Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Does This Finding Prove Jesusí Resurrection? New Book Offers Stunning Details About the Shroud
The Blaze ^ | March 28, 2013 | Billy Hallowell

Posted on 03/30/2013 1:29:01 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-121 next last
To: Swordmaker

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctGKH3oEXAk

I’m sure you have seen the History Channel show from a year or so ago. Amazing work! Here is Part 6 where they reveal the 3D image from their data analysis.


51 posted on 04/01/2013 12:40:03 AM PDT by 21twelve ("We've got the guns, and we got the numbers" adapted and revised from Jim M.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child; erlayman

The other cloth is believed to be the “Sudarium of Oviedo, or Shroud of Oviedo, is a bloodstained cloth...”

Has similar markings as the shroud and same rare blood type (AB). It is also mentioned in a historical document from 570 AD - which is can be used to support that the shroud was around much earlier than the middle ages.


52 posted on 04/01/2013 12:44:23 AM PDT by 21twelve ("We've got the guns, and we got the numbers" adapted and revised from Jim M.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Would anyone believe in Christ Jesus, regardless of any artifact, other than Grace; the key, to a responding soul.


53 posted on 04/01/2013 1:04:15 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Would anyone believe in Christ Jesus, regardless of any artifact, other than Grace. That is key, to a responding soul.


54 posted on 04/01/2013 1:06:06 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

very good


55 posted on 04/01/2013 1:22:05 AM PDT by southland ( I have faith in the creator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 21twelve

bookmark


56 posted on 04/01/2013 1:26:25 AM PDT by southland ( I have faith in the creator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: sakic
I just think that there is zero scientific evidence that ties Jesus to the shroud, and frankly I don’t understand why anyone cares about whether the shroud is related to Jesus.

Because it's so much fun to drive you trolls up a wall.

Cheers!

57 posted on 04/01/2013 3:06:06 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: sakic

So, you care about this issue. Why?


58 posted on 04/01/2013 3:32:52 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob
It’s interesting that with all the modern technology, no one has been able to duplicate this “medieval forgery.”

From my experience, the "medieval forgery" crowd isn't at all familiar with the evidence.

59 posted on 04/01/2013 3:39:35 AM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

I never said one word about height. I wrote of facial features only. Do the representations of Jesus make you think he was Arab? The representations i have seen show a very light skinned man, a very unlikely scenario.


60 posted on 04/01/2013 4:09:41 AM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

Because I love history and science. Why do you care about it?


61 posted on 04/01/2013 4:12:36 AM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

When one has nothing to contribute they scream troll.

I don’t dispute the existence of Jesus. I do wonder why some are so desperate to try and prove some things by clutching at straws. Isn’t your faith enough for you? Religion is based on faith, not evidence.


62 posted on 04/01/2013 4:17:05 AM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6

Yes, true. But it can be a nice booster for some who need it in their doubts.


63 posted on 04/01/2013 5:59:51 AM PDT by fabian (" And a new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo in laughter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sakic

Exactly. I don’t need a shroud. It is a fascinating subject for scientific debate. For the faithful it should be nothing more.


64 posted on 04/01/2013 6:25:01 AM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (What most people want are the things that Dems and Pubs have agreed that they will not discuss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Thank you for the correction.


65 posted on 04/01/2013 7:20:45 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: sakic

There is hugh forensic evidence tying the Shroud to Jesus. You might inform yourself before spouting. The evidence is immense. Go to the websites,study the evidence.


66 posted on 04/01/2013 7:24:22 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

too many people making the shroud an idol


67 posted on 04/01/2013 7:25:59 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch (http://thegatwickview.tumblr.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sakic

And the evidence IS scientific. Again, you write from total ignorance if you say zero scientific evidence exists.

And the facial features on the Shroud match up perfectly with the tradition of Jesus Icons in the East. Evidence points to the fact that the original icons were written (icon-speak for painted) with the Shroud image in mind (we have records of it being displayed approximately annually in Constantinople). Icons throughout history and around the world have a good degree of similarity, suggesting that they follow an ancient model and that this model was derived from the Shroud.

Think of it for a minute: there has to be a reason why the face cloth and the shroud are mentioned in John’s Gospel and that care is taken to distinguish the two.

Could it be that when they picked up those gravecloths that day and saw the facial image, they were overwhelmed at the thought that He left behind a facial image for them???? And they preserved that image.

The old saw that no one knows what Jesus looked like may be false. Much evidence (including scientific evidence, but also historical evidence) points to that conclusion.


