So, a discussion about the Shroud of Turin ended up on CBS Sports message boards yesterday. The question asked was, Did the C-14 tests debunk the Shroud of Turin?
After some banter back and forth, someone wrote: “So I don’t think trying to debunk religious artifacts should be looked at as trying to steal away the piece of mind of religious followers.”
Then someone who calls himself BUCKinFL and uses a football helmet for an avatar wrote:
I don’t think there is anything wrong with being a skeptic. A little often overlooked fact is that most Christians are also skeptics regarding religious artifacts. In fact the site that was posted, the skeptic site that is skeptical of that Ark site is in fact a Christian site. I think what a lot of people, Christians mostly, resent is the snarky elitist attitude that many atheist skeptics take. It shows a lack of tolerance to other people’s rights to believe hat they want to. Or more importantly, it shows a lack of tolerance for the rights of people to see things differently when the facts are not totally clear. The toast? yeah, I don’t think most Christians think this is anything but a hoax, likely done for one reason, to cash in on the idea that at least one sucker would come forward with money to own it.
The shroud however, has not been debunked and thus, how it was made is an unknown. It has been proven that it was not made by any known means in the past It is clearly from before the time of Da Vinci since it appears with known identifiable marks, well before Da Vinci and well before the dates of the C14 tests. In fact, not only is it known to not have been created through any known means available in the past, it wasn’t created by any known means even available today. In addition, there are many things about it that have been proven through research that suggest authenticity because they fly in the face of what was believed by people during the times it would likely have been created had it been created as a hoax, shortly before its introduction in Europe.
For instance, the fact that it can be proven that the blood stains are scientifically proven to have gotten on the cloth from an open wound, not through manual application. The ability to know the difference is a recent technology and not one that a hoaxer would have even suspected would be available. Nor would they know that in the future they could tell the difference between human or animal blood, not would they suspect that we could determine whether or not the blood was somebody who had been tortured. The fact that the hoaxer would have had to torture somebody and then applied the cloth to that person while they were still bleeding just makes it so unlikely as to make it you really have to stretch rational belief to believe that this was done.
The hoaxer would also have to understand the concept of a negative exposure, which is what the image is. When was photography created?
The hoaxer seems to have been able to predict the future, had access to advanced science not known for many centuries later, and also not hold to common misconceptions of the time. Given this, it seems as likely that the hoaxer is alien, or from the future as it is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ with the image created during his rise from the grave.
The most intelligent thing anyone can say with regards to the shroud is, "I don’t know."
Hat tip: Joe Marino