some help with the shroud of Turin?

Question

just watched a program on the discovery channel last night and one things they said was his arms are to long. but when they nailed Jesus to the cross wouldn't they have pulled his arms out socket ?or just the gravity pulling down on his body while his hands were nailed there that would have stretched his arms as well? making them look longer than a normal person

now i don't my self don't know what to think of shroud of Turin but i was just amazed that nobody addressed this

Answer 1

When someone is crucified roman style, the cross is slid into a fairly deep hole where it stands up, this almost always dislocates the shoulders.

I suppose I should address the carbon dating issue. The Shroud may have a past that links it to the time of Jesus ministry. Though, it is unclear at times.

It was carbon dated to 1400s? I believe, but it had Jerusalem plant pollen on it. It is also made out of the same linen that mummies were wrapped in, this linen seems to get a coating of something on it that changes the carbon date. A mummy known to be from about 2500BC was dated to only about 500BC, for instance. Same linen.

Answer 2

There are people in the other countries that get nailed to a cross every easter and it does not lengthen their arms.

The shroud is an old art form made in the 1400s. It was given to a French knight by the artist who sold it to a monestary as real. The priest that originally purchased it wrote the pope and stated it was obviously a fake. The pope declared it real despite the report. It was kept in a metal box and when the monestary caught fire the edges where the shroud was folded burned.

In the 70's four blind test were run on the shroud and all four conclusively proved it is not older than the 1400s. This made the scientist sick as most of them were catholic when they realized it was the shroud they were testing.

About a hundred years ago another shroud showed up exactly like the original but later disappeared while on exhibit. A French artist recently who knows the method the shroud was made, created one and just like the original.

One glaring obvious fact that proves the shroud is not real is the image is reversed. The peircing and blood pool on the side is facing the wrong way if the cloth really was against Christ. The artist had painted that in after impressing the cloth against a wooden carving of Christ doused in dye. The artist logically painted the peircing so it would be the on the correct side for the person looking at the shroud. However if it was real the peircing would be on the opposite side. This proves the artist was not trying to fool people with the creation and the shroud was just an artist's creation.

Answer 3

I think that one thing is for sure, it is all a fake! There is certainly proof 'against' but no proof at all 'for'.
The shroud was probably nothing at all to do with any Crucifixion, and even assuming it was , there were thousands upon thousands of Crucifixions before and after the so called 'Christ' thing, another thing that is for sure is that most of the victims of the Romans were nailed through the wrists, not the hands,they were also given little foot rests to prolong the death, so not a lot of stretching on going there?
I prefer to believe in the forgery theory 14th century carried out by a very good painter! There are many other relics held by the Catholic church (BTW these are all Christians) bits of the original cross on which Christ died, it was once calculated that if all these bits were collected together there would be enough timber to build 4 Noahs arks!!

Answer 4

The Shroud of Turin was analyzed in the 80's or 90's and that study showed that the Shroud was not nearly old enough to be real. However, some people contest that finding.

Personally, I believe it to be a fake. It seems by far too improbable to be real.

Answer 5

hmmmm, dont know. Really good point though. Although you do have to remember that it was nearly thousands of years ago. So maybe they held him up some other day also, by tying a rope around his waist maybe? Or maybe the cross was slanted a bit so he was laying back more than of a straight angle?

Who knows, but there is probably an explanation. Maybe the shroud of turin isn't the real deal either. There are a good number of explanations.

Answer 6

Arms could have been pulled out of joint on the cross or when he was whipped. When he was whipped I am sure that his hands were tied to a post and if he fell to the ground while his hands were tied up to this post it would have probably pulled his arms out of joint.

Answer 7

that does seem to make sense