I-it was a hoax. R-right?
>>1424694
Of course not.
It looks just like the contemporary paintings we have of Jesus.
Realistically we'll probably never know
I like how they projected modesty by strategically placing the hands. Now we will never know if Jesus was a plus-size model.
Joking aside, calm down. We may not be able to explain how it was made yet, but how would a shroud wrapping a body make a projection on a plane.
Yes.
Only the Crown of Thorns is real.
>>1424755
He is the son of God, he was obviously hung. Nobody would follow a micro dick messiah.
>>1424694
Why does the thought of Christ's existence scare you, anon?
>>1424778
if he was hung his dick would come out under his hands, chirstfag
>>1424776
This.
Also the four remaining pieces of the True Cross.
Also the tip of the Holy Lance that was in Paris but which disappeared during the Revolution.
>AYOO BOHEMIANS WUZ BLACK N'SHIEET MEDIEVAL EUROPE WAS MULTICULTURAL MANY TRADERS ARRIVED FROM FOREING LOCATIONS PEOPLE MOVE YOU RACIST
>it is entirely impossible that Jesus wasn't ethnically local
I don't even think Jesus was black/white or whatever but this kind of contradictory thinking seems to be extremely common among the 'progressives'
>>1424797
How does the image seen in the shroud in any way imply Christ was not a local of Galilee?
>>1424794
both of those are from the 4th century though
It's fake.
Carbon-dating tests from three independent labs showed it to be of Medieval origin. The thing itself only entered the historical record in the 13th century, and the Bishop who wrote of it declared it a hoax made by a local alchemist/artisan.
To believe it is real is to be ignorant of history and miss the fact that there was a veritable relic-producing industry during the Medieval period, and that the south of France and Constantinople were relic-producing "factories", catering to a very lucrative need for these.
>>1424837
Nah, we just know that they were already venerated in Jerusalem in the 4th century. Which puts them almost contemporary to the Crucifixion.
>>1424782
Because if it is true the Romans crucified someone then Hell is real and I have been looking at dirty anime on the Internet.
>>1424843
>The thing itself only entered the historical record in the 13th century, and the Bishop who wrote of it declared it a hoax made by a local alchemist/artisan.
And yet no record of the hoax maker exists along with modern studies showing details you couldn't get with tech of the time.
Seriously if you could make it with ancient tech, do it. Prove it was possible.
>>1424694
Wasn't it determined that the proportions are completely off for this to be an actual person, and that this is most likely just artwork?
>>1424892
Not him but I remember hearing that it couldve been done with a camera obscura, which existed back then
Correct me if Im incorrect. Personally, I am of the group which believes in the authenticity of the shroud but the Camera Obscura argument seems pretty solid.
>>1424919
Then why hasn't anyone tried reproducing it?
>>1424928
Someone has.
Luigi Gharlascetti made a replica using pigments and technology available from back then.
>History board
>Hoaxes are deemed a serious topic of conversation and most posters thinks they are real
This board was a mistake, we need a separate board for humanities and religion.
>>1424995
>Luigi Gharlascetti
>Google turns up nothing
Literally who?
>>1425109
Look up 'Luigi Garlaschelli', you fucking idiot.
>>1425090
We already have /x/ for religion.
>>1424694
Nah. The only thing that might be real is the Holy Lance and even that is contested.
>>1424797
The Bible says he was a jew, though.
Who cares about an image on a cloth when you get to eat an actual cracker-sized piece of his literal body every Sunday?
>>1425109
Sorry, typo'd the sphagetti man's name.
>>1424892
Reminds me of the pyramids or the Stonehenge alien argument. Why do people naturally assume that people in the past were mentally challenged, uncreative, unskilled idiots ?
>>1424694
To accept the shroud is to doubt the unerring word of the bible.
John the beloved disciple states in John 20:1 - 20:7 that the shroud is not one piece.
Of course since I don't actually believe that it doesn't matter to me but someone supporting the shroud might approach that kind of attitude toward the bible so I can still use the argument I guess.
>>1425193
With those its disbelief in scope. With this its "even Luigi's 'perfect recreation' has significant discrepancies with the genuine article."
It could've been a hoax, if it wasn't for shit that the hoaxer wouldn't have caught or even considered that we only notice nowadays with modern tech
>>1424694
There is more evidence of it being real than a hoax. No one know how the image got on to it and lab testing has been done on it many times with different results each time. Some say India and some say something else. Apparently it was damaged in a fire and a piece was used to fix it which is where people get the medieval time frame. There is some mystery and miracle behind it and we will never know. I guess it's just one of those leap of Faith's you must take
>>1425208
The point is that Luigi was able to make a replica at all. That it isn't a 1:1 replica means virtually nothing. A method was found and the method was successful.
>>1425233
It kinda does actually. It doesn't account for things only present in the Shroud ergo you'd need to make a copy with ancient tech that accounts for those qualities.
>>1425196
Not only that but John 20:25-27 says the marks were in Jesus' hands rather than his wrists.
Still I guess to some people a relic is more important than the Gospels.
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/turin_shroud_still_a_fake/
>>1425282
To be fair, the wrists may have been considered to be part of the hands back then instead of calling it the forearm.
Honestly even if something weird and inexplicable happened in Galilee two-thousand years ago it doesn't mean 'the Bible is certainly and completely the infallible word of the one true God'.
>>1425319
I'm always interested in being fair and trying to be as objective and factual as possible.
Is there any evidence that wrists / hands / forearm were all one word in Koine Greek?
I will admit I am no expert on the subject of translation from Koine Greek but merely introducing "might" or "may" and sort of insinuating that is the same thing as "probable" without something to back you up isn't very good reasoning.
>>1424694
Why would an imprint of a three dimentional human leave a mark resembling a two dimentional human? Smear yourself in paint, then make an imprint on a sheet and see for yourself if the imprint looks like you.
>>1424843
>Carbon-dating tests from three independent labs showed it to be of Medieval origin.
Carbon dating tests of a sliver of the corner that was repaired after a fire partially damaged it in 1532.
The test is useless, and the people who conducted it likely knew it.
Besides that, carbon dating tests themselves have a ridiculous margin of error.
All religious relics are hoaxes created by the wealthy during the medieval ages.
That said, holy fuck is it fun to track them and act like they do hold power.
babby level sources, but if you guys want to peer into more of the BS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Relics_associated_with_Jesus
>>1425417
>Carbon dating tests of a sliver of the corner that was repaired after a fire partially damaged it in 1532.
That's been debunked.
>Besides that, carbon dating tests themselves have a ridiculous margin of error.
kek
I'm waiting for that one guy who vehemently defends the authenticity of the shroud to show up.
>>1425453
sure kid
>>1425453
How's summer vacation treating you?
>>1425453
Excited for 9th grade?
>>1425469
>>1425474
>>1425510
>Repeats widely held academic consensus
>accused of being underage.
>>1425417
>Besides that, carbon dating tests themselves have a ridiculous margin of error.
Go ask on /sci/, you fucking mong.
The 1980s carbon-dating tests were accurate: your cum-rag is a Medieval forgery, and even the Vatican knows this, hence why they always stop short of calling it authentic.
Others have replicated the Turian Shroud using methods known to Medieval alchemists; the Shroud itself shows signs of having been made with assistance of a bas-relief, and the proportions are anatomically incorrect and frankly inhuman.
>>1425564
What are you even trying to do?
>>1424797
But the Bible which is, mind you, the only existing source of Jesus's life draws a genealogy between him and the big guys of old Israel. Plus he allegedly studied the Torah pretty well, so he was probably most likely not someone else
>>1425581
Which of the two mutually exclusive genealogies that both refer link him to those big guys through Joseph are you refering to?
>>1425608
As you said, both link him. So why is the plausibility of an Aramaic speaker who could read in Hebrew not being from the Jewish lands in the Levant something we should seriously doubt?
>>1425360
Not that poster, but if you nail someone's hands (palms) and not their wrists you run the risk of the body tearing off and falling during the crucifixion, as the palms structurally cannot support much weight in that position. A hand-nail would only work if the arms are additionally tied to the horizontal beam by rope or chain, the Romans or medieval anatomists would know as much.
>>1425637
Pierced then bound?
>>1424694
>tippers btfo
>>1425442
>the lance of longitude
finally
>Carbon dating proves middle ages creation
>Christos claim they dated a repair
>but they wont let it be dated again
Yeah, it's not Jesus, obviously, but it's still very weird.
>>1425898
It's possible, but there's no evidence to support the claim. You may as well say Jesus had pink skin and blue hair - sure it's POSSIBLE but why would you think that without evidence suggesting it?
>>1424694
How would a medieval hoaxer accurately know 0 AD-era Roman crucifixion techniques? (ankles and wrist, not hands and front of feet like all the artwork of that time period depicts)
How the fuck was an image burnt onto the cloth like that?
It's either real or it's an ancient hoax instead of a medieval one. It's stupid to outright dismiss it in any case.
> can't prove how it was hoaxed
> "It's a hoax! A-and a fake!"
lol every time
>>1426261
Its been carbon dated to the middle ages
>>1426263
Controversial and there has been more than one dating.
Also
> it was dated to some rocks that we KNOW were born in the middle-ages!!!
>>1426314
The very thing its made out of is an organic material and thus datable, even with the inaccuracies it;s not 1000 years inaccurate. You can also just tell by looking at it. 2000 year old fabrics simply don't survive anywhere other than deserts or very very dry places
>>1426320
Yes, and there have been multiple, conflicting carbon datings.
So you still cannot prove it's a hoax. The argument is still "It's just gotta be fake!"
>>1426325
No, all carbon datings say medieval period, non say christ period. It's conclusive.
If its medieval it's a hoax because christ died long before
>>1426325
I think there have only been two.
>>1426327
It can't be medieval, the wounds are not consistent with those of medieval depictions of Roman crucifixion. A hoaxer wouldn't know this nor would they potentially discredit themselves in their own time period by portraying the crucifixion differently than the Bible and contemporary artwork.
It could still be a hoax from a time period close enough to Jesus's life that people would still know this shit, but there's no way in hell that it's medieval.
>>1426365
Carbon dating > your ideas about medieval crucifixion knowledge
>>1426365
I haven't looked for myself, but is it clear that the wounds are actually in the wrists/ankles and not in the feet/hands?
It's kind of a blurry picture and since the exact line between 'wrist' and 'palm' is a bit unclear on a faded image it might be subject to interpretation and/or personal bias.
>>1424892
>we know it was from the 13th century, so it couldn't have been Christ
>well we don't have a record from almost a thousand years ago about who secretly crafted it, and we're not sure how to craft it today.
checkmate
>>1425090
They should leave this board alone and make a separate theology and religion.
>>1426368
They're not "my ideas". The knowledge did not exist back then. It is a fact. Until the finding of bones with nails in them in Jerusalem dated to around Jesus's time recently this knowledge was lost. Find me one medieval depiction of the crucifixion with wounds consistent with the shroud.
>>1426375
It become more apparent with an exact replica shroud placed over a mannequin, but the consensus is 100% that it's wrists and ankles. It's a weird as fucking hell to create a hoax biblical artifact and not actually follow the Bible's account of what it would look like.
>>1426394
>The knowledge did not exist back then.
Yes the fantastical knowledge that the nails might have been through the wrists and not hands.
No, it's not a difficult concept and doesn't prove it authentic at all. You're grasping at straws.
You're still ignoring the carbon dating which physically proves its medieval.
>>1424694
Its not real...because human beings can't burn our images into cloth, because we are just human being. Jesus may have been a real dude, IDK, but if he was real, he was just a human being who talked some stuff about loving eachother, then the romans got pissed because jesus was anti slavery, so they killed his ass. Christianity is fucking stupid, as with most religion. (I say most, cause Scientology is totally dead on)
Like one dude already said, how could the imprint of a 3D human, leave a mark that resembles a 2D human? This is just zealot art.
Accept your mortality, accept the meaninglessness of life, and create your own purpose instead of listening to fairy tales.
>>1426399
Yes, I am ignoring dating that is obviously bunk because I have proof that it's bunk before my eyes. I did not even rule out it being a hoax, just an earlier than thought hoax.
>You're grasping at straws.
How the fuck am I doing that? It's a big fucking detail staring at you right in the face.
>>1426401
>Like one dude already said, how could the imprint of a 3D human, leave a mark that resembles a 2D human?
Because it doesn't? The image on the cloth is completely consistent with a 3D body. They have physically proven it by laying replicas on dummies.
>>1426423
You have no proof, the dating is correct.
It is a straw, it's such a weak argument.
>Oooh the nail marks are in the correct place, must be real
Someone could have done it with an actual corpse, maybe.
idk
>muh relics
who cares?
>>1426448
>not caring about relics
Thats such a red thing to say
>>1426438
Greentexting things doesn't make them wrong. The nail placement is not consistent with medieval knowledge of Roman crucifixion, and that is that. I have no idea what level of self-delusion you have to be on to think a "medieval hoax" displaying non-medieval European knowledge of 1000 year old Levantine execution procedures is a "weak argument" that it's not a medieval hoax.
>>1426445
If it is a hoax then it would have to have been done with a real corpse. The problem is that we have no fucking idea what they did WITH it. Nobody can explain what caused the discoloration in the fabric. It is astoundingly confusing why whatever technique was used to fake this can't be found anywhere else, as whoever came up with it would have basically invented photography several centuries early and then not done anything with the technology afterwards.
>>1426497
satanic hoax
>>1425282
What does it say in Greek or Aramaic? The English translation might not be right.
>>1426497
It would have to be the least ambitious hoaxer in history. It would be like if invented a time machine, used it to take a selfie with Napoleon to show my friends, and then left it in a closet somewhere in my house and never used it again.
>>1426469
It's carbon dated to the medieval era. This is all that matters.
>>1426553
No it isn't...
If there's a lot of evidence supporting one date and one piece of evidence supporting another it's probably fair to at least give that piece of evidence a once-over.
>>1426562
>No it isn't...
Yes. It is
Both dates are medieval. Deal with it.
>>1426574
>this method of scientific dating doesn't stand up to repeated trials and thus fails to meet standards of the scientific method but deal with it
>>1426506
He's a protestant shitposter that shows up any time this is discussed on here. Ignore him. This is literally one of the only religious topics where atheists are far more bearable than other Christians.
>>1426590
It does though, it's used all around the world and is very reliable, it uses atoms.
>>1426610
I'm attacking the application of the medium for testing, not the medium itself. This object has changed hands many times and has been subject to repairs and all kinds of fuckery. It's not just some artifact found in the ground untouched since its last use.
The carbon dating has been done numerous times with different results
One say india one says medieval times the shroud was damaged and fixed with another piece but all these things are meaningless when it come to the actual image on the shroud. The real question is is it really from Jesus? Or is it how the fuck did the artist create something like this.
>>1426635
Why would some repair a holy object with non-holy materials?
>>1426608
He's not one of ours. He's some biblicist radical anabaptist shitposter.
>>1426227
Probability. My suggestion is something which exists within reason, wheras yours is hyperbole.
>>1426635
Yet multiple tests on different parts all show medieval.
just give up
Enjoy hell anon.
>>1426401
>because human beings can't burn our images into cloth
Well, people caught directly in nuclear blasts get burned into pavement and walls.
>>1426368
Did you not already understand that there were TWO tests done dating them to TWO different periods.
>>1426469
>The nail placement is not consistent with medieval knowledge of Roman crucifixion
[citation needed]
Why is it so hard to just apply occams razor?
>medieval european artisans created medieval art of common medieval subject matter using innovative method which was later used extensively by vermeer, etc
or
>the literal body-condom of jesus christ
>the carbon dating is a mistake
>the image is burned into it because ??? god did it (?)
>implications of god being nuclear radiation(?)
>>1426705
uh, what?
>>1426497
wait, so you are saying the discoloration wasn't caused by a corpse? how do you propose that it is Jesus's burial shroud then?
what about the dirt particles and pollen from israel?
>>1425090
even if it's a hoax it's still has at least 700/800 years of history
>>1426368
carbon dating is trash
>>1426497
A corpse that is magically 10 inches taller on the back side than the front?
>>1426553
*sheep bleating*
>>1427009
You do realize that thing was open to the public for centuries, right? And that a lot of the same people who went to see it would be either to or from a pilgrimage to the Levant, right?
>>1426867
you have no idea what occams razor is.
Google parsimony, and then google validity.
>>1425090
Fuck off, we should make a separate board for humanities. You fags are just as cancerous.
>>1426867
>[citation needed]
use your eyeballs. Jesus fuck.
>>1426705
>>1424694
Yes.
Itw was dated to the middle ages.
>>1425125
Nope thats not real either.
It was dated to the wrong era.
>>1427153
Nobody is arguing that it doesn't fit over a real body. You'd best drop that line of argument because it's not shared by anybody who studies the shroud and is far more kooky than the posts you're responding to.
