Originally posted by NorrinRadd
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Representations and depictions of the deity
Collapse
X
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
-
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View Post
(1) The cloth covering Jesus's head was separate from the linen cloth covering the rest of His body.
Simon Peter arrived just after him. He entered the tomb and saw the linen cloths lying there. The cloth that had been around Jesus’ head was rolled up, lying separate from the linen cloths. (John 20:6-7)
(3) Just my own personal observation, which I need to address tactfully: The figure is supposedly lying flat on his back with his arms by his side, but his arms are long enough so that the hands can modestly cover his genitals. I'm sure the crucifixion couldn't have stretched his arms by about another ten inches.When I Survey....
Comment
-
Originally posted by Faber View Post
A blatant forgery when you consider...
(1) The cloth covering Jesus's head was separate from the linen cloth covering the rest of His body.
(2) The earliest historical mention of the shroud's existence was in 1354, consistent with carbon dating of AD 1269 - 1390.
(3) Just my own personal observation, which I need to address tactfully: The figure is supposedly lying flat on his back with his arms by his side, but his arms are long enough so that the hands can modestly cover his genitals. I'm sure the crucifixion couldn't have stretched his arms by about another ten inches.
The cloth of Oviedo (a face-cloth of the type that you mention) is being compared with the Shroud of Turin. The provenance for that cloth is somewhat more certain than that of the shroud, and there are some interesting comparisons. So far there are matches in key points - blood type particularly - AB, not exactly the most common of groups. As for the C14 tests on the shroud - it is unfortunate that, the shroud having been exposed to heat of fire, those tests might be rather unreliable.
And point 3 ... without viewing the relevant parts of the image to see what supports the argument, it seems strange that a perfectly ordinary anatomy would be unable to reproduce that circumstance.
We discussed the shroud on TWeb some years ago - nothing offered since has given me cause to modify the conclusions reached then - it can't be definitively declared a fake. Nor has anything changed my opinion of relics in the interim - I don't trust the reports, I don't like the concept.
ETA: https://www.catholicculture.org/cult...fm?recnum=39531Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
- 2 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
Pretty much, yeah."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Faber View Post
A blatant forgery when you consider...
It appears that over the centuries there were some forty three “True Shrouds” of Christ in medieval Europe alone.
At the time of this shroud’s appearance the Bishop of Troyes was urged by his fellow churchmen to conduct a full inquiry, which he did, and according to his successor Bishop Pierre d’Arcis, afterwards reported that the shroud was a fraud and this had been attested by the artist who had painted it.
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
Not so hasty good sir.
The cloth of Oviedo (a face-cloth of the type that you mention) is being compared with the Shroud of Turin. The provenance for that cloth is somewhat more certain than that of the shroud, and there are some interesting comparisons. So far there are matches in key points - blood type particularly - AB, not exactly the most common of groups. As for the C14 tests on the shroud - it is unfortunate that, the shroud having been exposed to heat of fire, those tests might be rather unreliable.
And point 3 ... without viewing the relevant parts of the image to see what supports the argument, it seems strange that a perfectly ordinary anatomy would be unable to reproduce that circumstance.
We discussed the shroud on TWeb some years ago - nothing offered since has given me cause to modify the conclusions reached then - it can't be definitively declared a fake. Nor has anything changed my opinion of relics in the interim - I don't trust the reports, I don't like the concept.
ETA: https://www.catholicculture.org/cult...fm?recnum=3953
And as Faber notes, the Bible is very explicit about there being two separate cloths -- one for the head and another for a body -- which the Shroud of Turin contradicts. Moreover, IIRC there is no evidence that the Jews ever wrapped the deceased in the manner of the shroud, much less in a cloth using a weave that didn't become popular until centuries later.
As for more recent research, from 2018: Forensic research (once again) suggests the Shroud of Turin is fake and Shroud of Turin Is a Fake, Bloodstains Suggest
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAFAICT, in spite of some minor issues being raised, there is not one radiocarbon expert who has ever said the results were unreliable.
And as Faber notes, the Bible is very explicit about there being two separate cloths -- one for the head and another for a body -- which the Shroud of Turin contradicts. Moreover, IIRC there is no evidence that the Jews ever wrapped the deceased in the manner of the shroud, much less in a cloth using a weave that didn't become popular until centuries later.
