• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Bloodstains On The Shroud Of Turin Are Probably Fake, Say Forensic Experts

JacksinPA

JacksinPA

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
26,290
Reaction score
16,771
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
https://www.buzzfeed.com/danvergano...ain?bfsplash&utm_term=.ouo828EJny#.ry7v5vLDNl

“This is just not what happens to a person on a cross,” said a forensic investigator.

The Shroud of Turin, long considered by some to be the burial cloth of Jesus, has inconsistent bloodstain patterns that suggest it is a fake, a new forensic investigation has found.

Held in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, the shroud bears an image of a crucified man. It has been analyzed for decades, to some controversy, with radiocarbon dating determining its origin to be between 1260 and 1390. It is regarded by the Vatican as an icon, rather than a genuine religious relic. More than 2 million people came to see the shroud during a three-month display in 2015, including Pope Francis.
===================================================
Sorry, Catholics, it's a fake.
 
JacksinPA said:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/danvergano...ain?bfsplash&utm_term=.ouo828EJny#.ry7v5vLDNl

“This is just not what happens to a person on a cross,” said a forensic investigator.

The Shroud of Turin, long considered by some to be the burial cloth of Jesus, has inconsistent bloodstain patterns that suggest it is a fake, a new forensic investigation has found.

Held in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, the shroud bears an image of a crucified man. It has been analyzed for decades, to some controversy, with radiocarbon dating determining its origin to be between 1260 and 1390. It is regarded by the Vatican as an icon, rather than a genuine religious relic. More than 2 million people came to see the shroud during a three-month display in 2015, including Pope Francis.
===================================================
Sorry, Catholics, it's a fake.
Click to expand...

I think many people accepted that it was fake -- since it's unlikely Jesus ever existed, but it would be fascinating to know who perpetrated the fraud in the first place -- and why the did it.
 
HowardBThiname said:
I think many people accepted that it was fake -- since it's unlikely Jesus ever existed, but it would be fascinating to know who perpetrated the fraud in the first place -- and why the did it.
Click to expand...

I watched an interesting documentary about it and they concluded it was Leonardo Da Vinci who created it and its his face thats imprinted on the shroud.
 
PoS said:
I watched an interesting documentary about it and they concluded it was Leonardo Da Vinci who created it and its his face thats imprinted on the shroud.
Click to expand...

Da Vinci was an amazing man. I'm going to have to look for that.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Just the opposite actually, but that's a different thread for a different forum.
Click to expand...
Not according to the vast majority of historians. There are references to Jesus in both Christian and non-Christian records that go back 2000 years.
 
Of course it's fake...Jesus did not have to leave behind physical evidence of his existence...there were many eyewitnesses, some even wrote about him...
 
Taylor said:
Not according to the vast majority of historians. There are references to Jesus in both Christian and non-Christian records that go back 2000 years.
Click to expand...

Wrong thread. This is about the fake shroud.
 
Taylor said:
Not according to the vast majority of historians. There are references to Jesus in both Christian and non-Christian records that go back 2000 years.
Click to expand...

So start the thread already. This has always been one of my favorites.
 
zyzygy said:
Wrong thread. This is about the fake shroud.
Click to expand...
Sorry, did mean to intrude into your safe space. You can put your fingers back into your ears now.
 
HowardBThiname said:
I think many people accepted that it was fake -- since it's unlikely Jesus ever existed, but it would be fascinating to know who perpetrated the fraud in the first place -- and why the did it.
Click to expand...

Jesus as a real person is mentioned in at least 2 places: Roman historian Tacitus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ) & Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus, so it is likely that Jesus did exist. I think most of the Gospel narratives concerning his life have been embellished over the centuries.

As for the shroud, carbon dating puts the cloth in the Middle Ages, not during Roman times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom