The Shroud of Turin Mystery

26 Feb

Shroud of TurinShroud of Turin is a linen cloth of rectangular linen, 436 cm. and 110 cm long. wide, and herringbone fabric that covered the body of a man who was tortured, crucified and suffered a puncture in the chest.

Since 1578 the canvas has been kept in the Cathedral of Turin. Chanbery was in France before, since in 1453 it was ceded to the Savoy. Were the Savoy, who led the Turin Shroud when they moved their capital to the Italian city. In 1983, Umberto II of Savoy bequeathed the Shroud to the Pope, becoming part of the patrimony of the Holy See.

On 28 May 1898 the Shroud was photographed by Secondo Pia which, by revealing the photographs, he realized that photography was leaving negative into a positive. What was discovered is that the printed image on the canvas was a negative.

On 13 October 1988 the Church issued by the Archbishop of Turin, Cardinal Ballestero, the result of using carbon dating 14. According to this test, the Shroud dated from dates between 1260 and 1390, which preclude it was the Holy Shroud Jesus behaved. But this test sparked many questions.

The most devout of the Shroud has been said that the test of carbon-14 is unstable. But this statement is not shared by science. Criticism of the laboratories of Oxford, Tucson and Zurich not only focused on the instability of the method itself, but several scientists also questioned the methodology used in these laboratories and the cleaning treatment to which they subjected the fabric. However,  these labs have always advocated giving exact details of the cleaning process. Furthermore, the test did not only a piece of the Shroud, also used three other control samples, which were already dated in advance and were properly dated by three laboratories.

Each laboratory used a different technique and obtained similar results. However, the scientific organization AMSTAR announced that the carbon 14 test of 1988 was not made in the original cloth of the Shroud, but an aftermarket piece of it that had been added in the fourteenth century. What is not explained is why he gave him a piece of cloth that were not original.

But no scientific evidence to hint at another possible date for the Shroud. In 1978 the biologist Max Frei Sulzer took samples of dust from the Shroud and could check for native or frequent Israel substances such as pollen, dirt, etc. These elements could not have added in the Middle Ages because at that time there enough technology to work with this type of microparticles had.

According to these data might think that carbon-14 tests seem o make for a right way and that, therefore, their results are reliable. What would date the Shroud in the Middle Ages and being false hypothesized to be the shroud of Jesus. But there is a possibility that the analysis had not really done the Shroud and, therefore, feasible even yes it was the shroud of Jesus.

Are also interesting other evidence, rather than dating, focus on the origin and meaning of the printed image on the canvas. You can check that the image of a man that appears is anatomically perfect. The first surgeon who certified that statement was Yves Delage, a professor of comparative anatomy at the Sorbonne. In addition, this teacher was not suspicious as it was a recognized agnostic. For him, the man portrayed a similar martyrdom had gone to that in the Gospels.

NASA experts were able to see in 1977 that the image of three-dimensional properties could not be done by painting or photography. Not only is there no evidence of having used artistic methods, but there are no pigments or technology now known to produce a similar picture. The crown of thorns shaped hull, the nails of the hands on the carpus the only point that could sustain crucified on the cross and not on the palms, and other data more, seem to prove that the image is real and that the shroud was used to wrap a man executed on the cross for a period of 30-36 hours as evidenced by seven hundred small and large wounds modeled on linen

Studies have proven that there is no body image under the bloodstains, therefore, the image is formed later, and is neither a painting, or a burn. The image is the result of dehydration and oxidation of the cellulose contained in the fibers on the surface of the fabric and it could not be done, as we said above, with known methods.

The most plausible explanation, if there is one, would be that of a non-penetrating radiation on the sheet. At no point image light intensity, represented by the ratio of the distance between the fabric and the body is zero. This suggests that radiation could create the image did not occur by direct body contact with the fabric. Multitude of tests using X-ray, infrared, ultraviolet, spectroscopes, reflection electroscopica … were made

After knowing these data, we further investigated the composition of the image, and organic debris that formed or not. Many analyzes that were conducted showed enigmatic data. Apparently there were traces of human blood type AB, very common among the Hebrews. Forensic studies that studied the hundreds of injuries were recorded. At the height of a broken nose, possibly from a fall, knees and feet were found remains of land similar to the land around Jerusalem geological features. There are plenty of dents, bruises and contusions caused by blunt objects and human fists, indicating that the individual was subject to torture before death. Some of these injuries were caused by torture instruments similar to those used by the Roman forces.

Studies of the composition of the image we have shown and one can only explain the impossibility more concerned a forgery of the fourteenth century, it is an original. It can be concluded that no procedure for reproducing an image with all the features mentioned is unknown. Man exposed in the picture really suffered crucifixion and torture very similar, if not identical, to the Christian tradition presents in Jesus. But not only that, is that it shows features that have never appeared in that tradition, but are scientifically impossible to have been forged in the fourteenth century. But it could have been an impostor who suffered martyrdom in the fourteenth century.

Leave a comment

Posted by on February 26, 2015 in Historical


Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *