I saw a video years ago where they used 3D mapping imaging and that mapping system will only bring up a 3D image of a real photo of a real item. If the item is painted, it won't do a thing. So they used the 3D imaging and brought up the face off from this Shroud. The girl who as a child, painted a photo of Jesus because she said He came to her and she spoke with him, her photo looks just like the 3D image off the Shroud. And the little boy from the movie, Heaven Is For Real, looked at that photo and said, that's Him.
My doubts regarding the Shroud of Turin lie in the fact that the face looks exactly like artists depictions of Jesus during the Middle Ages. There are some indications that a Jew would not have longish hair, but would have kept his hair short. Also, the face just doesn't look like a native of the Middle East, but he does look like an Italian from the Middle Ages. Also, the scriptures indicate the burial cloth was wound around his body, not that Jesus was wrapped up in one large single sheet of cloth. I don't know of any burial cloths surviving from Judea in that time. I look forward to the time when science can determine conclusively whether not the Shroud is authentic. The most important thing is that we don't allow our faith to rely on artifacts, relics, or symbols. The Word of God is sufficient for my faith. ✝️🙏
You sure are confused. Artists used the image on the Shroud as their model for when they made a painting of Jesus! It's not the other way around!! And what idiot told you that Jesus wore a crew cut? Wow are you gullible.
OK, trying to be helpful... 1. It's more likely European art was influenced by the shroud. We know the shroud was known from at least the 11th Century now and the original 'natural' image was very visible in the past - see the 'pray codex.' The shroud was generally assumed to be genuine and so artists, wanting to depict Jesus, would have referred to the only possible source they had. 2. The actual fact of Jesus is different to that which is in the 2D photo negative. The Real image is held in the 3D data. This hasbeen drawn forth by Ray Downing. You can look him up on TH-cam. The AI picture doing the rounds is not worth a thing. 3. This is going back into hazy memory but as I understand it Jesus would most certainly have had long hair. Cutting hair was not so easy back then, shaving was a rich man's game. Also, as a J-e-w (I have to be VERY careful of YT's auto-delection!) AND Jesus's identification as a prophet the emphasis would have been on long hair as per the vow of Samson. Just done a check online and the hairstyle of the man on the cross includes sidelocks and an unplaited ponytail which were distinctives of 1st century Palestinian men. We certainly do have ancient depictions of J-e-w-s with long hair. 4. The face covering is the single biggest objection to the shroud’s authenticity from Christians, I grant, given it APPEARS to contradict John’s account and this is all over Christian websites, how the shroud cannot be genuine because it contradicts scripture. But the ‘face covering’ argument is only a contradiction if there is NO explanation. As it is, there is an explanation. For a start, it is likely we have the face covering - the Sudarium of Oviado and it is distinct from the shroud. The synoptics use the word 'sindon' to describe Jesus being wrapped in a SHROUD and they also make reference to ‘Deo’ - bindings around the Linen. 'Sindon' definitely refers to a single, large piece of cloth. It is only John who describes the cloth by using the word 'othonia' meaning strips. It has LONG been held by biblical scholars, before the photographing and scientific studies of the shroud, that the use of the word 'othonia' by John is in reference to the strips of cloth binding the 'Sindon' to the body. It could be that John was declaring that the cloth bindings were still in place meaning the body passed through the shroud (which, by the way, is the only way the image could have been created - long story) leaving the bindings still in place - a miracle and proof the body was not stolen which was what was originally assumed by the women "They have taken my Lord." The irony is that the Gospel Christians suggest is the one that contradicts the (potential) witness of the shroud could actually the one that best supports it as it has long been held that John was referring to the miracle that the shroud appears to show. It’s a huge subject with many papers but I am not permitted to link! Suffice to say that that the common interpretation of john 20 is that, an interpretation, usually from a modern English translation. As it is, I am going to try and spend more time on this since John 20 is the biggest objection Christian ahave to the shroud - it’s A number 1 - so I am try and give it some more time, though I have Asian flu (now out in Asia and Asian flu is A Thing!) and emergency at work tht has JUST dropped in! (I'm self employed.) 5. Again, the survival of the shroud is not impossible. Firstly, the shroud itself is extremely expensive - perfectly in line with the Gospel accounts and, thus, harder wearing than 'yer average.' It also strains credulity that the disciples would not have taken the shroud and head covering with them from the tomb, especially if it bore a visible image of Jesus - the original physical image from blood and sweat was quite visible at first Also, like it or not, early Christians took relics pretty seriously. We can argue over whether that was acceptable to the Apostles or a corruption, a pagan 'accretion' if you like - some Protestants can have trouble with the shroud given it is seen as a relic by some and declared an icon by the Catholic Church so it's assumed 'catholicness' leads to an aversion to the shroud being genuine - but there is no doubt from the early histories that relics were hoarded by the Christians by at least the 2nd Century. So Jesus's shroud, along with the Sudarium of Oviado could WELL have been preserved by early Christians in a way other burial shrouds were not. I mean... er, most of the others were buried. Agreed that no one's faith should reside in the shroud itself and even the Catholic Church states such - and that's something! I've checked on Catholic sites to confirm. However, as a historical artifact, much like the 'Pilate stone' which Christians are happy to accept as genuine and verification of the scriptures, the shroud could be highly important as an external witness to the scriptures. We should be looking at the shroud as a historical artifact, same as all the other archaeological finds that Christians do not have a problem with. And it's really, REALLY hard to explain away that image. Last attempt to reproduce the image was by computer controlled laser etching through UV light. It worked! For about two inches and then collapsed.
