Posted on 05/11/2014 5:55:03 AM PDT by marshmallow
Four university professors have published an article in “Injury” magazine revealing that the crucified man that was wrapped in the Turin Shroud suffered a dislocation of the humerus, the paralysis of one arm and a violent trauma to the neck and chest. There are also traces of a double wrist-nailing
The Man of the Shroud “underwent an under glenoidal dislocation of the humerus on the right side and lowering of the shoulder, and has a flattened hand and enophthalmos; conditions that have not been described before, despite several studies on the subject. These injuries indicate that the Man suffered a violent blunt trauma to the neck, chest and shoulder from behind, causing neuromuscular damage and lesions of the entire brachial plexus.”
This is the conclusion four university professors arrived at in an in-depth study they carried out on the image of the crucified Man on the Turin Shroud. They observed that “the posture of the left claw-hand is indicative of an injury of the lower brachial plexus, as is the crossing of the hands on the pubis, not above the pubis as it would normally be, and are related to traction of the limbs as a result of the nailing to the patibulum.” Only part of the study has been published so far in Injury , the prestigious International Journal of the Care of the Injured. The rest of the study is to follow shortly. The four experts involved in the research are: Matteo Bevilacqua of the Hospital-University of Padua, Italy; Giulio Fanti of the Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Padua, Italy; Michele D’Arienzo of the Orthopaedic Clinic at the University of Palermo, Italy and Raffaele De Caro of the Institute of Anatomy at the University of Padua, Italy.
(Excerpt) Read more at vaticaninsider.lastampa.it ...
Being how the Lord had to suffer it would not surprise me if his arms were dislocated
I BELIEVE! Yes I’m screaming..
“Being how the Lord had to suffer it would not surprise me if his arms were dislocated”
In “The Passion of the Christ” it looked like the Romans pulled His arm out of his socket to make the nail fit in.
All that proves is that the artist who painted it had read the New Testament.
. . . . and had startling medical knowledge.
The coloration is not paint, every expert agrees on that.
Yeah, and he was so talented he made Michelangelo and da Vinci look like chimps in comparison.
A dislocation is not a broken bone either; if a bone had been broken, then the shroud would be a false image of Christ.
Somehow the artist who painted it also figured out how to paint it without using a drop of paint or leaving a single brush stroke.
Where does the New Testament say anything about dislocated arms?
Knock it off, TROLL !
For those interested, here is a good study on the shroud.
How about Psalm 22:14 (OT, not NT)?
As a matter of fact, the actor who played Christ, Jim Cavaziel, did have his arm dislocate while carrying the Cross.
Coincidence? I think not.
While proof of authenticity might go a long way, proof of a sham would crush many believers' faith - IMO, it's better to look on without making soul-deep attachments to physical objects.
I feel pretty much the way you do. The Shroud is not at all necessary to hold up my believe in Jesus and how he suffered and died for us but, as a lover of antique artifacts, I would love for it to be authentic.
I am just the kind of person that had I been there when Jesus rose from the tomb, I would have taken The Shroud home and protected it.
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.