68 posted on 04/01/2013 7:29:15 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: sakic

You are, apparently thinking of representations of Jesus as being derived from Salman’s Head of Christ, 19th c. What a pitifully narrrow world you inhabit.

I agree that Salman’s Head of Christ turns him into a Western European and is misleading and should be taken down off all the Protestant Church walls on which it hangs.

But why do you assume that your narrow Protestant world of pictures of Christ is the sum of all the representations of Christ?

There are thousands of years of icons portraying Christ and he doesn’t look like a white northern European there.

Broaden your horizons. Open your mind to the possiblity tha the very Scripture you revere points to the veneration of this relic of Jesus from day one.

You with your “I don’t need no help to my belief, all I need is grace” mantra: Scripture itself tells us that people saw these gravecloths as a very important part of the historical record of the empty tomb. The Shroud of Turin was part of the faith of the Apostles who wrote the New Testament you revere. They didn’t think honoring this holy Relic of the Savior went against pure faith

But you do. Why? We are more scriptural than you.


69 posted on 04/01/2013 7:35:36 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

See no. 69


70 posted on 04/01/2013 7:36:27 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Too many people calumniating us by making false claims about us.

No one treats the Shroud as an idol.

You bear false witness against us. Please withdraw this falsehood.


71 posted on 04/01/2013 7:37:19 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: sakic

So John’s Gospel clutches at straws? You are holier than the Bible. Good luck with that.


72 posted on 04/01/2013 7:37:58 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

May I remind you of the meaning of “idol”—to treat a creature as if it were God.

Where is your evidence that anyone anywhere ever treated the Shroud of Turin as God?

Words mean things. When you throw around the word idol lightly you bear false witness. Idolatry is a serious charge.


73 posted on 04/01/2013 7:39:35 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.

try suggesting that the shroud be burned , see what response you get . the shroud is being used as “proof” that Jesus was resurrected , but that’s what faith is all about . it’s why God didn’t announce where Moses was buried , because the Israelites would have made his burial site a monument . the only item we need to aim our hearts to is Christ


74 posted on 04/01/2013 7:45:35 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch (http://thegatwickview.tumblr.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

You used the word idol. It has a meaning.

Try suggesting that the copies of the Declaration of Independence in the National Archives be burned. What reaction would you get? Does that mean anyone anywhere thinks the DoI is God?

Nothing else you write has any credibility until you acknowledge that you lied about those who venerate the Shroud as a historical artifact, not an idol.


75 posted on 04/01/2013 8:01:51 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Try suggesting that the Bible your great-great-great grandfathr brought from Scotland be burned. (If you had your great-great-great grandfather’s Bible from Scotland. This is merely an example to make a point that even you ought to be able to understand. Don’t reply by saying that your gr-gr-gr-grandfather wasn’t from Scotland.)

Try suggesting that your wife’s wedding dress from 50 years ago be burned. (Again, an example, not meant literally. A thought-experiment.)

Try suggesting that the Magna Carta be burned.

Try suggesting that the Gettysburg Battlefield be bulldozed and turned into a condo development.

Those are all direct analogies. People would be outraged if any of the above were done. But they did not worship any of those things as idols.

Retract your calumny.


76 posted on 04/01/2013 8:06:38 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

The Shroud is used by some as evidence of the empty Tomb and as a link to a historical event in Scripture.

Do you or do you not believe that John’s Gospel is historically true when it says that Peter and John ran to the tomb and saw it empty and the graveclothes lying there?

Those who argue that the image being produced by oxidation of only the tips of fibers proves the Resurrection was a burst of intense radiation are a small subset of Shroudies. Even they make that suggestion as a speculation. I think it’s unwise speculation.

And even they do not treat the Shroud as an idol. They think it is a physical historical artifact testifying to the physics of the Resurrection. Physics. Get that, physics. Unwarranted conclusion in my view. But even they are speaking of historical artifact and physical evidence.

They do not treat it as an idol.

Most of us think that, as a physical artifact, it testifies to the a historial accuracy of the Scripture account of the empty Tomb.

Protestants who believe in the historical accuracy of the Gospels (as do orthodox Catholics) should WELCOME the Shroud as one more piece of remarkable evidence supporting what we already believe about the Bible.

Instead you attack by MISREPRESENTING what we believe about the Shroud. Stop the distortion of what we believe. OPen your mind to the possibility of the preservation over centuries of a physical piece of evidence to what you and I already believe about the truth of Scripture.

What’s so hard about that?


77 posted on 04/01/2013 8:13:34 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.

Find me a scripture that suggests the shroud should be venerated.


