I haven't watched the video yet so I will just say my first thought looking at the cloth. As always I go to scripture and it says that he was unrecognizable he was beaten so bad. The cloth has a clear outline of his face so that gives me pause to start with.

It's theorized that the energy released when Jesus healed and rose from the dead is what made the markings on the shroud, so the markings would no longer show the bad beating.

Keith

I think it has been well established in the scientific community that it is a dark ages fake. Probably the most famous one though.

The Shroud of Turin is not mentioned in the Bible. It is a linen sheet thought by many to be the burial cloth of Jesus Christ. As a result of this belief, the shroud is considered by some to be one of Christendom’s most sacred relics. A cathedral in Turin, Italy, now houses the shroud in a high-tech protective casing.
Do Bible accounts support the idea that the Shroud of Turin is genuine? No.
Consider three aspects of the shroud that differ from what the Bible says.
1. The shroud is a single cloth measuring 442 by 113 centimeters (14 ft 6 in. by 3 ft 8 in.) plus an 8-centimeter (3 in.) strip sewed lengthwise.
What the Bible says: Jesus’ dead body was wrapped, not in one piece of linen, but in multiple strips of cloth. His head was wrapped in a separate cloth. After Jesus was resurrected, one of his apostles came to the empty tomb and “saw the linen cloths lying there.” The Bible adds: “The cloth that had been on his head was not lying with the other cloth bands but was rolled up in a place by itself.”—John 20:6, 7.
2. The shroud contains markings presumed to be bloodstains from an unwashed corpse.
What the Bible says: When Jesus died, his disciples prepared his body “according to the burial custom of the Jews.” (John 19:39-42) This custom included washing the corpse and applying oils and spices to it before burial. (Matthew 26:12; Acts 9:37) Therefore, Jesus’ disciples would have washed his body before wrapping it in cloths.
3. The shroud bears the image of a man “laid lengthwise along one half of the shroud while the other half had been doubled over the head to cover the whole front of the body,” according to the Encyclopædia Britannica.
What the Bible says: Jesus’ disciples discussed his death, his empty tomb, and the eyewitness testimony of women who saw “a supernatural sight of angels, who said he is alive.” (Luke 24:15-24) If the shroud had been in Jesus’ tomb, his disciples would no doubt have discussed it and the images on it. However, the Bible says nothing about such a discussion.

The washing cleaning of the body is addressed in the video ,,, I too thought about that… and the wrapping of the head with a separate piece is addressed as well

The were abouts of the shroud pre 1300s is addressed as well…

It has not been established because the parts of the shroud that were tested with radiocarbon were pieces sewed into the damaged parts of the shroud because of a fire,,,,, that’s one factor that nullifies the radiocarbon dating.. the other was the fire in the church itself,,, which could also significantly alter the testing… its no different than trying to convict someone with dna evidence that has been contaminated. The testing did confirm the blood is human blood,, and it contained bilirubin, which shows up in blood when the body sustains trauma.

Yupper Keith,,, extreme massive amounts of energy put the image on the cloth… from the INSIDE. There’s evidence of massive amounts doing similar things,, like the shadow of the man sitting, who was totally vaporized when the atom bomb was dropped…

Thank you for sharing foxkidd. Not meaning to dump on you here... Just offering another perspective.

I don't know whether the shroud is real or fake. Doesn't much matter to me as it is not central to my faith. A lot of things tied to Christianity are (for lack of a better word) superfluous. Even if the shroud is the 100% true burial cloth of Jesus it changes nothing about the message.

You can't prove or disprove matters of faith. That's why it's called faith.

"Blessed are those who have not seen and believed."

Mike

I like your Faith the BOTH of you. I can tell you for a fact that you are right. In the year of 2020 I collapsed on the Parking Lot Pavement. I was flown to Morgantown WV and my friends notifies my wife, when she got there I was already in Surgery, My Heart was Packed with Plaque from extensive Blasting. They informed my wife that I already had a stroke during the operation. Then they came out an hour later and informed her they had put two Pig Valves in my nHeart but that I had another stroke and that I probably would not live thru the night. They were all praying. The only thing I remember very clearly was that I saw a light and a very warm fuzzy feeling and felt very Calm and even Happy. But when I tried to go into the light it would not let me. I kept trying and a voice was very calm and told me to go back. That is when I woke up and was confused and cold. I have Faith now.

Truth

I just have never understood why all the fuss. If you have the need to see and experience relics or "signs and wonders" in order to have faith, then that is not true faith.

So what if the shroud is real? How does that change anything. People tend to focus on the wrong things many times.

So,,are you saying you cant have both faith,,,and an interest in relics?

Veneration of religious relics is a form of idolatry. I see no example of it anywhere in the bible, particularly in the new testament.
I don't think there is any problem having an interest in archeology from an historic perspective, however, artifacts (relics) have no spiritual value whatsoever. Giving them spiritual value is either idolatry or superstition.

I remember hearing that it was at one time in the possession of the Knights Templar.

Relics ? What about that pocket knife your Dad gave you 50 years ago ? You look at it and all those wonderful memories come ,love is remembered .I doubt you will worship that knife---

There was more to the testing than just carbon14 testing. The body positioning/blood staining was also shown to not be plausible. But hey, I don't care what anybody believes. My own belief is that people tend to be gullible.

I don't know if it's the burial cloth of Christ or not. It really doesn't matter. But, new testing has shown there were errors in the past on how it was tested. New tests have shown it is around 2,000 years old and it was a crucified man based on the wounds. But, the Romans crucified many men back then. It could be anybody.

What's interesting is that with today's technology, try as they can, they were unable to duplicate or determine how the impressions were made on the shroud. I find that as the most fascinating part of the story.

Except thats not true. just another exaggeration by TV producers


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...es-shroud-of-turin-idUSTRE5943HL20091005

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna33179539

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...echniques-make-relic-say-scientists.html

On January 2, 2019, researchers Filipo Marchisio, head of radiology and Professor Bollone, Forensic Medicine expert found inconsistencies in the carbon dating testing that was done on the shroud as there was evidence of minerals and algae in the corner where the sample was taken. This likely came from the water used to extinguish the fire. They also determined this was a man crucified and was real and not a hoax.

A Dr. Alan Adler, biochemist analyzed 15 fibers that were used for the 1988 Carbon dating and found a high degree of pollution on the samples nullifying the accuracy of the carbon dating.

I think it boils down to who you want to believe from the evidence that's out there pro and con.