Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
You have established the likelihood that the shroud comes from the general era. When does anyone first claim that the item is the actual one in question? Has it been considered that a shroud taken from someone else's grave some many years later but reasonably within the era would produce a similar set of artifacts to study? I recall from Miller's history that the very idea of artifacts was essentially brought up by Constantine. Before that, no such things had been given any ink or concern (according to Miller, as I recall).
Or is everyone expecting certain things and so they are found. It is interesting how we study some things with a skeptical eye so that it must prove its status, and other things with expectation and can't see the problems and gloss-overs.
I will resist the idea of asking about images found on other things. People who want to see them see them. The rest do not.
|
With the shroud of Turin I am pretty sure that all possibilities have been considered. However, the forensic evidence, to my mind is very strong that this in fact was a shroud that wrapped a body that was both scourged and crucified, that this even took place at the time of Jesus death, and it took place in the months of March or April, and that this Body was buried in a tomb in Jerusalem.
If that is in fact true then it would completely discredit the carbon dating as this form of punishment was not taking place in the 1300s.
There are basically three lines of evidence of the Shroud prior to the 1300s. First, there is some artwork and woodcuts that show a shroud with an image of a person on it. These date to about 600 AD. Second, there are some written records that describe a shroud with an image on it. Third, there are a number of iconic images of the face of Jesus which appear to be lifted from the image of the Shroud (there is a striking resemblance to the Shroud image even though that image is extremely peculiar and does not resemble the face that actually made it (3D information stored on a 2D format is distorted).
To me there are two very striking pieces of evidence. One of which I did not mention. First, the blood is really huge. If you think that scourging and crucifixion in Jerusalem during March/April is a very rare occurrence then it would not be an easy matter to just go and get any shroud. Now imagine finding one with the same blood type. That is a very, very long shot.
Second, there is a strip of the shroud about an inch or two wide, that was cut off and then sewed back on lengthwise. An expert in textiles analyzed the stitching and determined that this was sewn back on with a stitch that is from the period. The job appears to be meticulous and very well done. And the two strips appear to have been from the same cloth, cut and then sewn back together. Jewish tradition explained that the cloth was a standard size for the period, the strip was probably cut off and then used to tie the shroud up after it was wrapped around the body. What is extremely unusual is why someone would sew it back on. The quality of the work to me says "labor of love". Now there is no way someone could go into a tomb 1300 years later, take a decaying shroud and this strip used to wrap it up and sew it back together. Besides, why would you? Why would a forger think to do that? There is no record of that. To me this is the most telling piece of evidence that this was sewn back together quite soon after the shroud was used.
As far as your question 'did everyone find what they expected to find'. No, they didn't. The expectation by all the scientists (for the most part) was that this was obviously a forgery. They expected to find pigment and be home in a day. They expected to find animal blood. They expected to find that the wounds were similar to paintings and not anatomically correct. They expected that it would be a different blood type from the Sudarium. They expected that this was a 2 dimensional image, like a painting. They expected that the pollen would place the shroud being made in Italy, not Jerusalem. Likewise with the dirt. Again, let me repeat this, The Shroud of Turin is the one artifact in human history that has undergone the most scrutiny by Forensic scientist. So the one thing that absolutely no one can deny is that either this is the most brilliant forgery in all of human history or it is the real thing.