78 posted on 04/01/2013 8:49:49 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch (http://thegatwickview.tumblr.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

There is interesting analysis of the behavior of the players which attest to Hids resurrection. How the apostles reacted, how the Romans reacted, and how the Caiaphas camp reacted following news of the empty tomb, when taken together from the different expectations of each camp attests to the reality that He is Risen.


79 posted on 04/01/2013 10:04:05 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.

An imagined facial resemblance is not science no matter how much one goes into contortions.

If it was ever proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that the shroud had nothing to do with Jesus, would you lose faith? Is your faith that weak?


80 posted on 04/01/2013 6:20:12 PM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

:) Jesus is who he said he is.


81 posted on 04/01/2013 6:25:03 PM PDT by Truth2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.

Where are these Semitic representations in American churches? Calling me ignorant when you cannot show me an example paints a poor show of logic on your part.

Why do you think American churches in unison portray Jesus as European?


82 posted on 04/01/2013 6:28:58 PM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: sakic
I am one of the resident troll-hunters on FR; kind of a hobby of mine.

What straws are you talking about, anyway?

If you have actual substance, let's see it.

Cheers!

83 posted on 04/01/2013 6:39:50 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: sakic

Because they stupidly follow a portrait painted in the 1900s by Warber Salman and William Holman Hunt and the other Pre-Raphaelites in the 1800s who turned Jesus into a white Northern European and pay no attention to thousands of years of icons.

Get out into the world some day.


84 posted on 04/01/2013 7:07:48 PM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Thanks for the ping!


85 posted on 04/01/2013 9:01:10 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Troll hunter? Are you the fat guy in Hawaii?

Most understand that when one makes an assertion it is up to them to prove it. Clearly not everyone understands this.

In any case, as I have already stated, religious beliefs don’t need verifiable proof. They are dependent on faith. Those seeking proof are not true believers.

Good hunting. You might try looking under bridges.


86 posted on 04/02/2013 11:09:31 AM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Because it's so much fun to drive you trolls up a wall.

And with the above comes the evidence that your own comments on this thread are primarily rude insult & personal attacks (if any haven't noticed) which is a form of trollish behavior in and of it's self.

Cheers! Up Yours!

87 posted on 04/02/2013 11:32:59 AM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: sakic

Almost the same reason, for the season.


88 posted on 04/02/2013 11:15:23 PM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: sakic
Troll hunter? Are you the fat guy in Hawaii?

Nah, neither fat nor in Hawaii.

Most understand that when one makes an assertion it is up to them to prove it. Clearly not everyone understands this.

I understand it well...but those who attack the authenticity of the Shroud based on cut-and-paste from "skeptical" sites in defiance of their own rules for forensic debate, and when the contentions on the skeptical sites have been refuted many times by multiple independent sources...I tend to doubt the good faith of the cut-and-paste crowd.

In any case, as I have already stated, religious beliefs don’t need verifiable proof. They are dependent on faith. Those seeking proof are not true believers.

Or there are those who haven't thought about it much, but have heard of the Shroud, and go, "Hey, cool."

OTOH, you might want to check out John 14:11.

Good hunting. You might try looking under bridges.

That doesn't make any sense. What are you trying to say?

Cheers!

89 posted on 04/03/2013 7:37:48 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
And with the above comes the evidence that your own comments on this thread are primarily rude insult & personal attacks (if any haven't noticed) which is a form of trollish behavior in and of it's self.

I excuse you for your ignorance, both of the Shroud and of my history on FR.

Try for example this thread or this post.

Cheers!

90 posted on 04/03/2013 8:10:29 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Other threads. yeah I think I read those years ago. big deal. Not all that interested now,though I did briefly look. I'm no pollen expert...but have lingering doubts there, too, which I didn't see openly considered then, and doubt anything has changed there now. If there was better access to information, or if such as was crucial not so buried among such muck, I'd be morelikely to spend timeand energy inspecting it. Otherwise, as it comes across on FR threads,it's like one jumbled train wreck after another, with promoters such as yourself helping tangle things up morethan you perhaps realize.

What I did see is that much of your own argument depended greatly on ad hominem itself, with a little worshipfulness of "peer review" thrown in for good measure. Meanwhile, it's like depending upon reports of reports, which too isn't all that great of a scientific method, but might get one in the neighborhood of where to further look.

Dishing out "troll" accusation to those who on this forum are unconvinced, just for being unconvinced is uncalled for, and is beneath you... you used to be otherwise usually polite, so more's the pity. It's pretty obvious you have much personally invested here, in pride and opinion. I'd much prefer to rely upon those more disinterested, if such could be found.

