Shroud of Turin? Thoughts?

Question

http://www.shroud.com/#menu
What do people think?
P.S. Im not looking for anti religion answers.

Answer 1

Fake they seem to find some weird 2,000 year old artifact every 10-20 years just to profit off of it

Answer 2

There is some explanation regarding the reasoning why the carbon 14 tests may have shown a false age of sometime in the middle ages.



1 - The portion of the shroud that was carbon 14 tested was a later repair weaved into the original to repair the damage from the fire of 1532.



2 - Bacteria growing on the fibers of the shroud created an epoxy like coating on the individual fibers that make up the threads of the shroud. These epoxy like coatings would not be removed by normal cleaning methods used on the samples. As a result the carbon 14 ratios were skewed and produced an incorrect and younger date for the epoxy like coated fibers than for the fibers alone.



No known mechanism for the creation of the image has been explained. It is not paint, it is not stain, it is not burning, and the image only is present on the upper most fibers of the threads.

Answer 3

If the shroud was created as a fake.....

1. A pre seventh century artist had to create a 3D image, that is also a photographic negative. The image is rather like you taking a Xerox copy of your face.

2. The actual image itself is only present on microfibers on the top of the cloth. No way was it painted on.

3. It is possible to recreate the face of the man on the cloth. It took an artist a year using various computer techniques.

3. There is a companion cloth the cloth of Oviedo, in Spain. Putting the two together, and the bloodstains match. This cloth was known officially in Europe from at least the seventh century.

You can't just dismiss the shroud as a forgery anymore. It is impossible to prove on way or another but think its the real deal, the burial cloth of Jesus.

Answer 4

Most everyone is saying that the Shroud of Turin is a fake... but wait, the image is a negative image... dark is light, and light is dark. There is NO image ever like this before in all of history, and no negative image of anything appears in all of history until 700 years later, when photography is invented. Second, even today, no one knows HOW it was made. There are no copies of the Shroud, and there is NOTHING similar, before or after the Shroud appeared. Even in these hi-tech days, no one can reproduce that image.

Answer 5

There is also proof that in fact Michael Angelo did know how to take a picture (photo negative) and took one of himself which made the visual that the shroud depicts. You have to remember the vatican are the first to introduce the shroud as being Christ visual. And just as they are in denial about who should be their first Pope Peter or Paul, but choosing Peter because more convenient having more leverage (because Christ said He would build His Church upon the Rock, and Peter's name is similar ( a stone) They don't want to retract their initial claim because the integrity of the Pope is behind it. But almost every one and their mother knows it is Michael's face and not Christ face. The face impression (photo) is to narrow to be a cloth that covered the face, but not to narrow if it were a photo. And history shows Michael had knowledge which had not become common knowledge as yet. Michael was very inventive. Look the catholic church and their followers have been seeing images on the face of everything their imagination could produce for centuries now. If a man will believe in God and Jesus christ , God has given us His Spirit as a witness to us, for the sake of Christ. The just who live by faith are they who have an active working ministry of the Spirit in their lives, Ephesians 3: 16-17 the believe is strengthened with all might by the Spirit, in the inner man so Christ may dwell in our hearts through faith"...

Answer 6

Authors Joe Nickell, in 1983, and Gregory S. Paul in 2010, separately state that the proportions of the image are not realistic. Paul stated that the face and proportions of the shroud image are impossible, that the figure cannot represent that of an actual person and that the posture was inconsistent. They argued that the forehead on the shroud is too small; and that the arms are too long and of different lengths and that the distance from the eyebrows to the top of the head is non-representative.



In other words, it's just like many other figures in Gothic art. It has weird, unrealistic body proportions.

Answer 7

I do not need a thought. I know it is real. There is also some place that claims' to have the nails and the crown God was crucified with. Two of the nails' are correct but not the crown. That covered Gods' whole head and was destroyed by the soldiers' before God was seen by the crowds'. They put the cloak on him to cover His wounds'. If the crown had been left on He would never have been sacrificed for they would have demanded His release.

Answer 8

A fake artifact used to attract pilgrims and their cash.



@ WitnessofJesus. The previous shroud, if I remember rightly, was owned by the same DeCharney family as the one in Turin. I might be wrong though.

Answer 9

Proven Fake by three independent reliable labs by carbon dating. Its just one of the many "relics" made during the Crusades. Its dated back to the Middle Ages. But perhaps the power of belief elevates it to something more. I believe that the Church and many others believe in its authenticity, and have gained comfort and strength from its existence.

Answer 10

It is a burial shroud, but it was not signed so it could be anyone's.

Answer 11

Fake

Answer 12

i think its a forgery, because of the testimony of lynn pitnick

and because there was a 2nd shroud before that one came into existence. and it came out of time when men forged many false artifacts.



i think the entire Roman Catholic church inverted teh commandments of God, and there seems to be alot of evidence if one reads the bible. either the protestants were correct or the Roman church apostatized or the protestant are wrong and the catholics preserved and english bible that is not perfect.

Answer 13

Shroud of Turin? Thoughts?



~~~ Shown to be a fraud/forgery long ago!

Next...

Answer 14

There are many things that the church "interprets" as being significant which are not. It is just good salesmanship.

Answer 15

Absolutely proven to be a complete fake...

Answer 16

Just another "miracle" to keep the peasants happy and under the thumb.

Answer 17

marketing gimmick

Answer 18

proven fake. designed to make money.