Abraham wasn’t the first there. In Canaan, the Canaanites were there. Abraham literally bought a field from people that were there before him to bury Sarah.

But yes the land was promised to Abraham and his descendants via Isaac.

There was a lot that happened between creation and Abraham.

And lots of scripture that wasn't included in the making of the bible.

It doesn’t matter who “use” to own or inhabit it….
You can make that point, but what does it matter?
What’s the old saying about possession being 9/10th of the law.

C-14 dating - the sample used was taken from the outer boundary of the cloth that contained threads from repairs made during the medieval era, which contaminated the sample. This makes the data unreliable and has been disputed and agreed upon more than once by peer review. Additionally, the museum that oversaw the process refused to release the raw data for over twenty years, and only then because it was court ordered.

Phytolith analysis - Not sure what you’re trying to say here… plant pollen analysis of the shroud confirms pollen present that is actually exclusive to the region in and around Jerusalem. This is from plant pollen woven within the fibers themselves. The shroud’s historicity places it all throughout Europe… because it is a relic, it’s had tours all throughout its history.

Neuron activation analysis - if the process of resurrection formed the image, then you could logically conclude that the atomic properties of the material would be effected.

The claim that the blood is painted is false, no instances of dyes or paint residue exist on the cloth, per the original scientific team (STURP) that conducted the research in 1978.

There are no paints, dyes or pigments used to create the image shown. The image has 3-D qualities that exist in no other photographic image in existence… which originally sparked the study in in 1978. The shroud cannot be recreated, even with the advances of modern technology we have today. You literally couldn’t forge an exact replica with all the properties it possesses, even if you wanted to.

I’m no scientist… but I think you’re wrong on this claim. It sounds like you’re regurgitating information that the largely bias scientific community has said without doing research on your own. I’m not trying to be intentionally abrasive, I just don’t want anyone to take your word as gospel when there is a mountain of evidence that says otherwise.

Actually I am a scientist, I got the degrees and experience and publications to prove it. I even got congressional recognition for my scientific work but that was during the Obama administration so I don't like to count it.

The data, methods, research, and counter-research with cross-testing confirm that the shroud is a forgery.

If you think about it the odds of the shroud being real are so small that most reasonable people would be surprised if it were real,which is why it had all the testing done.

The Nuetron activation was used to locate the source of the paint.
Phytoliths are the husk or shell of pollen and plant cells. The flax the linen is made from still has those phytoliths present.
The 1978 research could not tell the difference between blood and paint, that took later technologies.

Nobody has to take my word as Gospel, I aint that special.

Look, I’m not gonna go back and forth because I’m not naive enough to think I’ll convince you otherwise. I just don’t want any definitive statements to persuade anyone else from doing their own research on it. The shroud is one of the most studied and cross-disciplinary studied archeological items in history. Not one of those professionals have provided an explanation for its creation that is verifiable. At least not one that contains all of the properties that it possesses. To make a statement that it is definitely a medieval forgery and cannot be more than 400-500 years old just doesn’t set right with me. Especially since there’s evidence that supports the sample used in testing was flawed. If it’s a forgery then I challenge anyone to make another… it can’t be done, at least not with known technology. And we’re talking about an item created years upon years ago.

I’ve not heard or read about any scientific research that concluded any presence of paint on the cloth. Although I would have to make a reasonable assumption that if there were, you could reasonably conclude that it was not part of the original. I could see it potentially added as it faded over time. I have however read papers that verified the existence of blood, and the type was indicative of a Semitic origin. Type AB if memory serves correct, I believe conducted by a university in Texas. Even so, the shroud has been touched and tainted organically by countless of people over centuries.

Like I said, I’m in no way trying to be rude or offensive in any way. As controversial a topic, with the obvious implications, if true, there will be tons of bias on both sides of the argument. I’ve just tried to find truth in all of it. Ultimately its authenticity has no bearing on my belief system whatsoever. I just believe that in all likelihood it is real, and in my mind it makes total sense for why God would have allowed it to continue to exist.

ok

Unfortunately, facts don’t mean anything to the type of people who are supporters of Palestinians. They tend to be leftists and irrefutable evidence of anything they don’t agree with won’t change their minds. They ignore reality. One time I was discussing something with a liberal relative and showed her something that disproved her argument and she told me she didn’t care if it was true or not, she wanted her belief to be true. Trying to convince someone with that mentality is a fool’s errand.