@@rianne-etc9479 science has already determined that - this latest dating method puts it at 2000 years, the photographic image can’t be recreated with today’s human technology, or of 700 years ago, or of 2000 years ago. It’s completely enigmatic from a scientific perspective and forensically it all aligns with all that is reported in the New Testament.
Dude… you didn’t say anything about the recent x-ray dating which concluded that the cloth *does* date back to the first century or that Jerusalem pollen samples were found on the cloth. The shroud was probably stored in some kind of container and brought to Europe from the Holy Land in the Middle Ages, and the 1988 carbon dating probably read something from that container that had contaminated the shroud.
Doesn't the bible say the body was wrapped in linen with a separate cloth over the head? The truth is that in the 14th century many shrouds were created and displayed in churches.
@@michaelbriefman-iw2uc yet it's a proven fake and even if it were real it only proves that someone was wrapped in it. Do we have a DNA strain for Jesus, no. Didn't exist.
A primary reason why John Calvin and many Bible scholars have rejected the Turin Shroud as being authentic is due to the lack of any reference to it in the New Testament. “How is it possible that those sacred historians, who carefully related all the miracles that took place at Christ's death, should have omitted to mention one so remarkable as the likeness of the body of our Lord remaining on its wrapping sheet? This fact undoubtedly deserved to be recorded.” 7
8 However, if we keep in mind the backdrop of persecution occurring during the period when the New Testament documents were being written, it should not surprise us that the writers would not want to make clear references to the miraculous image lest it be hunted down, confiscated, and destroyed by either religious opponents or by hostile, political authorities. As Jesus himself both warned and commanded: “Do not give that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.” 9
And, shortly after the Sign of Jonah prediction, we read in Matthew’s Gospel: “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted.” 10, 11 So, a plausible inference can be made that, due to the threat of persecution and confiscation, any reference to the Shroud in the New Testament itself would be veiled.12 Such secrecy would be in keeping with what would become known as “The Discipline of the Secret.” 13 William Ramsey, the renowned archaeologist who focused his efforts on early Christianity, wrote: “It was the recognized duty of a Christian to use carefully veiled language.” 14
In addition, consideration should be given to the fact that, under normal circumstances, a burial cloth which once enveloped a corpse and was stained with blood would have been looked upon by Jews as being unclean. Teaching would be required in order for new converts to gain a different perspective regarding this special burial Shroud. Since this particular funeral cloth was stained with the sacrificial blood of “The Lamb of God,” it came to be treasured by the early Christians and looked upon as being a sacred cloth-having been sanctified by Jesus’ holy blood and having served as his High-Priestly tunic while His body was inside the tomb.15 Importantly, this proper perspective regarding the holy garment was likely another reason, in addition to persecution, for the necessity of “The Discipline of the Secret” and its carefully guarded catechism during the early Church. This current paper will present brief analyses of four statements within the New Testament that serve as strong candidates for being “veiled” or hidden references to what is known today as the Shroud of Turin. The reader might conclude one text is more persuasive than another. Considered collectively, these texts offer strong evidence supporting the conclusion that the Turin Shroud (with its amazing image) both existed and was known by the earliest Christians. This paper is written from the perspective that the Turin Shroud is indeed the authentic burial cloth that once wrapped the corpse of Jesus.16
In this author’s opinion, it is best not to pitch these texts as being either unquestionable or primary proofs regarding the authenticity of the Shroud. One can find stronger evidence in that regard from forensic science and historical artifacts. It is preferable to perceive these passages with a different mindset.
In the end, the true power of resurrection isn't found in the piece of cloth no matter how fascinating but in the transformation that takes place place in us when we believe in Jesus Christ for our salvation.
What is Resurrection? Richard Rohr, OFM: "Back in 1967, my systematic theology professor, Fr. Cyrin Maus, OFM, told us that if a video camera had been placed in front of Jesus’ tomb, it wouldn’t have filmed a lone man emerging from a grave (which would be resuscitation more than resurrection). More likely, he felt, it would’ve captured something like beams of light extending in all directions." Resurrection is not the same as resuscitation. Resurrection is something that has never ever happened before. It is not simply the dead being brought back to life only to die again at a later date, like Lazarus whom Jesus raised from the dead. Or, what some doctors allegedly did with modern medical technology, etc. Resurrection is a quantum leap to a new form of a very superior kind life.... life everlasting, to say the least. An analogy would be that of a caterpillar having 'died' to its old form but lives again as a butterfly.... or of a seed having died but sprouted/transformed into a new form of life, that of a plant or even a tree. * The resurrection of Jesus Christ is not reanimation (like a zombie that can move about but is quite mindless) or resuscitation (like those who are clinically dead-whose heart has stopped -but brought back to life medically; or like Lazarus who was raised back to life, by Jesus, only to die again later of another mortal cause). Through the resurrection, the Risen Christ is the same Christ that people knew but in a new, glorious, immortal state of existence - no longer subjected to the limits of materiality or mortality: He has risen to die no more. The good news is everyone of us are called to share that life in Christ. ...“Resurrection is not a restoration to life, as with Lazarus and the widow’s son. Resurrection is something no human person has ever experienced. It is not a return to a former life, but a quantum leap into a higher life. In other words, the body of Jesus that rose on Easter was infinitely different from the body that was buried on Good Friday.” (Challenge 2000 by Mark Link,SJ; Wk.30,Day 4, p.321) -The Gospels do not explain the resurrection; the resurrection explains the Gospels. -J.S. Whale - Richard Rohr, OFM: "My systematic theology professor used to say that if the Resurrection had been filmed, it probably would not have shown a man stepping out of the tomb holding a flag, as most Christian art illustrates. The camera probably would have recorded a huge flash of light. The Risen Christ is Jesus released from all space/time restrictions. He is beyond space; he is beyond time. He includes all of the spiritual and the physical world, reconciled within himself."
A lot of grasping at straws by those who hate the Catholic Church and extend that hatred to the Holy Shroud. None of your so-called "idol worship" objections makes a bit of sense. Jesus' gave this "evil and unfaithful" generation a miraculous sign which proves that he was a real first century person who was executed by crucifixion and whose dead body dematerialized while still covered by its burial cloth. The skeptics ought to be ashamed of their long and worthless diatribes against the Holy Shroud.
i don't need the shroud to prove Christ died and rose again... i have my Bible and that is enough. Having that said, I do NOT believe it is Christ's shroud. The Bible is clear that the ripped out His beard in Isaiah 50:6. The shroud clearly shows someone who still has a beard.
Isaiah 50:6 doesn’t say his beard was ripped out. It says that he gave his “cheeks to them that plucked off the hair”. You can clearly see that he still had a beard and mustache and the sides of his cheeks are obscured by his hair so we don’t know exactly to what extent his beard was plucked. The shroud image still remains the world’s only fluorescing 3D image on a 2D surface which is against the laws of physics. If it’s not the burial cloth of Christ, then what is it? Aliens?
Of course but in this skeptical age science only and A.I. and money n power is God ,the Lord may have provided for those who "must SEE n touch his wounds" in order to believe ir have faith,the Lord may have made a provision for such souls be it a fake or true.
You may not need the shroud to prove that Christ died and rose again but it appears that God allowed that evidence to come to light anyway so that there is no excuse for unbelief in others. Many people have been caught admitting that they do not WANT the shroud to be genuine. That should speak volumes. Isaiah 50:6 doesn't say that they ripped out his beard. It says that they "plucked out the hair" from his cheeks. That's a big difference. You can plainly see in the shroud image that he has a beard and mustache. As far as his cheeks, it's obscured by his hair, so any speculation that this may debunk the authenticity of the shroud is valueless. We do not know exactly how much hair was "plucked" from his cheeks. So many people of science scream that we need reason in considering the authenticity the shroud. They say it's not reasonable that the shroud could be genuine and that we need to stay within the realm of science BUT they better be careful because the more that science advances and is used in determining the state of the shroud, it may very well end up confirming that the image was indeed formed on the shroud by a force from outside our time domain. Even this very day, the image of a crucified man on a linen shroud in Turin has been proven to be a 3D fluorescing image on a 2D surface which is impossible and operates outside what we call the laws of physics. Here it is the year 2024, and still no one can replicate the image due to the advanced properties therein.
Not his burial clothes. There were two parts, one for his head and the other for his body according to what the bible says. And, the bible says they pulled his beard off ( which was regular Roman law to humilate you) and beat him until he was UNRECOGNIZABLE. This is not the burial clothes of Jesus.
There are a loooooooooot of details on that shroud that do indeed match up with the gospels’ accounts of the crucifixion, and the part about ripping his beard out comes from Isaiah, which was a prediction from hundreds of years in advance, not an eyewitness account. If you want to get that specific, Isaiah also says Jesus would be hung on a tree, not nailed to a cross.
The Messiah Christ , for the Jew, is never a redeemer from original sin. He is, however, the restorer of the jewish state. He is King David, come again to rule over an independent jewish people, freed from the dominion of the foreigners. In the history of new testament gospel writer Joseph of Arimathaias General Saul Paul Josephus it will be noticed that the great central figure of the narrative of the " Wars " is the man this historian marks out for his blackest military calumnies, the greatest general of the Jews, the patriot whose unfailing faith in God, and hope in the direct intervention of Divine Providence worked out his own undoing on a roman cross in city of Rome and that of his unhappy country ; the man who, leading undisciplined multitudes from Tyre to Idumea, and from Perea to the sea, repeatedly defeating the finest disciplined armies of general Titus and the greatest military geniuses the Roman Empire could produce, was King Mono Basileus General Simon Iscariot Arshakuni Bar Giora Izates II the master Sicarius Zealot Unrecognized under his titular name of " the Liberator," this great man has remained undefended against the traitorous calumnies of the craven flatterer of the Flavian family. In spite of all his vilification at the hands of Josephus, the fact stands out that Simon Bar Giora was a man of intense, almost resistless energy. He swept like a devastating hurricane across the hills of Idumea and the valleys and plains of Judea. For three and a half years forty-two months " or " 1260 days he kept at bay the greatest army that the broad empire of Rome could furnish, and more than once cut into " fragments " and drove the soldiers like swine by thousands into the sea. The mountain of vituperation which the renegade Josephus heaped upon this wonderful man, cannot hide the passionate patriotism which sacrificed all for the independence of his country, his equally passionate devotion to the woman, nameless in Josephus, who shall ever be associated with him in glorious memory, his unswerving faith in the Lord of Hosts to intervene for his Chosen People and to establish for his own that Kingdom foretold by the prophets, who had actually named Bar Gi'ora as the one who should be the Liberator of his people, Israel. Did not Daniel, in fact, declare him, nominatim, the Anointed Savior and Deliverer of his people, the Ben Adam, the Hebrew form of the Aramaic Bara Gihhora, that is, Bar Gi'ora, the " Son of Man ".? With absolute, abiding faith and trust in these inspired promises, is it surprising that Simon Bar Gi'ora should believe himself to be what the people proclaimed him, when, according to Josephus (Wars IV, 9) they " made joyful acclamations to him as their Savior and Preserver.'' " Soter and Kedemon are the words used by Josephus, the equivalent of Jeshua and Natsir. Josephus, whose political apostasy made him hate the very name of the Liberator, Simon Bar Gi'ora, describes in Wars IV, 9, an expedition of that great leader into Idumea. He says the Son of Man went up into the mountains to pray the assistance of the settlements scattered along the Wilderness of Kadesh. To those who joined him he offered many advantages : " liberty to those in slavery and rewards to those who were free " - the men condemned to labors and those heavily laden with debts. Josephus says the populace were obedient to Bar Gi'ora, the Son of Man, " as their king." John 6: 15 says the jewish people sought to make him their king. penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/war-4.html?fbclid=IwAR0p9BxWjsTKwNQWP9lEtHw2fDisEhgEx9iakSsbrVzAk-l42Dvd9bxwitw
According to the Matthew, Christ the Son of Man King Mono Basileus General Simon Iscariot Arshakuni Bar Giora Izates II the master Sicarius Zealot King of The Jews , just before his arrest in Rome in garden after his escape, addressed his first born son known as the Rock " the Simon Judas iscariot Peter Rehem namely Eleazar " as Hetaire, which is incorrectly translated " Friend." The thought that the " Unerring One " should address a person deemed his mortal enemy as " friend," an epithet they believed to be false, has been a source of great annoyance to expositors. Really, hetaire is a much more intimate term than *' Friend," for it means " comrade," a military expression, of course. The Mark 14:45, relates the meeting thus: "And when he came, immediately he went up to him and said, ' Rabbi ! rabbi ! ' and he kissed him much," It is not unreasonable to suppose that the initial letter in " Rabbi " has been an early addition to the original text, which, accordingly, would previously have read, " And when he came, he immediately went up to him and said, ' Abbi ! abbi ! ' ('My father! My father!') and kissed him very affectionately. It is not reasonable to assume that such a positive character as the Son of Man undoubtedly was, would knowingly permit a traitor to approach him within arms' length and " to kiss him very tenderly " as a sign to an enemy. It is more than likely that he returned the sincere embrace with equal warmth, and that as they parted from each other's arms, he perceived the officers of General Titus who had shadowed his son, and at that moment, discovering that all was over, he said, with infinite sadness, as may be gleaned from the Luke 22:48, "Darling Son [Jehidi], with your kiss you have betrayed the Son of Man."
1. He wasn't wrapped at the moment of death. 2. The blood already divided into water and other substances on the cross, 3. There wasn't much blood left when he died after being beaten. 4. He fainted from bloodloss 5. The body was washed and balmed, prepared to be wrapped. 6. It took a long time to clean the body and patch up the wounds, 7. They used bandages to wrap bodies. 8. No mummy was ever wrapped in 1 sheet of linen. 9. This clip is stupid. 10. Carbon dating has never been accurate and you can test your dead cat that died 3000 years ago. 11. They took cloths from Paul to heal people with and this makes it mythology. 12. The cloth was only on his body for about 1 day, and he wasn't even bleeding. 13. Blood doesn't make facial imprints or finger lines. 14. I sleep in my bed every night and there isn't any evidence of my image on the sheets. 15. Who is the doofus that discovered this trash. 16. Pay me, I'll make a better one that looks more like a 30 year old boy and less like an 80 year old hobo.
@@B3AManYou're welcome! People are so gullible to deceit. I once pointed this out on a similar video and the replies were absolute nonsense. They want to stick to artifacts and tokens and a shroud, to worship them. I agree with what you said, except for the cloth being on Christ's body for one day. He was indeed 3 days & 3 nights in the grave/tomb. The [one day] legacy also came from the same establishment.
Pay you??? LOL! There is a standing prize of one million dollars offered to anyone who can accurately reproduce the images on the Shroud. Good luck! LOL !
The true dates of Christ and Prophecy... Birth: Tishri 1, 3737 - September 12/13, 25 bce - Sign of Revelation 12 Death: Nisan 14, 3786 - April 19, 26ad Passover Jubilee High Sabbath day Age at Death: 49.7 years old - Leviticus 25 50 years (the Jubilee Law) minus one fifth (1/5th) = 49.7 All according to the Law & the Prophets. The 2 true winesses This is the age of Christ at his death, 4-5 months shy of 50 years old. His time was cut short.
Praise Jesus amen
Jesus is alive Amen🙏🙏
The tomb is empty , He is coming again. That's it for me.
A reciept from God
I saw a video years ago where they used 3D mapping imaging and that mapping system will only bring up a 3D image of a real photo of a real item. If the item is painted, it won't do a thing. So they used the 3D imaging and brought up the face off from this Shroud. The girl who as a child, painted a photo of Jesus because she said He came to her and she spoke with him, her photo looks just like the 3D image off the Shroud. And the little boy from the movie, Heaven Is For Real, looked at that photo and said, that's Him.
Prove to me and others it's Jesus mate but then you don't have a photo of him do you o dear lol ? James uk
Christianity is proven true
1 John 5:7 King James Version 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
My doubts regarding the Shroud of Turin lie in the fact that the face looks exactly like artists depictions of Jesus during the Middle Ages. There are some indications that a Jew would not have longish hair, but would have kept his hair short. Also, the face just doesn't look like a native of the Middle East, but he does look like an Italian from the Middle Ages.
Also, the scriptures indicate the burial cloth was wound around his body, not that Jesus was wrapped up in one large single sheet of cloth. I don't know of any burial cloths surviving from Judea in that time.
I look forward to the time when science can determine conclusively whether not the Shroud is authentic.
The most important thing is that we don't allow our faith to rely on artifacts, relics, or symbols. The Word of God is sufficient for my faith. ✝️🙏
Amen
You sure are confused. Artists used the image on the Shroud as their model for when they made a painting of Jesus! It's not the other way around!! And what idiot told you that Jesus wore a crew cut? Wow are you gullible.
OK, trying to be helpful...
1. It's more likely European art was influenced by the shroud. We know the shroud was known from at least the 11th Century now and the original 'natural' image was very visible in the past - see the 'pray codex.' The shroud was generally assumed to be genuine and so artists, wanting to depict Jesus, would have referred to the only possible source they had.
2. The actual fact of Jesus is different to that which is in the 2D photo negative. The Real image is held in the 3D data. This hasbeen drawn forth by Ray Downing. You can look him up on TH-cam. The AI picture doing the rounds is not worth a thing.
3. This is going back into hazy memory but as I understand it Jesus would most certainly have had long hair. Cutting hair was not so easy back then, shaving was a rich man's game. Also, as a J-e-w (I have to be VERY careful of YT's auto-delection!) AND Jesus's identification as a prophet the emphasis would have been on long hair as per the vow of Samson. Just done a check online and the hairstyle of the man on the cross includes sidelocks and an unplaited ponytail which were distinctives of 1st century Palestinian men. We certainly do have ancient depictions of J-e-w-s with long hair.
4. The face covering is the single biggest objection to the shroud’s authenticity from Christians, I grant, given it APPEARS to contradict John’s account and this is all over Christian websites, how the shroud cannot be genuine because it contradicts scripture. But the ‘face covering’ argument is only a contradiction if there is NO explanation. As it is, there is an explanation. For a start, it is likely we have the face covering - the Sudarium of Oviado and it is distinct from the shroud.
The synoptics use the word 'sindon' to describe Jesus being wrapped in a SHROUD and they also make reference to ‘Deo’ - bindings around the Linen. 'Sindon' definitely refers to a single, large piece of cloth. It is only John who describes the cloth by using the word 'othonia' meaning strips. It has LONG been held by biblical scholars, before the photographing and scientific studies of the shroud, that the use of the word 'othonia' by John is in reference to the strips of cloth binding the 'Sindon' to the body. It could be that John was declaring that the cloth bindings were still in place meaning the body passed through the shroud (which, by the way, is the only way the image could have been created - long story) leaving the bindings still in place - a miracle and proof the body was not stolen which was what was originally assumed by the women "They have taken my Lord." The irony is that the Gospel Christians suggest is the one that contradicts the (potential) witness of the shroud could actually the one that best supports it as it has long been held that John was referring to the miracle that the shroud appears to show.
It’s a huge subject with many papers but I am not permitted to link! Suffice to say that that the common interpretation of john 20 is that, an interpretation, usually from a modern English translation.
As it is, I am going to try and spend more time on this since John 20 is the biggest objection Christian ahave to the shroud - it’s A number 1 - so I am try and give it some more time, though I have Asian flu (now out in Asia and Asian flu is A Thing!) and emergency at work tht has JUST dropped in! (I'm self employed.)
5. Again, the survival of the shroud is not impossible. Firstly, the shroud itself is extremely expensive - perfectly in line with the Gospel accounts and, thus, harder wearing than 'yer average.' It also strains credulity that the disciples would not have taken the shroud and head covering with them from the tomb, especially if it bore a visible image of Jesus - the original physical image from blood and sweat was quite visible at first Also, like it or not, early Christians took relics pretty seriously. We can argue over whether that was acceptable to the Apostles or a corruption, a pagan 'accretion' if you like - some Protestants can have trouble with the shroud given it is seen as a relic by some and declared an icon by the Catholic Church so it's assumed 'catholicness' leads to an aversion to the shroud being genuine - but there is no doubt from the early histories that relics were hoarded by the Christians by at least the 2nd Century. So Jesus's shroud, along with the Sudarium of Oviado could WELL have been preserved by early Christians in a way other burial shrouds were not. I mean... er, most of the others were buried.
Agreed that no one's faith should reside in the shroud itself and even the Catholic Church states such - and that's something! I've checked on Catholic sites to confirm. However, as a historical artifact, much like the 'Pilate stone' which Christians are happy to accept as genuine and verification of the scriptures, the shroud could be highly important as an external witness to the scriptures. We should be looking at the shroud as a historical artifact, same as all the other archaeological finds that Christians do not have a problem with.
And it's really, REALLY hard to explain away that image. Last attempt to reproduce the image was by computer controlled laser etching through UV light. It worked! For about two inches and then collapsed.
There are many who have no faith. Maybe this will help those who do not believe. No doubt this is a miracle.
@@rianne-etc9479 science has already determined that - this latest dating method puts it at 2000 years, the photographic image can’t be recreated with today’s human technology, or of 700 years ago, or of 2000 years ago. It’s completely enigmatic from a scientific perspective and forensically it all aligns with all that is reported in the New Testament.
Dude… you didn’t say anything about the recent x-ray dating which concluded that the cloth *does* date back to the first century or that Jerusalem pollen samples were found on the cloth. The shroud was probably stored in some kind of container and brought to Europe from the Holy Land in the Middle Ages, and the 1988 carbon dating probably read something from that container that had contaminated the shroud.
These videos help in Evangelism. Thank you.
Halleluja🙏
Doesn't the bible say the body was wrapped in linen with a separate cloth over the head? The truth is that in the 14th century many shrouds were created and displayed in churches.
Blessings from Discovery Bay Ca.
I walk by FAITH. Not by SIGHT. I don’t need a cloth to prove my Savior rose from the grave. He is alive forevermore. Amen and Amen.
Yet it didn't actually happen.
True❤🎉God Almighty is True and Alive,Jesus Christ is True and Alive, Our Blessed Mother Mary is True and Alive!!!❤❤❤❤🎉
@@IrenaRudenco g-d is the living g-d and he is not a man. Jesus and his mother died a long time ago.
The Shroud is thee icing on the cake!!!
@@michaelbriefman-iw2uc yet it's a proven fake and even if it were real it only proves that someone was wrapped in it. Do we have a DNA strain for Jesus, no. Didn't exist.
A primary reason why John Calvin and many Bible scholars have rejected the Turin Shroud as
being authentic is due to the lack of any reference to it in the New Testament.
“How is it possible that those sacred historians, who carefully related all the miracles
that took place at Christ's death, should have omitted to mention one so remarkable as
the likeness of the body of our Lord remaining on its wrapping sheet? This fact
undoubtedly deserved to be recorded.” 7
8
However, if we keep in mind the backdrop of persecution occurring during the period when the
New Testament documents were being written, it should not surprise us that the writers would
not want to make clear references to the miraculous image lest it be hunted down, confiscated,
and destroyed by either religious opponents or by hostile, political authorities. As Jesus himself
both warned and commanded: “Do not give that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast your
pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.” 9
And, shortly after the Sign of Jonah prediction, we read in Matthew’s Gospel: “To you it has
been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been
granted.” 10, 11
So, a plausible inference can be made that, due to the threat of persecution and confiscation,
any reference to the Shroud in the New Testament itself would be veiled.12
Such secrecy would be in keeping with what would become known as “The Discipline of the Secret.” 13
William
Ramsey, the renowned archaeologist who focused his efforts on early Christianity, wrote: “It
was the recognized duty of a Christian to use carefully veiled language.” 14
In addition, consideration should be given to the fact that, under normal circumstances, a burial
cloth which once enveloped a corpse and was stained with blood would have been looked upon
by Jews as being unclean. Teaching would be required in order for new converts to gain a
different perspective regarding this special burial Shroud. Since this particular funeral cloth was
stained with the sacrificial blood of “The Lamb of God,” it came to be treasured by the early
Christians and looked upon as being a sacred cloth-having been sanctified by Jesus’ holy blood
and having served as his High-Priestly tunic while His body was inside the tomb.15 Importantly,
this proper perspective regarding the holy garment was likely another reason, in addition to
persecution, for the necessity of “The Discipline of the Secret” and its carefully guarded
catechism during the early Church.
This current paper will present brief analyses of four statements within the New Testament that
serve as strong candidates for being “veiled” or hidden references to what is known today as
the Shroud of Turin. The reader might conclude one text is more persuasive than another.
Considered collectively, these texts offer strong evidence supporting the conclusion that the
Turin Shroud (with its amazing image) both existed and was known by the earliest Christians.
This paper is written from the perspective that the Turin Shroud is indeed the authentic burial
cloth that once wrapped the corpse of Jesus.16
In this author’s opinion, it is best not to pitch these texts as being either unquestionable or
primary proofs regarding the authenticity of the Shroud. One can find stronger evidence in that
regard from forensic science and historical artifacts. It is preferable to perceive these passages
with a different mindset.
In the end, the true power of resurrection isn't found in the piece of cloth no matter how fascinating but in the transformation that takes place place in us when we believe in Jesus Christ for our salvation.
What is Resurrection?
Richard Rohr, OFM: "Back in 1967, my systematic theology professor, Fr. Cyrin Maus, OFM, told us that if a video camera had been placed in front of Jesus’ tomb, it wouldn’t have filmed a lone man emerging from a grave (which would be resuscitation more than resurrection). More likely, he felt, it would’ve captured something like beams of light extending in all directions."
Resurrection is not the same as resuscitation. Resurrection is something that has never ever happened before. It is not simply the dead being brought back to life only to die again at a later date, like Lazarus whom Jesus raised from the dead. Or, what some doctors allegedly did with modern medical technology, etc.
Resurrection is a quantum leap to a new form of a very superior kind life.... life everlasting, to say the least. An analogy would be that of a caterpillar having 'died' to its old form but lives again as a butterfly.... or of a seed having died but sprouted/transformed into a new form of life, that of a plant or even a tree.
*
The resurrection of Jesus Christ is not reanimation (like a zombie that can move about but is quite mindless) or resuscitation (like those who are clinically dead-whose heart has stopped -but brought back to life medically; or like Lazarus who was raised back to life, by Jesus, only to die again later of another mortal cause). Through the resurrection, the Risen Christ is the same Christ that people knew but in a new, glorious, immortal state of existence - no longer subjected to the limits of materiality or mortality: He has risen to die no more. The good news is everyone of us are called to share that life in Christ.
...“Resurrection is not a restoration to life, as with Lazarus and the widow’s son. Resurrection is something no human person has ever experienced. It is not a return to a former life, but a quantum leap into a higher life. In other words, the body of Jesus that rose on Easter was infinitely different from the body that was buried on Good Friday.” (Challenge 2000 by Mark Link,SJ; Wk.30,Day 4, p.321)
-The Gospels do not explain the resurrection; the resurrection explains the Gospels. -J.S. Whale
- Richard Rohr, OFM: "My systematic theology professor used to say that if the Resurrection had been filmed, it probably would not have shown a man stepping out of the tomb holding a flag, as most Christian art illustrates. The camera probably would have recorded a huge flash of light. The Risen Christ is Jesus released from all space/time restrictions. He is beyond space; he is beyond time. He includes all of the spiritual and the physical world, reconciled within himself."
Jesus's tomb was in the surrounding area of Jerusalem..
A lot of grasping at straws by those who hate the Catholic Church and extend that hatred to the Holy Shroud. None of your so-called "idol worship" objections makes a bit of sense. Jesus' gave this "evil and unfaithful" generation a miraculous sign which proves that he was a real first century person who was executed by crucifixion and whose dead body dematerialized while still covered by its burial cloth. The skeptics ought to be ashamed of their long and worthless diatribes against the Holy Shroud.
We will be judged. that much is true.
i don't need the shroud to prove Christ died and rose again... i have my Bible and that is enough. Having that said, I do NOT believe it is Christ's shroud. The Bible is clear that the ripped out His beard in Isaiah 50:6. The shroud clearly shows someone who still has a beard.
Isaiah 50:6 doesn’t say his beard was ripped out. It says that he gave his “cheeks to them that plucked off the hair”. You can clearly see that he still had a beard and mustache and the sides of his cheeks are obscured by his hair so we don’t know exactly to what extent his beard was plucked. The shroud image still remains the world’s only fluorescing 3D image on a 2D surface which is against the laws of physics. If it’s not the burial cloth of Christ, then what is it? Aliens?
Of course but in this skeptical age science only and A.I. and money n power is God ,the Lord may have provided for those who "must SEE n touch his wounds" in order to believe ir have faith,the Lord may have made a provision for such souls be it a fake or true.
You may not need the shroud to prove that Christ died and rose again but it appears that God allowed that evidence to come to light anyway so that there is no excuse for unbelief in others. Many people have been caught admitting that they do not WANT the shroud to be genuine. That should speak volumes.
Isaiah 50:6 doesn't say that they ripped out his beard. It says that they "plucked out the hair" from his cheeks. That's a big difference. You can plainly see in the shroud image that he has a beard and mustache. As far as his cheeks, it's obscured by his hair, so any speculation that this may debunk the authenticity of the shroud is valueless. We do not know exactly how much hair was "plucked" from his cheeks.
So many people of science scream that we need reason in considering the authenticity the shroud. They say it's not reasonable that the shroud could be genuine and that we need to stay within the realm of science BUT they better be careful because the more that science advances and is used in determining the state of the shroud, it may very well end up confirming that the image was indeed formed on the shroud by a force from outside our time domain. Even this very day, the image of a crucified man on a linen shroud in Turin has been proven to be a 3D fluorescing image on a 2D surface which is impossible and operates outside what we call the laws of physics. Here it is the year 2024, and still no one can replicate the image due to the advanced properties therein.
😢
Not his burial clothes. There were two parts, one for his head and the other for his body according to what the bible says. And, the bible says they pulled his beard off ( which was regular Roman law to humilate you) and beat him until he was UNRECOGNIZABLE. This is not the burial clothes of Jesus.
There are a loooooooooot of details on that shroud that do indeed match up with the gospels’ accounts of the crucifixion, and the part about ripping his beard out comes from Isaiah, which was a prediction from hundreds of years in advance, not an eyewitness account. If you want to get that specific, Isaiah also says Jesus would be hung on a tree, not nailed to a cross.
The Messiah Christ , for the Jew, is never a redeemer from original sin. He is, however, the restorer of the jewish state. He is King David, come again to rule over an independent jewish people, freed from the dominion of the foreigners. In the history of new testament gospel writer Joseph of Arimathaias General Saul Paul Josephus it will be noticed that the great central figure of the narrative of the " Wars " is the man this historian marks out for his blackest military calumnies, the greatest general of the Jews, the patriot whose unfailing faith in God, and hope in the direct intervention of Divine Providence worked out his own undoing on a roman cross in city of Rome and that of his unhappy country ; the man who, leading undisciplined multitudes from Tyre to Idumea, and from Perea to the sea, repeatedly defeating the finest disciplined armies of general Titus and the greatest military geniuses the Roman Empire could produce, was King Mono Basileus General Simon Iscariot Arshakuni Bar Giora Izates II the master Sicarius Zealot Unrecognized under his titular name of " the Liberator," this great man has remained undefended against the traitorous calumnies of the craven flatterer of the Flavian family.
In spite of all his vilification at the hands of Josephus, the fact stands out that Simon Bar Giora was a man of intense, almost resistless energy. He swept like a devastating hurricane across the hills of Idumea and the valleys and plains of Judea. For three and a half years forty-two months " or " 1260 days he kept at bay the greatest army that the broad empire of Rome could furnish, and more than once cut into " fragments " and drove the soldiers like swine by thousands into the sea.
