The Shroud of Turin has NOT been reproduced !

[GoodShepard007]

Thank you Brother Peter Diamond for your posting. I sent you a few videos that prove with unmistakable clarity the shroud is the burial cloth of Jesus. The 58 pollen samples on the cloth are a virtual blueprint of the missionary journey of Paul of Tarsus. He practically signed his name on it. There is a face image of the Shroud on a Fresco Painting dated 280AD found in a underground catacomb in Rome. Timothy brought the shroud from Southern Turkey to Rome. Read 2nd letter of Timothy 4: 13

[GoodShepard007]

When Jesus was born he was given myrrh and put in a manger. A manger is hewed out of stone and looks like a small tomb, it was used for animals to feed out of, Coincidentally at death he also received myrrh and was place in a tomb of stone. He left the world the same way he came in. No matter how well the evidence is presented and the truth painstakingly explained there is always the kind of person that just cannot accept the fact that the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Jesus.

[GoodShepard007]

Yes the shroud is Paint. A Liquid Resin called MYRRH. This was also mixed with aloes that contain cellulose that when exposed to light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation forms a latent invisible image. That is exactly what we have on the Shroud. A reverse color image. A drawing with light, a photograph.

Ask Walter McCrone to fire up his microscope again and look at the caramel like substance that makes up the image, that is what myrrh looks like after almost 20 centuries

[GoodShepard007]

THE IMAGE ON THE SHROUD IS MYRRH.

Myrrh is a liquid tree resin that when it dries becomes hard and clear. Glossy, light sensitive and light reflective. It is also made up the carbohydrate formula of C6 H10 O5. This is what makes up the image on the shroud, NOT IRON OXIDE but Tree Resin. Myrrh.

When Nicodemus added 100lbs of myrrh and aloes to the 8 X 2 Cubit Cloth, he ended up making a 1St Century Photographic Film Plate. Aloes contain cellulose, are we learning yet?

[mjt532]

The only STURP guy qualifited to answer the types of questions asked here was Walter McCrone, an expert light microscopist. He convincingly shows that the shroud is a painting. He shows there is a lot of pigment on the image areas, no pigment on the non-image areas, and little pigment on light image areas. STURP scientist Schwortz agrees that there is paint, but comes up with a lame excuse for how it got there. He also claims the paint is in the non-image areas, ignoring McCrone's findings.

[cleanerfloors]

Thanks! Very useful info.

[daycindy5111]

cant you under stand that yevah was a brown man and he is wooly head , and all hes hairs where white as snow, the bible says that in rev. it is true that he had a crown of th , on his head, and there shoud be blood on the shroud of turin,

[bigboyburnsy]

Christ is risen! Praise God!

[MegaExelo]

This video was very interesting, i enjoyed it very much but i gurantee that this will not convince any nonbelievers (they have already made up their minds; ignorance?).

[hiddenmgr]

the shroud of turin is a fake and it even states it in the illumianti card game

[46ntool2]

don't need it to believe. do you?

[ravenwda007]

The accuracy of the Bible is just amazing.

[frost122585]

I am not sure if it is scientifically proven but I also saw that it is claimed that pollens on the shroud were found to be uniquely native to Israel. Further, I read that residue of lime stone was found on the shroud that had the same unique signature as limestone found in Jerusalem.

[JesusLorloves]

WOW THAT IS MY LORD & SAVER JESUS THE SON OF GOD AMEN

[TheBi0Mistake]

The shroud is been proven to be middle ages.

[arkansasbean]

@TheBi0Mistake At one time yes, but since then they have proved that only the piece that they carbon dated was from the middle ages, they further know that the piece that they tested was not apart of the original cloth. Also, they took it from an edge full well knowing that is the worst place to take a sample due to it being where everyone has always held the cloth. Check out some documentries on it, pretty astonishing evidence that it is real. 

[TheBi0Mistake]

@arkansasbean It's still dated to the middle ages,do you think that some rubbing and holding would really make that much of a difference?

[arkansasbean]

@TheBi0Mistake Your correct, the sample is dated to the middle ages, but is also proved to not be from the original cloth. Actually it does make a diference but with little factor in this case.The most anyone can debate about it not being the image of Chrsit is that there is no way to 100% tell. Every bit of evidence points to it 99.9 percent being in fact the image of Christ but I suppose there is always that .1 chance that it isnt. 

[arkansasbean]

@TheBi0Mistake Yep, dont dispute that a bit...and neither does anyone else because there is new proof showing that the piece that they took was not a part of the original so Its really not a factor in it. As far as my stiudies, there has never been a carbon dating test on a valid area...not that it is needed because its un disputablly historically dated far beyond the middle ages...historically to the time of Christ. Besides, there is enough evidence for itself that it is real.

[jurogalay2]

Shroud of Turin is the pollen of plants that only grow in the Holy Land

that´s in simply amazing.

[tsantini13]

i studied this issue for three months, stuck to the peer reviewed articles, and I cannot even believe there is even still a debate. The shroud of turin wrapped the body of Jesus. All the questions and comments is see here from "skeptics" have all been addressed by PEER REVIEWED SCIENCE. go do your homework.

[jobfromdayone]

Hello. I have no idea if this shroud belong to Jesus or anyone. There is something that none of these documents ever say: Body fluids such as blood, urine, and semen all glow under ultra violet let. They also decay over time. This would explain a faded image under visual light but it also informs as to why we still see something under ultra-violet light. The image could've been applied in blood. As for pollen, we must admit that pollen could've been transferred from handlers over time.

