Monday, 2 March 2015

Secrets Behind the Shroud of Jesus from Turin !



To say that the Vatican has historically tried to hide malicious authenticity of the Shroud of Turin may seem, at first glance, a paradox inexpensive and lacking substance. Why would the clergy to deny a truth that, pragmatic thinking, would not only bring benefits? Yet, there are some who argue that a confirmation of the authenticity of the sacred relics could radically change our understanding of Western civilization. In the face of such evidence would inevitably have rewritten history.

To say that the Vatican has historically tried to hide malicious authenticity of the Shroud of Turin may seem, at first glance, a paradox inexpensive and lacking substance. Why would the clergy to deny a truth that, pragmatic thinking, would not only bring benefits? Yet, there are some who argue that a confirmation of the authenticity of the sacred relics could radically change our understanding of Western civilization. In the face of such evidence would inevitably have rewritten history.


About the authenticity of the Shroud were written thousands of articles, books and treatises. Dozens of experts have tried to prove the truth or that it would only be a medieval forgery. By its nature, the relic born today paradoxes: to be proven as false and destroy such a myth for millions of faithful Christians, or to recognition in the fundamentals of hitting authenticity same Christian religions. The mere chance or good plan in place, the Shroud of Turin remains as controversial as seven centuries ago, and nature, human or divine, and today continues to be a fierce discussion topic.

Short history of the Shroud of Turin

Officially, the shroud in which it is assumed that Jesus was wrapped after the crucifixion appears immediately on the scene in 1357, year in which Jeanne de Vergy, the widow Knight Geoffroi de Charny (killed at the Battle of Poitiers in September 13, 1356), finds among goods deceased husband and expose him in the abbey of Lirey, France. Soon, Bishop of Troyes, Henri de Poitiers, prohibit public exposure to under why it would be just a painting and the veneration by the faithful they would be heresy. In 1389, another bishop, Pierre D'Arcis announced that the Shroud was a fake and that the author or was caught and admitted the offense. He does not mention the name but never farsorului and the argument that we bring for his hypothesis is not only that the existence artifact is mentioned nowhere in the Scriptures. A accusations without solid coverage, obsolete over time. Noble Humbert of Villersexel is the first to take the artifact and hides it in his own castle for fear of thieves. Louisa of Savoy (who paid a hefty sum of money annually abbey of Lirey to give up claims of ownership of the relic), is the next owner of the Shroud and expose it to the public in many European cities. Since 1532 relic take possession of the House of Savoy and remains so until 1983, the year is donated to the Vatican.

Shroud and promote its image in the world. But a shock provokes negative photographer. The picture shows how it clear "image of a man in distress" man with all the wounds that Jesus would have had when it was lowered from the Cross.


Holy See accept radiocarbon dating of the Shroud, an event that takes place in 1988, and that brings a disturbing result ... According to tests, the artifact was a medieval fake, created somewhere between 1260 and 1390. Later, scientists who conducted research has admitted that it is likely that the Shroud of Turin to be genuine, as long as the analyzes were strongly influenced by traces of fire 1532 fire that caused burns on much of the surface of the object and which would be distorted dating results carbon. For better protection of the material, it was locked in a silver box, exposed today in Turin Cathedral. As for the authenticity of the Shroud, opinions are still divided.


Proof of authenticity

Perhaps the simplest and to urge the originality observation is that the Shroud was created, if we are to believe radiocarbon tests in full Middle Ages, a golden age for counterfeiters relics. Dozens of "head of John the Baptist", a lot of chips and Graaluri Cross which was crucified Saviour, goose feather feathers sold as a cherub or any "artifact" that had contact with anyone who was associated with Jesus circulated fake markets of the time. And yet, there is only one shroud. Why not replicated author or a work masterfully perfected that certainly would have made a lot of money? Why not created and shrouds with images of saints or apostles?


Going on seniority artifact idea is interesting opinion reputed journalist Ian Wilson, one of the most vocal supporters of the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. He says the linen printed with the image of the Saviour was adored in the first centuries of the first millennium in Edessa (Urfa in Turkey present location), important early Christian center in what was then Syria. Subsequently, the Shroud is transported to Constantinople, in Hagea Sofia, where captures a note left by Archdeacon Gregory Refendarius in 944 - "Non Figure sed tantum facial Totius corporis Figure screening poteris" (You can see not only the face, but also the entire body image ), a testament that makes a direct reference to the sacred relic.

