Embedded Files
TAKE the TOUR — THREE/SEVEN-MAP — FAQ — Gematria Reference — Video-Channel
THE BLOOD CODE OF JESUS CHRIST
The Prophecy of the Three Seven Code
If one looks carefully you can see the modern symbols for the numbers 3 and 7 prominently on the Shroud of Turin. These are bloodstains. The two primary bloodstains on the head of the man in the Shroud. These two Biblically significant numbers, appear, not just anywhere, but in the portrait, in the 'head-shot' of the man. These shapes could have been anywhere. They could have been on his ankles or on his back, but they are not. They hover just above the face, the very seat of human identity, near to the most recognizable feature of the most famous icon in religious history, for the Shroud is believed to be the source of Christian iconography itself. If these two bloodstains are numbers, then they are a code, a code written in blood.
On Thanksgiving morning 2016, I awoke and put the graphic below together on my computer. I did so only after uploading around 100 pages of evidence of a code that ran throughout the Scriptures, a numerical cipher I named the Three Seven Code. On that fateful Thanksgiving morning, I awoke and said to myself:
"If there are this many 3’s and 7's in the Bible, then there should be a 3 and 7 on the Shroud of Turin."
I looked. There was.
And immediately thereafter, I began to wonder, to doubt and to question myself. Was it only a strange coincidence or was it in fact a code written in blood? A code in blood no less. To my tastes, a code in blood was like something out of the Da Vinci Code, a book and movie I absolutely loathe. By modern literary standards, it is safe to say that a code written in blood is not only an overused cliché, but perhaps one of the most overused clichés of all time, like beginning a novel with Lord Lytton’s famous words, ‘It was a dark and stormy night....’ But there it was, on the most controversial object in history. What I saw in a flash was perhaps the most sensational headline in history: ‘A code written in the blood of Jesus Christ...’
The real question was: How could one determine with any real degree of satisfaction that those blood stains were in fact representative of a modern 3 and 7?
It must first be acknowledged that our modern number symbols were not in use at the time in question of the origin of the Shroud. To some researchers, this seems to be a stumbling block. They seem to think that a three-shaped-blood-miracle couldn’t happen because three shapes hadn’t been invented yet. Such critics, clearly do not understand the concept of ‘miracle.’
The two prime numbers highlighted on the head of the man in the cloth could only have been understood thousands of years after the crucifixion. This is to say, that the miracle on the Shroud can only be understood to be a prophetic miracle in anticipation of the eventual universal adoption of the international numeral system. The very definition of a miracle precludes scientific replication.
One cannot manacle a miracle.
The image above is an unretouched graphic downloaded as is from the internet, from which I constructed the other graphics
How can we know it’s a 3 and 7? First we must determine the authenticity of the Shroud itself. Thankfully there is an army of scholars called Sindologists, who have already done this. The second step is to see if the numbers 3 and 7 have anything to do or to say about the being whose image is locked in the cloth. Theistic mathematics can display with an enormous amount of evidence that the Bible and Biblical numbers is pervasively structured on the two numbers, 3 and 7, seen written in the blood of the founder of Christianity. The entirety of this website is just that evidence.
But why is the 7 written backwards?
The same could be asked of the 3. The fundamental feature of the design of nature is its inherit symmetry. We see that same symmetry in the codes of the Bible (especially in the 1st verse whose factors are 37 x 73). Looking at the Shroud of Turin we are arrested by a four-fold symmetry. The first symmetry is the image of the front and the back of the man. The second symmetry is the negative to positive photographic aspect.
We see this sort of mirror logic not only in the numbers and codes of the Bible but in the actual words and stories of the Scriptures. So it is not surprising that the 7 is in reverse orientation but it is actually consistent with theistic mathematics. In this fashion, no matter which photographic aspect you gaze upon, there will always be one number whose orientation is correct. That is mirror logic.
When I gaze upon the Shroud I do not see the image of a dead man. I see a being who is purposely posing for a picture that will be shown to all the world. The Shroud of Turin is an encyclopedic tapestry of scientific evidence. In a very real way, the Shroud is the world’s first photograph. It is all too appropriate then, that the first photograph would be a photograph of God, recording the most important and debated moment in history, the essence of man's salvation and the very seed of the world's largest religion.