>>1426590
>carbon dating doesn't stand up to the scientific method
What the fuck am I reading?
>>1427674
>all methods of testing are acceptable for all situations and should 100% be believed even if they do not produce consistent results
>>1427657
What? That's not what I argued at all; rather that the front and back images don't match in height.
>>1424694
Why doesn't Shroud Jesus have ears?
>>1426842
Amd neitger one dated to the correct time.
The fabric analysis also determined that the fabric was not of the correct century.
Shit aint authentic bruh.
>>1427701
What else does pointing out they don't match in height argue? But anyway, the cloth has been restored, displayed, and stored in a huge variety of situations for centuries, one side was probably just stretched and/or the front shrunk. During one restoration effort in 2002 alone its size was increased by an estimated 8 centimeters. It's for that reason why nobody can actually determine the height of the figure depicted (generally accepted to be 5ft8-5ft9 but some people insisting 6 feet or above and at lowest 5ft7)
>>1427728
>The fabric analysis also determined that the fabric was not of the correct century.
Absolutely false, the shroud's herringbone weave is consistent with a first century Syrian textile.
>The weaving pattern, 3:1 twill, is consistent with first-century Syrian design, according to the appraisal of Gilbert Raes of the Ghent Institute of Textile Technology in Belgium. Flury-Lemberg stated: "The linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin does not display any weaving or sewing techniques which would speak against its origin as a high-quality product of the textile workers of the first century."[99]
>>1424694
I think one of the problems with the shroud, is that so many of the researchers who write the most on it are Christians determined to prove its authenticity.
>>1427752
>only enlightened euphoric individuals such as myself should be scientists because we are le enlightened and immune to confirmation bias :^)
"no"
>>1424694
It's probably a real imprint, but assuming it has to be Jesus is illogical.
>>1427760
No, but if you have a few people, even accredited, who are obsessed with proving the validity of relics and miracles, they are almost certain to be on the fringes of the scientific community.
>>1427734
It argues fraud, since you know, most people are just as tall in the front as they are in the back.
>During one restoration effort in 2002 alone its size was increased by an estimated 8 centimeters.
Stop making things up anon.
>>1427752
So while its wrong to aggressively try and prove its authenticity it's perfectly okay to aggressively try and disprove its authenticity?
Double standard much?
>>1424694
He didn't actually look like Cesare Borgia. They also cloned someone with the DNA on the shroud and he didn't have any powers so...
>>1427769
>They also cloned someone with the DNA on the shroud and he didn't have any powers so...
Assassins Creed isn't real.
>>1427768
I dont think the people doing the carbon dating tests were trying to prove or disprove it. I think this work is best done by groups of people of different views, and when they all start pointing towards the same conclusion its more reliable than a few hardcore believers
>>1427743
Thats nice. But dating methods using the actual msterials say otherwise.
Reproducing fabric techniques is not a difficult task.
>>1427765
This hoaxer sure put in a lot of work to convince a bunch of people who thought witches were real with no knowledge of 1st century textiles, accurate Roman crucifixion methods, or ability to analyze fabric discoloration. Especially when they could have just put paint on a body, wrapped it in a bedsheet, given it to the church, and have had it hanging in a cathedral for several centuries until people started to question it. But yes, lets trash the whole thing, unreproducable photo-realistic image of a person created using technology completely unknown to us today and seemingly never used to produce anything else, because of two flawed tests that can't even produce the same result on repeated trials.
>>1427799
I did and my point still stands.
Repriducing techniques is not difficult. If you get it from the levant area the probably still did it that way at that time
The carbon dating carries more weight.
It has to since reproduction of techniques is not difficult.
>>1427796
The weave existed in the 1st century but it wasn't exclusive to the first century.
>>1427771
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/22/europe/subject-cloned-using-dna-shroud-of-turin-causes-controversy/
Go ahead and call it a hoax now.
>>1427895
I am now a #CruzMissile
>>1427895
Fuck off.
>>1427895
Even if that were true. What would it prove?
That a body left dna and nothing more.
>>1427895
[CATHOLIC CHURCH PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP REQUIRED TO SEE THIS POST]
>>1428011
DNA breaks down rather quickly when something dies. It would be impossible unless a mosquito bit Jesus and then got encased in tree sap before digesting the blood... That would make a good movie. They clone Jesus and his pals and put them in a park so everyone can come see them. Neva been done before.
