> It contains neither color nor pigments> The fibers of the cloth are discolored only to a depth of 200–600 nanometers> It does not fluoresce under UV light (though the scorches and repair marks from the 1560 fire damage do)> Natural negative image, discovered in 1898> Contains 3D information from brightness differences, discovered in 1976> Cannot be reproduced with medieval or even modern technologyAs I said, the cloth contains no dye or binder particles. Those would in any case penetrate to a depth of several micrometers, so that is doubly impossible (and they would fluoresce under UV illumination). The image was also not produced by pressing a hot imprint. That would burn much deeper and the chemical changes would also cause the image to fluoresce under UV light. And even if it were not so, the origin of the 3D information would still be a completely unresolved mystery. The discoloration is caused by the oxidation/dehydration of the cellulose itself, not by any applied substance.A method has been found to produce similar physical, chemical, and microscopic properties in a laboratory on a piece of linen:If a piece of flax is irradiated with a laser of 193 nm wavelength, 12-nanosecond pulse duration, and an intensity of 2–4 gigawatts per square centimeter, a similar color, depth and chemical change of the cloth occurs. For 1.7 square meters (17000 cm2) this therefore requires 34 terawatts. A prize of one million dollars was offered from 2022–24 for a replication that emulates all known properties using medieval techniques. No one applied. Because it is impossible. It was the flash of light from Jesus resurrection that altered the shroud in this way and no one can debunk this - not even a single aspect.
>>533669752Idk why Christians want this to be real. It’s called faith for a reason. Having “proof” defeats the purpose
>>533669752BEHOLD! The holy foreskin!
>>533670047well kindahttps://x.com/benwehrman/status/2044129100022067382?s=20>>533669903>Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.John 10:25What am I supposed to do? Ignore an otherwise unexplainable phenomenom? Not making a thread about a topic that deserves a thread?
You can easily check this yourself with a LLM sumup
>>533669903The resurrection happening doesn't justify the faith. You still have to believe that God will raise YOU from the dead. And honestly, if it is divine I'd be very worried that God performed a miracle in such a way that our generation would know that it was real. That's scary.
>>533669752Who cares? Just some cloth seasoned with dead sand nigger.
>>533669752Ill take religious artifacts more seriously as long you Christians will admit ufos are real and we live in an age of disclosure You can believe they are demons but im hundred percent they are not of this earth.
>>533672089I think it's a "something to ponder about ;)"-easter egg from God. We can decipher some its elements because God wanted it this way and we now know it could not have come from man. A God that can resurrect the dead can do anything. I think it's some form of small gift for us so even the autistic stemcels will believe in this age.>not so fast, atheist ;) - don't fall for the lies of this age.
>>533669752It doesn't prove anything
>>533672952I know pol christians here have long accepted them as real and playing out their part for project blue beam and the new age, they stop trying to anally probe you when you rebuke them in Jesus name
grok sumup.
I known fake like forever. Most recent study showed that you could only form that image from it being draped over a body if the body were a carved bas relief with exaggerated features.
The negative and 3D information can be explained by the fact that the shroud was loosely draped over his body.The rays of light emanating from him caused the greatest change in the cloth where it came into direct contact with his body (nose, forehead). Where the light was brightest, the imprint is darkest (“burned in”) (but, as mentioned, not in a way that would cause it to fluoresce). From the cheeks, which did not directly touch the cloth, part of the radiation was absorbed by the air, resulting in less “burn-in.” Hence the negative and the accurate 3D information.
>>533669752shroud is real, even dating it is real(chronology is fake)
>>533669903its not made so obviously to be "real" that it defeats faith. Its amazing for believers, because it is a gift, an image of our Lord showing the marks of his passion for us. Thats what makes it real, it gives us a tangible link to him we only otherwise get in the Eucharist (but then it is disguised). Youll never "prove" God exists with science, he didn't make it that way. It just is.
>>533672089>You still have to believe that God will raise YOU from the deadHow the fuck is that gonna work kek
>>533669903Well probably because not even them believe the abrahamic bullshit.
>>533674490there are no pigments in the fibers. And burning the cloth via uniform heat would make it fluoresce under UV light and make the imprint many micrometers deep. These people always try to explain just a single aspect with new theories, just to run into other problems. A bas relief can't replicate the chemical change in the fibers.
>>533672952>we live in an age of disclosureEXCEPT for the Epstein files. Aliens is ok but rich people fucking kids NO NO NO!
If you have access to one of the larger and better LLMs, you can CTRL+A, CTRL+C and CTRL+V and ask it whose statements are true (mine are). Fact check this thread.
>>533674732the OT has little theological meaning to Christians. It's just a historic document.
>>533669752wouldn't the simplest test be to lay an identical clean shroud over an actual corpse and let it sit for three days?
>>533669752My problem is that though I believe the Shroud to be the real deal, the Bible itself seems to be a crock of shit in general.Jesus really resurrected from the dead, but He also said He would be back “before this generation has passed”.It’s been 2000 years, nigger.
>>533669903this is the most European post in this thread
>>533670047Though shalt not mock they holy precipice!
>>533669903This. They got their proof when constantines mom cured some broad with an exhumed hunk of wood
Making an image like this is so easy to do. I've seen it done in an american documentary about 25 years ago. Probably aired on Discovery channel or maybe a Swedish TV-channel.
https://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/article-15712935/jesus-resurrection-shroud-turin-experiment.htmlhttps://www.dailymail.com/sciencetech/article-14543595/Historical-evidence-Jesus-crucifixion-ancient-Roman-manuscript.html
>>533669752>It was the flash of light from Jesus resurrection that altered the shroud in this way and no one can debunk this - not even a single aspect.Nowhere in the bible does it claim he flouresced when resurrected nor would they have just forgotten to mention that there was a fucking imprinted funeral shroud when people went in.It's Some Face made Somehow.There's no primary accounts for it being Jesus.
https://shadowshroud.com/images.htm
>>533679529No one was there to witness it and the resulting effect might not have been noticed until much later after the scriptures were written. Thy probably stuck it in a box and forgot about it.
>>533674490what kind of retarded reasoning is this? people think the image was caused by the shroud falling THROUGH the body, not the body glowing outward. it wouldn't be a distorted image, retard
>>533677107Maybe he did return, maybe many times over, but each time he doea he ia tracked by some unholy means, captured, locked up for a lifetime until death by old age, and the cycle continues for many generations over and over.By whom you'd ask? That's a self evident one.
>>533669752Right. Christ is obviously god and you didn’t need the shroud to figure that out, but he left it here anyway for the doubters.
>>533669903Sure. But if you’re a materialist this represents an unresolvable paradox to your world view. It’s a bigger leap of faith for you to deny what is plainly in front of you of your eyes than to accept the truth of this object. Like Christ, it’s completely unique and without any kind of peer example
>>533669903>muh faithI don’t want faith. Faith for me is just an educated guess based on the little evidence provided. Enough for me to believe but not enough for me to fully know and understand.Keywords: knowing and understanding. I don’t just want to believe in Christ. I want to fully know it. In greek knowledge is gnosis. The endgame for any serious religious person isn’t religion. Is science. It’s gnosis. Faith is just the first step. It’s the equivalent of formulating an hypothesis. I still ultimately want proof.
