Is the Turin Shroud a Masterpiece or a Masterful Hoax?

[eljose]

Is the Turin Shroud a "fake"? i mean in the sense that the supposed cloth Jesus was buried with was only a paint or a fake...if so (that,s possible) the man who did it should have been a complete unknown "genius" superior to Leonardo Da Vinci in all aspects..

-he should know anatomy, Botanic,Paint,some kind of photography and more things, although on the other hand there are several contradictions (the face and body are deformed, there is some paint on it, ..)

what do you think?...

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The Shroud's Second Image
New evidence reopens debate about the controversial relic.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/012/32.56.html
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=57058

 

[12noon]

Hmmm, it's a very good fake.

From what I've read, it isn't the same shroud that was first talked about and this one turned up about the same time as Leonardo Da Vinci lived. Also wasn't Jesus supposed to be a small ugly looking hunch back ?

 

[Pengwuino]

Hmmm, it's a very good fake.

From what I've read, it isn't the same shroud that was first talked about and this one turned up about the same time as Leonardo Da Vinci lived. Also wasn't Jesus supposed to be a small ugly looking hunch back ?

Unfortunately, it carbon dates to before DaVinci's life (inaccuracies even taken into account).

 

[Cyrus]

They had this on tv a while back. A guy figured out how to make these fake shrouds. It involves using a piece of glass and a picture. The light shines through the glass. In the processes, the picture blocks out some sunlight and causes a slight discoloration between the areas where the picture is and is not. It makes a 3d effect. He showed several pictures he had used to create similar "shrouds."

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Not that I want to get into a religious discussion but you'll generally find the Catholic church has long had a policy of advicating that which agreed with it's messages and denying or even destroying that which didn't much like any organisation, most organisations don't resort to burning people who advocate a difference of opinion but still

The Church has a deal of trouble with many of it's artefacts this being one among many that are hoaxes. Although if your the church you would welcome anything as well hoaxed as this whether you knew it was a fake or real, means to an end, understandable.

Same with everything Christian be it apocrypha, gnostic texts etc, etc, all genuine text but not necessarily conducive to the message: it's good practice to only include that which agrees with the churches message, otherwise people get confused and the message becomes diluted. Whether it's the right message though is anyones guess? But a shroud or a knuckle bone of Jesus never hurts when stirring the religious ferver pot :)

During the middle ages you could pick up religious relics all over christendom, it's hardly surprising some genuine ones got mixed up with fakes. The Aramaic scrolls of the new testament, pukka, the left toe nail of St John the divine and the holy hand grenade of antioch, ahhh probably not

In conclusion in holy terms what is real fake and genuine and the true words of Christ is strictly decided by the Church, and apparently God tells them they are right To be honest though, I find all of it pretty interesting whether it agrees with the catholic message or it's fake or genuine.

BTW I really do have a knuckle bone of Christ if your interested and part of the holy cross, I'll sell you both for oooh a score? Interested?

 

[ray b]

old quote
there is enuff wood from the true cross to build the ark!

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

There is! God be praised it's a miracle!

 

[Wishbone]

Not that I want to get into a religious discussion but you'll generally find the Catholic church has long had a policy of advicating that which agreed with it's messages and denying or even destroying that which didn't much like any organisation, most organisations don't resort to burning people who advocate a difference of opinion but still

what a poor interpretation of the history of the church. Compared to most organizations, the church is probibaly one of the better ones. And I'm sure on average the everyday person employed by the church, whatever the job may be, is more helpful to the community than the common man, or common poster on an internet physics board. When you watch too many PBS specials on the Crusades/Dan Brown books, I can see why people share your view.

The Church has a deal of trouble with many of it's artefacts this being one among many that are hoaxes. Although if your the church you would welcome anything as well hoaxed as this whether you knew it was a fake or real, means to an end, understandable.

This really isn't a coherent paragraph, but if you are attempting to imply that the church would knowingly promote a artifact they knew to be false, I would like to see proof that they would promote such activities. I think you are pulling this out of thin air.

Same with everything Christian be it apocrypha, gnostic texts etc, etc, all genuine text but not necessarily conducive to the message: it's good practice to only include that which agrees with the churches message, otherwise people get confused and the message becomes diluted. Whether it's the right message though is anyones guess? But a shroud or a knuckle bone of Jesus never hurts when stirring the religious ferver pot :)

The right message is anyones guess? More like the daunting reasearch of countless scholars, historians, priests, and others. And I doubt they promoted the shroud of turn in order "stir things up".

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Okay, everyone got in their shots. Please stick to the topic.

Off topic posts will be deleted.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

I remember hearing someone carbon-dated the blood on the shroud and found that it came 1000 years after Jesus's death... Also, I think it was determined that the punctures in the hands were in the wrong place, and the nails would have ripped out...

...if so (that,s possible) the man who did it should have been a complete unknown "genius" superior to Leonardo Da Vinci in all aspects.

Why do you say that? I haven't seen anything about this shroud to make me suspect this.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

what a poor interpretation of the history of the church. Compared to most organizations, the church is probibaly one of the better ones. And I'm sure on average the everyday person employed by the church, whatever the job may be, is more helpful to the community than the common man, or common poster on an internet physics board. When you watch too many PBS specials on the Crusades/Dan Brown books, I can see why people share your view.



