40 yrs ago STURP began in Vatican City, 1st time a major Relic Scientifically studied

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Photographic Images you are referring to may look like not made by contact or brushes, they do not require contact of the body with the cloth to manufacture the actual image on the shroud, and in that sense are not in risk to produce something like the rough image that the other member posted.

Certainly in some aspects the shroud resembles ordinary photography, but apart to be not caused by chemical reactions of corporal fluids or embalming substances it show characteristics that can not be produced with such means, it resembles modern radiation able to penetrate inner structures, like x rays plates.

Please check:
Radiation origin of the Shroud man image

A very detailed analysis of the photographies taken to the shroud shows that the image shows in different points like the face and hands and feet the underlying bones, the roots of the teeth of Jesus are visible behind the beard and leaps, the finger bones also are pretty visible behind the mass of muscles, the same can be said of the bones of the toes.

Don't tell me that also Donatello had the possibility to have invented X rays on the middle ages, that is too much to be even remotely possible.

Please check:
Quantum analysis seeking the source of the Shroud image

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

Put it this way there is about as much real evidence to support Donatello discovering and utilizing X-rays as there is of the existence of Jesus Christ.

It's a nice story or horrendous tragedy dependant on perspective, laced with a modicum of wisdom and a healthy dose of hyperbole.

a reply to: The angel of light

Your wrong here this explains hiw the shroud was made.

www.google.com...

a reply to: The angel of light

I've seen some of that discussion before about the various Jesuses. That last link I just glanced through but bookmarked for later.

I'm sure some of it refers to the correct person. There was another thread here on ATS about how they also managed to slander his mother, Mary. I don't care to get further into this discussion lest I am accused of being anti semetic.

As far as the shroud goes, I've seen several ideas about how it could have been created besides painting. One theory involved treating an actual dead body then wrapping it with some kind of curing process.

Since you seem to know a lot about this, I would like to ask something. The NT says he was anointed with a mixture of myrrh and aloes and included these spices in the burial cloth according to Jewish customs. Is this really Jewish customs? I have always thought the body was washed then buried with no embalming. The myrrh and aloes sounds more like healing herbs to me.

a reply to: toms54

One thing is sure, they can Not wash the body If it was impregnated of his blood, is against the ritual Jewish customs.

The blood contains the principle of life, according with Jewish Law, so it would sacrilege to wash it away, must be buried with the body.

By the way the image on the shroud was not made by contact, that possibility was ruled out when it was analyzed by STURP, the image do not match at all the remains of body fluids or balm. They may overlap but the stains of blood, pleura and transpiration have no correlation with the shadow of the image.

The closest thing that image resembles is effect of radiation, like the shadows of the vaporized victims of nuclear bombing that are visible in the Atoms bomb museum of Hiroshima.

Sorry but this also answer why I don't feel really motivated to respond the previous post of the French Magazine, I don't need to continue reading it beyond the point of an image made with Gelatne, Colagen and amonia, that is no sense at all.

If that would be the case the face should look deformed when the cloth was removed from the body and stretched again in a similar way than the image face posted by other member.

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: andy06shake

There is quite a bit of evidence for his existence if you consider all that has been written about him. Most people and events from antiquity are accepted as factual by historians on the basis of far less, maybe even a single casual mention of some accepted chronicler. But then, it's possible that most all ancient history was forged at a later date. We don't have any original works. All are copies of copies. In fact, we have no proof the people said to have written these ancient accounts actually existed themselves either.

So you can say there is no archeology but there is the literary evidence. Most of the events from the Bible do not match archeological evidence. Very little can be proven with any certainty.

a reply to: toms54

If Jesus existed he was a Man, his mother was not impregnated by God, nor an angel, and he died a very mortal death, i can say that with complete certainty, just like i can with any other Man.

That's if he existed.

a reply to: The angel of light

Do some research about history,funny the article is never mentioned till more recent years,if it has anything to do with the Vatican,you can bet it's a ruse,it's been tested it's only a few hundred years old,like somethin and shinola

The NT says he was anointed with a mixture of myrrh and aloes and included these spices in the burial cloth according to Jewish customs. Is this really Jewish customs? I have always thought the body was washed then buried with no embalming. The myrrh and aloes sounds more like healing herbs to me.

Correct..A proper Jewish burial was done on Lazerath before his resurrection.Jesus was bought down from the cross after 6 hours unconscious,wrapped in healing herbs and spices in cloth.Then placed in a cave,not a burial niche to recover.Joseph and a couple others (Essenites) rolled back the stone and helped Jesus walk out just before Mary arrived.Who do you think the Gardener was?
Its all in John.
To start off the Shroud history you need look at the story of King Abgar.

Here i thought this may intrest you. One of the people the bishop accused if making the image. Oddly did a self portrait that is an exact match to the shroud. I know you will never admit it is fake but others may find it interesting.



kaysalbrechtdurer.blogspot.com...

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: toms54

If Jesus existed he was a Man, his mother was not impregnated by God, nor an angel, and he died a very mortal death, i can say that with complete certainty, just like i can with any other Man.

That's if he existed.

