re: Has the Shroud of Turin been proven authentic?

quote:

---

Jesus told Jessie Duplantis that it's a forgery

---

quote:

---

- No wraparound distortion as would be expected by an authentic burial shroud

---

I am not an expert on burials in the 1st century or the 12th, 13th centuries, but just by looking at the shroud it appears it was folded rectangularly by the creases in the shroud itself. If they folded it in this manner there shouldn't be any wraparound distortion. It appears they did not wrap it like a mummy but folded it.

quote:

---

- Anatomically incorrect head, arms, legs, torso to the point that a man of those proportions would be considered freakish if he actually existed.

---

Rigor mortis is seen in the stiffness of the extremities, the retraction of the thumbs and the distension of the feet. It has frozen an attitude of death while hanging by the arms; the rib cage is abnormally expanded, the large pectoral muscles are in an attitude of extreme inspiration. [ William Meacham, The Rape of the Shroud, 2005, p. 4.]

Rigor mortis could have played a roll in the proportions of the image, especially considering the dead weight of the body would have been hanging by the arms.

quote:

---

This sixteenthcentury painting by Giovanni Battista shows how the body could have been wrapped
in a burial shroud in a position that would match the image on the Shroud of Turin

---

Keep in mind that the research says the image is not a contact image. Therefore, the position of the body in relation to the shroud would effect the proportions of the image. In some cases, the body would have been up to 2 inches away from the shroud where the image was formed, according to the link.

I'm not saying this explains your questions, only that there may be an explanation.

I'm still trying to figure out the argument. Are people saying it is Jesus or just a guy from the biblical times?

Great read. Thanks for posting. I seriously doubt that the non believers making snide remarks actually took time to read. The proof stands on it's own. The history of the burial cloth dates back to the time of Christ.

quote:

---

- Anatomically incorrect head, arms, legs, torso to the point that a man of those proportions would be considered freakish if he actually existed.

---

Why would a fake have been painted using such freakish distortions?

I can't explain them, but if I were creating a fake, I certainly wouldn't have included them.

Because he was a bad portrait artist and because he didn't wish to portray Jesus's private parts.

quote:

---

Everything you posted has been proven false by science. My question still stands. Why do you hate science, Rex?

---

Holy deflection batman.

We don't have to know the exact method he did it. The fact of the matter is that similar images have been reproduced by other methods, any of which might have been the actual employed. We can CLEARLY see, however, that the maker was a bad portrait artist.

It's weird that the image in the shroud reflects what the western world wants him to have looked like. It does not at all match what he most likely really looked like.



Also, for those that say the piece that was carbon dated was pulled from an area that was repaired, why would they be so dumb as to pull a sample from a non-original portion of the shroud?

quote:

---

No

---

Yes.