Shroud of Turin

[saucy]

I recently saw a new program on the Shroud of Turin where they actually came up with a good theory and tested it and it seems very probable. They said it looks like the shroud is nothing more than a print. In ancient times, people would create some kind of stone figure or a small statue and heat it up and press the cloth against it and then you get the end result. They tested this and the imprint that came out looked exactly like the shroud image. If they made a stone figure of Jesus and wrapped a cloth around it, it could certainly capture the whole image. They show claims that Da Vinci was well known with doing this kind of work. What do you guys think?

[Wings of Selkhet]

I think I might've seen the same show, and I consider the whole Turin case pretty much closed. Nothing supernatural involved at all.

[saucy]

Nobody ever claimed there was anything supernatural about it as far as I know. The case has always been whether it was the burial cloth of Jesus or not.

[Wings of Selkhet]

Of course people have claimed that it had supernatural aspects. Before it was known how the image on the shroud was made, fanatics were convinced that somehow when Jesus rose from the dead his image was imprinted onto it. If that's not supernatural, I don't know what is.

[doomgirl]

If I tried that with my step monster, I'd end up with a Gorilla

[Subtemperate]

Why do I have an image of people walking around in ancient times with :

"I met jesus and all i got was this lousy t-shirt..."

[thewicked1]

The problem with the Shroud is that the face looks awfully white. Jesus would have to be either black or arabian. Prove me wrong and show me a white boy in Israel at that time period.

[Asterix]

The problem with the Shroud is that the face looks awfully white. Jesus would have to be either black or arabian. Prove me wrong and show me a white boy in Israel at that time period.

First of all, the skin's natural tint has nothing to do with the marks it leaves on the fabric.

Second, there are ppl living in Israel that are even dark blonde. (And by the way, there is no "arabian" race. Arabs can be caucasian, black, or with genes from both)

[aquatus1]

The other problem that springs to mind is that the picture looks well proportioned in two dimensions, as if it was a photograph. If it was indeed wrapped around a three dimensional object, such as a statue or a body, then the image would be warped and extended. Try molding a piece of paper around your face, then flatten it out and see how the imprint looks nothing like a photograph.

[thewicked1]

First of all, the skin's natural tint has nothing to do with the marks it leaves on the fabric.

Second, there are ppl living in Israel that are even dark blonde. (And by the way, there is no "arabian" race. Arabs can be caucasian, black, or with genes from both)

Actually I was talking about facial features, not skin tone. And yes there are dark blondes living in the region, now 2000 years later. I'm talking about then. As for there being no arabians, go tell them that. They are distinct and different from whites or blacks, not just a mixture of the two. There has been a distinct arab race for the last 6000 years.