Vatican Insider: Study says Man in Shroud had Dislocated Arms, Cause of Death is Broken Heart

At about 1:25 you see a quote from the 2011 Italian study that show the Shroud is preternatural. Man cannot yet
produce the UV rays it took to make the marks on the Shroud.


www.huffingtonpost.com...

a reply to: solomons path

Cool. How did this artist create the shroud? Let alone with the technology available at least hundreds of years ago if not thousands? I'd like to know so i can make one for my wife and me when we pass. Just a simple hoax right? Should be easy to figure it out how it was done by those primitive folk.

a reply to: FlyersFan

The shroud is pretty mysterious. If it's a forgery, then it's a VERY VERY VERY well done one, almost to the point where they would have had to actually kill someone to make it. They seemingly got all the anatomical details down and got pollen ect, from the region. It's almost too good of a forgery to be a forgery, given the time frame when it would have been created, if you know what I mean.



If it's not a forgery.................

originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: FlyersFan

It's almost too good of a forgery to be a forgery, given the time frame when it would have been created, if you know what I mean.
If it's not a forgery.................

It's 14th century... and, I don't know what you mean - a great forgery, out of time and place...

a reply to: 3n19m470

Just a simple hoax right?

No . . . A very intricate and masterfully done job of medieval relic manufacturing.

Should be easy to figure it out how it was done by those primitive folk.

Who said they were primitive? Have you not seen the many great examples of medieval architecture, sculpture, art, metallurgy, etc. Just because they didn't have computers doesn't make humans of that time "primitive". How arrogantly modern of you to assume such. One of the main arguments for the C14 dating of the shroud is the claim of "invisible weaving". Apparently, the section tested was actually a "patch", according to this claim, and the researchers or the Vatican couldn't tell due to this weaving technology that we modern folk cannot figure out. They could do that, but were "too primitive" to have manufactured the whole thing?

They now insist that you can't tell it's a patch, even under a microscope, because the medieval repairers employed 'invisible reweaving'. Obviously this skill of 'invisible reweaving' was lost by the time of the 1532 fire repairs in 1534, which appear very amateurish. Shroud proponents' claim that medieval artisans were too stupid to make the shroud but at the same time had this unknown weaving skill that is impossible to achieve today.

Cool. How did this artist create the shroud? Let alone with the technology available at least hundreds of years ago if not thousands? I'd like to know so i can make one for my wife and me when we pass.

No one really knows . . . that's the point. We probably could tell if the church would let the main part of the image be analysed. However, that would destroy the shroud. There are possible ways to do it, whether they were used we'll never know, but these techniques come close.
Bas Relief or Model Rub:

Professor Garlaschelli said his team used the same type of woven linen as the shroud and first artificially aged by heating it in an oven and washing it with water.

The cloth was then placed on a student, who wore a mask to reproduce the face, and rubbed with red ochre, a well known pigment at the time.

The entire process took a week, said Professor Garlaschelli of the University of Pavia.

His replica even includes the spots which, on the original, were said to show blood seeping out of Christ’s nailed hands and feet.

Camera Obscura:

One proposed hypothesis is that Leonardo da Vinci was commissioned to replace an earlier version of the Shroud of Turin that was exposed as a poor fake, which had been bought by the Savoy family in 1453 only to disappear for 50 years.[2] Da Vinci created a "new" Shroud of Turin using a camera obscura technique involving a mirror and lens, on cloth impregnated with silver sulphate in a darkened room. The silver sulphate acted as a negative which propagated an image onto the cloth when exposed by light through the lens. Silver sulphate and the camera obscura technique were known in the 15th century. In January 2009, visual arts consultant Lillian Schwartz at the School of Visual Arts in New York, compared the face on the Shroud of Turin with that of a portrait of Leonardo da Vinci, and found they matched.

Or the more gruesome choice, actually torturing a man and wrapping him up . . . And, I'm sure there are methods that I didn't even list.

Never mind the obvious facts like: Jews didn't simply lay a cloth down and drape it over the top of the body, doing so was a medieval custom; According to John 19:4, Jesus was buried under Jewish custom, which means his body would have been washed before being wrapped eliminating the blood. As he was dead, no new blood would have flowed; Blood does not flow in rivulets from the head and wouldn't have made such stains; Any blood stains that leaked out of the woulds after washing and laying down would have appeared as pools . . . that's gravity for you; The "blood", if real and natural, wouldn't appear as a faded "red" on the threads because blood turns brown with age.

On death blood will pool inside the body, sinking to the lower extremities such as the back or legs depending on how the body is positioned. If there are open wounds at these low points then you may get some blood flow, but you won't likely get blood flowing from wounds on the top of a body that is lying on its back. And since the Bible [John 19:40] indicates that Jesus's burial followed Jewish customs, meaning Joseph of Arimethea would have washed the body, this means that the blood flow onto the shroud must have occurred after it was washed and wrapped. Although contradicting the Bible account, the body shown in the shroud was not washed. Washed or not, evidently there was blood flowing freely from all of Jesus' wounds, not just the lower ones due to gravity, which is difficult to explain.

Even if by some 'miracle' the blood flows were still wet and not disturbed, as soon as you wrapped the body in an absorbent linen cloth, the blood would spread into the material. The detail that is supposedly seen in the image would be lost. Same with the blood from the scalp wound, it should mat the hair, not run in rivulets. Far from being accurate, the blood flows are more like an artist's representation of blood.

I could go on . . . but, you get the point.

So much effort put into this mythological character , the world could have been saved and renewed a thousand times by now....

If any of it were real, no doubt things would be different.

Face facts, this is ALL a giant distraction, in one of the many scams and religions that are necessary to produce just the right environment here, so that SOMEONE can have their cake and eat it too.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Interesting; I hadn't heard about this one.

On the carbon dating; it isn't just that they used patches, but that they didn't account for the entire thing being in a fire, which pretty much kills such testing results.

Interesting. Thanks for the post!

a reply to: AfterInfinity

So I presume you come to these religious "style" topics to spout the fact you don't believe in God.

I'm sorry, but we get it. Now... debate by all means. But don't laugh in the face of those who believe. You're showing your ignorance.

Thanks to the OP for a interesting little read.

some very interesting BBC documentaries on the Shroud…

one physicist said it looked like a singularity had occurred, as if Christ renewed the entire universe…

imo, Christ also was dead because of severe blood loss… the life is in the blood…

a reply to: ParasuvO

curious, face the facts, you say?

“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being.”
--Sir Isaac Newton, Principia, Book 3

“A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."
--Dr. Fred Hoyle (scientist who coined the term "Big Bang" who was unafraid to go wherever the facts led him, and who consequently recanted his atheism.)


yt: Lee Strobel - The Case for the Resurrection
www.youtube.com...
yt: The Bible Is True! ~ The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict
www.youtube.com...
yt: Walter Veith (13) Battle of the Bibles /Total Onslaught
www.youtube.com...
youtube: The Resurrection Argument That Changed a Generation of Scholars - Gary Habermas at UCSB youtu.be...

a reply to: FlyersFan

Interesting.... They can tell all these internal injuries from a cloth placed over a body briefly 1000s of years ago....

These guys should start looking for missing persons, and solving their murders. That's pretty #ing remarkable, for 0 evidence.

originally posted by: Verum1quaere
some very interesting BBC documentaries on the Shroud…

one physicist said it looked like a singularity had occurred, as if Christ renewed the entire universe…

Wow.. that's very scientific!

That physicist needs to hand in his badge..