Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

The shroud of Turin


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#16    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 29 May 2004 - 01:42 PM

I dont think it was him who rolled them back... it was the angels that came to tend to him. (Isnt that what the bible says?)

Chauncy: That pictures of the scientific methodology is missing a portion... right between pass and theory... theres recheck.

Edited by Stellar, 29 May 2004 - 01:43 PM.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#17    saucy

saucy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan

  • Peter Piper picked a pack of pickled peppers.

Posted 29 May 2004 - 03:22 PM

Well, there's one more thing I didn't mention.  The proof is on the shroud.  They said that the shroud shows all the same whip marks and everything and some other dude was crucified the same way Jesus was so it was this other guy.  Well, having a spear thrust into the side isn't something associated with crucifixion.  A storm was brewing and they wanted to make sure Jesus was dead so they thrust a spear into his side.  That hasn't happened with any other cases of crucifixion so if there is the image from the spear in the side, then it has to be from Jesus.  Scientists proved that indeed it wasn't paint or any other means that put that image on the shroud.  Even Da Vinci wasn't that good.  



#18    Chauncy

Chauncy

    Quixotic

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,033 posts
  • Joined:13 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • "Sanity may be madness but the maddest of all is to see life as it is and not as it should be." (from) Don Quixote

Posted 29 May 2004 - 03:28 PM

QUOTE
Even Da Vinci wasn't that good.


Shame , shame saucy old chap!

user posted image

user posted image

user posted image

user posted image

As long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost and science can never regress.
Julius Robert Oppenheimer. (1904-1967)
Posted Image

#19    saucy

saucy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan

  • Peter Piper picked a pack of pickled peppers.

Posted 29 May 2004 - 03:38 PM

He's an amazing painter, I didn't say he wasn't good enough to paint a 3-D image of a body on a shroud without paint or berries or anything they used as paint.  


#20    Chauncy

Chauncy

    Quixotic

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,033 posts
  • Joined:13 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • "Sanity may be madness but the maddest of all is to see life as it is and not as it should be." (from) Don Quixote

Posted 29 May 2004 - 03:47 PM

QUOTE
He's an amazing painter, I didn't say he wasn't good enough to paint a 3-D image of a body on a shroud without paint or berries or anything they used as paint.


What inability do you feel he had that would prevent him from creating such an image, I could show you many, many drawings, paintings that display an expertise at 3d design.

He was much more than a painter, he was an inventer first and foremost.

user posted image
user posted image


As long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost and science can never regress.
Julius Robert Oppenheimer. (1904-1967)
Posted Image

#21    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 29 May 2004 - 04:19 PM

Saucy, I think Da Vinci would be smart enough to figure out how to use blood to paint the shroud.... other than that i"m not gonna discuss that other guy being mistaken for Jesus thing since I havent heard of that.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#22    Boddhi

Boddhi

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined:12 Dec 2003

Posted 29 May 2004 - 04:30 PM

A few interesting points - sorry if someone else has mentioned them!

The head on the shroud is 5% too big for the body.

The arms are disproportionate - too long.

There is no gap where the front and back of the head appear.

I believe that Da Vinci purposely put these flaws into the shroud rather than attempt to create a questionable hoax. Perhaps he had a sense of humour and laughed at the thought of people believing it was real.

Posted Image

#23    saucy

saucy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan

  • Peter Piper picked a pack of pickled peppers.