"The Shroud of Turin is an encyclopedic tapestry of scientific evidence."
The Shroud of Turin contains libraries worth of scientific evidence in a single object. It is perhaps the most studied object in history. Yet there is one last secret, a secret hidden in plain sight. Two Numbers. Written in blood. That is only clue. Fortunately, it is more than enough. If there is a code written in the blood of Jesus Christ, it is incumbent upon every follower of Christ to attempt to understand this last message of the Son of God. This website and others like it can provide an answer to the riddle of the 3 and 7 written in blood on the Shroud of Turin.
The links below are the best places to start:
The meaning of the code:
The code found in the science of the natural world:
The code seen in the Protoverse, Genesis 1:1:
A good breakdown on all the evidence for the Shroud and the Resurrection can be seen here:
The Question of the Shroud
By John Elias
The Shroud of Turin is a highly controversial object. It is so controversial, that should one so much as capitalize the word ‘Shroud’ that they are guaranteed to loose credibility, in certain circles. These circles appear overly fixated on ‘objectivity,’ over ‘factuality.’ Perhaps they should be more interested in their own lack of grammatical accuracy. The Shroud is a proper noun referring to a specific singular object and as such, must be capitalized.
Should the Shroud be necessarily so controversial? Not at all. Will it continue to be internationally controversial? You can count on it. That is its power. It is a magnet of controversy and will be a continuing flashpoint between secular and religious authorities. But it need not be so.
For those not in the know, the amount of material written about the Shroud of Turin is absolutely voluminous. There are entire libraries solely dedicated to the subject of the Shroud. Libraries. It may be the most studied object of the modern world. Yet to many, the question of its authenticity is still wide open. This should not be so.
The debate revolves around a single question, and no its not about the laughably absurd attempt to carbon date it in 1987 (but we will get to that). The only question that matters is whether or not it was a forgery of the Middle Ages. This is the question that journalist salivate over. This is the question that pseudoscientists labor weekend after weekend in their basements trying to recreate. The real problem with these journalists and pseudoscientists is that they are trying to answer the wrong question.
Wrong Question.
Because the Shroud of Turin is ever at the crossroads of ancient religion and modern science, many believe the question to be: Can the process that created the Shroud be replicated. As if this would answer anything. They even believe that if such a process could be discovered that the debate would be over.
Far from it.
They are trying to answer the wrong question. They are trying to answer the question of whether it can be replicated. The short answer is, maybe, kind of or possibly, but always in an entirely unsatisfying way. After all, it is the world’s first photograph and we know a lot about the science of photography. So printing or developing an image on cloth is not that incredible. But that’s not the question.
It never was.
The question is ‘WHY?’ Why would anyone in the Middle Ages attempt to create a forgery such as the Shroud? That is the question. All other questions pertaining to the authenticity of the Shroud pale in comparison, paling by orders of magnitude. Some noted Sindologists (people who study the Shroud) point this out, but the point of it gets lost in the shuffle of so many other interesting facts about the object. In every debate the only question that really matters about the authenticity of the Shroud is the ‘Why' question.
’Why?'
Why would anyone create a forgery the likes of the Shroud of Turin in the premodern era? Like a mantra, repeat this question in your head a thousand times, for it is the only question. Why?
Yes the era in question certainly had its fair share of forgeries. This bit of knowledge has condemned the meager minds of many a poor soul. For once they discover this tidbit of history, like some scurrilous vermin, they carry off this morsel of knowledge and pronounce the subject dead. The problem is that there is more to history than tidbits. A little bit of knowledge can be a terrible thing, especially if you are a first time journalist on the matter.
Yes there are many fakes, forgeries and hoaxes when it comes to Christian relics. This is precisely why the Shroud of Turin is not such a fake, forgery or hoax. It is precisely why. This is the question to which I refer. I will repeat. The question is and will ever be:
Why?
Not why would someone make a forgery. The answer to that is obvious. But why would someone make a fake like the Shroud of Turin? Why in a world where fakes and forgeries abounded and were easily crafted and sold to an unwitting public would anyone ever make anything like the Shroud of Turin?
Why?
There was money to be made in relics. But in order to make a viable forgery, it had to have a stamp of authenticity. Now please note, it is here, remarkably, that the modern pseudoscientists and poorly researched journalist fail so miserably in the most basic task of reason. Like someone who has suffered from a recent concussion, they have forgotten that in order for science to function properly, it has to make sense! I believe that many of these beleaguered 'thinkers' are truly under the mad belief (or at least they present it in such a way that it appears to be so) that some hoaxer in the past was desperately trying to create a 20th Century authentic ‘looking’ Shroud. A Shroud that would only be considered authentic hundreds of years later, in a world they could not imagine, with inconceivable technology and entirely different rules for authenticity.
This is the science and reasoning of an idiot.
You cannot separate reason from science. There were married from the beginning. Should you attempt a divorce, science will immediately take another bride. History has shown that the name of that bride is propaganda and the child of that illicit union is always pseudoscience.
Pseudoscience.
The question is simple. It is based on the very facts pertaining to the Shroud. We know the image on the Shroud is a photographic negative. We know it contains 3-dimensional information. We know it was not painted. We know the image of the man is anatomically perfect and that his wounds are consistent with a Roman crucifixion. We also know that they are consistent in a way that only experts of the modern era could possibly have known. All of these facts could only have been understood in the light of the science and technology of the modern world.
Why would someone from the Middle Ages ever make a forgery such as this?
Why?
If this question cannot be answered with satisfaction, then all other inquiries must come to an immediate halt. It is the only question that matters. Why would someone create a photographic negative, when they had no idea what a photograph was, let alone its negative? Why would anyone labor to create a galaxy of scientific details when all of these details would have no meaning to them? Even worse, all the facts and features of the Shroud would all be horrible selling points to passing off the Shroud as authentic.
All of them.
No one would want a Shroud as this. No one would believe in a Shroud as this. No one could understand a Shroud as this, until the dawning of the scientific age. It is a true testament to Tradition that the Shroud survived the ravages of history at all. Tradition, a much overlooked word in the modern sciences, but it is tradition alone that preserved the Shroud unto the modern day. Without that sacred tradition, the Shroud would have been nothing other than a cloth.
Until this question is properly answered by the critics of the Shroud, the debate is over. You do not get a chance in the podium. You have nothing to say on the matter, unless you answer thee question of questions.
Why?
Because some people are obstinate in their ignorance, I will answer the inevitable journalistic follow-up question: ‘But what about the 1987 carbon dating test?’ The answer to this is even more rudimentary, albeit, unsatisfying to the pseudoscientists and those reluctant to the truth: The Shroud of Turin cannot be carbon dated.
Cannot.
You cannot carbon date something that has already been cooked in an oven. You cannot. The Shroud underwent a fire in 1532 while locked in a silver chest. Under the circumstances, this chest was in every respect an oven and it baked the Shroud. You cannot carbon date something that has been cooked in an oven at 961 degrees Celsius (1,763 degrees Fahrenheit), the melting temperature of silver, since, in the fire the chest had begun to melt. This alone invalidates any attempt at carbon dating the object.
Moreover, you cannot carbon date an object with an enormously unknown preservation record. We do not know what else ‘Medieval Science’ attempted to do to the Shroud, but by some expert estimations, (Ian Wilson) it is believed the Shroud was put to the Medieval ‘Hot Poker Test.’
What is the Hot Poker Test?
No one knows! And no one will ever know. Why? Because it’s not science. It’s Medieval quackery. This is only one test, that we know of, that the Shroud may have been subjected to. For all we know, it may have been weighed against a duck to see whether or not it was a witch!
The Shroud is a cloth, a fabric. A fabric is very much like a sponge. At the microscopic level a cloth absorbs anything it comes in contact with. The greatest failure aspect of carbon 14 dating is contamination. When it comes to the Shroud, you’re talking about an object that has been passed from hand to hand for thousands of years, from continent to continent, kingdom to kingdom, era to era, absorbing microscopic aspects of all of it.
We do not know what the conditions the Shroud has been subjected to. This immediately invalidates any carbon 14 dating. What we do know of the conditions it has been subjected to also immediately invalidates any carbon 14 dating of the Shroud. The Shroud of Turin cannot be tested according to carbon 14 dating.
Ever. Full stop. The end.
