OMG! The Shroud of Turin Is a Hoax!

Someone going by "Arvyn Braich" wrote an article at MSN for all the World to see: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-biggest-christian-hoaxes-of-all-time/ss-AA1YU1X8#image=10

Having some experience in these matters (how the MSM deals with Christian issues) I was supremely confident that a lie of some kind would be insinuated somewhere into the article... and sure enough!

At the very end, the article makes the claim: "The Shroud of Turin too is a hoax." THAT my friends was the main point - to discredit the Shroud. The rest was the set up for it. The MSM does this all the time: poisoned candy. This time using a propositional fallacy, e.g., "Those others are hoaxes, therefore they're all hoaxes."

Irrespective of Braich using evidence that has been discredited for over thirty years - many/most people still have vague memories of something they once saw on TV... telling them the Shroud is a hoax. And they assume that's still true.

However, whatever else it might be, The Shroud has proved an immensely stubborn obstacle to all those who've set out to prove it a hoax. And they've striven mightily.

The most recent claim of forgery reared its head back in the late 70's with the STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project). Some, though not all, of those involved in STURP claimed the Shroud was a hoax. In particular, a scientist named Walter McCrone garnered attention for his bold claim that the man on the Shroud was "painted" onto the linen. This has been quite discredited. In fact, there is no evidence of any paint on it. None. Whether McCrone lied is a matter open to debate. What is certain is that he was very, very wrong.

Then there was the 1988 radioisotope study, in which Carbon-14 testing supposedly proved the Shroud was a medieval forgery. But, there too problems arose: the samples taken from the Shroud were not tested according to accepted scientific standards. Quite the opposite actually. In fact it looks like certain prelates within the Church colluded with some of the STURP researchers in faking a pre-determined outcome, by taking samples from a section of the Shroud that was repaired following a 1532 fire. That wouldn't have been an accident. They knew what they were doing.

There are numerous reasons for believing the Shroud is in fact the burial cloth of Jesus Christ:

1. No paint or dyes were used to create the image.

2. Photographic negatives (which is what the Shroud is) were unkown at the time it was supposed to have been made.

3. The image is coded in 3D. No painting or photograph can duplicate that.

4. Pollen from Israel and Istanbul (formerly Constantinople) are found in it.

5. The blood stains on it are real blood (Type AB) and are still red after many, many years.

6. The image was created by a sudden, incredibly brief but immense burst of billions (some think trillions) of watts of ultraviolet light that only lightly scorched the top few nanometers (0.2-0.6 microns) of the fibrils.

7. Wide Angle Scattering X-ray tests (WAXS), say that the Shroud actually is 2,000 years old.

8. The image on the Shroud is that of a tall, well built man, who was crucified, who had been scourged (over 120 times), who wore a crown of thorns, whose side was pierced, and who had been nailed through both wrists and feet....

Fitz