Posted 29 May 2004 - 04:49 PM

Okay, you guys may be right.  I really don't know very much about Da Vinci or anything.  He's obviously brilliant and gifted.  Or was anyway.  Whether it was Jesus, some other dead dude or a great work of art by Da Vinci, doesn't effect my faith in any way.  I was simply trying to figure out all I could about this shroud.  I saw a thing on the Discovery Channel about it near Easter and many of the scientisits studying it believe it to be the real thing.  That's why they're conducted many, many studies on it.  Though, if all the scientists studying it say it is that of Jesus, I'm sure you would still hold your doubts and if they say it wasn't Jesus, you would laugh in my face.  I think it's Jesus because 1) there is no body wrapped up in the shroud 2) all the wounds are identical to Jesus and only Jesus because his case was unique.  Most people who were crucified did not endure a beating.  Pontus Pilate thought it would make the crowd of angry jews happy if they beat Jesus nearly to death because he didn't want to kill Jesus.  When the crowd wasn't happy, he then condemed Jesus to death.  Nobody else had the crown of thorns or spear to the side.  3) the head was too large and the arms were too long?  When they moved the body around, the blood certainly would smeared to other parts, making the face appear larger and arms longer and so forth.  Also, the blood would've soaked into the cloth, making it appear larger and who knows what other things could've changed the appearance of the image over two thousand years.  You guys only dismiss it because it would prove the existance of Jesus, which is something you will not accept.  I would certainly accept it if the scientists did confirm that it wasn't Jesus because it wouldn't hurt my faith any, but it would hurt your arguements if it was Jesus.  I simply do not know.  

Da Vinci would surely be one sick puppy if he painted the shroud with blood.  It would have to be blood of a human because I believe the scientists did test it and confirmed the DNA was that of a human.  


#24    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 29 May 2004 - 06:55 PM

No, you know why we dont accept that scientists say it is Jesus? We dont accept it because 1) not all scientists agree on the fact and 2) theres no way to prove that its Jesus' also. And even if it was Jesus' it does not mean that Jesus was the same as was portrayed in the Bible. It wouldnt mean that Jesus performed miracles or had any tie to God. Also, maybe whoever wrote in the NT about the death of Jesus (biblical fictional character wise) based it on a death of one of his friends or someone else that he witnessed... Just like many writers of today, even when making fantasy stories, base certain things on their own experiances.

And you know what? If it was scientificaly proven to belong to Jesus (Bible Jesus) then we'd wouldnt deny it... we'd have no choice but to accept it. You on the other hand... even if its proven NOT to belong to Jesus you would come in and argue that science is wrong and it still probably is Jesus.... well, at least until you find something else to use as "evidence" of the Bible. What if God was disproven scientificly? Would you accept it or would you still say science is wrong?

Edited by Stellar, 29 May 2004 - 08:05 PM.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#25    AndyThorley

AndyThorley

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • Joined:20 Sep 2002
  • Location:Right behind you...

  • You're only insane when you think you arent...

Posted 29 May 2004 - 07:33 PM

QUOTE (Boddhi @ May 29 2004, 02:13 PM)
REGARDING JESUS - one thing that has always bothered me is that if the shroud is the one found found in Jesus' tomb and Jesus had risen from the dead, why was the rock covering the entrance to the tomb rolled back?

If he had risen to spirit, surely he would not have had to roll back the rock. If he didn't, who did?

The stone could have been rolled back for any number of reasons.
Personally I think it's because the three ladies who found Jesus had risen wouldnt stand a chance of rolling it on their own wink2.gif

QUOTE
It wouldnt mean that Jesus performed miracles or had any tie to God.

There was a second Jesus? a kind of...Bizarro Jesus if you will?
who went about kicking puppies and pushing old ladies in front of mules?

QUOTE
Also, maybe whoever wrote in the NT about the death of Jesus (biblical fictional character wise) based it on a death of one of his friends or someone else that he witnessed... Just like many writers of today, even when making fantasy stories, base certain things on their own experiances.

Now while I would be inclined to agree with you had ONE person written the new testament...it's a whole 'nother ball game when at least 23 different people wrote about it original.gif
The bible isnt a book...it's a collection of books.
That's what Holy Bible means..."Alternative/Different Library"

As for the spear mark on the side of the body on the shroud (the spear has an interesting story. apparently hitler used to own it...but thats another thread tongue.gif), DaVinci could have easily replicated it.
he supposedly used dead bodies to mark the cloth, so why not go all the way and make a little stabby stabby...
I highly doubt the piercing of Christ's side is a modern inclusion in the bible, wouldnt you agree?