[Flagrum3]

@jobfromdayone -Your questions are valid, but may I suggest you read further on Shroud studies.Many of your questions will be answered by doing so.Check out shroud.com (especially) as it contains hundreds of scientific papers relating to all aspects of the shroud. Shroudstory com and shroudtv com also are good sites.

[matthewtaylorbrown]

Nobody hates the shroud. It is a great puzzle.

It is not a hoax, it is a failed attempt at a comprehensive reproduction.

There was a separate head/face cloth according to the Bible. Thus, this is not the shroud of Jesus. What if it is the shroud of Lazarus?

Outside of the Bible, could it be someone else?

[Flagrum3]

@matthewtaylorbrown -And @ theoak84-Why do so many of you bring this retarded argument up all the time? Two cloths? Yes there was more then one cloth found in the tomb.One was the Shroud, the other was the face cloth (the Sudarium of Oviedo), which was undoubtably removed from the face before the Shroud was wrapped around the body.But you guys forget there was more; the linen strips, which most probably was a 4" strip removed from the Shroud and at some time after resewn back on.

[ceaser8999]

@matthewtaylorbrown lazarus wasn't crucified

[theoak84]

This is so false, havent you read the bible? First of all, there were 2 cloths one for Jesus body and one for his HEAD! Second, in crucifixion, you are nailed in the wrist/forearm (which is technically part of the hand) not the METACARPALS! and third, Jesus beard was PLUCKED out of his face by the Romans.. This is so false its not even funny.

[tsantini13]

@theoak84 yes the romans did rip a chunk of beard from Jesus. That is why there is a chunk of beard missing in the image of the Shroud of turin. this has been determined very easily, and verified by multiple forensics examiners, and any laymen can make this distinction, by looking at a close up image of the face.

[theoak84]

@tsantini13 they plucked his whole beard.

[Flagrum3]

@theoak84 Cheez man, I've read the same passage and different versions over and over and never did I understand it to mean they ripped his 'complete' beard off.You are misintepreting the passage.The sShroud clearly shows a torn out section of the beard...simple deduction bro!

[Matthew1944]

@tsantini13 yes the romans did rip a chunk of beard from Jesus"

Where is that stated?  Too bad. A sacrifice must be without blemish when it's BLED on an ALTER.

[tsantini13]

@Matthew1944 "I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting. Isaiah 50:6. In the King James version it translates: "I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting." KJV Isaiah 50:6

[Matthew1944]

@tsantini13 Isaiah isn't about Jesus, tsantini. None of the OT is.

[lonedove1981]

@tsantini13 For a true version read the Catholic Bible... Not something that was rewritten by man to justify their BS...

[DayneAW]

I like how most people are avoiding the idea that people would actually beat and kill a man to create this shroud, and only think they'd use dye or paint to reproduce it....Christians, catholics in particular, have a wealth of history of NOT using violence to get their message across riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight ;-) *sarcasm*

[Flagrum3]

@DayneAW -Your comments not only show a mediocre attempt at sarcasm, but also a terrible lack of knowledge, brinking on ignorance of this relic.No doubt from a lack of open-mindedness and want for knowledge.Please try educating yourself...thanks.

[DayneAW]

@Flagrum3

UhOh you got me. Thank you for the advice.I'll search for this knowledge you're speaking of through the book of boundless wisdom and scientific achievements called the bible. Maybe I can achieve my open-mindedness by blindly following the words of 2000 year old power-seeking, primitive minded, bigoted men. My apologies, I'll take your example and try to use my thesaurus next time to seem like I'm more intelligent. ;-)

[Flagrum3]

@DayneAW >Now you make a ridiculous Assumption! When I say knowledge, I mean reading scientific peer-reviewed articles and professional papers on this specific topic;The Shroud of Turin, not the bible.I will make an assumption then; Like many others you have probably watched a few videos and have come to a conclusion on this topic...that is the wrong way at going about it.Please do some searching and reading of proper documents.

[tgamerlegend]

The original carbon dating was flawed and heres why. The shroud of turin was being stored in a church and that church caught on fire in turn burning the shroud a bit. Somebody fixed the burnt spots on the shroud by stiching new fabric into it. The scientist took the carbon dating samples from those newly patched spots and not the original fabric itself.

[DayneAW]

@tgamerlegend

yes this is true...I am so good at patching my pants when there's a hole, that nobody can tell the difference in the original pant fabric and the patch fabric....also EVERYBODY knows that when a scientist takes a sample of anything, they just take ONE tiny piece from a single spot on the material....

If you can't sense the sarcasm here, may imaginary Jesus has mercy on your "soul" ;-)

[nni9310]

Our inability to explain may be either from ignorance or because that we do not have the mental faculties to understand. Also, I do not see any contradiction with the image having been formed by means that human science can explain and Christian belief about Jesus.

[Stinukli]

@nni9310 You wrote: "Also, I do not see any contradiction with the image having been formed by means that human science can explain"

Now, the case is that modern day science is UNABLE to explain the image on the Shroud.

[LooksAeterna]

@seymourbrest Bogus, the carbon dating was centered around the year 1290 and is known to be a dating not of the linen Shroud itself but of a part of the cloth that was repaired with cotton material from that time.

Get up to date with at shroudstory com before purveying such mush.

The Shroud is the real thing.

[dave4248]

"It's been all over the headlines"

WRONG, I didn't hear about it until recently. I guess our "anti-christ" media forgot to give it much press.

[JDvorak2009]

Shroud is authentic. No doubt. Pollen taken from the shroud was from the first century.

You cannot go back in time and grab pollen from the first century, place it on the shroud, and pretend that it's from the first century. The image contains real blood and not paint.

[castlekingside28]

why do Christians always feel the need to undertake the futile exercise of trying to dissprove scientific evidence?

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28

With all respect I am a moderate catholic ( becoming less moderate thanks to these "scientific stunts)r I ASK WHY IS IT THAT ATHEIST OR ANTI CHRISTIAN AND OR ANTI CATHOLIC MEDIA HAVE A NEED OF LYING TO THE PEOPLE??? CAN YOU ANSWER THAT?? I THOUGHT FOR MANY YEARS THAT THIS WAS A FAKE BECAUSE OF THOSE FAMOUS HEADLINES...AND OHHHH NOW I FIND OUT BY RESEARCHING (ACTUALLY AFTER WATCHING THE OTHER DAY JC 3 D DISCOVERY CHANNEL)

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 Respond to this video...THAT WHAT THEY PRESUMED TO BE AN ABSOLUTE REPLICA OF THE SHROUD IS A LIE! AND WORST..THEY KNEW IT WAS A LIE FROM THE GET GO BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT MATCH THE SHROUD ON A MICROSOCOPIC LEVEL..WHICH IS AN ABC IN THIS MATTER OBVIOUSLY AND THEY CHOSE TO SHUT UP ABOUT IT AND INFILTRATE THERE FAKE DISCOVERY TO THE MEDIA WHO HAPPILY PASSED THE WORD ON TO ASSES SUCH AS MYSELF!!!

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 I CONSIDER MYSELF QUITE UNBIASED...BUT WITH ALL THESE FAKE PRESUMPTIONS AND CONSTANT ATTACKS AND HOW BIASED THE MEDIA IS

I AM INCLINING EVER SO MUCH TO BELIEVE IN WHAT THE CHURCH STANDS FOR OR A RESPECTABLE SCIENTIST WHO WOULD NEVER LIE AND SELL THEMSELVES FOR THE SOUL PURPOSE OF ATTEMPTING TO DESTROY SOMETHING AS IMPORTANTE AS THE SHROUD !! I WOULD EVEN ENCOURAGE SOMEONE TO FILE A SUIT BECAUSE THE LIED!!

[castlekingside28]

@flormat30 the Shroud's historical records point to the 12th century in France which coincidentally (or not) the carbon dating also indicates that this is when it was created. The technique is also extremely similar to other productions being made by nobels in France at this time using an early method of sulphur sulphate photography. a great piece of art? yes. the shroud of Jesus Christ? absolutely not.

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 .If you want Ill pass some UNBIASED research links I have, because being catholic does not mean i believe in every apparition I see.

There is also a fact that it is not paint nor oil substance if not hemoglobin ( Heller and Adler) on the shroud

[castlekingside28]

@flormat30 it would be much more sensible for you to go back to your misguided, blind faith, than to argue with someone with facts and evidence who will make you look as stupid as you are.

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 Ill reply here also.

One..try to be RESPECTFUL and not insult myself nor my faith because I did not insult you nor your faith if you have one...ok??? Second The shroud is 4.4 × 1.1 meters and A PART OF IT (because when you test it you destroy that particular piece of cloth) under went the carbon dating you talk about and yes it matched the date of the first appearance of the shroud ( 13 century)

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 The shroud suffered from various burns (documented..readdd please) and even in one of the burns the carmelite nuns had it the patched part of it up, trying to restore the part burned! Ergo...it should be tested in various parts and see if it coincides with 33AD and ALSO the timeline it suffered its other burns!

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 They are doing that because that is the ONLY fact they have against the shroud. I, with out a doubt, encourage they do it...for now at least the time it was first burned is in accordance to a historical timeline...

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 .The Carbon dating is pretty much a strong point they have to continue to work on...until then...watch your words! I said..i hate being lied to....because they said they reached an exact replica..and I believed that...whose blind or manipulative here??? TRY NO TE BE SO NARROW MINDED and wait the results of future carbon dating!! There ar emany many other things found that are pretty difficult to explain...but again...read read and read!

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 Last but not least....Please tell me you DID NOT think that the entire shroud was tested on!!! Please tell me you knew at least this!

[Flagrum3]

@castlekingside28 What facts are you talking about? Your statements made above are all untrue and show total ignorance to the true FACTS on your part....This makes YOU look stupid not only to me but anyone with half a brain cell that has taken the time to read real scientific peer reviewed documents as opposed to media hype.Please do everyone here a favour, unless your willing to do real unbiased research, please keep your uneducated comments to yourself...thank-you

Peace.

[flormat30]

@castlekingside28 YOU CAN NOT SAY IT IS A REPLICA IF IT IS NOT A LEAST ON THE SAME MICROSCOPIC LEVEL..AND THAT IS A FACT YOU KNOW AT THE START!YOU KNOW WHAT I DID..I WENT TO WILKIPEDIA AND ALL THAT THIS MAN IS SAYING IS ALL THERE! I HATE BEING LIED TO..NO MATTER WHICH SIDE!

[glycop]

The case is far from closed. Your eyes and mind must remain open if you care to seek the truth. Humans are not infallible.

[glycop]

The linen cloth was repaired with cotton in the area that was carbon dated and there is a renewed call for testing the carbon that was cleaned from the original cloth.

All the facts must be carefully examined to reach a verdict. When new facts are presented, the verdict must be revisited. The truth will set you free.

[glycop]

In 1988, scientists removed a swatch of the shroud for radiocarbon testing. Three independent laboratories concluded that the material originated between 1260 and 1390, leading some to deem it inauthentic. Since then, however, further studies have cast doubt on those results, suggesting that the shroud may indeed date back to the time of Jesus Christs life and death.

[glycop]

In March 2010, researchers unveiled a revolutionary radiocarbon dating method that could allow scientists to safely establish accurate ages for precious artifacts like the Shroud of Turin. Unlike traditional carbon dating, the new process does not require samples; instead, the entire object is exposed to an electrically charged gas that gently oxidizes its surface without causing damage. This means that, someday soon, the world may have a more precise estimate of the Shroud of Turins real age.

[glycop]

In March 2010, researchers unveiled a revolutionary radiocarbon dating method that could allow scientists to safely establish accurate ages for precious artifacts like the Shroud of Turin. Unlike traditional carbon dating, the new process does not require samples; instead, the entire object is exposed to an electrically charged gas that gently oxidizes its surface without causing damage. This means that, someday soon, the world may have a more precise estimate of the Shroud of Turins real age.

[IHS7]

Catholics are grasping for Straws... Oh well time to join the Ebionites.

[maryjo313]

The problem with skeptics and religious fanatics alike is they just conveniently ignore any information they don't like, and cling stubbornly to what they do. Is the shroud image "miraculous"? Science has explained much of what once was considered miraculous. While we still have no explanation for the formation of the image, that does not preclude the possibility of finding it someday. One can be skeptical about an actual divine Jesus and still believe the shroud is his authentic burial cloth.

[animation3dfx]

Maryjo313,

Can you spell BULLCRAP? The cloth has been proven a fraud long ago BY SCIENCE. Deal with reality and move on. Besides Jesus would not even have long hair ..It even says in the bible that long hair is a disgrace..(along with him being buried with more than one cloth). You might want to read it sometime. FYI you know what the bible says about praying to false images don't you? See you in hell....lol. Christians said the shroud cannot be reproduced...WELL THEY HAVE BEEN PROVEN WRONG

[maryjo313]

@animation3dfx

As I expected, you can't give even one example of this "proof" since there is none. Again, the argument using the Bible is totall y non-scientific and is not even correct anyway. You are just a total joke.

[animation3dfx]

maryjo313,

You conflicted yourself once again. How can an atheist take the cloth as being created because the spirit of Jesus (or whoever this guy is) made an image on the cloth by his spirit and still be an atheist? That is a conflict on itself. If you say he made the image by sweating on it and not by his spirit then you piss on your own shoes. Can you even prove this is Jesus?...NOPE! Pissing on your shoes again...lol.

[maryjo313]

Again, you show your total understanding of science and history with this absurd statements. I can believe there was some man that was crucified and buied and that some natural process occurred to cause an image to form on his burial shroud. That certainly does not mean I need to believe he was some magical figure that rose from the dead. Again, science has explained many, many things in the past that were considered "magic". But it's folly to say it has already explained the shroud. It hasn't.

[maryjo313]

Oops, that should have been "misunderstanding" obviously.

[animation3dfx]

maryjo313,

Exactly,

I could care less if people think this is some amazing cloth when it really is not. They will say they found this and that about it- all to sell more books or videos, just like they will always sell movies proving UFO's really exist. (Next, they will say they found Jesus semen stains) It is like when they had an incredible outburst of amazing crying statutes, which suddenly died off when they found out that those miracle statues were really frauds.

[animation3dfx]

maryjo313,

The fact is that they DID make a replica of the Turin..proving that it can be made from the exact materials that used at that time. So much for them saying "It cannot be reproduced"..Like I said in my latter post...this video is LYING by saying the Turin was not reproduced when it IS A FACT IT WAS REPRODUCED. So the topic of this video should be "Was the Turin reproduced or not?" To which the facts is...IT WAS REPRODUCED.

[maryjo313]

That statement alone shows your total ignorance of science and the information we have about the image on the cloth. Only the *appearance* of the image has been reproduced, not all its unique qualities, nor has such "reproduction" appeared in any scientific journal or been peer-reviewed in any away (because it would never stand up to such scrutiny). You might as well claim that someone reproduced the Mona Lisa by taking a photo of it. It's nonsensical, but then most of what you write is.

[Pattyjo46]

The carbon dating is wrong because the samples were taken from a patched area that was rewoven. Scientists found under a microscope the cut ends the were twisted together and evidence of dye and cotton fibers. This is the true burial cloth of Christ.

[QuestioProVerum]

The original was carbon dated to the 13th century...so there is no need to reproduce it because it dates far too late-meaning it didn't come from Christs time.

[bubba85715]

The carbon 14 did it's job correctly, however, the samples given were invalid. This is because the samples contained re-threaded repairs from the middle ages. The dates were correct, but that was due to the repairs made at the time (carbon dating will take the latest time found).

This has been proven by a scientist named Ray Rogers, who was a firm believer in the carbon dating. Unfortunately, he died not long ago, but he did make it clear that the dating results were invalid due to this.

[QuestioProVerum]

The common misconception is that the Turin was re-threaded or repaired. There is absolutely no evidence of this anywhere. This is one of those myths that manifest itself online without any corroborating evidence.

[bubba85715]

Unfortunately, you're misinformed.

I have seen the facts represented numerous times online and even once on TV. The evidence is there, I just question how willing you are to see it.

I'm not someone who believes the shroud is real no matter what. I want to know what facts exist, and this is one of them.

Here is a good site explaining what I told you. I suggest you take a look, because your information is not up to date.

factsplusfacts com/shroud-of-turin-carbon-14 htm

[QuestioProVerum]

I have seen this article before and again, this cite produces nothing more then speculation. There are no peer reviews or scientific entries corroborating the shroud was re-stitched. You have omitted reference to the other facial image on the back of the shroud which should not be there, it would be the back of the head, not the front and the image is different than that of the front.

I also don't see the Vatican offering up any samples either...sketchy if you ask me.

[bubba85715]

The Vatican has no reason to prove the shroud to anyone. They have stated that they believe it is up to science to determine that, but they do view the shroud as sacred.

To be honest, there will never be enough evidence either way to establish a definite answer. Personally, I think God intended it to be that way.

I still find it impressive that the image cannot be reproduced.

Seems that one has to jump through a lot of hoops to discredit the shroud. That is why I think it may be legit.

[QuestioProVerum]

@bubba85715

So now your claiming faith as the reason you

believe in the shroud. Sorry, but faith does

not trump science and faith leads one to

make irrational conclusions sometimes.

[bubba85715]

In my opinion, science has its place, but to live life without faith leaves a lot to be desired.

As for the shroud, yes, faith does share a part in my opinion. It has to, especially since I love Jesus Christ.

That doesn't mean, however, that nothing could be revealed that would change my opinion on the shroud. With that said, I doubt any such evidence will be found - because I don't believe it exists.

[maryjo313]

The faulty C14 findings were indeed peer-reviewed and have since been collaborated. Other evidence as to an earlier age continues to build, such as lack of vanillin in the main shroud. Your comment on the image on the back is quite laughable as well. If the image is formed in some way due to the proximity of features to the cloth, which seems clear from the 3D encoding, the image on the back would be exactly the same as the one on the front of the cloth, that is, the front of the man's face.

[QuestioProVerum]

@maryjo313

The back of the cloth would contain the back

of a head, not another face. Remember, according

to tradition, Jesus was wrapped in the cloth,

not covered with it.

Furthermore, the two faces are not the same.

[maryjo313]

@QuestioProVerum how can you say what image it would have unless you know how it was put there. Actually, any natural means that makes sense would create the same image. The fact that it is *not* the back of the head certainly makes it far less likely that an artist did it because they indeed would think it would show the back of the head. They are only dissimilar in terms of the density of the image, otherwise completely in sync.

[QuestioProVerum]

@maryjo313

You say any natural means, yet offer no instances

in which that would happen. Your good book

says he was wrapped in the cloth, not covered with it.

I'm only using your book as evidence to my assertions

while you make blind assumptions as to why

it is the way that it is.

[maryjo313]

We don't know the means yet....there is some evidence that amines from the decomposing body played a part, the layer of starch on the cloth having been discolored and this being a known reaction that can take place. This is the best explanation as well for the superficial images on both sides. As for what "book" I am using, I am using the bulk of the scientific data on the shroud. It's hysterical that the best you can come up with are arguments that have no bearing in science at all.

[QuestioProVerum]

@maryjo313

Sure you can claim science, but when the BIble

states Jesus was wrapped in a shroud, not covered with one

then science can't explain why a face different

then what is on the front, can appear on the

back of the shroud.

The bible contradicts what appears on the shroud

that is the point I was trying to make. Apparently,

you have a hard time comprehending that.

[maryjo313]

@QuestioProVerum

Since when does science try to explain what

the bible says? Its sole purpose is to determine

how the shroud was made and when. Whether the

bible agrees with that or not may or may not

be important to some people (obviously it is to you, for reasons I can't fathom, but it sure as heck isn't something science cares about.

[animation3dfx]

maryjo313,

You do know lying is a sin right? The carbon dating was not flawed nor was it ever changed on that statement, as well as the church will not allow the shroud to be examined again. Now 3D encoding proves what again? NOTHING! That's what! Your whole bible is proven false by science and so is the shroud..move on.

[maryjo313]

The C14 dating itself was not flawed, but the sampling was. Even before they proved it, the protocol was stupidly changed from the original intent of sampling frm multiple locations on the shroud, a FAR more scientifically valid method. Also, no scientist would claim that one test "proves" anything. C14 dating has been wrong in the past and will be wrong in the future as well. It is only accurate if the sample tested is accurate for the whole. In the case of the shroud it wasn't.

[animation3dfx]

Maryjo,

Tell me who it was that collaborated that the shroud was made at the time of Jesus's death. Also while you are at it prove it was Jesus (which you cannot). And I can prove your bible is false..but first I would have to ask if you believe the Earth is flat, the Sun orbits the Earth, dinos lived with man, Unicorns, Fire breathing sea monsters, Cherubims, evolution is a myth...for some reason Christians change reality based on their bible..why defend the bible? u aren't a CHRISTAN

[maryjo313]

@animation3dfx Where did I say there was any *proof* that the shroud belonged to the historical Jesus? I agree, there's no way that will ever happen. There's evidence that may support that theory, but that is not the same as proof. I certainly have not defended the bible in anyway. Again, you seem totally clueless to the fact that one can accept the science that shows us the shroud was not likely to be made by human hands and yet not believe that it was caused by some supernatural force.

[frettop]

@animation3dfx you are so lost!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pattyjo46]

Since you don't believe why are you here? You don't convince true believers that it is a fraud or faked. There is a huge amount of data confirming it. Ray Rogers was not a believer when he started but became one after studing the Shroud. My husband knew Mr Rogers and great data was gained with the VP8 analyzer which proved it wasn't painted.

[Parture]

Camera Obscura.

[PheremoneJ]

also, look at jesus hair. if he was laying down then his hair shouldnt be handing down on the side. you shouldnt be able to see the hair (from his head) on both sides of his face. his mustache and goatee (not beard) looks pretty well polished. And yes, i'm a Christian by the way and i don;'t think i'm gonna go to hell for not believing yet another BS fact the church has cooked up.

[animation3dfx]

Also even the bible says he was covered in more than one cloth. And just a few drops of blood?...guess he wasn't beaten up like in Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ" huh? Heck wasn't even enough blood on it for a simple nose bleed.

[maryjo313]

The two cloths does not necessarily mean two cloths covering separate areas, the second cloth could be a chin strap or a sundarium. There is certainly far more than a "few" drops of blood on the shroud. It's clear you know little to nothing about the actual scientific data on it.

[animation3dfx]

@maryjo313

Yeah. two cloths could mean the other was used to cover his privates.....LOL. Give it up, you are like most Christians..grasping at stupidity only makes you look retarded.

[maryjo313]

Where did I say I was Christian?? There are many agnostic/atheists that believe the shroud is an authentic burial shroud from the 1st century, because the vast majority of the data supports this. I find it laughable that some "skeptics" like yourself think the Bible is crap, and then turn around and try to use it to "prove" anything about the shroud. It's just an absurd and illogical argument.

[animation3dfx]

Wow! A Christian preacher lying..Imagine that. The Shroud was reproduced. Deal with it. Shwoing once again that preachers will lie for their false religion. By the way, the Shroud was proven false long ago..deal with it.

[alvarez73726]

Where is the proof that it was reproduced then?

[animation3dfx]

alvarez73726,

Youtube won't let people post web sites so just google it . One is shown on the Huffington Post. It says a group of Italian scientists have reproduced the shroud with materials that were in tht era...and they reporduced it easily I might add.

[maryjo313]

Reproducing the shroud in terms of the superficial image is not the same as reproducing the shroud. Making something *look* like the shroud is easy. But they didn't even come close to actually recreating the properties of the shroud that science has revealed about it.

[animation3dfx]

@maryjo313

The Shroud is total bull crap. It was proven long ago to have been made long after the death of the mythical Jesus.

[maryjo313]

Again, you just show your total ignorance of science is and what it can and cannot "prove". Show me any proof that hasn't already been discounted by peer-reviewed scientific means. Problem is you can't so you just make such great arguments at the shroud is "crap". Yeah, that should convince people you know what you're talking about.

[SparklingVoices]

This is the shroud. The TRUTH is always attacked.

[dayofwrath1]

Faith is a grace.Read the book the coin of the temple by Souheil Bayoud,there you will know the person of the shroud and definitely Mr Luigi Garlaschelli and all the scientists of the world can not reproduce what that real story is relating.

dayofwrath1

[austinkate]

i'm sorry to have to put this but there is know god!! put your faith in humankind an help eachother dont worship the dead help the living!! peace..

[Atheistx82]

There is know god? lol.

[frettop]

@Atheistx82 GOD still loves you, its not to late!!!!!!!!!

[Atheistx82]

Oh and by the way, the 'reproduction' is very realistic and was made with materials available in Milan at the time.

So what's different about the reproduction under a microscope?

[NilDesperandum777]

@Atheistx82, Using materials available in Milan in the middle ages at time is actually irrelevant considering that the image AND THE INFORMATION on and IN The Shroud Of Turin isn't made with any materials available in the middle ages, or at present. In order for a reproduction to be made, new technology that DOESNT EXIST NOW would have to be invented. THAT's what supporters of Shroud forgery are up against. In essence, the unthinkable and the impossible ACCORDING to present day science.

[Atheistx82]

Wow you true believers would rather worship a cloth than admit it's a fake.

[MrZetterlund777]

I'll take it you've never actually learned about the Shroud? Ignorance is bliss I guess.

[Atheistx82]

Yeah, I guess I must be ignorant if I don't believe it's a magic cloth. I guess all the problems the critics bring up are just lies right?

[MrZetterlund777]

Yes, because forensic science is so mystical. You say: "all the problems the critics bring up" as if it where overwhelming. I will slaughter any of their flimsy little arguments. The only problem with the Shroud of Turin was the C-14 dating. Which was proven insignificant because, well, the evidence is overwhelmingly against it. I pitty anyone who expects to get the correct C-14 date from an object that's been burned, flooded on, rewoven, and preserved for many centuries.

watch?v=Vj0DXYQWPDw

[Atheistx82]

Yeah even though it's possible to replicate the fabric and even though it should be a stretched outline if it were truly wrapped and even though it's dated to about the time of Da'Vinci, it's clearly a magic cloth right? Nothing could ever prove it a hoax to you.

[MrZetterlund777]

It's never been re-created, it can't be reproduced, it was directly ontop of the body, and still, has somewhat of a stretched outline, and all your arguments are ignorant and stawman.

[Atheistx82]

Ok here's the way I see it

Even if this is the cloth your Jesus was buried in (dating, wrapping problem, ability to create a similar cloth, Da'Vinci's precursor ideas to photography aside), here's how I see it.

If it's not Jesus' cloth you're worshipping the image of another man, quite possibly a heathen. You are venerating an earthly object and holding it in your heart next to 'Christ'.

If it is the cloth Jesus was supposedly buried in, you're still venerating an earthly object.

[MrZetterlund777]

I suggest watching this documentory:

watch?v=Vj0DXYQWPDw

It shows you that Da Vinci couldn't have made it since it existed long before him. Not only that, it shows you the wrapping technique used fits like a glove. The reproduction looks like a four-year-old did it. If you're asking me the difference between the reproduction and the Shroud under the microscope then you haven't even watched this video. ironoxide was used in the reproduction. Imediately eliminating the "reproduction."

[Atheistx82]

Let me ask you something. What would it take to convince you that it's a hoax?

[MrZetterlund777]

Well the documented evidence is overwhalming to the contrary, it can't be a hoax.

[Atheistx82]

Actually I watched the same documentery and took the opposite conclusion from it.

[MrZetterlund777]

Which is exactly why you're wrong. You believe Davinci did it, even though it's been documented in the 11th century to have existed before him. And much more before that. I'm sure you haven't watched this documentory:

watch?v=1Ai30u3sPSs

I think the only reason you come to the opposite conclusion is because you refuse to believe in Jesus Christ.

[Atheistx82]

It's already been reproduced by baking a cloth in an oven which only left pigment on the ends. Pigment was found on the shroud it simply did not saturate it, which was the mystery. Your holy relic is a hoax, and you worship it because you desperately need some worldly authentication to justify your faith.

[MrZetterlund777]

Well that's wonderful. However syrum stains taken from the Shroud say the blood came directly from a human body. This clot of raptured blood cells happens after someone is brutally tortured. Your "reproduction" is a hoax because blood was PLACED on the cloth and a mask wask used for the face. When the REAL Shroud showed the blood came directly from the body. By the way, I don't worship the frieken cloth.

[Atheistx82]

The reproduction doesn't claim to be the authentic thing, it claims to show how the original shroud could be made. If the best you have to dismiss it is that they didn't brutally torture someone before placing the cloth in the oven, that's a pretty weak argument.

Where did you get your information about the "raptured" (lol) blood coming from a tortured person by the way?

[MrZetterlund777]

@Atheistx82

It's on the documentory I marked as a favorite and is the first video you'll see on my profile. Shroud of Turin: New Evidence 2009. I was saying that even posing as a reproduction Luigi's shroud is a hoax. Meaning it's not even worthy as a reproduction. I'm pretty sure the partical physisists(if I spelled that right) would disagree on the Iron oxide thing, anyway.

[Atheistx82]

So it is not worthy because of the method used to artifically age it?

[MrZetterlund777]

What? What are you talking about? If you're refering to the C-14 dating that was an epic fail because the end of the Shroud was re-woven for preservation.

[Atheistx82]

Yeah sure it was, multiple independent labs come back with the same finding, there are problems with the head spacing, the head and arms are not porportionate, other shrouds can be made, but this is all ok because it's been re-woven right?

[MrZetterlund777]

Multiple labs tested the same peace of linen that was cut off from the Shroud. That peace was cut into multiple smaller peaces. I don't have a clue what you're talking about as far as the head & arm spacing, but the body isn't lying flat and still, as we can tell by ACTUALLY learning it, but the body is in the "I'm gonna get up now" position. I can Email you the body's positional studies.

[Atheistx82]

Yeah I don't think we'll be coming to the same conclusions, you are looking at all of this as a true believer who wants it to be true and feels like he is defending his faith, I am looking at it as someone who does not believe in the supernatural and sees X Y and Z problems with the cloth and no reason to believe that it was even Jesus' cloth even if everything else checked out. I mean, if you can make a replica by placing blood on and baking it in an oven, why could it not be done with this?

[MrZetterlund777]

Well you got my point of view all wrong. My problem is that you want me to disreguard everything I've learned about the Shroud because you find a problem with the way the head is proportioned or something. And I've explained a hundred times, YOU CAN'T make a replica just by baking some blood in an oven. The blood contained SYRUM meaning it caim directly from a HUMAN BODY just like multiple other tests have shown. And for some reason, this human body scortched only the surface of the Shroud.

[MrZetterlund777]

Honestley, I think the only thing that keeps you from believing it's real is because you refuse to believe in the supernatural. Science isn't negotiatable. There's no two ways to interprit something in science. Creation Science is an oxymoron. I can proove the Shroud is real beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Atheistx82]

MrZetter, I guess I could say the same to you about your disbelief in UFOs. There are problems with the Shroud that have not been addressed. You can talk about science all you want, the Shroud is definately real but your conclusion about it are a whole other story. You can believe the shroud is a magic cloth if you want but there's no reason for me to believe that.

This raptured blood thing, why is there still a stain? How is there a syrum if it was raptured? Why can the copy not be the same?

[MrZetterlund777]

Om... Actually, I'm a firm believer in UFO's. I didn't mean "raptured" blood, I meant "ruptured" blood cells. This is what produces syrum after a man is beaten or tortured, and shows that it had to have come directly from the human body. It's not like someone said "I've got it! I'll hide this syrum stain here, and years from now, THEY'LL FIND IT! -Give me a break." -Barry Schwortz

I don't see any problems with the Shroud that can't be understood through studying it.

[Atheistx82]

Any man's blood can rupture, MrZetter. It doesn't have to be holy blood. The dark and medieval ages were brutal times, were brutal men took other men prisoner. The blood could easily be that of a criminal or pagan tortured in a dungeon celler in Milan.

[MrZetterlund777]

I never said it was any sort of "holy divine blood." But you're missing my point, the syrum prooves that it came from a human body, and this human body scortched the surface, (only the top lineal fibrils of the linnen fibers) ONLY THE VERY TOP of the Shroud. Why is a human body burning linen? And remember, heat florences, so if were burned on (as the "Davinci did it" Documentory believes) then it should have florenced through the top fibrils.

[Atheistx82]

So what if it came from a human body? Blood baked in an oven is blood baked in an oven. I doubt the shroud was ever pressed against a person because there are a number of problems with this, the distance between the front and back where the head wraps over, the length of the arms, the size of the head, the fact that the head is not distorted in the way that it should be if pressed against an actual face. For all you know it could be painted with blood on a water worn cloth and baked in an oven.

[MrZetterlund777]

Om..... What? Even skeptics will admit when you put a photographic negative on the front and back on top of each other you get a perfect three dimensional figure of the human body. I don't know what your problem is with the arms, but Jesus' shoulder was dislocated before He died, just for the record. The head's size is common for Nazarine Semetics during the 1st century (apart from European facial structure.)

[MrZetterlund777]

I think you got ahold of some bad science. (It sounds like something a YouTuber cooked up.)

[Atheistx82]

Actually I misspoke, the head was too small, not too large. Nope, not something a youtuber cooked up. You're a true believer, you want to believe, no amount of evidence will ever convince you to change your mind. There were many shrouds of Jesus, the Shroud of Turin is just the most successful. It's head is too small and not warped as it would be if it were truly against a face, the arms are too long, the back is smaller than the front, your holy relic is only impressive as art to me.

[MrZetterlund777]

Oh, so now the head is too small! Well what skeptics usually complain about is that the face is too long, I assumed that's what you meant. And like I said, do your homework. All these problems you have with the Shroud is because you aren't aware of how the body was positioned underneath the cloth. Many assume the body is lying flat, it's not. You make an account on the Shroud of Turin official website and ask Barrie Shwortz to email you the tecnique they used to measure the body.

[MrZetterlund777]

What you have is nothing in the lines of "evidence against the shrowd" I am actually well aware of what the problem is you're facing. And it can be solved by just doing your homework. By the way, the blood did come directly from the body, the left cheek was swolen, there were a number of puncture wounds running down the body, the nose we could actually see bone structure and was twisted, ect. I have no bias for the Shroud of Turin, I'm just not ignorant to the study put behind it.

[MrZetterlund777]

In the mean time I would watch this video:

watch?v=cgvEDfkuhGg

[Atheistx82]

Also it was found by a family who hired Davinci, before he died, was it not?

[MrZetterlund777]

@Atheistx82

By the way, the syrum stains aren't the only reason to believe it's authentic. Pollen samples from the Shroud take it to Jerusalem, and we have even learned more about the practice of crucifixion through the Shroud. (the nail went through the bottom of the hand and thtough the wrist.) They don't give crucified men proper buirials. So all together someone would had to have paid a chunk of money to get the body taken off the cross.

[athlete117]

The lies of the secular world are staggering sometimes. Anything to discredit the supernatural, even if you have to cheat to do it.

Thanks for the video.

[cfh99nyc]

see the miracles

mostholyfamilymonastery (dot) com / watch_our_videos_3 (dot)php

[thewordisalive1]

Thanks for making this video,,,What's up with the media not even checking this thing out? I guess they really don't care for the truth and just want to generate controversy even if they have to publish false headlines to do it.

[olaezdpenitent]

this refutation is beyond amazing work of an intellectual mind .. it's a product of a true Catholic Faith rooted in a deep love of Christ and His relics in this world .. Christ must be very pleased with this video and more power!

[jake61nyc]

As usual, Lord God outshines them all. And the Lord is going to keep out shining them all till the day nearing, the Lord will split. the sky wide open. Nearing per end time prophecy. Put your faith in Christ, He is mighty to save. All Glory is God's. Amen.

[NilDesperandum777]

I think what is telling, is that the media at large actually and seriously entitled the "reproduction" as such. This "reproduction" is akin to the difference between being in the presence of an african lion and a "reproduction" of an african lion as seen through the eyes of Napolean Dynamite. Napolean Dynamite's art, like the "reproduction", like the scientist's claim and the media's attention to the "reproduction" is comedy and should be regarded as such. Christus Rex.

[gabriele6sette]

@NilDesperandum777: strangely, italian media gave no or little coverage of this atheists' bluff, don't know why. Maybe they will use it next year, during the exposition.

[NilDesperandum777]

That is interesting, gabriele6sette.

[menno000]

Thanks, finaly a scientific view on this matter. Indeed, most people have no clue about all the amazing scientific details about the shroud! When you really study the shroud there is no way you can fall for the so called scientific aproach of Garlaschelli. The guy even believes in the carbon dating which was proven false! EVEN if someone could make copy, that wouldn't mean the original was formed in the same way. But compared to the shroud this so called copy is simply not good enough.

[pepper72375]

the Shroud is authentic