Posted on 08/01/2025 6:02:53 AM PDT by Red Badger
For centuries, devout Christians have flocked to the Italian city of Turin to pay their respects to one of the most famous relics in the world.
The Shroud of Turin is a piece of linen, measuring 14ft 5in by 3ft 7in, that bears a faint image of the front and back of a man.
Many believe that this image was created when Jesus was wrapped in the venerated shroud shortly after his death on the cross 2,000 years ago.
However, according to a new study, the Shroud of Turin was never laid on Jesus' body.
Brazilian 3D designer and researcher Cicero Moraes, an expert in reconstructing historical faces, says that the shroud is nothing more than a 'masterpiece of Christian art'.
Mr Moraes used digital modelling software to examine how cloth drapes over the human body compared to a low, flat sculpture of a body.
These results, published this week in the journal Archaeometry, show that the shroud's distinctive pattern could only have been produced by a sculpture.
In his paper, Mr Moraes wrote: 'The Shroud's image is more consistent with an artistic low-relief representation than with the direct imprint of a real human body.'
New analysis shows that the images on the Shroud of Turin (centre) could only have been produced by laying the cloth over a flat sculpture (right) rather than over a human body (left)
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Exactly.
Right!
I understand with your sentiment but part of belief as a Christian is that Christ was incarnate, lived a life, the Crucifixion was a historical event, etc... While we walk by faith and not by sight St. Paul as said if Christ was not Crucified our faith is in vain.
I don’t care either. I still believe!
Balderdash
Such relics are useless, bordering on idol worship.
Synchronic theistic monism, or Synthemon, teaches that the cosmos is a unified, holistic system with both physical and spiritual attributes, governed by metaphysical laws and divine intentionality. God, and by extension the glorified Christ, is not bound by the ordinary dimensions or physical limitations of the cosmos. The glorified body of Christ, after the resurrection, is understood as manifesting higher-dimensional or spiritual attributes—capable of appearing and disappearing, passing through closed doors, and interacting with matter in ways that transcend ordinary causality
I believe that Christ is true God and man, and that he is my savior. The shroud had nothing to do with that, and never will. Such artifacts are worship of graven images, idolatry.
digital modelling software
pfft.
Is that like Climate change modeling ?
Gigo.
“how cloth drapes over the human body compared to a low, flat sculpture of a body.”
Apparently they don’t know what flat or sculpture means.
There IS an in depth credible investigation that was done that discredits the other “ investigations”
THIS Is Why the Shroud of Turin Is REAL! W/ L.A. Marzulli
In this episode of ISOW Insights L.A. Marzulli (@TheLamarzulli) shares proof that the Shroud of Turin is what it is claimed to be- the linen covering of Jesus’ body at His burial. Listen in to this episode to hear:
How L.A. found out about the Shroud
The history of the Shroud
False claims about the Shroud being debuked
Proof that the Shroud is legitimate
Run Time 34 min
Interesting that this ridiculous theory is proposed while there is a shroud conference going on in St Louis right now.
was thinking more along the lines of equine solid waste
Similarly Was thinking of bovine origin
discussions with the other elite researchers on the shroud for critical cross examination.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8L88SQA9Jg&pp=ygUbbGEgbWFyenVsbGkgc2hyb3VkIG9mIHR1cmlu
Runtime 34 min
It occurs to me that this guy, Cicero Moraes, has chosen a professions where he literally can’t be wrong.
He recreates faces of dead people, humanoids, things, etc... and proclaims they are accurate. Who could prove him wrong.
I would be very interested to know if his “recreation” skills were ever put to the scientific test. Has he ever been given remains of a modern person and asked to recreate what they looked like to compare it to known photos or videos of the person from when they were alive?
My guess is that he hasn’t and if he had, he would fail miserably.
“However, according to a new study”
The re$ult of mo$t $tudie$ i$ more $tudie$ needed.
Ask him to reproduce it then. To my understanding, nobody has a clue of how to.
“Mr Moraes used digital modelling software…”
“to understand how the image on the Shroud of Turin might have been created, Mr Moraes created two digital 3D sculptures.”
Now do it for real.
“The Shroud of Turin is a piece of linen, measuring 14ft 5in by 3ft 7in, that bears a faint image of the front and back of a man.”
“These results, published this week in the journal Archaeometry, show that the shroud’s distinctive pattern could only have been produced by a sculpture.”
“In his paper, Mr Moraes wrote: ‘The Shroud’s image is more consistent with an artistic low-relief representation than with the direct imprint of a real human body.’”
If I understand correctly, there would have had to be “an artistic low-relief representation” of the front and the back…. two separate representations. And they would have had to of “matched”.
veneration of relics.
Holy Dead Things Society
He’s using computer and interpolative tools but hasn’t shown a true working example...the real proof would come if they tested the computers results against the actual doing. Take a shroud and drape it over a very detailed sculpture super heated in such away to produce the same image as what is found on the shrowd. Paint won’t do it...it would smudge. The Shrowd image was not paint but a thin charring as though it were a flash image produced from an intense light source.
Otherwise this article is bunk full of digital flatulent vaporware speculation. He was making a speculation based on results colored by parameters he personaly programmed into software. Now he needs to find a way to reproduce in real life what the software is suggesting. I suspect he can’t do it.
Anyway, I’m looking forward to a Daily Mail article claiming that Mohammed never existed.
—
There was such an article, but I forget the source.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.