Egyptians called their pharaoh a god, ancient Romans called their emperors gods and worshiped and sacrificed to them, other eastern faiths regard their religious leaders as incarnations or reincarnations of gods, yet I don't see you railing about any of them. What's so special about Christ (who came from the same time period as pharaohs and emperors) that makes you single him out? Or do you just dislike Christians?

a reply to: toms54

I discount organized religious practice in all its many guises.

I dislike stupidity.

As to Christians well i was born and brought up as a Protestant, went to Sunday school and all that jazz.

Whats your claim to fame again? LoL

a reply to: andy06shake

For a long time, I had a similar view to yours. When I got older, I seemed to reacquire an appreciation for organized religion, even though I seldom go to Church and personally question many aspects of it. It's good for society in general and helps with raising children. I don't believe it's stupidity to admit we don't know everything. A religious answer can be just as good or better than some made up rationalization that we adhere to just because it sounds logical. Just always question the accepted wisdom until you find the best truth you can.

a reply to: toms54

Ile take science over religion, at least until God turns up and tells me I'm wrong.

Depends on the question i suppose, but show me a religious answer that does not rely on a leap of faith nor contain a control construct or 10?

Totally agree with the always question part, and if God exists then so does he/she/it/we i imagine.

a reply to: dragonridr

Well, if Bishop of Poiters knew Duhrer as the artist that supposedly "falsified" the shroud, the object itself might have been brought to the XIII from future by a time travel, using a technology we don't have developed even today.

Surely you meant in a previous incarnation of Duhrer? Isn't it?

Because in his normal life as an artist he was born by 1471, that is about 1.5 centuries at least after the first records of the shroud in western Europe.

He is closer to the apparition of the shroud in France tgan Davinci, but in spite of all his talent well normal people Can Not start to work before to be conceived.

I believe somebody is trying to fool naive people in that website, it is incredible the way irresponsible people try to gain fame at expense of this relic..

Just for the record notice that also clearly the man of the shroud has larger nose than Duhrer and from his own self portrait also the German Artist had narrower face than him.

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

Oh o had no doubt you weren't going to be convinced you ignore evidence. I will leave your faith intact if you choose to believe its real so be it.

The earliest mentions of the shroud involve several fake shrouds. You neglected to mention there was more than one didnt you?

Christian relics were a dime a dozen during the medieval times. Everyone had something nails from the cross knuckle of a saint. It was huge money to get people to come to your church. The veil of veronica is a much better image by the way.

a reply to: dragonridr

What !!!??

It may be Historically or Archaelogically very interesting, but I don't see really what is the connection of this with any personal respect or admiration to a figure, or faith or religious belief?

The Shroud of Turin is not an essential element to support a Religion, or a philosophical current, Not at all.

Even without it No body whatsoever is going to question with a solid base that Christ was not the magnificent religious leader than the JudeoChristian accounts claim or the Roman Empire honored after Emperor Constantine.

Christ is still a preeminent figure that define in a unique way the western Civilization, with his burial cloth present in our time or Not.

There were entire cultural, artistic, arquitectonic and even Engineering projects inspired in his legacy. The Ship that put in contact first time the Renaissant Europe with the Americas was called Sta. Maria after his mother name.

Cities, Principalities, Kingdoms and empires were founded over a legacy of ethical and philosophical principles He originated. His thoughts and ideas have an incredible important influence in Education, psychology, music and Arts, humanism, Laws, even in to shape the progress of Science for centuries in the west.

How many cities in the world were named after him?

There are even states called after him, like the Republic of El Salvador, The Holy See or the Republic of Mt. Athos.

His physical image carved in tons of solid stone dominates the high Andes between Chile an Argentina, the western Andes over the Cauca's Valley of Colombia, the Bay of Rio de Janeiro, the valley of Guanajuato in Mexico or the National Panteon of Spain, and of course his painted image crowns the magnificent Cathedrals of St Paul in London, St Peter in Rome, Notredame in Paria, Haggia Sophia in Istanbul or St Basili on Moscow.

Christ does Not need the Shroud to improve his prestige at all, He does Not need to prove nothing at this point of History, his glory is full, nothing what so ever to be admired, trusted or respected. Not even with a Shroud miracolously stamped or preserved, perhaps 20 centuries ago He needed that to convince, but definitively Not now.

We are ,in our limited way to grasp things, the ones that perhaps may gain something with its scientific study to understand better the real dimension of his person, the so complex nature of this unique and fascinating personality, personal magnetism, wisdom and so famous attributes, that make him singular in History.

Your comment sounds really silly, completly ignorant of the person you are pointless trying to undermine or demerit.

With all respect that statement is really absurd, who says that Napoleon was Great due to the sword he used or his hat instead of his contribution to universalization of civil rights or Military strategies?

Who claims that Socrates was so due to his nice tunic, instead of his Philosophical legacy?, or

That Christopher Columbus thanks to his fashioned Jacket, and Not for his tenacity to communicate civilizations?

Who cares about the curled wig that Johann Sebastian Bach used? It was his Angelic music what is important.

what are you talking about? Are you living on a cloud or what?

You are living in a Nebula if you think my admiration, trust or faith in Christ depends exclusively on this. He exceeds in credentials to be respected.

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

I agree with everything you've said. Aside from all that, the shroud is fascinating in it's own right. At least to me.

If Vatican paid for those research it's like Philip Morris conducting tabacco research