I think herein lies the answer to the question - if the Vatican for one minute believed that it was not faked, they would be in there like a shot claiming that it proves the existence of Jesus. Which Church wouldn't? It's not often you can provide absolute proof of your religious beliefs.

firedoor Posted Feb 17 2005, 11:29 PM   ok so maybe jesus didn't have a beard, the point still stands we still don't know if that imprint is jesus or just some random bloke, in fact it's more than likley it's a crusader.

I also think that firedoor may be correct about the crusader theory. The face is quite western european in appearance. It was also quite common for Europeans at the time to have long hair and beards. To me the face doesn't look particularly Middle Eastern.

I don't think it could be 100% proven that it is the face of Jesus anyway, as even if the cloth does date from that era, what proof is there that it really is his face? Of course, if it was possible to extract his DNA from the shroud we could... oh yes, he didn't have any children. Unless you listen to the other theories that are out there...

[talse 0]

jesus clearly couldn't have had kids. it works like this.1.) jesus is a super cool guy and doesn't act like a jerk to anyone2.) jesus knew in advance he was going to be A) crucified and go top side when his brief revisit after the death thing.3.) people who leave their kids to their mother are jerks to their kids and they're wivesSO from this we can conclude several things.jesus, knowing about 2 and following 1 had to avoid being 3 so he couldn't have had kids. QED

[_VJ 0]

Hey. I just want to apologize ahead of time if I'm doing this wrong because this is my first time on a forum. I was looking up information on the Shroud of Turin because I am doing a report on it for my religion class. I found it really interesting to look at all of your different view-points on the subject. I for one, am not really sure on whether it's real or fake. I have read from numerous sources saying why the Shroud would be legitimate, and why it would not. I am Catholic, and there is no question that I believe that Jesus was real, but I am not positive that the Shroud is real. The Shroud is just a very difficult subject, and all of you who have said something, well, all of what all of you have said has made sense on both sides of the discussion. I don't really have much more to say, but I will keep checking here for any updates, this is actually a pretty fascinating topic. lol. _VJ

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

Well, the Catholic Church no longer vouches for it. So, considering they would be the ones who would most like to claim that it is real, I wll take their word.

[adamsgi 0]

talse Posted Mar 1 2005, 04:25 AM   jesus clearly couldn't have had kids. it works like this.
1.) jesus is a super cool guy and doesn't act like a jerk to anyone
2.) jesus knew in advance he was going to be A) crucified and  go top side when his brief revisit after the death thing.

I wanted to pick up on point number two there. You say Jesus knew he was going to be crucified and then be ressurected, however in Luke 23:34...

Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."

Why would God need to forgive the Jews when they were following the plan that God and Jesus had? If anything they should be thanking them because everything was going to plan.

And then whilst on the cross, in both Matthew and Mark (Matt 27:46 and Mark 15:34)

"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Forgive me if I'm wrong but this doesn't sound like someone who's mission on this earth is to die for the sins of human kind. If I was in his shoes I would be overjoyed that I got the chance to wash away all the sins of every living being.
Back to the subject of the Shroud, I agree with Majestic Tree Frog - if the Vatican want nothing to do with it, then it has to be a fake.

[Herbert1405241469 0]

If I was in his shoes I would be overjoyed that I got the chance to wash away all the sins of every living being.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Haha. Now, let's see you go get beaten and nailed to a block of wood and see how "overjoyed" you would be

Divine or not, He was just as human as the rest of us. Though "The Plan" was going into effect, how do you think you would react if you knew that was going to happen to you... I think at that very moment, you wouldn't care less about "the sins of every living being" and would rather not be poked by a Roman's spear and whatnot.

[adamsgi 0]

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

What John is saying is that Jesus is not only human. He is a manifestation of God (i.e. God made flesh)

I think at that very moment, you wouldn't care less about "the sins of every living being" and would rather not be poked by a Roman's spear and whatnot.

So where is the overwhelmingly selfless compassion that we have heard so much about? That sentiment seems quite selfish for someone who is fulfilling their destiny. As for how I'd feel, I am not proclaiming to be the Only Begotten Son of God.

My destiny is to die, not for the sins of everyone, but according to my own karma.

[thermoid 0]

Carbon dating may show that it's not that old, but people, you've gotta remember that carbon dating isn't infallible. How old is the oldest  thing that we've carbon dated that we know for 100% sure when it was created? For all we know, it could only have a certain range of acceptable accuracy. And, it could be possible that a fire screwed up it's carbon or soemthing like that...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They did indeed screw up the dating. They took samples from a heavily contaminated area where people have touched repeatedly. And the labs that did the test broke most of the other rules that the Vatican put in place.

[thermoid 0]

I wanted to pick up on point number two there.  You say Jesus knew he was going to be crucified and then be ressurected, however in Luke 23:34...

Why would God need to forgive the Jews when they were following the plan that God and Jesus had?  If anything they should be thanking them because everything was going to plan.

 

And then whilst on the cross, in both Matthew and Mark (Matt 27:46 and Mark 15:34)

  Forgive me if I'm wrong but this doesn't sound like someone who's mission on this earth is to die for the sins of human kind.  If I was in his shoes I would be overjoyed that I got the chance to wash away all the sins of every living being.

 

Back to the subject of the Shroud, I agree with Majestic Tree Frog - if the Vatican want nothing to do with it, then it has to be a fake.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

the vatican is very involved with it.

[JoeyG 0]

Forgive me if I'm wrong but this doesn't sound like someone who's mission on this earth is to die for the sins of human kind. If I was in his shoes I would be overjoyed that I got the chance to wash away all the sins of every living being.

Um, do you have any idea how much pain Jesus was in at that point? Evil Nazi scientists have done tests and determined that anyone in His situation would be in "total body pain" which means that the only thing that He would be able to think about was the pain. The fact that He was even able to speak is amazing. Also, Jesus bore the sins of the entire world, putting him in immense spiritual pain. He was 100% human as well as 100% God, and His human nature would have called out against God.

As for the shroud, there is no scientific explanation for the image. It is not ink, it is not burnt. Also, if you look at the shroud, you will see that the nails were in Jesus' wrists. In the Bible it says that they were in His hands. In the 1900s forensic scientists determined that the only bone in the hand area capable of holding the entire body was a bone in the wrist. Which means that anyone who faked this shroud would have had to have known a lot about Roman crucifixion techniques (which is only known recently with archaelogical finds), and have not used the Bible as a strict source (which would have been the smart thing to do at the time in order to fool people).

To me this shroud is obviously real. How the image got onto the shroud I do not know, although Divine Intervention seems the most plausible of all explanations.

The shroud belongs to Turin, and in Turin it will stay. The Church has no reason to prove the existance of Jesus, we all know He was a real man.

There's my take.

[saxsux 0]

Apparently, they originally thought it was a fake becaue the area of cloth they tested was actually repaired with newer material, or something like that.

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

Which means that anyone who faked this shroud would have had to have known a lot about Roman crucifixion techniques (which is only known recently with archaelogical finds), and have not used the Bible as a strict source (which would have been the smart thing to do at the time in order to fool people).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its not like the romans were the only people to use crucifiction you know. Assorted groups in europe used it. Rome lasted for a long time, and had tremendous influence on the region. Refering to the hands is only a necessary clue if you have no idea about crucifiction. If you do, then what it is refering to is obvious, and there you go.

[lorenzo 0]

i'm not so sure about this. From what i've heard Shroud of turin does exist. N it is placed in Vatican Rome. Although historians say that it does exist, there's really no image of Christ's face on it.