It can be tested in many other ways, however, and in those ways it passes every test. Until the modern world of science and journalism can come to grips with basic scientific complexity, the Shroud will remain a lightning rod of controversy. Until journalists can do a little more research than is available on the latest edit of a Wikipedia entry, the Shroud of Turin will remain a gravity well of controversy.
That is the power of the Shroud. And perhaps the Shroud prefers it that way.
Below is a humorous but rigorously logical list of 14 impossibilities for the Shroud to be a hoax. Check out more here: SHROUD HISTORY
This paradigm assumes that the radiocarbonists’ claim that the Shroud of Turin is a 14th century forgery is correct. It is based on what that conclusion tells us about the forger. It tells us that:
1. The forger first painted the bloodstains before he painted the image.
2. The forger integrated forensic qualities to his image that would only be known 20th century science.
3. The forger duplicated blood flow patterns in perfect forensic agreement to blood flow from the wrists at 65° from vertical to suggest the exact crucifixion position of the arms.
4. The forger "painted" the blood flows with genuine group AB blood that he had "spiked" with excessive amounts of bilirubin since the forger knew that severe concussive scourging with a Roman flagrum would cause erythrocyte hemolysis and jaundice.
5. The forger "plotted" the scourge marks on the body of the "man in the shroud" to be consistent under forensic examination with two scourgers of varying height.
6. The forger also duplicated abrasion and compression marks on the scourge wounds of the shoulders to suggest to 20th century forensic examiners that the "man in the shroud" had carried a heavy weight following the scourging.
7. The forger, against all convention of medieval artistry, painted the body he was "hoaxing" as Jesus of Nazareth, nude to conform to genuine Roman crucifixions.
8. The forger, as the forensic genius he was, illustrated the nails of crucifixion accurately through the wrists rather than the hands as in all other conventional medieval representations. He also took into account that the thumbs of a crucified victim would rotate inward as a result of median nerve damage as the nails passed through the spaces of Destot.
9. The forger was clever enough to "salt" the linen with the pollens of plants indigenous only to the environs of Jerusalem in anticipation of 20th century palynological analysis.
10. The forger was an artist who surpassed the talents of all known artists to the present day, being able to "paint" an anatomically and photographically perfect human image in a photographic negative manner, centuries before photography, and be able to do so without being able to check his work, close up, as he progressed.
11. The forger was able to paint this image with some unknown medium using an unknown technique, 30-40 feet away in order to discern the shadowy image as he continued.
12. The forger was clever enough to depict an adult with an unplaited pony-tail, sidelocks and a beard style consistent with a Jewish male of the 1st century.
13. The forger thought of such minute details as incorporating dirt from the bare feet of the "man in the shroud" consistent with the calcium carbonate soil of the environs of Jerusalem.
14. This forger was such an expert in 20th century biochemistry, medicine, forensic pathology and anatomy, botany, photography and 3-D computer analysis that he has foiled all the efforts of modern science. His unknown and historically unduplicated artistic technique surpasses all great historical artists, making the pale efforts of DaVinci, Michaelangelo, Raphael and Botticelli appear as infantile scribblings.
If the Shroud of Turin is a forgery of the 14th century, as the radiocarbonists claim, and not a genuine artifact of the 1st century, all of these qualities of the purported medieval "forger" must be accepted. If the Shroud was "forged" it would have to have been painted.
It is an irrefutable fact that there is NO paint or pigment on the Shroud of Turin leaving the only explanation of the technique of the forger to have used "photography" to manufacture the relic in the THIRTEENTH CENTURY!! Some authors have gone so far as to suggest exactly that. This is patently absurd!
CONCLUSION
The Shroud of Turin is a genuine artifact of a first century Roman crucifixion of an adult Jewish male. The radiocarbon dating placing the manufacture of the linen in the 14th century was flawed by extrinsic C14 accumulated over centuries of fungal growth, candle smoke and the intense heat of the fire of 1532. There is NO paint on the linen of the shroud and is not the artifice of a forger.
SHARE THIS
Want to get the latest discoveries in biblical mathematics? Then email johnelias@israelmail.com Subject Line: Updates!
© Copyright 2020, johnelias@israelmail.com
"Photography is truth."
— Jean-Luc Godard
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse