What Jesus looked like as a young boy

[Still Waters]

Detectives claim to have revealed how Jesus Christ looked as a child - based on computer forensics and the world's most famous relic.

Using the Turin Shroud, the supposed burial cloth of Jesus, police investigators have generated a photo-fit image from the negative facial image on the material. And from this they reversed the ageing process to create an image of a young Jesus, by reducing the size of the jaw, raising the chin and straightening the nose.

http://www.independe...y-10223989.html

[Eldorado]

LOL

[some new guy]

looks like Weird Al Yankovic

BEST - Ron

[Magnanimus]

Hey, they got the most important thing, and that's to make sure Jesus always looks like a shaded in White guy.

[Podo]

Looks like a young Ronnie James Dio.

[She-ra]

Isn't there a controversy that the Turin Shroud might not be the actual burial cloth of Jesus? I can't remember. I thought I read that somewhere that there wasn't definite proof or anything? Just curious.

[.ZZ.]

I thought it was very odd.

I have an image in my mind of what I like to think he looks like, but that's not quite it.

Edited May 5, 2015 by ZZ430

[Magnanimus]

Isn't there a controversy that the Turin Shroud might not be the actual burial cloth of Jesus? I can't remember. I thought I read that somewhere that there wasn't definite proof or anything? Just curious.

You can't ever have proof of something that's an article of faith, like the Resurrection. That said, there are a lot of quirks to the Turin Shroud that could understandably raise eyebrows, despite carbon-14 testing.

Really, the Shroud is the exception to relics in that it was even allowed to be tested by modern science. Of course, that just causes more fun to be had when the Vatican treats it like literally every other relic and says that further testing isn't allowed and it's meant to be taken on pure faith, not justified hunches. People jump at every chance they get to think the Vatican is "up to something" or trying to hide something ground breaking.

Between the late 1200's and the late 1800's, the Shroud was important to the monasteries and churches that kept it, but people weren't really lining up to see an old, faded image when there were prettier paintings around. When the Shroud was displayed for the first time in x-number of decades, it was photographed for the first time, and the photo-negative of the image is what got everyone's attention, since it actually made things like blood stains stand out and defined the image. It's more likely that you've seen the negative image before the actual image.

Jump forward a hundred years, or so, and the new carbon-14 dating technology and a number of new trace forensic techniques convinced the Church to let a team of independent researchers run tests on the Shroud. The carbon-14 test was the big one everyone paid attention to. You see, organic matter is constantly replacing the atoms that make it up, carbon included. Carbon usually has a mass number of 12: 6 protons and 6 neutrons in its nucleus. Carbon-14 is a radioactive version of carbon with two extra neutrons. Over time, carbon-14 decays, and when something dies, it fixes a set amount of carbon-14 in its make up, so the decay can be compared to a standard and the time period that something stopped taking in carbon (read as: died) can be determined within a margin of error. They tested the Shroud and came back with a date of sometime in the mid-1300's, so an obvious medieval forgery… Except for a couple outstanding issues...

First off, in about the fifteenth or sixteenth century, the Shroud was involved in a fire at its home monastery. It was kept in an oaken strongbox, banded with silver. The fire burned hot enough to melt the silver, which dripped down and burned holes in folded cloth, explaining the obvious patches sewn into it. But what also happened was that the oak wood box was sealed so tightly that it created a low-oxygen environment, which saved the Shroud from combusting, but essentially dry-roasted it and began to turn it to charcoal with the inside of the chest. At the time of testing, that wasn't taken into account and there really isn't a definitive way you can account for something like that contaminating results. It might actually make it entirely impossible to date, unless (and only then, possibly) the interior fibrils of the threads can make up enough to sample.

Second, while the Vatican didn't allow more samples to be taken, the original postage stamp-sized samples taken from the hem of the Shroud were still around. When the original sample were tested by fiber analysis, it came back that they were Egyptian cotton… The original Shroud is made of linen… So not only did the researchers jump the gun on releasing the carbon-date without taking a proper history, they dated the medieval restoration work of nuns reweaving the frayed edges of the Shroud with cotton yarn that had been artificially aged to match the look of the rest. Which also calls into question another supposed nail in the Shroud's coffin; the discovery of pigment on the blank threads, but not on the image itself. The pigment may also be the result of a common medieval practice of reproducing relics and pressing the replicas to the original for a little extra contact-mojo.

Third, they could have saved everyone a lot of time and not made the Church look superstitious and senile and themselves look pretentious and douchey if they'd bothered to look into the relic's history. There are dated historical records with detailed illustrations that discuss the Shroud over half a century before the absolute earliest date the adjusted carbon-date predicted. That should've been the first clue that something was up with the dating.

Now, I mentioned how they used nearly every trace forensic test available at the time, and it's the results of those tests, immediately over-shadowed by the corrupted carbon-date, that suggest the Shroud to be much more… "interesting"… than a simple medieval forgery.

Threads taken from the image itself show that the discoloration only affects the outer casing fibers of the yarn and not the internal fibrils. Dyes would soak through to the cores and there's nothing to suggest pigment being used, making the exact mechanism behind the threads' discoloration still a mystery.

Dust particles taken from the feet of the image are consistent with the geology of Jerusalem, and pollen from extinct species of plants native to the Levant were trapped in the weave. The blood on the Shroud is also human, type A-, but that's common enough and no usable DNA was present in sample.

The image doesn't suggest a stamp, like a face was covered in a colorant and the cloth was pressed over it. Instead, the image is darker relative to the closeness the cloth would be to the "body" it was wrapped around. In other words, places where it was touching the face, like the bridge of the nose, brow, and chin are more greatly discolored than the parts further from the cloth like the maxilla, orbital sockets, and orbicular lines. The plain image is disproportional to a human face, but taking this three-dimensionality into account, the reconstructed face takes on the proper proportions.

There are also a number of historically accurate traits that disagree with commonly held depictions of Christ, chief among them, the "nail holes" being through the wrists and not the palms, as would be expected. If it were a medieval forgery, I'm not sure the artist would get his full price for messing up something so accepted as nails through the palms. There are also visible, barbell-shaped marks on the back of the figure consistent with the metal tips of a distinctly Roman scourge. Also the material of the Shroud and its very distinctive weave pattern are consistent with first century Judaean designs and materials.

To say, "Yes, this is the burial cloth of the resurrected Jesus of Nazareth," is a statement of faith, free from objective science. At the same time though, to write this off as a medieval forgery is to willfully controvert that very same science out of personal bias. It would also mandate an equally fantastic scenario of a medieval forger who could see the future in order to fool any number of modern forensic techniques, as well as the ability to create a modeling technique of three-dimensional realism, that took a computer to crack, that was never used in any other work.

Personally, I think this is one of those things we weren't meant to have an answer to in this world. The thing has been pulled from a number of "mysterious fires" and saved enough times in its recorded history that I don't really need a "the truth is out there" speech to suspect it could be more than just mundane. Whether that's the result of an angelic Men in Black order at work, or just what comes naturally to a table cloth that has a legend that exceeds anything it should be expected to live up to, is beyond me.

If definitive and conclusive proof came to light that it was an undoubted fake, I'd be disappointed, but it won't affect faith. There's a reason the Judeo-Christian God forbade idol-making. Man is the only fabricated image the Lord lives and works through, and as fascinating as this bolt of cloth is, it's still only a discarded husk, even in the context of its own story.

[docyabut2]

since he was from the house of David who was described as rugy and red,I picture him like this,

Edited May 6, 2015 by docyabut2

[Magnanimus]

[She-ra]

Thanks for the explanation Magnanimus

Third...

[acute]

I'm sorry, I refuse to pray to some spotty teenager!

[Davros of Skaro]

The Shroud is fake just like the Gospels.

Just read these and be amazed.

Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed at All

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0557709911/ref=mp_s_a_1_3_twi_2_pap?qid=1431024009&sr=8-3&keywords=nailed

On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1909697494/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1431024119&sr=8-1π=AC_SY200_QL40&keywords=richard+carrier&dpPl=1&dpID=41LEbzwO3FL&ref=plSrch

See the technology behind the making of the Shroud of Turin:

Lemon juice turns brown on heating | Irreversible change | Chemistry 

[docyabut2]

The head Shroud`s that was found , its DNA match the Shroud of theTurin, that places it at the time of the Jesus Christ. Perhaps they only took samples of the outer lining of Shroud of the Turin of which could have been added or sew on.

[Davros of Skaro]

The head Shroud`s that was found , its DNA match the Shroud of theTurin, that places it at the time of the Jesus Christ. Perhaps they only took samples of the outer lining of Shroud of the Turin of which could have been added or sew on.

Do not forget that the same Blood of the Shroud matches the the Blood found in a Tunnel.The Tunnel ended directly under Golgotha where Jesus's Blood flowed down and dripped on the Mercy Seat of the Ark.Also this blood shows that it only has one parent which was a female.

What more proof and evidence do these hardened Hearted Atheists need?

[Allesehir]

since he was from the house of David who was described as rugy and red,I picture him like this,

soo right ! and here is the real image from the shroud from this study into it .

and the baby ( @ about 4) Burpo Identifies the Jesus of the little girl Akiana's painting which she painted at 8 years old.

to Burpo only her Jesus as the real one.

not only does it match the shroud it also matches the scars on opposite sides , just like a true mirror image/ reflection should.

that is just soo cool!

now the meaning behind this whole deal I don't think is quite as fluffy and sweet as the two tiny little children express as His purpose about it .

[Grandpa Greenman]

This is what kids of the area look like today.

Ancient canaanites

[back to earth]

What ? You expect me to worship some swarthy Palestinian ?

They aint 'pure enough' for God.

They gotta be white, with the right eye colour