As for more recent research, from 2018: Forensic research (once again) suggests the Shroud of Turin is fake and Shroud of Turin Is a Fake, Bloodstains Suggest
From the article that you cited:
textiles experts and art historians have suggested that the materials and images are not from the right era.
The "pigments" used are of an unidentified origin, and the image bears no evidence of having been painted.
The artist's confession: The investigator decided prior to beginning his investigation that the image was a forgery. He did not set out to discover whether the shroud was a forgery, he set out to prove that it was a forgery, which set up conditions for confirmation bias. Interrogating the artist would have been conducted using the standard interrogation techniques of the time - which you would be familiar with. A confession wrung from a suspect by those techniques cannot be considered factual.
The shroud bears pollen that could only have come from Palestine - nothing in the documented history places the shroud anywhere that has the necessary mix of plants producing that pollen.
Rome does not classify the shroud as a relic - which testifies to reservations about its authenticity.
Again: as much as I would like the shroud to be a fake, it simply cannot be declared inauthentic on the basis of current information. Though it can be fairly stated that with the ongoing investigations, the likelihood of authenticity is reducing.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
Not so hasty good sir.
The cloth of Oviedo (a face-cloth of the type that you mention) is being compared with the Shroud of Turin. The provenance for that cloth is somewhat more certain than that of the shroud, and there are some interesting comparisons. So far there are matches in key points - blood type particularly - AB, not exactly the most common of groups. As for the C14 tests on the shroud - it is unfortunate that, the shroud having been exposed to heat of fire, those tests might be rather unreliable.
To what blood are you referring? The secret commission [1969-1976] that was established to study this item included internationally recognised forensic serologists and efforts to validate the blood including microscopic, chemical, biological, and instrumental tests all proved negative.
Claims were made for the "blood" on the shroud by Dr. Pierluigi Baima Bollone, a professor of legal medicine, and somewhat partisan in his views on the authenticity of this piece, who reported that not only was the “blood” real but he even identified it as type AB. His finding was utterly negated by those forensic serologists.
Walter McCrone a distinguished microanalyst found that the “blood” actually consisted of red ochre and vermilion pigments, along with traces of rose madder, in a collagen tempera binder. These pigments were used by medieval artists to depict blood in their paintings.
Entire books have been written on the lucrative trade in Christian relics and among those that are most revered, and disputed, are relics of the Passion and Jesus' burial . These artefacts include the [alleged] marble slab on which his body was laid, complete [allegedly] with traces of his mother’s tears and also bits of the angel’s candle that lit Jesus’ tomb, although why a celestial being would require such a mundane item as a candle remains an unanswered question.
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
I am of the opinion that the evidence is inconclusive. Documented errors in C14 dating do exist, and resulting from circumstances relevant for the shroud.
Originally posted by tabibito View PostFrom the article that you cited:
The material in question is linen twill - said be some experts to not have been present in the region until late second century. Reverse Z weave twill was found in a rag bag in Masada's ruins. (If I remember rightly, Teallaura can confirm.)
The "pigments" used are of an unidentified origin, and the image bears no evidence of having been painted.
The artist's confession: The investigator decided prior to beginning his investigation that the image was a forgery. He did not set out to discover whether the shroud was a forgery, he set out to prove that it was a forgery, which set up conditions for confirmation bias. Interrogating the artist would have been conducted using the standard interrogation techniques of the time - which you would be familiar with. A confession wrung from a suspect by those techniques cannot be considered factual.
Moreover, do you envision them rounding up artists willy-nilly and torturing them until one confesses? Given the number of possible suspects it may well be that the artist responsible stepped forward.
As for being painted, this appears to be true with wet paint but there are several techniques using dry pigments that IIRC have produced remarkably similar results. And btw, wasn't iron oxide detected in the "blood"?
Originally posted by tabibito View PostThe shroud bears pollen that could only have come from Palestine - nothing in the documented history places the shroud anywhere that has the necessary mix of plants producing that pollen.
Originally posted by tabibito View PostRome does not classify the shroud as a relic - which testifies to reservations about its authenticity.
Again: as much as I would like the shroud to be a fake, it simply cannot be declared inauthentic on the basis of current information. Though it can be fairly stated that with the ongoing investigations, the likelihood of authenticity is reducing.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
[QUOTE=Hypatia_Alexandria;n1329047] Oh good grief are you contending this artefact may be authentic?
To what blood are you referring? The secret commission [1969-1976] that was established to study this item included internationally recognised forensic serologists and efforts to validate the blood including microscopic, chemical, biological, and instrumental tests all proved negative.
