@@stuksy4321 his avatar body is no more. He is back in the eternal with God where we will all be one day if we play this game called life right and believe in Jesus and do his will on this planet.
Rip Barrie Schwortz 😢 This is the first I’m hearing of it. I loved his interviews and stories about his time working with the shroud and how he was a reluctant believer at first but came to terms with its authenticity. He was a good man and a gentleman. He will be missed. 🙏
I once had the opportunity to speak with Barrie on the phone for about an hour one evening over 10 years ago. He did more than anybody I know to promote the Shroud and it's connection to Christ. We'll all miss you Barrie.
Speaking as an artist, I can't think of ANYTHING more fiendishly difficult to paint than a negative image. That alone convinces me that whatever it is, it isn't faked. If it was faked in the middle ages, it would *look* like a painting done in the middle ages. The "photorealism" would look like a Jan Van Eyck, or something similar. That's what looked real to people of that era. The faker would probably throw in gold leaf and interesting colors. He would not do *any* sacred image in the raw style appropriate to a black and white newspaper image of the 20th century, completely drained of beauty or interest to medieval eyes. That rawness came later. If you know your art history, the idea that this is what a medieval fake would look like...can only be imagined by an ignorant modern mind. My two cents as an artist.
l pray with ALL my heart, and have prayed for Barrie ...that he accepted Jesus as his Saviour. The Man who's face he has been looking at for 47 years. May he be with The Lord in paradise today ~ Amen.
This is all so cringeworthy. We know the Shroud is a mediaeval forgery. There are small discrepancies in the carbon dating due to different cleaning methods at the labs, but they all returned dates from the Middle Ages. For contamination to explain the results would require hundreds of pounds of extraneous carbon. All the evidence is consistent with forgery.
Oh, very sad to hear that dear Barry Schworts has left us. Thank you Barry for your splendid input on the shroud over many years. I always loved listening to you speak on the Shroud. May you rest in peace now 🙏🏽 🤍 🕊 🤍
So sad to hear that Barry has passed away. He liked a life full of purpose and left a great legacy for future generations. My perpetual light shine upon him.
It makes perfect sense to me why the negative image of the facial portion of the shroud appears so life-like; it is a negative of a negative, that being the shroud itself. A negative of a person’s image ordinarily looks odd to us, and that is what we have in the shroud. It only makes sense that a negative image of the shroud would reverse that oddness and give us a clearer representation of the original person that made the negative impression on the shroud.
! am 91 years old. My husband and i ran a small guest house in Orkney 1975 - 1990 ---- six guests B & B, and three course evening meal meal. I have our guest book ---- with 50 pages of signatures. One of our guests sent me a copy of the Reader's Digest "Traditional CRAFTS in Britain" with an entry advertising my spinning an weaving courses for wives while their husbands went fishing.. I learned to weave in Oxford where I qualified as an Occupational Therapist. Before the curriculum changed because of thalidomide. We learned twenty different crafts. Spinning an Weaving was one of two main crafts. that was compulsory, with a choice of a second main craft, and an introduction to the rest. Sadly AIDS TO DAILY LIVING have replaced all the different crafts which entertained the patients ---- especially those in mental hospitals. I wish I knew which guest advertised us in the Reader's Digest book..
Gutted I missed the live show on this, but my garden required my urgent attention. The Lord needed a little help in this part of his creation 🙂 . I love the Shroud and I believe it's real! Just think if the first photo of it had not been taken at the beginning of photography, but today. We wouldn't know about it being a negative, as the photo would have been by either a mobile phone or a digital camera. The shroud didn't just appear, it was always there and people knew about its existence for hundreds of years. I find that amazing. John mentioned it in his Gospel, but didn't spell out what it was he has seen, in order of avoiding to it being taken and destroyed. If you haven't yet, please also do a show with priest who is currently looking after the Shroud. I forgot his name, but he appeared on other shows about it here on YT. Greetings from a humble Lutheran 🙂
The color depth discoloration on the Shroud of Turin is only 200-500 nanometers. This is much less than the linen fiber diameter of 10-20 micrometers, and cannot be explained by using medieval artistic techniques. Even modern lasers are not capable of delivering micro burns this precise.
@@Tenebris_Sint You clearly don't know how intricate the image on the shroud is. Some blood details are visible only under UV radiation. It's important to note that burial practices could vary, and exceptions to norms did occur.
@@Tenebris_Sint The image on the Shroud has properties that are difficult to explain through medieval or Renaissance artistic techniques. It's superficial, with no visible brush strokes, and has 3D information encoded in it. The image on the Shroud has characteristics that can only be observed and analyzed using modern technology that was completely unknown during the Renaissance. These include: Nanotechnology: Used to study the Shroud at a microscopic level, revealing details about the image formation that would have been impossible to create intentionally in the Renaissance. UV radiation analysis: This has revealed aspects of the image that are invisible to the naked eye and couldn't have been deliberately produced with Renaissance technology. 3D modeling: The image contains three-dimensional information that becomes apparent when analyzed with modern computer modeling. This property would have been impossible to intentionally encode using medieval or Renaissance techniques.
How can you call the voice he heard a coincidence!!!!!! There are no coincidences! Everything happens for a purpose. I am so tired of people not believing others who heard the voice of God. Of course it was the voice of God. That way he could reach so many more people out there, than to write a letter which could`ve taken forever to get there, or get lost etc. I have heard the Voice many times in my life. Every time something beautiful happened when I followed it, but when I told people about it, they ridiculed it, they came up with this "un"word: coincidence. That word was made up by folks who are afraid of admitting, that there is more out there than meets the eye. There was a time when I became silent, because I didn`t want to be ridiculed any more. Decades went by, but nowadays I am not afraid of speaking out anymore. Of course the dark side wants us to hide with our wonderful experiences, wants to dim our light, God`s light and install fear. We have to be brave. Well done Joe Marino for speaking out and writing about it. Thank you for beeing brave!
It seems reasonable to entertain the possibility that the Shroud is truly a miraculous image that was created miraculously in the Middle Ages. The arguments against the c-14 dates seem fairly weak and ad hoc but the arguments in favor of the miraculous properties of the image seem very strong.
I dunno, I work with a lot of archaeologists and textile experts (I make early medieval reproductions) and my wife is a biochemist, so I'm pretty familiar with how radio carbon dating is conducted and how archaeologists view & use it. I'm familiar enough with textiles to see the merit in the renaissance repair hypothesis and if that had been presented for any other historic textile it would have been met with universal academic acceptance. That's how strong the theory is. The implications of that on the C14 dates would also have been universally recognised, particularly in that the date range spread corresponds with the spread of the repair:original sample ration you'd see in the repaired section of textile on the shroud. Furthermore, if the scientists leading the 80s tests had engaged in such sloppy methodology in any other field or period they would have been pilloried in the academic community. I was a kid when the first test hit the news and it was publicly discredited by the time I was an adult, but having worked in an adjacent field (I know the archaeologists who recalibrated the C14 dates for the Viking Great Army Camp at Repton in the UK) I'm more certain that hypothesis is correct than I am about most other things in my field!
Your perspective is interesting. However, there are several issues with the carbon dating of the shroud. Only one sample from a single part of the shroud was tested, and the raw data does not match the 95% accuracy claimed in the Nature article. The 1988 radiocarbon dating did not follow many important protocols, including the prohibition of communication between labs and the proper use of control samples. When the raw data, hidden for decades, was finally revealed, it showed inconsistencies that undermine the 95% accuracy claim. A peer-reviewed article using statistical analysis has shown that the 1988 carbon dating is not reliable(with 95%).
Beyond the testings of Tristan Casablanca & Julio Fonte, who settled on 90-95 A.D. as their dating, in 2022, scientist Liberato Ricardo of Italy’s National Laboratories did a brand new kind of dating called ‘Wide-angle X-Ray Scattering Dating’ through a peer-reviewed series of tests, and finally found the dating of the Shroud to be between 55-74 AD.
@@horridhenry9920 you don't understand margins of error, do ya there buddy...nor do you understand the technological capacities of 55-74 AD, if you somehow believe a forger accomplished that.
It was in two major fires, to a point it was even burned, let alone engulfed in smoke. So what happens during combustion?......carbon emission. What would absorb this carbon most easily?.....fabric This particular artifact qualifies as one of the worst things to carbon date considering it's history of being in at least two fires, let alone all the other variables that render it inconclusive.
@@prophetrob this rescuing device simply isn't true. Fire and smoke can introduce modern carbon into the artifact, contaminating the sample with 14C from the burning material. This can make it difficult to accurately date the artifact, as the added 14C can mask the original 14C signal. However, you're conveniently ignoring the other variables here, with your dismissal Oxidation for example. Fire can cause organic materials to oxidize, which can lead to the loss of 14C. This can result in a false young age for the artifact, as the remaining 14C is not representative of the artifact's true age. Nor to mentioning charring. We can visually see the damage on the shroud. These fires caused charring and damage on the fabric, which could absolutely alter the chemical structure of the organic material and potentially destroy or degrade any remaining 14C. Lastly, there is Pyrolysis. High temperatures generated by fire can cause pyrolysis, a process that breaks down organic molecules into simpler compounds, potentially releasing 14C into the atmosphere. So if there is anything absurd, I'd say it's the rescuing attempt here.
@@gregariousguru you need to look into your ideas more. Look up what percentage of contamination material you need to skew the sample like you're saying Any loss of carbon wouldn't change the carbon ratio because the process does not favor an isotope to any measurable degree. It's a ratio of isotopes of carbon, not a ratio of carbon to everything else. Fire can't decay the carbon itself
@@prophetrob In general, a contamination level of around 1-5% can affect the accuracy of carbon dating results. One of the fires actually burned it severely. So I think you may need to be the one who looks into it more, since it's you that is seemingly so dismissive. Here is a breakdown for you like you asked. 1-5% contamination can cause deviations in the age determination, potentially affecting the precision of the result. 5-10% contamination can lead to significant deviations in the age determination, potentially causing errors of hundreds of years. 10-20% contamination can result in substantial errors in the age determination, potentially leading to incorrect ages or ages that are significantly different from the true age. The infrared reflectography (IRR) study conducted in 1997, led by Dr. Raymond Rogers, provided valuable insights into the Shroud's composition and potential exposure to fire and smoke. The results suggested that the contamination was estimated to be around 50-70% (modern carbon,) which is a significant amount. This means that the actual age of the Shroud is likely much older than the dates obtained from the radiocarbon dating test. The study also identified a unique "fingerprint" of fire residues on the Shroud, which is distinct from other types of contaminants. This fingerprint is thought to be related to the high-temperature combustion products generated during the fire. Which leads to my other variables mentioned earlier. Lastly, we aren't talking about loss of carbon, we are talking about added modern carbon which can disrupt the radiocarbon dating test. Nobody is suggesting that fire decays the carbon, unless oxidation is a factor. Hope this helps, but it sounds like the presuppositions and rescuing devives are just stacked too high.
You can see the teeth of the Man in the Shroud. Especially when you look at a photo that had the striation lines (verticle lines) removed by the computer to reduce noise. The teeth can be seen in the original image but they are easily confused with the verticle lines in the cloth. But when the computer is used to remove those lines, you can clearly see that the Man in the Shrould had crooked bottom teeth.
People! The onus isn't on anyone here. If you believe, based on the (albeit fascinating) evidence already provided by all the scientists, botanists, medical forensic specialists, etc., etc., that it is in fact the burial cloth of Jesus, then great. It can be used as a beautiful tool for meditation and reflection. However, faith doesn't (shouldn't) rest on the outcome of studies of some artifact, no matter what is true about it. The Church will very likely never declare one way or the other because that is not the Church's job. The Shroud's authenticity is up for debate, let it remain so. If you don't believe that the Shroud is the authentic burial cloth of Christ, then ok. No one is saying you have to. You are perfectly free to look at the evidence and decide for yourself. All I would recommend is that people are intellectually honest about what has, in fact, been learned about the Shroud. It is the most scientifically studied artifact in the history of the world. It is compelling. But no one is forced to believe one thing about it. Just enjoy, if you do, the very intriguing discoveries that have been made about it. ❤️
@@philmiska7295 Researchers have understood the basic composition of this pigment since the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with analysis revealing that it is made from a combination of silica, lime, copper, and alkali, which undergoes a heating process to create the blue compound. The challenge in fully understanding how the Egyptians created this pigment lies in the fact that many of the original recipes and techniques were not documented. The ancient processes likely varied over time and region, contributing to the complexity of recreating or understanding them fully. Unlike Egyptian blue, which has a consistent chemical composition, the Shroud is an artifact of uncertain origin. Dating methods (like carbon dating) have produced conflicting results, and while some scientists have studied the fibers and any stains, there is still debate about how it came to be, whether it is a forgery, radiation, or whether it bears any historical authenticity. If the comparison seeks to draw direct parallels in their creation processes, it may be less meaningful due to their fundamentally different natures and contexts. Especially when this is seemingly being used as a red herring or rescuing device. Mainly, because the comparison is superficial and lacking in contextual awareness, and does not yield valuable insights. Nice try though.
@@philmiska7295 Researchers have understood the basic composition of this pigment since the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with analysis revealing that it is made from a combination of silica, lime, copper, and alkali, which undergoes a heating process to create the blue compound. The challenge in fully understanding how the Egyptians created this pigment lies in the fact that many of the original recipes and techniques were not documented. The ancient processes likely varied over time and region, contributing to the complexity of recreating or understanding them fully. Unlike Egyptian blue, which has a consistent chemical composition, the Shroud is an artifact of uncertain origin. Dating methods (like carbon dating) have produced conflicting results, and while some scientists have studied the fibers and any stains, there is still debate about how it came to be, whether it is a forgery, radiation, or whether it bears any historical authenticity. If the comparison seeks to draw direct parallels in their creation processes, it may be less meaningful due to their fundamentally different natures and contexts. Especially when this is seemingly being used as a red herring or rescuing device. Mainly, because the comparison is superficial and lacking in contextual awareness, and does not yield valuable insights.
Researchers have understood the basic composition of this pigment since the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with analysis revealing that it is made from a combination of silica, lime, copper, and alkali, which undergoes a heating process to create the blue compound. The challenge in fully understanding how the Egyptians created this pigment lies in the fact that many of the original recipes and techniques were not documented. The ancient processes likely varied over time and region, contributing to the complexity of recreating or understanding them fully. Unlike Egyptian blue, which has a consistent chemical composition, the Shroud is an artifact of uncertain origin. Dating methods (like carbon dating) have produced conflicting results, and while some scientists have studied the fibers and any stains, there is still debate about how it came to be, whether it is a forgery, radiation, or whether it bears any historical authenticity. If the comparison seeks to draw direct parallels in their creation processes, it may be less meaningful due to their fundamentally different natures and contexts. Especially when this is seemingly being used as a red herring or rescuing device. Mainly, because the comparison is superficial and lacking in contextual awareness, and does not yield valuable insights. Nice try though.
Very sorry to hear about Barrie Schwortz. I’m not convinced but am very interested in the topic of the shroud and have watched many, many of his presentations online. He seemed like a wonderful and truly nice man.
At minute 1:13:17 the video treats us to a photo of Dr. Raymond Rodgers as he closely examines the Shroud. The funny thing is that this photo was taken in 1978 when Dr. Rodgers was a member of the STURP team of scientists who spent five full days examining the Shroud. That team went over every square inch of the Shroud using sophisticated instruments. In their many papers and studies, no member of that team, including Dr. Rodgers, made the claim that an undocumeted repair existed on the Shroud. But then in 2004, without having seen the Shroud in over twenty years, Rodgers suddenly wanted us to believe that a secret repair did exist on the Shroud and that it was located exactly at the corner where the 1988 radiocarbon sample was cut from. It is all just a little too much. The threads that compose the cloth were hand-spun under unknown conditions. Cotton could easily have made its way into that spinning process. Every textile scientist who has examined the Shroud in person has confirmed that no undocumented repairs exist anywhere on the Shroud. In addition to that, relics which were in the tomb with the Shroud also show severely skewed radiocarbon dates. The only unfalsified hypothesis for explaining the Shroud's radicarbon readings is the neutron absorption idea.
God can create his Son to be born through Mary his mother who had no sexual relationship with a man: Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit: God can do anything: God created his own mother to be born through her: Again !! remember God can do anything! Don't restrict your thinking to our worldly thinking:
Elon musk doesn't have any technology, he's is a total fraud who hasn't created anything. He has just invested money in other peoples technology and boasted as if HE has done anything lol 😂 People treat him like a real life Tony stark, when he's more like a mix between JP Morgan and PT Barnum lol 😂
There's something about God and falling books. I come from a deeply dysfunctional family. I was in the self-help section in a bookstore when from out of the blue a book fell from a shelf and hit me in the head. I hadn't touched anything on the shelf, nor were any people around me. The book was People of the Lie by Scott Peck. It described my family and helped me understand what choices I needed to make in my life. I always thought the event was from my guardian angel, who has been working overtime in my life. But it might also reflect God's sense of humour. "Here stupid, let me hit you on the head already."
@@malirk its STURP, not STURIP. They should, after more and more scientist debunked their claim and after people expose their methodology and sample collecting.
@@borneandayak6725 It is. I've read so much on it that I didn't care to google anything to double check the acronym. What scientists debunked their claims? The ones who came and said, "Nu uh! You got it wrong" Glad you admit scientists who got to examine it came back saying it was a fraud. Turns out Turin was not happy about that 😢! No wonder they don't let more scientists test it.
The BIBLE is CLEAR that there was NO single shroud that Jesus was wrapped in, but linen cloths, with a single cloth or "towel" that was wrapped around his head SEPARATE from multiple linen cloths that was wrapped around his body, as John 20:3-7 states: "Then Peter and the other disciple (John) set out for the tomb. The two of them began running together, but the other disciple ran faster than Peter and reached the tomb first. Stooping forward, he saw the linen cloths (PLURAL, "linen cloths", Greek othonion, meaning "a linen bandage, strips of linen") lying there, but he did not go in." "Then Simon Peter also came, following him, and he went into the tomb. And he saw the linen cloths (PLURAL, "linen cloths", Greek othonion, meaning "a linen bandage, strips of linen") lying there. The cloth (single, Greek soudarion, meaning "a sweat cloth, i.e. towel, as for binding the face of a corpse", see Luke 19:20; Acts 19:12) that had been on his (Jesus) head was NOT lying with the OTHER cloth bands (PLURAL, Greek othonion) but was rolled up in a place by itself." Upon Lazarus death, he was wrapped in a similar way as Jesus, with a cloth (Greek soudarion or a towel) wrapped around his head and the rest of the body wrapped in different cloths (Greek keiria, meaning "a swath, i.e. winding sheet", such as linen) when he was laid in a tomb, for John 11:44 states: "The man who had been dead came out with his feet and hands bound with wrappings (plural, Greek keiria, meaning "a swath, i.e. winding sheet"), and his face was wrapped with a (single) cloth ("cloth", Greek soudarion, meaning "a sweat cloth, i.e. towel"). Jesus said to them: “Free him and let him go.” So, what Jesus (and Lazarus) was wrapped in was NOT even remotely a "shroud", but a series of cloths, one for the head (a towel or sweat cloth), and the rest of the body with wrappings or linen cloths, like taking a roll of medical gauze and wrapping a wound, going round and round until covered. The Shroud of Turin has been shown as a fake, dated around the 13th/14th century C.E. by three prestigious laboratories, at the University of Arizona, at Oxford, and at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, with each not revealing their results, but were each sent independently to the British Museum for certification, whereby the Shroud of Turin was dated as from 1260-1390 C.E. But Catholics (and others) will reject the sound evidence and still cling to the false belief that it is "the image of Jesus". It will be their loss, for these ones are like what the apostle Paul wrote about at 2 Corinthians 4:3, 4: "If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God (and NOT God), might not shine through."
See: "The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption," Rucker, 2020. To the best of my knowledge no one who has personally examined the Shroud has concluded that the Shroud has an undocumented repair on its corners or anywhere else. The exception would be the late Dr. Raymond Rodgers who was a member of the STURP team in 1978 which carefully examined and tested every inch of the Shroud. However, subsequent to that analysis, neither Dr. Rodgers nor any other member fo the STURP team reported an undocumented repair. It was only in 2002, without having seen the Shroud for over twenty years, that Dr. Rodgers decided that the Shroud actually did have an undocumented repair to its corner.
I first saw the holy shroud when i waes working in the city of London - I am not sure if it was there or on Kensington, the actual shroud or a copy of it, in about 1956. it was on a trailer in the street
i could not care if the shroud is real or not and i dont understand why anyone would. the christian faith is used to save our souls and guide our lives. not be upheld evidentially by a random cloth. best case scenario its real and its cool. worse case its fake and a cool piece of art or coincidence.
You don’t understand why people care if a possible relic of the death and resurrection of Christ is authentic? Hmmm. Maybe you need to re-consider the historical importance of Christ.
Jesus spent His entire ministry giving signs, wonders and performing miracles. He did this to provide Proof of Concept because He said, as He was quoted by John, that people wouldn’t believe without the signs, wonders, and miracles.
@patricpeters7911 if it's fake is Christianity fake? If it's still real then the shroud was nothing more then an oppurtunity for more evidence of the resurrection. The case for christ does not rest on this cloths validity.
@matthewcollins8148 of course but the point is that the shroud being real or fake does not reflect the truth of Christianity. So it's either a piece of art or it's the real deal. Neither are going to move the needle on the validity of Christ's resurrection
Why are people so interested,our savior was crucified for me and you,he loved us that much.but to be in love with Jesus to have so much admiration and respect and compassion,well it would be the most memorable thing in my life to see it or touch it or even be in the same room with it,he is my hero my father,my savior,it would be the most humbling experience.to love him so much already that would be so overwhelming .
The cloth of the holy shroud is not herring-bone. It is three-point twill, with which it is easy to weave a seamless coat. Turin now holds a relic - revered two thousand years - This length of linen three point twill - alerted experts’ fears, that what the Church has always taught, just might, indeed, be true, that they might have to think again - or even start anew. If grasp of mathematics equalled that of History, then what they knew of either, dents their credibility - their maths inspired no confidence, as in a simple range, their choice of kinds of samples had a tendency to change. While fibres of pure linen, over centuries, stay true - and Carbon-dating systems can tell when they were new - persuade belief in miracles most difficult to take of man-made painted blood-stains of medieval fake. What little is “de fide,” alone, is root and seed of what makes sense of knowledge, of prejudices freed. If Biblical tradition cannot be guaranteed we do not know whom we can trust, no matter what we read.
If plumb-lines are rejected, there would seem a kind of rift twixt what is learned by science - and what is known by gift. For TRUTH is same for all of us, for science and life as well - and truth leads us to Heaven, whereas falsehood leads to HELL - and Revelation tells us that all truth will set us free - not only here before we die, but through eternity - And printed on the holy shroud - the King of Kings is seen - the Son of God - the Son of Man - the Son of Heaven’s Queen
Though not the holy spirit, she was just the second Eve - with His consent another man was made she could conceive “a second Adam to the fight and to the rescue came” from Nazareth and Bethlehem - and Jesus was His name
@@laddieweidow6119sorry, but I listen to/watch a LOT of podcasts on a wide range of topics (around 30-40 hours a week) and that is a standard not applied anywhere else. Having been an atheist and being in the history/archaeology field If this is an echo-chamber then Sonia every other podcast, especially the ones with a secular world view. This guy isn't a debater, he's an interviewer and he's pretty good at getting the interviewee to tell us what he thinks and letting us make up our own minds. People of many denominations listen to this podcast, and that there are denominations in the first place is the biggest clue this isn't an echo chamber. Even within denominations there is disagreement as to authenticity and nature of the shroud, let alone its implications if there was agreement.
There are really two options for the Shroud: (1) It is the actual burial shroud of Jesus. (2) If it is fake, is the greatest piece of art ever made and it is wildly underrated as an art piece. If we want to get into “what is art” then fine. It is the greatest and most clever forgery ever made. Either way, absolutely incredible.
@@user-dw1jp7tp6i on the face of it the titulus crucis looks real, it even tricked paleography, while the shroud has some errors in anatomy, like too small skull top, no knuckles on fingers, hairs that looks like a towel rather than hair and for some reason feet are only visible from the back (with the injury placed in the wrong place, but one could argue that we don't have enough proof that all crucifixions nailed the heel) there are also other things, like why it looks like a photo on a 2 panel rather than wrapped around a 3d body and why the back doesn't look pressed against the shroud like when you xerox your face (or ehm... Other body parts)
I already know Jesus is alive and saviour. Now as for these shrouds etc, I see them as intriguing but they may help others who refuse to see but won't sway me any further than i already am towards the risen Jesus!
I thought this was already pretty settled-that French nuns did repair and re-wove parts of the Shroud. Besides, anyone who believes in Jesus Christ knows it’s real; anyone who doesn’t want to believe in Christ will continue to think it’s not really anything super natural.
See: "The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption," Rucker, 2020. God has gifted us this miraculous relic to us to be used an aid to convince the doubters, just as Jesus showed his fatal wounds to his disciple, Thomas.
Not really, STURP scientists have mathematically proven your claim to be false, the mistake you are making is assuming that the only way the Shroud images could be formed is via direct contact which would have produced the "Mask of Agamemnon" or wrap-around effect of which you speak. No one on the Pro-Shroud side has claimed the Shroud images were produced naturally via direct-contact since 1939 when Paul Vignon did experiments and proved it was impossible due to the very issue you mention here thinking it is news to us on the Pro-Shroud side- it's not, we already have proven the images were formed via a vertical-encodation path; one of the proof that straight line vertical radiation from the body was responsible for the images we see.
My God! Why can;t the interviewer shut up and stop interrupting the person beiing interviewed? It's like he's trying to prove his own knowledgeability. Big thumbs down for the interviewer!
First to leave a post I see. Anyways, it was really great seeing Joe on the show giving his perspective on the evidence for the Shroud. That said, I have some differences with Joe on how to answer the C-14 dating as I go for Bob Rucker's Neutron Irradiation hypothesis; the explanation that literally leaves all Shroud skeptics stunned into silence on the issue lol. But yeah, I think Joe represents his Invisible Re-Weave hypothesis well in this show and did a good job providing visuals to explain the evidence such as the Blue Quad Mosaic image there- so keep up the good work Cam by bringing on these Shroud experts :)
@@bigdavexx1 You are welcome :) No the body itself could not naturally form the body images through direct contact or gas diffusion, the images could only have been formed supernaturally by God. Now, that supernatural process probably used the body of Jesus such as those who submit that some kind of radiation from within the body of Jesus caused the images to form during the moment of His Resurrection.
Medieval artists did not have access to the advanced technological tools we have today for creating three-dimensional images on a two-dimensional surface, such as computer graphics or 3D modeling software.
If the carbon dating came back as 100bce-200ce would have spent so long arguing about only one sample spot and the dating inaccuracy? Also if Yahweh is all powerful and wants everyone to have a relationship with him why not just make sure there’s multiple samples and the date came back correct? Would have been simple for him. Yet he decides to make it look like it’s probably forged. Most believers will believe it’s real so it doesn’t matter but if you want skeptics to believe make easy so it couldn’t be denied by a rational person. Same thing with the Bible and everything else Christians claim
@@CapturingChristianity my day job is in the Early Medieval period (I do historical outreach and make reproductions), and I think you're on the money. You've got the lost art of the interview down to a tee, most mainstream interviewers spend more time letting us know what they think, but you accurately articulate counter arguments to draw out the full thoughts of your guests, including their workings (always show your workings!).
@@CapturingChristianity That is a good reply actually Cam, well said :) For what it is worth, I'm friend with Joe and despite my disagreements with him on some things like the Invisible Re-Weave, he has always been completely honest with me, even when it hurt, so while I don't know what to make of Joe's claims explanatorily myself, there is no doubt that he is telling the truth to the best of his ability. BTW, I was wondering if it would ever be possible for you to have Bob Rucker on your show, he is a Nuclear Engineer and has done amazing work in terms of his Vertically Collimated Radiation Burst hypothesis which explains, the body images, bloodstains and C-14 data all at once- if you need I can hook you up with him and/or Joe knows him too, but trust me, the skeptics can't really argue with his model apart from objecting to its involving the supernatural.
Without a doubt, an artefact that becomes more sacred with each scientific endeavour to prove it as false. In my opinion, the closest we will ever get to the death mask if our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
@@truthseeker7867 I'd challenge you research more on the topic of the shroud if you haven't already done so. Don't get hung up on the work of one or two scientists acting with bias. Some of the most erudite scientists in this area of research are atheistic or agnostic and have applied tests far more advanced than carbon dating to establish its veracity. Still, they are baffled by its revelations.
@@truthseeker7867 Look into the Liberato De Caro of Italy’s Institute of Crystallography of the National Research Council in Bari. Their team utilused au untested “Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering” method to examine the natural aging of cellulose that constitutes a sample of the famous linen cloth.This is one of many different studies that attempts uograded or outdated methods of 'complete dating' They researchers in this study concluded that their peer reviewed research shows the Holy Shroud is compatible with the hypothesis that it is much older than seven centuries old - the conclusion first reached in 1988 using carbon dating techniques - and is around 2,000 years old. I think this paper is from 2022.
You know Jesus is a mastermind of course there would be evidence,he took the time to leave his presence remember he folded the cloth covering his face,Jewish customs was to fold the napkin it would mean you would return,nothing he did was mistake everything he did was purpose.I believe it’s real,becouse if you truly have a relationship with him,it just wouldn’t be surprising.
Why don't they just go get a couple new pieces of samples from the red/orange area of the cloth and run another C14 test on them and silence all doubts?
I don't think they can, there was some kind of infestation and the preservation process may have ruled out further tests. Also, between the parties in the RC church who think it's fake and don't want it tested in case it isn't, those who hope it's legit and don't want it tested in case it isn't and those who don't care one way or the other, the ones who just want to know barely get a word in!
I'm going to suggest that DARPA has already been doing this on the assumption that the shroud could have been created by Extra terrestrials to inspire us to create the technology and understand the science that we need before contact and full disclosure. For example a 40 billion watt ultra violet laser printer with AI that could embed 3D information. Think about the related technologies from the experiments that are not obvious. On the other hand the shroud is the perfect ET test, if ET shows up then demand they demonstrate they can reproduce the shroud.
Also, on Nabeel Quereshi conversion and the shroud. The Ahmadiya Muslims teach that the it proves Christ was crucified but that he didn't die, the swoon theory. They base this on their interpretation of the blood stains, that in his burial Jesus was washed and dead bodies don't bleed therefore the blood proves he was still alive. If I remember correctly, Gary Habermas in a discussion with Nabeels father defeated this hypothesis primarily by showing that the man on the shroud was in late stage rigor mortis and therefore had to be dead (this places Jesus in the 1-3 day range). This is also a detail that skeptics need to address for it to be a hoax, the hoaxers had to think they needed the rigor mortis details AND they only had three days to create the hoax if they used a real body.
*HOW TO END THE DEBATE:* Just hand the shroud over to scientists to examine it now. Give 5 samples that range in their dates where only 1 is the real shroud. Then have 3 sets of scientists return results.
these are destructive tests, so they are probably weary of snipping off another sample. Also, i heard they have reservations in terms of contimation of carbon from the fire that damaged it. i personally don't need the c14 dating proof to believe in Jesus. but it is an extra bit of evidence, that incredibly, we can use science to do forensics.
@@fre7717 I can't believe it by faith. I need evidence. Imagine proving with multiple secular scientists that it is real! What do you value more? 1) Bringing people to God. 2) Preserving the claimed relic 100%.
If this is actually the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, should we be destroying ANY of it to convince a few skeptics? If it’s authentic, it’s the most sacred thing on the planet. I can see both sides. I do not suspect that if carbon dating were performed again, and it proved its authenticity, that there would be mass conversions. The skeptics would simply find some other way to be skeptical.
@@malirkyou totally missed the point about contamination, the shroud is not a proper item to use carbon dating on so you can't get a reliable date even IF it dated to 30 AD on a thousand samples. So if you did retest it and it dated to Jesus you would only give the skeptics reasons to question the carbon dating.
I believe Joe's book story, about 75% though the video . I have one that's even better but it's very personal and would take a very long time to tell. But I beleive Joe about the book falling near him the moment he begain thinking about it.
Well, he's an evolutionary biologist for a start, so my wife has got as much expertise in this field as he does. Secondly he comes out with blinders like {many mainstream biblical scholars doubt Jesus was a historical figure}, without any reference, and when challenged on it he can't name a single one, let alone "many" (Reddit doesn't count). Now standard academic practice would be to issue a retraction, which he hasn't done. He's a smart evolutionary biologist, but when it comes to theology or even philosophy he knows about as much as my window cleaner, and when it comes to historic textiles I have greater expertise and that's a field only adjacent to my own
“The shroud is real because god told me to do my chores, which inadvertently led to me being on the radio!” Should we really be taking this guy seriously?
@@CapturingChristianity he thinks that is a good data point. He brought it up. It is not the entirety of why he believes. Anyone who thinks that is a solid data point, but everything about the dating experiments is wrong, is clearly biased. Also, I think you did a good job of pushing back on some of his ideas. Much better than in the past. Cheers.
Because skeptics lied about it and people just believe what they are told meanwhile the actual experts have proven that the Shroud Man is a perfect fit for first century rural Jews similar to modern Shepherdic Jews today.
There's nothing wrong with C14 dating, the dates from the 80s would be consistent with repair hypothesis. It's the people who conducted them back in the 80s that aren't credible because their methodology was garbage (or deliberately rigged). The problem is people think it's a magic bullet, but when you know it's limits and use it honestly it's very useful
I loved the interview. The only thing I can say about is that Mr. Marino is not the best speaker ever. He is very knowledgeable but definitely not the best speaker ever. For those who speak or understand Spanish I'll leave a link of a conference held not long ago. It took place in Spain and those who partaken are both knowledgeable and well eloquent. Hopefully I don't break rule in here and my comment isn't banned or hid. ruclips.net/video/sKQ03s6nRGM/видео.htmlsi=ohOtuT7NgghpZJXT For those who speak English I'll leave another interview. ruclips.net/user/liveHAbuG-oVq1Q?si=v4hi_Ovu6D9flmV2
@@J.MTZ356 Thanks, yeah its weird, I've had issues, but maybe it will allow it on here, I will try to reply to myself with a link just to test- thanks again.
Of course it's fake. Look at the gospel accounts and see how badly Jesus was beaten. Beard pulled out, crown of thorns pressed on to his head, beaten within an inch of his life by multiple roman soldiers and finally crucified. The Bible also shows that Jesus was mangled beyond recognition when he died so anyone with a passing knowledge of the gospels will know that Jesus would not have looked as perfect as he does on that shroud.
You can't find that level of detail in the Bible, so why are you making things up. The man on the shroud does not look perfect. He is badly beaten, speered in the side and his nose is broken.
The Shroud of Turin is a Hoax 1)The shroud is all one garment depicting a man’s face. This is not how Christ was placed in the tomb. We see in the scriptures that it was tradition to bury the dead in two sets of garments including a head napkin. We see this in the case of Lazarus, John 11:44-"And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go." We see this at the tomb of Christ, John 20:7-"And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself." 2)Christ would not have shamed Himself by having long hair as depicted on the shroud. 1st Corinthians 11:14-15, “Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.” 3)Testing of the blood done on the shroud has revealed the “Y” chromosome. Jesus only had one earthly parent and that was Mary who could only give Him the “X” chromosome. Christ would not have the Y chromosome as it would have corrupted His divinity.
Um… Jesus was fully human. He was a human male. Basic middle school biology requires any human male to have XY chromosomes. This is no way compromises his divinity. To say so would be to reject Nicene christology. As for #2, you’re assuming short hair is what we moderners consider to be short hair. Hair down to cheeks could have been short hair comparatively speaking. As for #1, look up facecloth of Oviedo. Has same marks as the shroud, and is likely the face covering you’re talking about.
The idea that Jesus didn't have a Y chromosome is absurd, without a Y He couldn't be male. I don't really care what you think about the shroud, but please rethink this. Jesus was and is fully human, God did whatever He needed to do to make sure Jesus' body would have all the genetics an ordinary human would need.
1. This is literally not an objection to the shroud. The way Jesus is positioned, with his hair falling down and his hands being able to cover his genitals without his arms being outstreched, means he was standing up, not laid down, which means He was already resurrected, so He could've prepared the shroud to be imprinted with his image in any way He wanted to. 2. Paul was talking to people in Corinth. The church there was composed of greeks, not of jews, and THEY had this cultural standard that men having long hair was shameful, and Paul was using this to make a point, just read the surrounding context. Jesus, as a jew, would have no problem keeping a long hair (and it can even be argued via Leviticus 19:27 that jews should not cut their hair). Jesus spent his final years mostly living in the wilderness, not a lot of opportunities for haircuts. 3. This is almost as stupid as the people who say Jesus was trans. Jesus was a man, He didn't inherit Adam's corrupted Y chromosome, but He obviously had one; handcrafted by the Holy Spirit. God can create a universe out of words, but you think He cant put together a few nucleotides? What a petty god you believe in. Certainly that is not the god who rose Jesus from the dead.
The napkin was placed over the shroud which covered the face and body. Also Jesus was fully man. He needs a Y chromosome. He gets it miraculously. Where did Adam and Eve get their chromosomes ?
RE: #1 check the Sudarium Oviedo - I think you'll soon see how it matches this evidence in many places #2 Samson had long hair and took a Nazarite vow #3 we're talking miracles, aren't we? Holy Ghost provided.
Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )
The earliest creed we have of Christianity. 1 Corinthians 15 . Has jesus death ,burial, and resurrection . So even the "earliest forms" of Christianity are not compatible with islam . We have writings also that are pre gospels that assert jesus was a pre-existing divine being which isn't compatible with Islam
Sorry dude, your religion is false religion created by pagan Arab, who copying the Bible. The prophet era was end and Prophet John was the last prophet according to Jesus in Luke 16:16. Islam is the late interpertation of the Bible, by using Arian and Gnostic Christology. Quran is the corruption of the Bible. Sunni and Shia, are the evolution of Islam, with their extra-interpretation, one of them are the Tawheed, the late 10th century doctrine, the Sunni follow the Asharite version of Tawheed. While there is zero prophet teach Tawheed, even the corrupted book Quran also teach nothing about Tawheed. Also Salat and Hajj to Mecca, both are Arabian pagan religious practicing. The Arab in 7th century reinterpret Hajj and Salat by conneting both pagan practices to Biblical prophets in order for the Arab to legitimized their pagan practices.
You need to repent and come to Christ through repentance, faith and baptism. Islam or Sunni or Shia, all three are false and pure paganism. Come to Christ, stop fooling yourself with false religion.
Rest in Peace, Barrie. Praying for you. Such an interesting well-regarded gentleman. Interesting talk.
@@stuksy4321 his avatar body is no more. He is back in the eternal with God where we will all be one day if we play this game called life right and believe in Jesus and do his will on this planet.
Rip Barrie Schwortz 😢 This is the first I’m hearing of it. I loved his interviews and stories about his time working with the shroud and how he was a reluctant believer at first but came to terms with its authenticity. He was a good man and a gentleman. He will be missed. 🙏
Cheer up…he’s with Jesus!
So sad
I once had the opportunity to speak with Barrie on the phone for about an hour one evening over 10 years ago. He did more than anybody I know to promote the Shroud and it's connection to Christ. We'll all miss you Barrie.
Speaking as an artist, I can't think of ANYTHING more fiendishly difficult to paint than a negative image. That alone convinces me that whatever it is, it isn't faked. If it was faked in the middle ages, it would *look* like a painting done in the middle ages. The "photorealism" would look like a Jan Van Eyck, or something similar. That's what looked real to people of that era. The faker would probably throw in gold leaf and interesting colors. He would not do *any* sacred image in the raw style appropriate to a black and white newspaper image of the 20th century, completely drained of beauty or interest to medieval eyes. That rawness came later. If you know your art history, the idea that this is what a medieval fake would look like...can only be imagined by an ignorant modern mind. My two cents as an artist.
l pray with ALL my heart, and have prayed for Barrie ...that he accepted Jesus as his Saviour. The Man who's face he has been looking at for 47 years. May he be with The Lord in paradise today ~ Amen.
This is all so cringeworthy. We know the Shroud is a mediaeval forgery. There are small discrepancies in the carbon dating due to different cleaning methods at the labs, but they all returned dates from the Middle Ages. For contamination to explain the results would require hundreds of pounds of extraneous carbon. All the evidence is consistent with forgery.
Amen! Amen! Amen!
I believe he did at the end.
@@ginacool9207 ~ ARE YOU SERIOUS?? How do you know? Have you heard something? l'm really interested. :D
Oh, very sad to hear that dear Barry Schworts has left us.
Thank you Barry for your splendid input on the shroud over many years. I always loved listening to you speak on the Shroud.
May you rest in peace now 🙏🏽
🤍 🕊 🤍
So sad to hear that Barry has passed away. He liked a life full of purpose and left a great legacy for future generations. My perpetual light shine upon him.
It makes perfect sense to me why the negative image of the facial portion of the shroud appears so life-like; it is a negative of a negative, that being the shroud itself.
A negative of a person’s image ordinarily looks odd to us, and that is what we have in the shroud. It only makes sense that a negative image of the shroud would reverse that oddness and give us a clearer representation of the original person that made the negative impression on the shroud.
I'm not Catholic *and* I believe the Shroud is authentic! Barry's work convinced me.
Oh no! I've watched Barry Schwortz for a while and love his work! Rest in Peace Barry! ❤
I’ve been casually following Barry Schwartz since the 80s. Requiescat in pace.
Incredible amounts of patience shown by the host in not advising to please silence the distracting phone after the 5th ping.
! am 91 years old. My husband and i ran a small guest house in Orkney 1975 - 1990 ---- six guests B & B, and three course evening meal meal. I have our guest book ---- with 50 pages of signatures. One of our guests sent me a copy of the Reader's Digest "Traditional CRAFTS in Britain" with an entry advertising my spinning an weaving courses for wives while their husbands went fishing..
I learned to weave in Oxford where I qualified as an Occupational Therapist. Before the curriculum changed because of thalidomide. We learned twenty different crafts. Spinning an Weaving was one of two main crafts. that was compulsory, with a choice of a second main craft, and an introduction to the rest. Sadly AIDS TO DAILY LIVING have replaced all the different crafts which entertained the patients ---- especially those in mental hospitals.