This really isn't a coherent paragraph, but if you are attempting to imply that the church would knowingly promote a artifact they knew to be false, I would like to see proof that they would promote such activities. I think you are pulling this out of thin air.



The right message is anyones guess? More like the daunting reasearch of countless scholars, historians, priests, and others. And I doubt they promoted the shroud of turn in order "stir things up".

I'm afraid I can't answer your questions or it would break forum rules I will say this though I have done a deal of studying of the Church and I don't make claims like this off the top of my head, shame we can't discuss it but rules is rules.

I'm sorry my grammar doesn't meet with your approval btw

 

[arildno]

I'm sure that if you got a group of some knowledgeable non-believers to look into the Shroud business, they would puzzle out the "miracle" of the Shroud in a couple of months.

 

[J77]

When did the present day, popular ''image'' of Jesus enter the public's minds?

That is, when did we first see this image of Jesus as a long-haired, almost hippy-like man?

This must be key in understanding that the Shroud is a romantic fake.

linkto shroud: http://www.shroud.com/shrdface.htm

btw: I have seen the blood of Jesus - though I left the Basilica when the donation tins were handed round

here's the blood -

http://www.sacred-destinations.com/belgium/images/bruges-holy-blood-brugge.be-300.jpg

it'd be cool to get a dna test on that!

 

[arildno]

The handsome, soulful Jesus-with-a-beard first appeared in the 12th-13th centuries.

 

[J77]

For me that says a lot - however, I don't take religion as written - I just think there are some good stories in there.

And the J man does have soul

 

[arildno]

.
And the J man does have soul

Yes he does, particularly because he is so haaaaandsome*










*Okay, that was perhaps somewhat superficial of me, he did say something important as well.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

here's the blood -

http://www.sacred-destinations.com/belgium/images/bruges-holy-blood-brugge.be-300.jpg

it'd be cool to get a dna test on that!

That's one of the knowingly promoted fakes I'm talking about, the church has known it isn't blood for centuries, it's just an interesting chemical reaction is all.

 

[arildno]

That's one of the knowingly promoted fakes I'm talking about, the church has known it isn't blood for centuries, it's just an interesting chemical reaction is all.

Yet another way in which religionists became/become morally stunted by their beliefs.
In the interest of "furthering piety", they knowingly twist facts, disseminate lies and so on.
That is, values like intellectual integrity and commitment to truth is hindered from developing within them.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

That's one of the knowingly promoted fakes I'm talking about, the church has known it isn't blood for centuries, it's just an interesting chemical reaction is all.

Do you have anything to back that up or is this just biased guessing on your part?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Yet another way in which religionists became/become morally stunted by their beliefs.
In the interest of "furthering piety", they knowingly twist facts, disseminate lies and so on.
That is, values like intellectual integrity and commitment to truth is hindered from developing within them.

And some people over-generalize to the point of absurdity.

Stick to the physical evidence or this thread is locked.

 

[arildno]

And some people over-generalize to the point of absurdity.

Hmm..really?
What do you think is the basis of cults proclaiming that by the power of prayer, people get healed?

There is a heck of a lot self-delusion going on here, in which individuals edit their perceptions, histories and so on to suit their fervently held religious beliefs. That is, they are twisting the facts.

On another note, I quite well see that this is all OT, so feel free to delete this, and other, OT comments from the thread.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Hmm..really?
What do you think is the basis of cults proclaiming that by the power of prayer, people get healed?

There is a heck of a lot self-delusion going on here, in which individuals edit their perceptions, histories and so on to suit their fervently held religious beliefs. That is, they are twisting the facts.

On another note, I quite well see that this is all OT, so feel free to delete this, and other, OT comments from the thread.

I'll leave this in order to make the following point. A ban on religious discussions does not mean that this is open season on believers. After over four decades of faith, I for one have never changed or modified the facts to suit my beliefs.

I knew of a technician who wore aluminum foil on his head to prevent the aliens living in the middle of the Earth from reading his mind. Should I assume that this is representitive of all technicians? I have also known many very religious people who are some of the best people I have ever known. A couple of them were physics professors of mine.

If there is specific evidence of fraud, fine; that's fair game. But unsupported attacks are as much pseudoscience as are the alien conspiracy theories.

 

[J77]

Any pointers to lists of fake relics?

My first search came up with this:

 The Shroud is merely the most prominent of Western relics, which prior to the French Revolution included

    * around 14 versions of the Holy Prepuce,
    * three Holy Umbilical Cords,
    * four Spears of Longinus,
    * three Crowns of Thorns,
    * a large number of Holy Toenail clippings,
    * the rods used by Moses and Aaron,
    * leftovers from the feeding of the 5,000,
    * three arms of St Francis Xavier,
    * the shirt of John the Baptist (and a mere three of his heads),
    * phials of milk from the Virgin Mary,
    * quantities of Christ's blood,
    * His milk teeth
    * some 204 bits of babies massacred by Herod

and what Calvin in one of his more irascible moments described as enough authentic nails from the Crucifixion to fill several barrels.

http://www.caslon.com.au/forgeryprofile3.htm

Fake relics even from the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_relics