The year 1205 brings a new proof of the existence of the Shroud before the date that is officially recognized. This is a note of Theodor Angelos, nephew of Byzantium, which describes the Codex Chartularium Culisanense a short inventory of assets taken by the Knights Templar in Constantinople: "Venetians turned their attention to gold, silver and ivory, while French did the same with sacred relics and most valuable of all, canvas in which our Lord Jesus Christ was wrapped after the crucifixion and resurrection before. Items were taken to Venice and France, while the Shroud was taken in Athens. "


Reconstitution of the image of the Savior after the Shroud of Turin











































Some historians claim that the Shroud took possession knight Otto de la Roche, later Duke of Athens. Another source indicates it Tibault of Champagne, who plundered Constantinople Templar leader, as the author of theft. Coincidentally or not, the abbey of Lirey, the place where the Shroud is mentioned first time from a reliable source, it is right on the field. Interesting to note is the fact that Geoffroi de Charny, knight whose wife expose artifact in the abbey of Lirey, is none other than the grandson of Geoffrey of Charney, Templar leader burned Jaques de Molay with in 1314. Was it Shroud even that Grail which so much has been written throughout history and what is believed to have been discovered by the Knights Templar?

No further assumptions above are from Hungary and a manuscript dated in the period 1192-1195, the Saviour is represented image while it is wrapped in the shroud mortuary. The similarities between the images on the Shroud of Turin manuscript and are striking, emphasizing that it was known long before him to be officially recognized.

Aside from data provided by historians, we focus on results provided by chemists, data supporting the authenticity of linen again. The chemist Alan Adler, cited by Time magazine says that blood which is impregnated with the Shroud is real and, moreover, as revealed in the tests, blood clot particularities. If possible forger wanted to give authenticity to his creation a blood spewing, you would expect it to clot? At that time, be it ancient or Middle Ages, the possibility that any person to have knowledge of the chemical composition of blood and the fact that it borders on the absurd change in clotting time. A noteworthy detail is the crucifixion wounds resulting from. Contrary to widespread religious image at the time, do not have crucified character prints of the nails in his hands and feet but in the joints. Only recently it was shown that an execution by crucifixion take place in this way. Where, then, would have known prankster same technique extinct for centuries?


Vatican conspiracy theory

Those who support the idea of ​​a conspiracy by the Vatican to the Shroud of Turin, including journalists Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen, are convinced that recognition of its authenticity would amount to a veritable storm in the Christian world. Why?

The fabric and how was buried man whose face remained impregnated shroud are identical to those of a small sect Israel i.Hr proliferated between centuries II and I d. AD ... Essenes. It mentioned that the same Essenes are Gnostic manuscripts and authors of the Dead Sea manuscripts remained largely unpublished in the twentieth century after their discovery. It recognizes that the whole Christianity derives its origins in pre-Christian sect that would mean, first, a denial of one of the principles promoted by Catholicism, is that there was no Christianity before Christ. A true heresy. In addition, if Jesus would have been part of the Gnostics, it would mean that the Vatican has persecuted and killed dozens of followers of an authentic Christian religions. Remember only the culmination of the campaign anti-Gnostic Albigensian Crusade against the Cathars (1209 - 1229), the campaign resulted in the nearly 20,000 victims and legislating Inquisition.













































He knew Henri de Poitiers and Pierre d'Arcis, first bishops who have called for a ban Shroud exposure, these details? He had tried them and those who followed them to impose a "monopoly" on the history and image of Jesus? These are questions to which we probably never find the answer. The fact is that despite dozens of tests and historical evidence, the true origin of the Shroud of c will remain unknown for long.

UPDATE:  In a press conference held on Tuesday, April 7, 2009, in Rome, Barbara Frale, researcher of the Vatican Secret Archives, said the Knights Templar owned and secretly venerated the Shroud of Turin for over 100 years . The announcement not only shed light on the Shroud disappears century of public attention in medieval Europe, but it comes and attest to its age and contradicts radiocarbon tests showed you a fake as the XIV century. However, Barbara Frale not said if the relic is only one authentic or fake, leaving further held suspicions.


Follow by Email

Free Directories ChicagoIX.com Free general web directory web directorySubmit Blog, Blog Directory SubmissionBlogadr.com - Listed (add your blog to Blogadr.com)Blog Promotion, Promote Your BlogLinkPro - Director Webtop-portal - Director LinkuriBlogarama - The Blog Directory