Entire books have been written on the lucrative trade in Christian relics and among those that are most revered, and disputed, are relics of the Passion and Jesus' burial . These artefacts include the [alleged] marble slab on which his body was laid, complete [allegedly] with traces of his mother’s tears and also bits of the angel’s candle that lit Jesus’ tomb, although why a celestial being would require such a mundane item as a candle remains an unanswered question.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
I am of the opinion that the evidence is inconclusive. Documented errors in C14 dating do exist, and resulting from circumstances relevant for the shroud.
From the article that you cited:
The material in question is linen twill - said be some experts to not have been present in the region until late second century. Reverse Z weave twill was found in a rag bag in Masada's ruins. (If I remember rightly, Teallaura can confirm.)
The "pigments" used are of an unidentified origin, and the image bears no evidence of having been painted.
Originally posted by tabibito View PostThe artist's confession: The investigator decided prior to beginning his investigation that the image was a forgery. He did not set out to discover whether the shroud was a forgery, he set out to prove that it was a forgery, which set up conditions for confirmation bias. Interrogating the artist would have been conducted using the standard interrogation techniques of the time - which you would be familiar with. A confession wrung from a suspect by those techniques cannot be considered factual.
Originally posted by tabibito View PostThe shroud bears pollen that could only have come from Palestine - nothing in the documented history places the shroud anywhere that has the necessary mix of plants producing that pollen.
Originally posted by tabibito View PostRome does not classify the shroud as a relic - which testifies to reservations about its authenticity.
Again: as much as I would like the shroud to be a fake, it simply cannot be declared inauthentic on the basis of current information. Though it can be fairly stated that with the ongoing investigations, the likelihood of authenticity is reducing.
There are lots of samples much older than 2,000 years. Linen, which is essentially cellulose, is an extremely durable material. But what is a problem is that you just don’t find anything quite the size of the Shroud except for Egyptian mummy wrappings—certainly nothing that measures fourteen feet, the size of the Shroud. That’s a helluva lot of linen! What I’m suggesting is that it’s just too large to be convincing, too much to have been kept intact for so long.
Furthermore one may assume that the burial customs of the earliest Christians must have been premised on that of the Jews. In the Acta Martyrum are references to shrouds, linen fabric, plain linen cloths and even rich fabrics with gold etc, as was discovered when the body of St Cecilia [c. 200- c.235 CE] was exhumed in the late sixteenth century.
Towards the end of the first century a tunic possibly with a sindon [i.e. a linen cloth that could be used for a garment, shroud,or other purpose] wrapped around it was used by Coptic Christians in Egypt, the body was then bound round with ribbons of cloth in the manner of a mummy and burial tunics of this period are preserved in museums today. The writer of the gospel of John clearly refers to multiple burial garments, using the plural othonia and these are understood by biblical scholars to be those “strips of linen cloth” or “wrappings” or “linen bandages,” indicating that the body was wrapped mummy style; with some suggesting that that the sindon, or sheet, was torn into strips for this purpose.
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
OK - if that panned out, the evidence would be all but conclusive. Strange that I haven't encountered mention of that research before now - it should have been at the forefront of every article declaring the shroud a fake. So - I have to assume I haven't been looking in the right places.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
OK - if that panned out, the evidence would be all but conclusive. Strange that I haven't encountered mention of that research before now - it should have been at the forefront of every article declaring the shroud a fake. So - I have to assume I haven't been looking in the right places.
Purely for amusement and following the comment by Faber over the rather long arms, one pro-authenticity pathologist concluded the excessively long extremities indicated that Jesus suffered from Marfan's syndrome!
Edit I note Little Sir Echo has repeated my reference to Walter McCrone.Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 11-28-2021, 08:48 AM."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThat would likely by Walter McCrone's conclusion. Back in the day he was regarded as the preeminent expert in microscopic analysis (not that he's infallible) and his conclusions were prominent in nearly everything I've read about the authenticity of the shroud. It seems that much of the effort from the pro-authentic crowd has been spent seeking to debunk his findings,1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
|
39 responses
185 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 03:32 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
|
21 responses
132 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-21-2024, 12:15 PM | ||
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
|
80 responses
428 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 12:33 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
|
45 responses
305 views
1 like
|
Last Post 03-17-2024, 07:19 AM | ||
Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
|
406 responses
2,517 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 05:49 PM
|
Comment