Posted Image

#26    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 29 May 2004 - 08:09 PM

QUOTE


There was a second Jesus? a kind of...Bizarro Jesus if you will?
who went about kicking puppies and pushing old ladies in front of mules?


What I mean is, Jesus could have been a normal person like you and me, maybe even a good person... and either he pretended to be the son of God... or the church morphed him into the son of God and said he performed miracles. Catch my drift?

QUOTE

Now while I would be inclined to agree with you had ONE person written the new testament...it's a whole 'nother ball game when at least 23 different people wrote about it original.gif
The bible isnt a book...it's a collection of books.
That's what Holy Bible means..."Alternative/Different Library"


Once one person wrote that he died on the cross the way he did then the follow up-ers would probably use the same story if they wanted to make theirs seem like a worthy addition to the Bible.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#27    AndyThorley

AndyThorley

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • Joined:20 Sep 2002
  • Location:Right behind you...

  • You're only insane when you think you arent...

Posted 29 May 2004 - 09:21 PM

How much of it is people copying what one person wrote and how much of it is people writing what they saw?

You don't doubt that newspapers all write about an event that happened, right?
You wouldnt say that they're copying one another...

Posted Image

#28    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,903 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 29 May 2004 - 09:42 PM

I've seen many instances of the same exact article from different news sources... but you still dont understand what I'm trying to say. How many people write what they see about 50 years AFTER Jesus' death btw?

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#29    saucy

saucy

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan

  • Peter Piper picked a pack of pickled peppers.

Posted 29 May 2004 - 09:52 PM

All the disciples wrote about what they experienced.  Don't you think that concerning the reputation of the women back then that the male disciples would write that women saw Jesus first?  Do you really think they would write that they were hiding and scared about themselves?  Do you think they would write about events that really didn't happen when all the jews were watching their every move, waiting for them to make a mistake?  Don't you think that the Roman government would've destroyed the documents, never letting them get out into the public if what was written wasn't right?  Do you think two women have the strength to take out fifteen roman guards who were ordered to watch Jesus' grave site and roll a 2 ton rock out of the doorway?  Don't you think that Jesus would've have the same bruises and slashes all over his body after only three days inside the grave?  Many of you claim he didn't really die and that explains how they saw Jesus three days later.  He didn't look the same the second time around.  There is just so much to show that the events in the new testament really happened.  The reason why Jesus was crucified was because the high priests saw what he was doing, how he was transforming their religion and how so many people were following him.  They knew that things were about to change.  They cared more about their fancy houses and power and position in the roman empire than Jesus and what he was doing.  He was actually out there helping people and he didn't even have a pillow to lay his head.  He cared about people and did a lot.  He had nothing and was more influential than any other figure in history or today.  More than 20 authors wrote about him in the bible and there are other records of his existance but you refuse to believe he lived.  If you don't want to believe the shroud was that of Jesus, that's fine.  I already said I wouldn't care if it wasn't his.  Just because the shroud isn't his doesn't mean there was no Jesus.  Right now, your stance is that Jesus doesn't exist.  That's what you've been telling me.  If they said it was that of Jesus, you would be proven wrong and that's just something that shouldn't happen.  The only reason why other scientists don't believe it's jesus is because they will refuse he ever lived.  


#30    Chauncy

Chauncy

    Quixotic

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,033 posts
  • Joined:13 May 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • "Sanity may be madness but the maddest of all is to see life as it is and not as it should be." (from) Don Quixote

Posted 29 May 2004 - 09:53 PM

I was wondering if anyone has ever mentioned the co-relation between the wound in Jesus's side and the area that the rib was taken out of Adam to create Eve. the alleged side wound would then be a literary reference to the creation story.....any thoughts?

As long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost and science can never regress.
Julius Robert Oppenheimer. (1904-1967)
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users