I wish I knew which guest advertised us in the Reader's Digest book..
Gutted I missed the live show on this, but my garden required my urgent attention. The Lord needed a little help in this part of his creation 🙂 . I love the Shroud and I believe it's real! Just think if the first photo of it had not been taken at the beginning of photography, but today. We wouldn't know about it being a negative, as the photo would have been by either a mobile phone or a digital camera. The shroud didn't just appear, it was always there and people knew about its existence for hundreds of years. I find that amazing. John mentioned it in his Gospel, but didn't spell out what it was he has seen, in order of avoiding to it being taken and destroyed. If you haven't yet, please also do a show with priest who is currently looking after the Shroud. I forgot his name, but he appeared on other shows about it here on YT. Greetings from a humble Lutheran 🙂
Wonderful comment.
The color depth discoloration on the Shroud of Turin is only 200-500 nanometers. This is much less than the linen fiber diameter of 10-20 micrometers, and cannot be explained by using medieval artistic techniques. Even modern lasers are not capable of delivering micro burns this precise.
@@Tenebris_Sint The STURP initiative already concluded that the shroud is not a work of an artist. Nice try!
Whats a jeebus crispy?@@Tenebris_Sint
@@Tenebris_Sint You clearly don't know how intricate the image on the shroud is. Some blood details are visible only under UV radiation. It's important to note that burial practices could vary, and exceptions to norms did occur.
@@Tenebris_Sint I love when trolls out themselves. I almost took you seriously for a second.
@@Tenebris_Sint The image on the Shroud has properties that are difficult to explain through medieval or Renaissance artistic techniques. It's superficial, with no visible brush strokes, and has 3D information encoded in it.
The image on the Shroud has characteristics that can only be observed and analyzed using modern technology that was completely unknown during the Renaissance. These include:
Nanotechnology: Used to study the Shroud at a microscopic level, revealing details about the image formation that would have been impossible to create intentionally in the Renaissance.
UV radiation analysis: This has revealed aspects of the image that are invisible to the naked eye and couldn't have been deliberately produced with Renaissance technology.
3D modeling: The image contains three-dimensional information that becomes apparent when analyzed with modern computer modeling. This property would have been impossible to intentionally encode using medieval or Renaissance techniques.
How can you call the voice he heard a coincidence!!!!!! There are no coincidences! Everything happens for a purpose. I am so tired of people not believing others who heard the voice of God. Of course it was the voice of God. That way he could reach so many more people out there, than to write a letter which could`ve taken forever to get there, or get lost etc.
I have heard the Voice many times in my life. Every time something beautiful happened when I followed it, but when I told people about it, they ridiculed it, they came up with this "un"word: coincidence. That word was made up by folks who are afraid of admitting, that there is more out there than meets the eye. There was a time when I became silent, because I didn`t want to be ridiculed any more. Decades went by, but nowadays I am not afraid of speaking out anymore. Of course the dark side wants us to hide with our wonderful experiences, wants to dim our light, God`s light and install fear. We have to be brave. Well done Joe Marino for speaking out and writing about it. Thank you for beeing brave!
I thought the shroud was a fake until I did more research. Now I believe that it is authentic. Would love to have Joe back on again soon!
That is wonderful :)
Great to hear!
Great discussion!
It seems reasonable to entertain the possibility that the Shroud is truly a miraculous image that was created miraculously in the Middle Ages. The arguments against the c-14 dates seem fairly weak and ad hoc but the arguments in favor of the miraculous properties of the image seem very strong.
What is already known about d shroud is mind boggling. Jesus is alive
I dunno, I work with a lot of archaeologists and textile experts (I make early medieval reproductions) and my wife is a biochemist, so I'm pretty familiar with how radio carbon dating is conducted and how archaeologists view & use it.
I'm familiar enough with textiles to see the merit in the renaissance repair hypothesis and if that had been presented for any other historic textile it would have been met with universal academic acceptance. That's how strong the theory is.
The implications of that on the C14 dates would also have been universally recognised, particularly in that the date range spread corresponds with the spread of the repair:original sample ration you'd see in the repaired section of textile on the shroud.
Furthermore, if the scientists leading the 80s tests had engaged in such sloppy methodology in any other field or period they would have been pilloried in the academic community.
I was a kid when the first test hit the news and it was publicly discredited by the time I was an adult, but having worked in an adjacent field (I know the archaeologists who recalibrated the C14 dates for the Viking Great Army Camp at Repton in the UK) I'm more certain that hypothesis is correct than I am about most other things in my field!
Your perspective is interesting. However, there are several issues with the carbon dating of the shroud. Only one sample from a single part of the shroud was tested, and the raw data does not match the 95% accuracy claimed in the Nature article. The 1988 radiocarbon dating did not follow many important protocols, including the prohibition of communication between labs and the proper use of control samples. When the raw data, hidden for decades, was finally revealed, it showed inconsistencies that undermine the 95% accuracy claim. A peer-reviewed article using statistical analysis has shown that the 1988 carbon dating is not reliable(with 95%).
Beyond the testings of Tristan Casablanca & Julio Fonte, who settled on 90-95 A.D. as their dating, in 2022, scientist Liberato Ricardo of Italy’s National Laboratories did a brand new kind of dating called ‘Wide-angle X-Ray Scattering Dating’ through a peer-reviewed series of tests, and finally found the dating of the Shroud to be between 55-74 AD.
Jesus died around 33 AD. So even on this “data” it could not have been Jesus’s burial shroud.
@@horridhenry9920 There would be a margin of error on the part of the science. They won't be exact with something like dating a 2k year old object.
What's the margin of error in both of those dates? Usually the smaller the range provided the lower the degree of certainty.
@@ReapingTheHarvest there is always a margin of error with science. It would have been factored in when they calculated their numbers.
@@horridhenry9920 you don't understand margins of error, do ya there buddy...nor do you understand the technological capacities of 55-74 AD, if you somehow believe a forger accomplished that.
It was in two major fires, to a point it was even burned, let alone engulfed in smoke. So what happens during combustion?......carbon emission. What would absorb this carbon most easily?.....fabric
This particular artifact qualifies as one of the worst things to carbon date considering it's history of being in at least two fires, let alone all the other variables that render it inconclusive.
There would have to be an absurd amount of smoke residue to change the dating
@@prophetrob this rescuing device simply isn't true. Fire and smoke can introduce modern carbon into the artifact, contaminating the sample with 14C from the burning material. This can make it difficult to accurately date the artifact, as the added 14C can mask the original 14C signal.
However, you're conveniently ignoring the other variables here, with your dismissal
Oxidation for example. Fire can cause organic materials to oxidize, which can lead to the loss of 14C. This can result in a false young age for the artifact, as the remaining 14C is not representative of the artifact's true age. Nor to mentioning charring. We can visually see the damage on the shroud. These fires caused charring and damage on the fabric, which could absolutely alter the chemical structure of the organic material and potentially destroy or degrade any remaining 14C. Lastly, there is Pyrolysis. High temperatures generated by fire can cause pyrolysis, a process that breaks down organic molecules into simpler compounds, potentially releasing 14C into the atmosphere.
So if there is anything absurd, I'd say it's the rescuing attempt here.
@@gregariousguru you need to look into your ideas more.
Look up what percentage of contamination material you need to skew the sample like you're saying
Any loss of carbon wouldn't change the carbon ratio because the process does not favor an isotope to any measurable degree. It's a ratio of isotopes of carbon, not a ratio of carbon to everything else. Fire can't decay the carbon itself
@@prophetrob In general, a contamination level of around 1-5% can affect the accuracy of carbon dating results. One of the fires actually burned it severely. So I think you may need to be the one who looks into it more, since it's you that is seemingly so dismissive.
Here is a breakdown for you like you asked. 1-5% contamination can cause deviations in the age determination, potentially affecting the precision of the result.
5-10% contamination can lead to significant deviations in the age determination, potentially causing errors of hundreds of years.
10-20% contamination can result in substantial errors in the age determination, potentially leading to incorrect ages or ages that are significantly different from the true age.
The infrared reflectography (IRR) study conducted in 1997, led by Dr. Raymond Rogers, provided valuable insights into the Shroud's composition and potential exposure to fire and smoke. The results suggested that the contamination was estimated to be around 50-70% (modern carbon,) which is a significant amount. This means that the actual age of the Shroud is likely much older than the dates obtained from the radiocarbon dating test.
The study also identified a unique "fingerprint" of fire residues on the Shroud, which is distinct from other types of contaminants. This fingerprint is thought to be related to the high-temperature combustion products generated during the fire. Which leads to my other variables mentioned earlier.
Lastly, we aren't talking about loss of carbon, we are talking about added modern carbon which can disrupt the radiocarbon dating test. Nobody is suggesting that fire decays the carbon, unless oxidation is a factor.
Hope this helps, but it sounds like the presuppositions and rescuing devives are just stacked too high.
@@gregariousguru are you telling me there was 40 percent modern carbon by weight in the sample?
You can see the teeth of the Man in the Shroud. Especially when you look at a photo that had the striation lines (verticle lines) removed by the computer to reduce noise. The teeth can be seen in the original image but they are easily confused with the verticle lines in the cloth. But when the computer is used to remove those lines, you can clearly see that the Man in the Shrould had crooked bottom teeth.
I’m wondering if there are any miracles associated with the shroud
People! The onus isn't on anyone here. If you believe, based on the (albeit fascinating) evidence already provided by all the scientists, botanists, medical forensic specialists, etc., etc., that it is in fact the burial cloth of Jesus, then great. It can be used as a beautiful tool for meditation and reflection. However, faith doesn't (shouldn't) rest on the outcome of studies of some artifact, no matter what is true about it. The Church will very likely never declare one way or the other because that is not the Church's job. The Shroud's authenticity is up for debate, let it remain so.
If you don't believe that the Shroud is the authentic burial cloth of Christ, then ok. No one is saying you have to. You are perfectly free to look at the evidence and decide for yourself.
All I would recommend is that people are intellectually honest about what has, in fact, been learned about the Shroud. It is the most scientifically studied artifact in the history of the world. It is compelling. But no one is forced to believe one thing about it. Just enjoy, if you do, the very intriguing discoveries that have been made about it. ❤️
The mirculous images on the Shroud are an element of the Sign of Jonah which Jesus predicted 2000 years ago.
What is the natural explanation as to how it was done?
*crickets chirping*
We just found out 2 years ago how the Egyptians created their blue pigment🤷♂️
@@philmiska7295 Researchers have understood the basic composition of this pigment since the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with analysis revealing that it is made from a combination of silica, lime, copper, and alkali, which undergoes a heating process to create the blue compound. The challenge in fully understanding how the Egyptians created this pigment lies in the fact that many of the original recipes and techniques were not documented. The ancient processes likely varied over time and region, contributing to the complexity of recreating or understanding them fully.
Unlike Egyptian blue, which has a consistent chemical composition, the Shroud is an artifact of uncertain origin. Dating methods (like carbon dating) have produced conflicting results, and while some scientists have studied the fibers and any stains, there is still debate about how it came to be, whether it is a forgery, radiation, or whether it bears any historical authenticity.
If the comparison seeks to draw direct parallels in their creation processes, it may be less meaningful due to their fundamentally different natures and contexts. Especially when this is seemingly being used as a red herring or rescuing device. Mainly, because the comparison is superficial and lacking in contextual awareness, and does not yield valuable insights. Nice try though.
@@philmiska7295 Researchers have understood the basic composition of this pigment since the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with analysis revealing that it is made from a combination of silica, lime, copper, and alkali, which undergoes a heating process to create the blue compound. The challenge in fully understanding how the Egyptians created this pigment lies in the fact that many of the original recipes and techniques were not documented. The ancient processes likely varied over time and region, contributing to the complexity of recreating or understanding them fully.
Unlike Egyptian blue, which has a consistent chemical composition, the Shroud is an artifact of uncertain origin. Dating methods (like carbon dating) have produced conflicting results, and while some scientists have studied the fibers and any stains, there is still debate about how it came to be, whether it is a forgery, radiation, or whether it bears any historical authenticity.
If the comparison seeks to draw direct parallels in their creation processes, it may be less meaningful due to their fundamentally different natures and contexts. Especially when this is seemingly being used as a red herring or rescuing device. Mainly, because the comparison is superficial and lacking in contextual awareness, and does not yield valuable insights.
Researchers have understood the basic composition of this pigment since the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with analysis revealing that it is made from a combination of silica, lime, copper, and alkali, which undergoes a heating process to create the blue compound. The challenge in fully understanding how the Egyptians created this pigment lies in the fact that many of the original recipes and techniques were not documented. The ancient processes likely varied over time and region, contributing to the complexity of recreating or understanding them fully.
Unlike Egyptian blue, which has a consistent chemical composition, the Shroud is an artifact of uncertain origin. Dating methods (like carbon dating) have produced conflicting results, and while some scientists have studied the fibers and any stains, there is still debate about how it came to be, whether it is a forgery, radiation, or whether it bears any historical authenticity.
If the comparison seeks to draw direct parallels in their creation processes, it may be less meaningful due to their fundamentally different natures and contexts. Especially when this is seemingly being used as a red herring or rescuing device. Mainly, because the comparison is superficial and lacking in contextual awareness, and does not yield valuable insights. Nice try though.
@@philmiska7295 ☝️
Very sorry to hear about Barrie Schwortz. I’m not convinced but am very interested in the topic of the shroud and have watched many, many of his presentations online. He seemed like a wonderful and truly nice man.
He was :)
At minute 1:13:17 the video treats us to a photo of Dr. Raymond Rodgers as he closely examines the Shroud. The funny thing is that this photo was taken in 1978 when Dr. Rodgers was a member of the STURP team of scientists who spent five full days examining the Shroud. That team went over every square inch of the Shroud using sophisticated instruments. In their many papers and studies, no member of that team, including Dr. Rodgers, made the claim that an undocumeted repair existed on the Shroud.
But then in 2004, without having seen the Shroud in over twenty years, Rodgers suddenly wanted us to believe that a secret repair did exist on the Shroud and that it was located exactly at the corner where the 1988 radiocarbon sample was cut from. It is all just a little too much. The threads that compose the cloth were hand-spun under unknown conditions. Cotton could easily have made its way into that spinning process. Every textile scientist who has examined the Shroud in person has confirmed that no undocumented repairs exist anywhere on the Shroud. In addition to that, relics which were in the tomb with the Shroud also show severely skewed radiocarbon dates.
The only unfalsified hypothesis for explaining the Shroud's radicarbon readings is the neutron absorption idea.
God can create his Son to be born through Mary his mother who had no sexual relationship with a man: Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit: God can do anything:
God created his own mother to be born through her:
Again !! remember God can do anything! Don't restrict your thinking to our worldly thinking:
I don't know much about the shroud. This gave me a lot to think about. Thank you.
Can Elon Musk reproduce the shroud with his technology?
Elon musk doesn't have any technology, he's is a total fraud who hasn't created anything. He has just invested money in other peoples technology and boasted as if HE has done anything lol 😂 People treat him like a real life Tony stark, when he's more like a mix between JP Morgan and PT Barnum lol 😂
There's something about God and falling books. I come from a deeply dysfunctional family. I was in the self-help section in a bookstore when from out of the blue a book fell from a shelf and hit me in the head. I hadn't touched anything on the shelf, nor were any people around me. The book was People of the Lie by Scott Peck. It described my family and helped me understand what choices I needed to make in my life. I always thought the event was from my guardian angel, who has been working overtime in my life. But it might also reflect God's sense of humour. "Here stupid, let me hit you on the head already."
It happens . . .
This is a great interview; I’ve been waiting to read his book. I just have had a lot on my backlog lately.
The Shroud of Turin is indeed a true shroud of Jesus, based on all evidences we have.
Tell that the STURIP people who came back saying it's not real.
@@malirk its STURP, not STURIP. They should, after more and more scientist debunked their claim and after people expose their methodology and sample collecting.
@@Tenebris_Sint better than atheism, you have zero evidences for your atheistic religion.
@@Tenebris_Sint so, when atheist say "there is no God", are they really know there is no God or they just assuming it?
@@borneandayak6725 It is. I've read so much on it that I didn't care to google anything to double check the acronym.
What scientists debunked their claims? The ones who came and said, "Nu uh! You got it wrong"
Glad you admit scientists who got to examine it came back saying it was a fraud. Turns out Turin was not happy about that 😢! No wonder they don't let more scientists test it.
So sorry to hear about Barry, he was great
Can’t wait for this!
The BIBLE is CLEAR that there was NO single shroud that Jesus was wrapped in, but linen cloths, with a single cloth or "towel" that was wrapped around his head SEPARATE from multiple linen cloths that was wrapped around his body, as John 20:3-7 states:
"Then Peter and the other disciple (John) set out for the tomb. The two of them began running together, but the other disciple ran faster than Peter and reached the tomb first. Stooping forward, he saw the linen cloths (PLURAL, "linen cloths", Greek othonion, meaning "a linen bandage, strips of linen") lying there, but he did not go in."
"Then Simon Peter also came, following him, and he went into the tomb. And he saw the linen cloths (PLURAL, "linen cloths", Greek othonion, meaning "a linen bandage, strips of linen") lying there. The cloth (single, Greek soudarion, meaning "a sweat cloth, i.e. towel, as for binding the face of a corpse", see Luke 19:20; Acts 19:12) that had been on his (Jesus) head was NOT lying with the OTHER cloth bands (PLURAL, Greek othonion) but was rolled up in a place by itself."
Upon Lazarus death, he was wrapped in a similar way as Jesus, with a cloth (Greek soudarion or a towel) wrapped around his head and the rest of the body wrapped in different cloths (Greek keiria, meaning "a swath, i.e. winding sheet", such as linen) when he was laid in a tomb, for John 11:44 states:
"The man who had been dead came out with his feet and hands bound with wrappings (plural, Greek keiria, meaning "a swath, i.e. winding sheet"), and his face was wrapped with a (single) cloth ("cloth", Greek soudarion, meaning "a sweat cloth, i.e. towel"). Jesus said to them: “Free him and let him go.”
So, what Jesus (and Lazarus) was wrapped in was NOT even remotely a "shroud", but a series of cloths, one for the head (a towel or sweat cloth), and the rest of the body with wrappings or linen cloths, like taking a roll of medical gauze and wrapping a wound, going round and round until covered.
The Shroud of Turin has been shown as a fake, dated around the 13th/14th century C.E. by three prestigious laboratories, at the University of Arizona, at Oxford, and at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, with each not revealing their results, but were each sent independently to the British Museum for certification, whereby the Shroud of Turin was dated as from 1260-1390 C.E.
But Catholics (and others) will reject the sound evidence and still cling to the false belief that it is "the image of Jesus". It will be their loss, for these ones are like what the apostle Paul wrote about at 2 Corinthians 4:3, 4:
"If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God (and NOT God), might not shine through."
Thank you for not having an annoying intro clip
See: "The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption," Rucker, 2020.
To the best of my knowledge no one who has personally examined the Shroud has concluded that the Shroud has an undocumented repair on its corners or anywhere else. The exception would be the late Dr. Raymond Rodgers who was a member of the STURP team in 1978 which carefully examined and tested every inch of the Shroud. However, subsequent to that analysis, neither Dr. Rodgers nor any other member fo the STURP team reported an undocumented repair. It was only in 2002, without having seen the Shroud for over twenty years, that Dr. Rodgers decided that the Shroud actually did have an undocumented repair to its corner.
Not my cup of tea but still an interesting video.
Jesus lives! ♥️ and is God 🙏🏻 Christ ✝️ and King 👑
I first saw the holy shroud when i waes working in the city of London - I am not sure if it was there or on Kensington, the actual shroud or a copy of it, in about 1956. it was on a trailer in the street
Oh! Barrie Schwortz passed? This man was awesome and brought so much to the public about the shroud.. It's a big loss.
i could not care if the shroud is real or not and i dont understand why anyone would. the christian faith is used to save our souls and guide our lives. not be upheld evidentially by a random cloth. best case scenario its real and its cool. worse case its fake and a cool piece of art or coincidence.
You don’t understand why people care if a possible relic of the death and resurrection of Christ is authentic? Hmmm. Maybe you need to re-consider the historical importance of Christ.
Jesus spent His entire ministry giving signs, wonders and performing miracles.
He did this to provide Proof of Concept because He said, as He was quoted by John, that people wouldn’t believe without the signs, wonders, and miracles.
@patricpeters7911 if it's fake is Christianity fake? If it's still real then the shroud was nothing more then an oppurtunity for more evidence of the resurrection. The case for christ does not rest on this cloths validity.
@matthewcollins8148 of course but the point is that the shroud being real or fake does not reflect the truth of Christianity. So it's either a piece of art or it's the real deal. Neither are going to move the needle on the validity of Christ's resurrection
Sounds to me like Cameron has never had an unexplained mythical or divine experience the skepticism he showed about the tiny book falling.
It’s real
Why are people so interested,our savior was crucified for me and you,he loved us that much.but to be in love with Jesus to have so much admiration and respect and compassion,well it would be the most memorable thing in my life to see it or touch it or even be in the same room with it,he is my hero my father,my savior,it would be the most humbling experience.to love him so much already that would be so overwhelming .
The cloth of the holy shroud is not herring-bone. It is three-point twill, with which it is easy to weave a seamless coat.
Turin now holds a relic - revered two thousand years -
This length of linen three point twill - alerted experts’ fears,
that what the Church has always taught, just might, indeed, be true,
that they might have to think again - or even start anew.
If grasp of mathematics equalled that of History,
then what they knew of either, dents their credibility -
their maths inspired no confidence, as in a simple range,
their choice of kinds of samples had a tendency to change.
While fibres of pure linen, over centuries, stay true -
and Carbon-dating systems can tell when they were new -
persuade belief in miracles most difficult to take
of man-made painted blood-stains of medieval fake.
What little is “de fide,” alone, is root and seed
of what makes sense of knowledge, of prejudices freed.
If Biblical tradition cannot be guaranteed
we do not know whom we can trust, no matter what we read.
If plumb-lines are rejected, there would seem a kind of rift
twixt what is learned by science - and what is known by gift.
For TRUTH is same for all of us, for science and life as well -
and truth leads us to Heaven, whereas falsehood leads to HELL -
and Revelation tells us that all truth will set us free -
not only here before we die, but through eternity -
And printed on the holy shroud - the King of Kings is seen -
the Son of God - the Son of Man - the Son of Heaven’s Queen
Though not the holy spirit, she was just the second Eve -
with His consent another man was made she could conceive
“a second Adam to the fight and to the rescue came”
from Nazareth and Bethlehem - and Jesus was His name
Wow, did you write this? It's impressive.
New testing under extremely strict scientific protocols need done.
I am so sad that Barry Schwartz passed away!
Didn’t hear the news about Barrie Schwortz. Rest in peace
I'm curious: why do you only seem to feature guests that confirm the things you already believe?
It’s called Capturing Christianity
Sure, but that doesn't have to equal echo chamber...
Dawkins was busy
@@albinjonsson1177
🙄
@@laddieweidow6119sorry, but I listen to/watch a LOT of podcasts on a wide range of topics (around 30-40 hours a week) and that is a standard not applied anywhere else.
Having been an atheist and being in the history/archaeology field If this is an echo-chamber then Sonia every other podcast, especially the ones with a secular world view.
This guy isn't a debater, he's an interviewer and he's pretty good at getting the interviewee to tell us what he thinks and letting us make up our own minds.
People of many denominations listen to this podcast, and that there are denominations in the first place is the biggest clue this isn't an echo chamber.
Even within denominations there is disagreement as to authenticity and nature of the shroud, let alone its implications if there was agreement.
27:24 😅
27:55 😂
28:16 💀
There are really two options for the Shroud:
(1) It is the actual burial shroud of Jesus.
(2) If it is fake, is the greatest piece of art ever made and it is wildly underrated as an art piece. If we want to get into “what is art” then fine. It is the greatest and most clever forgery ever made. Either way, absolutely incredible.
If it's impossible to replicate it in our time then the scale is weighing in the direction of it's real.
Start requesting Elon Musk put up an X PRIZE for anyone who can reproduce the shroud by any means.
The titulus crucis Is a Better forgery
@@astrol4b there's no question about how the titulus could be created
@@user-dw1jp7tp6i on the face of it the titulus crucis looks real, it even tricked paleography, while the shroud has some errors in anatomy, like too small skull top, no knuckles on fingers, hairs that looks like a towel rather than hair and for some reason feet are only visible from the back (with the injury placed in the wrong place, but one could argue that we don't have enough proof that all crucifixions nailed the heel) there are also other things, like why it looks like a photo on a 2 panel rather than wrapped around a 3d body and why the back doesn't look pressed against the shroud like when you xerox your face (or ehm... Other body parts)
I already know Jesus is alive and saviour. Now as for these shrouds etc, I see them as intriguing but they may help others who refuse to see but won't sway me any further than i already am towards the risen Jesus!
Thank you.
I thought this was already pretty settled-that French nuns did repair and re-wove parts of the Shroud. Besides, anyone who believes in Jesus Christ knows it’s real; anyone who doesn’t want to believe in Christ will continue to think it’s not really anything super natural.
See: "The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption," Rucker, 2020.
God has gifted us this miraculous relic to us to be used an aid to convince the doubters, just as Jesus showed his fatal wounds to his disciple, Thomas.
How to end the debate is compare the shroud to video games render skins. A real shroud would look more like the latter.
Not really, STURP scientists have mathematically proven your claim to be false, the mistake you are making is assuming that the only way the Shroud images could be formed is via direct contact which would have produced the "Mask of Agamemnon" or wrap-around effect of which you speak. No one on the Pro-Shroud side has claimed the Shroud images were produced naturally via direct-contact since 1939 when Paul Vignon did experiments and proved it was impossible due to the very issue you mention here thinking it is news to us on the Pro-Shroud side- it's not, we already have proven the images were formed via a vertical-encodation path; one of the proof that straight line vertical radiation from the body was responsible for the images we see.
My God! Why can;t the interviewer shut up and stop interrupting the person beiing interviewed? It's like he's trying to prove his own knowledgeability. Big thumbs down for the interviewer!
First to leave a post I see. Anyways, it was really great seeing Joe on the show giving his perspective on the evidence for the Shroud. That said, I have some differences with Joe on how to answer the C-14 dating as I go for Bob Rucker's Neutron Irradiation hypothesis; the explanation that literally leaves all Shroud skeptics stunned into silence on the issue lol. But yeah, I think Joe represents his Invisible Re-Weave hypothesis well in this show and did a good job providing visuals to explain the evidence such as the Blue Quad Mosaic image there- so keep up the good work Cam by bringing on these Shroud experts :)
How can something that's unreliable be reliable?
What are you referring to?
@@sigurdholbarki8268 Probably C14 dating
There are other records that the shroud was carried from church to church
I don't really understand the claim about this artifact. Are they saying the image of Jesus was miraculously put onto this cloth?
Yes that is exactly it
@@RealSeekers , sincerely, thank you.
So the body didn't cause the image, but God put the image there as a sign that this shroud was for Jesus?
@@bigdavexx1 You are welcome :) No the body itself could not naturally form the body images through direct contact or gas diffusion, the images could only have been formed supernaturally by God. Now, that supernatural process probably used the body of Jesus such as those who submit that some kind of radiation from within the body of Jesus caused the images to form during the moment of His Resurrection.
Medieval artists did not have access to the advanced technological tools we have today for creating three-dimensional images on a two-dimensional surface, such as computer graphics or 3D modeling software.
@@les2997 I agree Les that is one way we know the images are supernatural
If the carbon dating came back as 100bce-200ce would have spent so long arguing about only one sample spot and the dating inaccuracy?
Also if Yahweh is all powerful and wants everyone to have a relationship with him why not just make sure there’s multiple samples and the date came back correct? Would have been simple for him. Yet he decides to make it look like it’s probably forged. Most believers will believe it’s real so it doesn’t matter but if you want skeptics to believe make easy so it couldn’t be denied by a rational person. Same thing with the Bible and everything else Christians claim
Im gunna ask again for chapters/timestamps
Why does this video only have 13k views?
For a guy running a christian podcast the cam guy seems very skeptical on anything supernatural.
To the Christians, I’m too skeptical. To the atheists, I’m too credulous.
@@CapturingChristianity my day job is in the Early Medieval period (I do historical outreach and make reproductions), and I think you're on the money.
You've got the lost art of the interview down to a tee, most mainstream interviewers spend more time letting us know what they think, but you accurately articulate counter arguments to draw out the full thoughts of your guests, including their workings (always show your workings!).
@@CapturingChristianity That is a good reply actually Cam, well said :) For what it is worth, I'm friend with Joe and despite my disagreements with him on some things like the Invisible Re-Weave, he has always been completely honest with me, even when it hurt, so while I don't know what to make of Joe's claims explanatorily myself, there is no doubt that he is telling the truth to the best of his ability.
BTW, I was wondering if it would ever be possible for you to have Bob Rucker on your show, he is a Nuclear Engineer and has done amazing work in terms of his Vertically Collimated Radiation Burst hypothesis which explains, the body images, bloodstains and C-14 data all at once- if you need I can hook you up with him and/or Joe knows him too, but trust me, the skeptics can't really argue with his model apart from objecting to its involving the supernatural.
Without a doubt, an artefact that becomes more sacred with each scientific endeavour to prove it as false. In my opinion, the closest we will ever get to the death mask if our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
How did it become more sacred after carbon dating revealed it to likely be a forgery?
@@truthseeker7867 I'd challenge you research more on the topic of the shroud if you haven't already done so. Don't get hung up on the work of one or two scientists acting with bias. Some of the most erudite scientists in this area of research are atheistic or agnostic and have applied tests far more advanced than carbon dating to establish its veracity. Still, they are baffled by its revelations.
@@pauliewalsh6875 which specific test that is more advanced than carbon dating are you referring to?
@@truthseeker7867 Look into the Liberato De Caro of Italy’s Institute of Crystallography of the National Research Council in Bari. Their team utilused au untested “Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering” method to examine the natural aging of cellulose that constitutes a sample of the famous linen cloth.This is one of many different studies that attempts uograded or outdated methods of 'complete dating'
They researchers in this study concluded that their peer reviewed research shows the Holy Shroud is compatible with the hypothesis that it is much older than seven centuries old - the conclusion first reached in 1988 using carbon dating techniques - and is around 2,000 years old. I think this paper is from 2022.
You know Jesus is a mastermind of course there would be evidence,he took the time to leave his presence remember he folded the cloth covering his face,Jewish customs was to fold the napkin it would mean you would return,nothing he did was mistake everything he did was purpose.I believe it’s real,becouse if you truly have a relationship with him,it just wouldn’t be surprising.
That phone going off was rude.
💪🐻❤️ really miss Barry
Why don't they just go get a couple new pieces of samples from the red/orange area of the cloth and run another C14 test on them and silence all doubts?
I don't think they can, there was some kind of infestation and the preservation process may have ruled out further tests.
Also, between the parties in the RC church who think it's fake and don't want it tested in case it isn't, those who hope it's legit and don't want it tested in case it isn't and those who don't care one way or the other, the ones who just want to know barely get a word in!
CREATE A $10 MILLION X PRIZE FOR ANY TEAM THAT CAN REPRODUCE THE SHROUD BY ANY MEANS, ANCIENT, MODERN, OR YET TO BE DEVELOPED.
BTW CAMERON THIS X PRIZE COULD BE CROWD FUNDED. I BET WHEN DONATIONS TO THE PRIZE HIT ONE MILLION DOLLARS WE WILL SEE RESULTS.
