So to speak: Burial cloth found in Jerusalem cave casts doubt on authenticity of Turin Shroud
Archaeologists have discovered the first known burial shroud in Jerusalem from the time of Christ’s crucifixion – and say it casts serious doubt on the claimed authenticity of the Turin Shroud.
Ancient shrouds from the period have been found before in the Holy Land, but never in Jerusalem.
Researchers say the weave and design of the shroud discovered in a burial cave near Jerusalem’s Old City are completely different to the Turin Shroud.
Nearly every bit of evidence points to it being a fake anyway, so this is just one more. Of course, for certain segments nothing will ever be enough. I’d bet that if some new form of imaging technology found an inscription on the shroud saying something like “Theodoric’s Custom Shroud Shop, 11 Millhouse Sq., est. 1289″ it might start some to questioning.
MQ | 19-Dec-09 at 5:51 am | Permalink
You seem to be bright fellow, could you help me then and tell me how the fake shroud was produced, and fill me in on all the evidence showing it was a fake?
I will assume you will follow up with solid evidence…. I already know about the carbon dating.
thank you
acagle | 19-Dec-09 at 10:41 am | Permalink
Well, you could start here: http://www.livescience.com/history/050318_reason_turin_shroud.html
Nothing in the form of the image suggests it was ever wrapped around an actual body; it’s a painting on a flat material. The “blood” was not blood. Frankly, it’s up to Shroud authenticists to demonstrate its authenticity, but such hath not been done.
J-Dog | 19-Dec-09 at 5:03 pm | Permalink
FACTS? MQ don’t need no stinkin’ facts!!!
Nothing will ever be good enough to disprove the shroud for True Christer Believers(TM) like MQ!
MQ | 19-Dec-09 at 7:03 pm | Permalink
Fact’s, we say? Well the only scientific, that is scientific attempt on the shroud has been carbon dating, and yes the piece dated was to the middle ages, later explained by pieces mended to the shroud, after a fire destroyed some of the material. The shroud has been repaired over time and it could be the piece carbon dated was sewn on during the middle ages, you don’t know or does anyone else.
No other scientific methods have ever been done to the shroud and that, leaves you without a clue, which tells me your clueless.
By the way, clueless, everyone who discounts the shroud also has absolutely NO clue how the shroud was produced ( if it is a fake), which tells me your in good clueless company.
Not only isn’t there anyone who can explain the shroud, they can’t even explain why it has not turned to dust over the years.
So you tell me how it was produced and how it has stayed in existence all these years? me thinks your clueless.
J-Dog | 21-Dec-09 at 6:30 am | Permalink
MQ – You make the Baby Jesus cry when you lie and turn your back on reality. No cookie for you, you are going to hell.
Please take your meds and get off the internets until you learn how to play nice, and use real grownup arguments and facts when discussing a subject not straw grasping.
i.e. “later explained by pieces mended to the shroud, after a fire destroyed some of the material.” So the Archangel Michael or Gabriel preserved the rest of The Shroud? I guess that proves it’s a miracle!
MQ | 21-Dec-09 at 1:12 pm | Permalink
i.e. “later explained by pieces mended to the shroud, after a fire destroyed some of the material.” So the Archangel Michael or Gabriel preserved the rest of The Shroud? I guess that proves it’s a miracle!
By the way, I didn’t say the entire shroud was destroyed, but it was damaged, try and read the history of the shroud before you come up with an opinion. you didn’t come up from the public school school system did you?
Now back to Archangel Michael or Gabriel, What the hell are you talking about? I realize you are an expert in the shroud, and you also know that a portion of it was destroyed in a fire back during the middle ages, and later repaired. Some argue it was that mended piece that was carbon dated.
There is an actual history to the shroud, not just a preconceived concept in your mind.
PS: SOooooooooooo, Mr. expert how was the shroud made? You still don’t even attempt to answer that, because it leaves you clueless.
acagle | 21-Dec-09 at 4:54 pm | Permalink
Well, if anyone else is interested, you can read a fairly recent paper in the ACS journal by Walter McCrone who confirmed that the image was, in fact, painted on using fairly common techniques and materials from the 13-14th century: http://www.mcri.org/CMSuploads/the_microscope_%20shroud.pdf?PHPSESSID=0c7c693318201eb5d76aec2e2e025519