The mountain of vituperation which the renegade Josephus heaped upon this wonderful man, cannot hide the passionate patriotism which sacrificed all for the independence of his country, his equally passionate devotion to the woman, nameless in Josephus, who shall ever be associated with him in glorious memory, his unswerving faith in the Lord of Hosts to intervene for his Chosen People and to establish for his own that Kingdom foretold by the prophets, who had actually named Bar Gi'ora as the one who should be the Liberator of his people, Israel. Did not Daniel, in fact, declare him, nominatim, the Anointed Savior and Deliverer of his people, the Ben Adam, the Hebrew form of the Aramaic Bara Gihhora, that is, Bar Gi'ora, the " Son of Man ".? With absolute, abiding faith and trust in these inspired promises, is it surprising that Simon Bar Gi'ora should believe himself to be what the people proclaimed him, when, according to Josephus (Wars IV, 9) they " made joyful acclamations to him as their Savior and Preserver.'' " Soter and Kedemon are the words used by Josephus, the equivalent of Jeshua and Natsir. Josephus, whose political apostasy made him hate the very name of the Liberator, Simon Bar Gi'ora, describes in Wars IV, 9, an expedition of that great leader into Idumea. He says the Son of Man went up into the mountains to pray the assistance of the settlements scattered along the Wilderness of Kadesh. To those who joined him he offered many advantages : " liberty to those in slavery and rewards to those who were free " - the men condemned to labors and those heavily laden with debts. Josephus says the populace were obedient to Bar Gi'ora, the Son of Man, " as their king." John 6: 15 says the jewish people sought to make him their king. penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/war-4.html?fbclid=IwAR0p9BxWjsTKwNQWP9lEtHw2fDisEhgEx9iakSsbrVzAk-l42Dvd9bxwitw
Its a proven fake and even if it was real all ot proves os someone was wrapped in it not that jesus was in it
LOL !
@@jeffreyerwin3665 can laugh all you want I didn't do the test on it.
@@CMain2Stupid
According to the Matthew, Christ the Son of Man King Mono Basileus General Simon Iscariot Arshakuni Bar Giora Izates II the master Sicarius Zealot King of The Jews , just before his arrest in Rome in garden after his escape, addressed his first born son known as the Rock " the Simon Judas iscariot Peter Rehem namely Eleazar " as Hetaire, which is incorrectly translated " Friend." The thought that the " Unerring One " should address a person deemed his mortal enemy as " friend," an epithet they believed to be false, has been a source of great annoyance to expositors. Really, hetaire is a much more intimate term than *' Friend," for it means " comrade," a military expression, of course.
The Mark 14:45, relates the meeting thus: "And when he came, immediately he went up to him and said, ' Rabbi ! rabbi ! ' and he kissed him much," It is not unreasonable to suppose that the initial letter in " Rabbi " has been an early addition to the original text, which, accordingly, would previously have read, " And when he came, he immediately went up to him and said, ' Abbi ! abbi ! ' ('My father! My father!') and kissed him very affectionately. It is not reasonable to assume that such a positive character as the Son of Man undoubtedly was, would knowingly permit a traitor to approach him within arms' length and " to kiss him very tenderly " as a sign to an enemy. It is more than likely that he returned the sincere embrace with equal warmth, and that as they parted from each other's arms, he perceived the officers of General Titus who had shadowed his son, and at that moment, discovering that all was over, he said, with infinite sadness, as may be gleaned from the Luke 22:48, "Darling Son [Jehidi], with your kiss you have betrayed the Son of Man."
The shroud is a 14th century curio.
1. He wasn't wrapped at the moment of death. 2. The blood already divided into water and other substances on the cross, 3. There wasn't much blood left when he died after being beaten. 4. He fainted from bloodloss 5. The body was washed and balmed, prepared to be wrapped. 6. It took a long time to clean the body and patch up the wounds, 7. They used bandages to wrap bodies. 8. No mummy was ever wrapped in 1 sheet of linen. 9. This clip is stupid. 10. Carbon dating has never been accurate and you can test your dead cat that died 3000 years ago. 11. They took cloths from Paul to heal people with and this makes it mythology. 12. The cloth was only on his body for about 1 day, and he wasn't even bleeding. 13. Blood doesn't make facial imprints or finger lines. 14. I sleep in my bed every night and there isn't any evidence of my image on the sheets. 15. Who is the doofus that discovered this trash. 16. Pay me, I'll make a better one that looks more like a 30 year old boy and less like an 80 year old hobo.
This also goes with the scripture verse where Christ was wrapped with more than one linen cloth.
One for the head and one for the body.
John 20:6-9
@@M.Kingsley-zy7dn I didn't know. Thank you.
@@B3AManYou're welcome!
People are so gullible to deceit.
I once pointed this out on a similar video and the replies were absolute nonsense.
They want to stick to artifacts and tokens and a shroud, to worship them.
I agree with what you said, except for the cloth being on Christ's body for one day.
He was indeed 3 days & 3 nights in the grave/tomb.
The [one day] legacy also came from the same establishment.
Pay you??? LOL! There is a standing prize of one million dollars offered to anyone who can accurately reproduce the images on the Shroud. Good luck! LOL !
@@M.Kingsley-zy7dn the only "gullible" on this thread are those who buy into the dismissal of what science has proven about the Shroud.
😂😂😂All fake
The true dates of Christ and Prophecy...
Birth: Tishri 1, 3737 - September 12/13, 25 bce - Sign of Revelation 12
Death: Nisan 14, 3786 - April 19, 26ad Passover Jubilee High Sabbath day
Age at Death: 49.7 years old - Leviticus 25
50 years (the Jubilee Law) minus one fifth (1/5th) = 49.7
All according to the Law & the Prophets. The 2 true winesses
This is the age of Christ at his death, 4-5 months shy of 50 years old. His time was cut short.