Speaking of pitys, it's too bad the best information, along with any best possible challenges and questions, isn't assembled all in one place. Somebody chimes in with this same sort of idea (or whine) every year, so it's not an original thought on my own part.

Clumps of shroud info can be found here and there, but often enough just raise questions answered elsewhere, and not always answered all that well or completely when they are. Dare to ask some to think...get abused for one's troubles.

Where's the fun in that, unless one just hangs around seeing how many people one can get away with "besting"? Troll inspectors turn into trolls themselves, as they troll for a hobby, hunting for trolls. Get it?

91 posted on 04/03/2013 10:30:54 PM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Where do trolls live?


92 posted on 04/04/2013 3:56:45 PM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Where do trolls live?


93 posted on 04/04/2013 4:34:53 PM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
No.
94 posted on 04/04/2013 5:52:15 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: sakic
They usually live in a little booth next to the Troll Bridge.

Next to their house is a little sign which says, "Stop. Pay Troll."

Cheers!

95 posted on 04/04/2013 5:53:02 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
Do you take credit cards? wait...don't have any with me.

how about an IOU? here, have a couple, I've got plenty more. Always print up extra before leaving the house.

96 posted on 04/04/2013 6:10:09 PM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Happy to see that you figured it out.


97 posted on 04/05/2013 10:12:13 AM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: sakic
I never said one word about height. I wrote of facial features only. Do the representations of Jesus make you think he was Arab? The representations i have seen show a very light skinned man, a very unlikely scenario.

You did not. But almost all who bring up the look of Semites do bring up stature, . . they expect them to be short and slight of build. You already assumed everyone in 1st Century Jerusalem would look the same as a modern minority of Jews. I headed that stature expectation argument off at the pass.

98 posted on 04/05/2013 3:04:36 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon; grey_whiskers; dinodino; sakic; NYer
Speaking of pitys, it's too bad the best information, along with any best possible challenges and questions, isn't assembled all in one place. Somebody chimes in with this same sort of idea (or whine) every year, so it's not an original thought on my own part.

You know, Blue, we get damned tired of responding to the same tired, outdated, refuted, wrong, and just plain repetitious lies not to mention the insults posted by trolls over and over again on Shroud threads. It gets old. Your complaint is just one more whine. Same old stuff, same old whine.

As to your statement that "it's too bad the best information, along with possible challenges and questions, isn't assembled all in one place" is totally wrong and just shows you haven't bothered to even do cursory investigation of the issue before spouting off and flaming participants such as grey_whiskers. I assure you he is not a troll.

I've posted links to two comprehensive sites. . . repeatedly. . . for each and every one of these trolls on every Shroud thread on Freerepublic. One of the sites I link to is the repository of every scientific and scholarly article on the Shroud. The other is a more accessible and readable and also links to the articles and translates the science for those who may have trouble understanding it, and puts the scholarship in context.

Both sites ignore the twaddle from the non-scientists and non-scientists who inhabit the majority of the skeptic sites who seem to have no concept of peer-review or what it means to be accepted for publication in a scientific journal, or just how difficult that is. You, yourself, seem to think that is meaningless. Grey_whiskers, the Freeper you are attacking, is a scientist. . . and DOES know what it means. None of the trolls here are. . . or even have a clue. This thread is a prime example as one Freeper keeps insisting that falsified C-14 data still has validity, despite irrefutable proof the sample tested was compromised. No legitimate scientist would argue that. He would recognize garbage in equals garbage out.

One sure sign of Trollish behavior is the demand for proofs, but then NEVER bothering to read them when presented, or even visit the links to the sites holding the proofs. . . then claiming the link is not authoritative, when it is a peer-reviewed scientific journal reporting work in the field of its expertise.

The trolls always demand that we do THEIR research for them. . . and that we must give their "experts," invariably non-scientists, published only in outdated skeptical journals which are never peer reviewed, the same credibility as the latest peer-reviewed published science. The skeptical articles which ALWAYS cite a handful of already falsified claims, never cite the latest research, or even the earlier research accurately, and use ad hominems attacks in describing any Shroud researchers who actually do work on the Shroud as "Psuedo-scientists" because they are researching the Shroud, which, according to the skeptics is obviously a fraud. Science and scholarship simply don't work like that.

99 posted on 04/20/2013 11:17:38 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon; grey_whiskers

Yes, you are dead on the money. I posed a couple of legitimate skeptical questions and received hysterical, shrieking ad hominem attacks for my trouble. It’s clear that grey et al. not only have no clue how science works, but don’t care to know.


100 posted on 04/21/2013 3:21:15 AM PDT by dinodino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-121 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson