Hi
You have a very valid point.
One which there are no simple answers to.
DNA is extracted from the Turin Shroud.
So what?
We can identify the person, but that does not ensure that that person is Jesus.
The science of DNA.
There must have been an Adam and Eve.
The first two to produce Human DNA.
Who, when and where is light years away from current science.
We can say when it was not, and where it was not, but nothing else.
There are no simple answers I agree with.
Since I believe in evolution I canât possibly belief in the biblical story of how we were created. My mind canât possibly go there however I can believe that a man named Jesus existed and he did some extraordinary things. Whether these things actually happened the way the bible depicts them, Iâm not sure. I do however think that there must have been something extraordinary about the man to have such stories told about him.
The testing of the DNA Iâm most interested in
The cloning of the DNA could become a nightmare in the wrong hands
Intention would need to be pure.
Donât let the politicians anywhere near it then!
True:lol:
Jesus blood type, as had been reported from the samples taken from the shroud and sudarium tested are AB ⊠of which AB+ is the universal recipient blood type, and also one of the rarest . AB - is less than 1% of the population
If they ever manage to secure a DNA testing, maybe this guy could be an Indian Raja ⊠just because it was kept in a Roman Catholic church for thousands of year , doesnât mean anything positive .
I can see eyes lighting up at the thought of the shroud turning up the possibility of it being from a different ancient civilisation.
.Shroud of Turin -- Christâs Blood Is Both There and on the Sudarium of Oviedo | National Review
This makes AB+ the universal plasma donor, meaning that AB+ plasma can be transfused into patients who have any other ABO blood type. The AB blood group is believed to be the newest blood type. The AB blood group is the result of the intermingling between Caucasian (commonly group A) and Mongolian (commonly group B) people. For these reasons, the AB blood group is found in low percentages throughout the European population, but appears more commonly within the sub-continental Indian population.
No, it isnât a belief system in any sense of the term. It is simply alchemy, a series of definable processes using well known scientific actions including distillation, separation, sublimation, cohobation and so on. There is absolutely nothing religious involved or anything resembling a belief system.
Whether those defined processes produce something with the qualities of the Philosopherâs Stone is a binary thing, they either do or they donât. No belief required. It is science.
The only way anyone in todayâs world would know the answer to that, is to undertake the processes themselves.
What one must understand is that if someone had done the processes and produced the end product, they would likely keep that extremely secret. People would hunt and kill you if they believed you had it. It is more valuable than silver or gold, more valuable than anything in this world because it provides pure life energy allowing you to heal yourself from all illness and extends your life possibly indefinitely.
Hence this âproofâ you refer to is unlikely to appear even if the Stone does exist. It will be kept extremely secret. The consequences of it being released to the general population would be utterly huge and for some, devastating. It would see the collapse of banks, of pharmaceuticals, of just about everything in theworld today. Life would be transformed overnight.
The problem Bratti is in the claims that anyone alive today has any sample of Jesusâ blood. Thatâs a fantastical claim.
Jesus has been dead for over 2000 years (assuming he did exist).
People have found a shroud but the claims that it is the shroud used by Jesus are equally fantastical. You would need to prove and demonstrate an unbroken line of dedicated âcaretakersâ who treated the shroud with extreme reverence from the crucifixion across those 2000+ years to today.
Were that the case we would also have numerous other Jesus related artifacts.
The shroud is not mentioned in any of the Gospels. If it had been so revered from the moment of Jesusâ death then it would surely have been recorded by Matthew, Mark, Luke or John.
The shroud, for me is just an attempt by the church to try and reinforce its belief system and give credibility to it in a world that is fast rejecting religion.
So what is there to really discuss? You have to first demonstrate how and why it has anything to do with Jesus rather than be the shroud of any other person.
Why should it be ? A shroud is a shroud and part of the Jewish burial , you yourself have previously said that, and wanted to know where the sudarium was if it was a Jewish burial.
I want to know why John didnât mention the eruption of vesuvuis , that would be because it had nothing to do with what the new testament was about. In the same way a linen cloth was a linen cloth, and you seem to be missing the point . Only since 1930âs has the mystery opened up, by pure accident.
If itâs a shroud of King David or Tim Buktu , would it be any different to you or all the sceptics.
Fact : Itâs a linen cloth. It has a negative imprint of a man, front and dorsal, blood samples have been authenticated as AB group . HOW did the IMAGE get on the cloth ??? If they can find that out, they can give an answer. Itâs nothing to do with the bible.
In which case why would anyone keep it, preserve it, rather than just dispose of it and/or burn it?
You canât have it both ways. Either it was revered as an artifact in which case the Gospels would surely have mentioned it and we would have some evidence of caretakers spanning 2000 years . . . or it was not revered and would surely have just been destroyed/burned for hygienic reasons.
No. Youâd still be trying to present the utterly fantastical and frankly farcical notion that it did actually belong to those people without any proof whatsoever.
They recently dug up a bunch of bones in the UK and spun the fantastical story that they were the bones of Richard III.
In truth they have no idea, they are just a bunch of bones, but the story makes good news sensation and publicity.
Ok so this is better. Itâs just a linen cloth, so absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Jesus.
Sure, there is some archealogical interest in its make up and preservation, itâs an intriguing object. So are rocks from the Moon or Mars. I donât think anyone has issue with the item as an object of interest. The problem comes from the nonsense that it has anything to do with Jesus or anyone else specific, which is clearly what the church is trying to spin.
For me personally that archeological aspect isnât that interesting. We live in a world where we can make films looks as if the things really happened. The Lord Of The Rings films show incredible landscapes and monsters as if they were real things but we know they are not. We live in a world where a great painting from 100s of years ago can be replicated so perfectly as to be virtually indistinguishable.
Hence it is kind of a mute point about how this shroud was created. It could extremely easily be a total fake just like fake paintings and amazing movies. It could be a natural phenomenon.
I get that archeologists would be interested in it but there the interest ceases. After 2000+ years nobody can possibly lay serious claim to the notion of who the shroud belonged to and the churchâs attempts to spin their yarns serves only to make the whole thing less and less credible.
What I like about all this DNA research is that we are really trying to tell the story of us.
Figuring out our âYour are hereâ spot on the scientific map of humanity so we can see where we came from (likely DNA from RNA from some spontaneous triggering of chemicals), and where we are heading, is endlessly fascinating. Some lonely guy cornered on the last outcrop of land in the last ice age either luring or stealing some woman and then fathering zillions us - wouldnât that be neat to know? That a fourteen-year-old girl might have a child with what - no DNA, perfect DNA, all dominant genes makes for mind-boggling and unlikely possibilities, but isnât it worth giving it a try?
The problem is that, like Sting sings in the song, âI never saw no miracle of science that didnât go from a blessing to a curse.â
Too right - I might not like what they find in my DNA !