I'm going to suggest that DARPA has already been doing this on the assumption that the shroud could have been created by Extra terrestrials to inspire us to create the technology and understand the science that we need before contact and full disclosure. For example a 40 billion watt ultra violet laser printer with AI that could embed 3D information. Think about the related technologies from the experiments that are not obvious. On the other hand the shroud is the perfect ET test, if ET shows up then demand they demonstrate they can reproduce the shroud.
Also, on Nabeel Quereshi conversion and the shroud. The Ahmadiya Muslims teach that the it proves Christ was crucified but that he didn't die, the swoon theory. They base this on their interpretation of the blood stains, that in his burial Jesus was washed and dead bodies don't bleed therefore the blood proves he was still alive.
If I remember correctly, Gary Habermas in a discussion with Nabeels father defeated this hypothesis primarily by showing that the man on the shroud was in late stage rigor mortis and therefore had to be dead (this places Jesus in the 1-3 day range). This is also a detail that skeptics need to address for it to be a hoax, the hoaxers had to think they needed the rigor mortis details AND they only had three days to create the hoax if they used a real body.
Jesus's body after his burial was guarded.
Tested material was cotton….
The shroud is made of flax… I think…
but definitely not made of cotton…
It's made of linen.
Is it possible that the shroud image is a holograph?
For anyone looking this is the documentary that was mentioned/showed partially: ruclips.net/video/JBDuKZSgDSI/видео.htmlsi=9apjnNDrZinkBocB
You seemed oddly combative when he told his story about the relic and his nephew. Seemed pretty unwarranted
*HOW TO END THE DEBATE:* Just hand the shroud over to scientists to examine it now. Give 5 samples that range in their dates where only 1 is the real shroud. Then have 3 sets of scientists return results.
these are destructive tests, so they are probably weary of snipping off another sample. Also, i heard they have reservations in terms of contimation of carbon from the fire that damaged it. i personally don't need the c14 dating proof to believe in Jesus. but it is an extra bit of evidence, that incredibly, we can use science to do forensics.
@@fre7717 I can't believe it by faith. I need evidence. Imagine proving with multiple secular scientists that it is real! What do you value more?
1) Bringing people to God.
2) Preserving the claimed relic 100%.
If this is actually the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, should we be destroying ANY of it to convince a few skeptics? If it’s authentic, it’s the most sacred thing on the planet. I can see both sides. I do not suspect that if carbon dating were performed again, and it proved its authenticity, that there would be mass conversions. The skeptics would simply find some other way to be skeptical.
@@malirkare you here claiming that if the dating came back to the time of Jesus…it would be a good piece of evidence that merits belief in God?
@@malirkyou totally missed the point about contamination, the shroud is not a proper item to use carbon dating on so you can't get a reliable date even IF it dated to 30 AD on a thousand samples. So if you did retest it and it dated to Jesus you would only give the skeptics reasons to question the carbon dating.
I believe Joe's book story, about 75% though the video . I have one that's even better but it's very personal and would take a very long time to tell. But I beleive Joe about the book falling near him the moment he begain thinking about it.
I'd like to know what Mr R Dawkins thoughts are on the Turin Shroud.
Based off everything I know about him: he thinks it’s fake
Yep... agree.
He believes the shroud shares a common ancestor with a carrot.
Well, he's an evolutionary biologist for a start, so my wife has got as much expertise in this field as he does.
Secondly he comes out with blinders like {many mainstream biblical scholars doubt Jesus was a historical figure}, without any reference, and when challenged on it he can't name a single one, let alone "many" (Reddit doesn't count).
Now standard academic practice would be to issue a retraction, which he hasn't done.
He's a smart evolutionary biologist, but when it comes to theology or even philosophy he knows about as much as my window cleaner, and when it comes to historic textiles I have greater expertise and that's a field only adjacent to my own
“The shroud is real because god told me to do my chores, which inadvertently led to me being on the radio!” Should we really be taking this guy seriously?
I think we should but not because your quote is a very obvious straw man.
@@CapturingChristianity he thinks that is a good data point. He brought it up. It is not the entirety of why he believes.
Anyone who thinks that is a solid data point, but everything about the dating experiments is wrong, is clearly biased.
Also, I think you did a good job of pushing back on some of his ideas. Much better than in the past. Cheers.
Very visceral
How did the man in the shroud get that Roman nose? I thought Jesus was a Jew.
Because skeptics lied about it and people just believe what they are told meanwhile the actual experts have proven that the Shroud Man is a perfect fit for first century rural Jews similar to modern Shepherdic Jews today.
The fact anyone still believes c14 dating is credible is very sad.
There's nothing wrong with C14 dating, the dates from the 80s would be consistent with repair hypothesis. It's the people who conducted them back in the 80s that aren't credible because their methodology was garbage (or deliberately rigged).
The problem is people think it's a magic bullet, but when you know it's limits and use it honestly it's very useful
You should censor the email address part
Actually that is his email he uses to give Shroud updates, there are many many people who have it, so it is all good.
This guy doesn’t give any credibility to the Shroud. Unfortunately, he sounds like a phony. He’s just not credible.
Let's go
I loved the interview. The only thing I can say about is that Mr. Marino is not the best speaker ever. He is very knowledgeable but definitely not the best speaker ever. For those who speak or understand Spanish I'll leave a link of a conference held not long ago. It took place in Spain and those who partaken are both knowledgeable and well eloquent. Hopefully I don't break rule in here and my comment isn't banned or hid.
ruclips.net/video/sKQ03s6nRGM/видео.htmlsi=ohOtuT7NgghpZJXT
For those who speak English I'll leave another interview.
ruclips.net/user/liveHAbuG-oVq1Q?si=v4hi_Ovu6D9flmV2
Question- how do you post links without RUclips deleting your posts?
@RealSeekers I don't know. I guess it allows it bc it doesn't take u out of yt.
@@J.MTZ356 Thanks, yeah its weird, I've had issues, but maybe it will allow it on here, I will try to reply to myself with a link just to test- thanks again.
He sounds stuck up
Your hairs a little messed up
Of course it's fake. Look at the gospel accounts and see how badly Jesus was beaten.
Beard pulled out, crown of thorns pressed on to his head, beaten within an inch of his life by multiple roman soldiers and finally crucified.
The Bible also shows that Jesus was mangled beyond recognition when he died so anyone with a passing knowledge of the gospels will know that Jesus would not have looked as perfect as he does on that shroud.
I've wondered about this too
You can't find that level of detail in the Bible, so why are you making things up. The man on the shroud does not look perfect. He is badly beaten, speered in the side and his nose is broken.
@@isoldam Never read the Bible huh? That level of detail is in there
People still think about the shroud??? Old news.
If it's authentic its a really big deal.
The Shroud of Turin is a Hoax
1)The shroud is all one garment depicting a man’s face. This is not how Christ was placed in the tomb. We see in the scriptures that it was tradition to bury the dead in two sets of garments including a head napkin. We see this in the case of Lazarus, John 11:44-"And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go." We see this at the tomb of Christ, John 20:7-"And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself."
2)Christ would not have shamed Himself by having long hair as depicted on the shroud. 1st Corinthians 11:14-15, “Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.”
3)Testing of the blood done on the shroud has revealed the “Y” chromosome. Jesus only had one earthly parent and that was Mary who could only give Him the “X” chromosome. Christ would not have the Y chromosome as it would have corrupted His divinity.
Um… Jesus was fully human. He was a human male. Basic middle school biology requires any human male to have XY chromosomes. This is no way compromises his divinity. To say so would be to reject Nicene christology.
As for #2, you’re assuming short hair is what we moderners consider to be short hair. Hair down to cheeks could have been short hair comparatively speaking.
As for #1, look up facecloth of Oviedo. Has same marks as the shroud, and is likely the face covering you’re talking about.
The idea that Jesus didn't have a Y chromosome is absurd, without a Y He couldn't be male. I don't really care what you think about the shroud, but please rethink this. Jesus was and is fully human, God did whatever He needed to do to make sure Jesus' body would have all the genetics an ordinary human would need.
1. This is literally not an objection to the shroud. The way Jesus is positioned, with his hair falling down and his hands being able to cover his genitals without his arms being outstreched, means he was standing up, not laid down, which means He was already resurrected, so He could've prepared the shroud to be imprinted with his image in any way He wanted to.
2. Paul was talking to people in Corinth. The church there was composed of greeks, not of jews, and THEY had this cultural standard that men having long hair was shameful, and Paul was using this to make a point, just read the surrounding context. Jesus, as a jew, would have no problem keeping a long hair (and it can even be argued via Leviticus 19:27 that jews should not cut their hair). Jesus spent his final years mostly living in the wilderness, not a lot of opportunities for haircuts.
3. This is almost as stupid as the people who say Jesus was trans. Jesus was a man, He didn't inherit Adam's corrupted Y chromosome, but He obviously had one; handcrafted by the Holy Spirit. God can create a universe out of words, but you think He cant put together a few nucleotides? What a petty god you believe in. Certainly that is not the god who rose Jesus from the dead.
The napkin was placed over the shroud which covered the face and body. Also Jesus was fully man. He needs a Y chromosome. He gets it miraculously. Where did Adam and Eve get their chromosomes ?
RE: #1 check the Sudarium Oviedo - I think you'll soon see how it matches this evidence in many places #2 Samson had long hair and took a Nazarite vow #3 we're talking miracles, aren't we? Holy Ghost provided.
Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time
The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits
So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply
Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )
The earliest creed we have of Christianity. 1 Corinthians 15 . Has jesus death ,burial, and resurrection .
So even the "earliest forms" of Christianity are not compatible with islam . We have writings also that are pre gospels that assert jesus was a pre-existing divine being which isn't compatible with Islam
Sorry dude, your religion is false religion created by pagan Arab, who copying the Bible. The prophet era was end and Prophet John was the last prophet according to Jesus in Luke 16:16. Islam is the late interpertation of the Bible, by using Arian and Gnostic Christology. Quran is the corruption of the Bible. Sunni and Shia, are the evolution of Islam, with their extra-interpretation, one of them are the Tawheed, the late 10th century doctrine, the Sunni follow the Asharite version of Tawheed. While there is zero prophet teach Tawheed, even the corrupted book Quran also teach nothing about Tawheed. Also Salat and Hajj to Mecca, both are Arabian pagan religious practicing. The Arab in 7th century reinterpret Hajj and Salat by conneting both pagan practices to Biblical prophets in order for the Arab to legitimized their pagan practices.
You need to repent and come to Christ through repentance, faith and baptism. Islam or Sunni or Shia, all three are false and pure paganism. Come to Christ, stop fooling yourself with false religion.
They ate lamb during Passover so they weren’t strictly vegetarian.
theguyver...You sure are wrong ... where in the Bible did you read that which you put in yr comment:
There is no such person as Allah.