- I accept that due to the supernatural implications of the appellant's case, there is a virtually unlimited background of implicit negative evidence against it that is already in place... Consequently, my task is not simply to provide a preponderance of explicit evidence for our case (which to me, would seem relatively easy); my task is to provide an extraordinary preponderance of explicit evidence for our case.
Though, please keep in mind that some of the background arguments (for "magic," for instance) has been provided in previous chapters, already. Please also keep in mind that modern mainstream science could be wrong in its unwavering advocacy of naturalism and materialism. After all, science has been wrong before. Perhaps, there is more to reality than mainstream physics.
1: The body that was wrapped in the shroud was tortured and executed by crucifixion as described in the Gospels. Evidence / Debate.
- 1.1: The details of the image are consistent with Roman crucifixion.
- 1.2: Scourging details are amazing and fit with Roman “flagrums,” and practices, of the times.
- 1.3: Where the details are anomalous, or atypical, they are consistent with (or simply do not contradict) the crucifixion as depicted in the Gospels.
2: The Shroud was made circa 1 CE. Evidence / Debate.
-2.1: This is supported by historical documents.
- 2.2: This is not refuted by the carbon-dating of 1988
--- 2.2.1: The scientific consensus is that the 1988 dating is invalid
----- 184.108.40.206: This scientific consensus includes multiple peer-reviewed articles written by non-Christian scientists -- many of those beginning their work on the Shroud as skeptics, and some with an interest in proving the Shroud a phony -- published in reputable academic journals
--- 2.2.2: There is scientific evidence which contradicts the 1988 dating.
- 2.3: Some of the pollen and other contaminants indicate that the Shroud originated circa 1 CE, in Israel.
- 2.4: The remaining contaminants are consistent with the traditonally believed movements of the Shroud.
3: The Shroud cannot be a forgery, particularly not one produced circa 700 years ago. Evidence / Debate.
- 3.1: No-one has been able to reproduce the shroud
- 3.2: The image shows no signs that it was painted or otherwise printed onto the linen.
- 3.3: there is human blood on the shroud
--- 3.3.1: Evidence
--- 3.3.2 Debate
- 3.4: The blood was put on the Shroud before the image
- 3.5: No forger 700 years ago could have known the correct details found on the Shroud, in order to make a forgery
- 3.6: there is evidence that the image was caused by a real corpse.
4: The Shroud has been altered by supernatural forces. Evidence / Debate.
- 4.1: It cannot be totally explained by natural causes.
- 4.2: The image on the Shroud has 3D encoding.
- 4.3:The body that was wrapped in the shroud did not lay on the bench, but levitated above it.
--- 4.3.1: the image on the Shroud shows that the back of the body and limbs had not supported the body's weight while wrapped in the Shroud
5: Scientific consensus is that the Shroud is authentic. Evidence / Debate.
- 5.1: Most reputably published articles on the Shroud of Turin support its authenticity.
- 5.2: The research of sceptics is unreliable.
6: Opposing arguments are groundless. Evidence / Debate.
1: The body that was wrapped in the shroud was tortured and executed by crucifixion in a manner consistent with the Gospels' narrative.
2: The Shroud was made circa 1 CE
3: The Shroud cannot be a forgery, particularly not one produced circa 700 years ago.
4: The Shroud has been altered by supernatural forces.
5: Scientific consensus is that the Shroud is authentic.
6: Opposing arguments are groundless.
C. The Shroud is the burial cloth of the Biblical Jesus of Nazareth.