Is the Shroud of Turin real or hoax?

Answer 1

I asked a friend about it who is an expert on such things. He said there were four blind tests originally done on it. All four teams were scientist that concluded it did not exist before the 14th century. The scientist were upset when they learned it was the shroud they were testing because most were Catholics.

The story goes that a French knight sold it to a priest. The priest wrote the pope stating that it looked like a fake yet the pope without seeing it declared it real. Nuns kept it in a metal box and when their church caught fire it burned the edges as to why you have burn marks on it.

A French artist demonstrated 10 years ago that during the 1400's to 1600's there was a popular dying method on a cloth to image people. He demonstrated that making a burial cloth like the shroud was easy to do. The one he made was identical to the shroud.

There has never been any dna, pollen from Jerusalem found on the shroud as spun by certain pro-shroud groups. The original tests and subsequent blind tests afterwards found none.

In the early 1900's a second shroud turned up and immediately was taken by the Catholic church and never seen again. Before it was taken it was examined and found to be the same cloth, dye and artist that made the original.

However the big smoking gun that disproves the shroud is that the image is reversed. The image on the shroud is supposedly taken from the closest part of the body. Therefore looking at the image side the spear wound on the right side of Christ would appear to be reversed on the right side. Like a mirror. However on the shroud it is painted exactly on the image's right side which looking at it is on our left. This indicates the artist drew the spear wound on the correct side as if looking at Christ. However as an image of his body it would be on the opposite side. A clear indication it was made.

Answer 2

There have been so many opinions lately about the Shroud of Turin and carbon dating has not provided a definitive date, so the discussion between scientists and religious believers continues to date. The last I heard was that it was a little joke played by Leonardo Da Vinci and that it is just the result of an experiment with a crude type of photographic chamber.

This is just like the Mantle of the Virgin of Guadalupe in Mexico, which some people declare to be a hoax while respected professionals are willing to swear it is not.

Answer 3

It is a hoax. As someone else has pointed out, carbon dating has shown this is not from the correct time period. I actually saw a documentary that claimed it was possible Leonardo DaVinci created it, but I think this was just an attempt to cash in on the popularity of the DaVinci code. And I have to ask: where would anyone get Christ's DNA? When you try to mix science with religion, all you get is nonsense.

Answer 4

I certainly have performed extensive examine in this over the years. It has a good evidence of being genuine. a million. it is the main possibly merchandise to maintain via fact it became into left smartly piled up via the Lord himself after he arose. 2. it does not be saved if the guy dying became into nevertheless in it. 3.It exhibits marks of a individual who has nails in the wrist it is greater possibly the suggestions-blowing place to place them via fact the palms might pull out. 4. The eyes have been lined with Roman money that are seen and could be seen as from that era. 5. there is pollan from flowers which date it. 6.the textile is woven from Israel with that era and likewise signs and indications of a rich person which it could be. 7. the variety could be taken in a wierd shape if wrapped around a individual and this exhibits that. It became into no longer straightforward for an artist to teach this sort of factor. 8. there is not any sign of paint. i've got self assurance that's genuine and that i'm not at all Catholic. If genuine they'd be the keepers even nonetheless it belongs to all Christians in yet another experience. i needed to function to this considering I study comments via others. They have been coming to place the spices on the physique while they got here upon the risen Lord. It had none on the time then. additionally there became right into a pretend shroud yet I not at all heard that any one varified this one as pretend. there have been numerous.

Answer 5

I personally believe it's the real deal. If it's turns out not to be we had an artist among us that had more talent than any artist at any time in the history of man and we didn't see him. He would have had to paint in negative the image on the shroud before negative images were known.. Nope, it's the real deal, no one was that good...

Answer 6

I doubt we will ever know.

I DO know it is a powerful piece of fabric, clearly depicting the body of a crucified man....either real or an elaborate recreation.

I DO know that whether it is authentic or a hoax doesn't matter. What DOES matter is the faith it inspires in people and the appreciation for how horrible crucifixion was.

Answer 7

It's a fourteenth century fake. We know this from:

- numerous c12 datings
- the earliest historical record for the shroud dates to that time
- shrouds were big business at the time
- it's a bas relief painting, and the technique likely used to paint it has been reproduced.

Answer 8

its a hoax because if it is not then the age of the cloth should be atleast 2005 years, but by carbon-dating method, it was established that its not more than 700 years old.

Answer 9

Hoax.

Answer 10

i think its a hoax, because the type cloth used for shroud at that time could not survive for such a long span of time. it ould have decomposed.