Life of Brian

[Wheeze]

I never thought we would see anybody to rival Always Injured posts....but he is now revealed as a lightweight!😂

[Stagger]

https://youtu.be/EqAukNnT_M8

[Dave_Mole]

I will point out two things.

3

If somebody can show how it was produced in the 5th century

The dates are AD 1260 - 1390

where most of us said

so, you've not only claimed to represent the whole of the Catholic church (more than once) and now count yourself amongst shroud "experts"?

The other historic evidence doesnt fit. Take the sudarium correspondence. The iconography

So if you're going to create a fake you're going to *not* make it look like something else which is *supposed* to date from around the same time?

Put simply if they tested a 16 th century eg fire repair, they would get a corresponding date!

Dating a burnt patch is precisely what Rogers suggested in the article I linked to: "A second radiocarbon analysis should be very advisable, at least on the charred materials removed during the June-July 2002 restoration"

and it is certainly possible it is genuine

and so to that word. What do you mean by "genuine"? That it is the shroud which wrapped the body of "Christ" or just that it is older than 14th-15th century? Because your general imprecision with language (and concepts) makes it difficult to be certain.

[Wheeze]

Let's get Brexit done!

[Wheeze]

I suppose I could try to educate myself about the enigma of the shroud by reading these impassioned adversarial posts. But if I've learned anything from forum jousting it is this.

Less is more. If you cant make your point in 100 words you p!ssing in the wind.

[Dave_Mole]

If you cant make your point in 100 words you p!ssing in the wind.

Science says Shroud of Turin is medieval. People who want it to relate to “Christ” make up their own techniques to disprove this. It doesn’t work.

There, 26.

[Daletownrunner]

Science says Shroud of Turin is medieval. People who want it to relate to “Christ” make up their own techniques to disprove this. It doesn’t work.

There, 26.

I actually hope it’s a medieval beach towel and that the image is made from that brown Nivea oil that my old fella used to cook himself with in the 70’s

[Dave_Mole]

I actually hope it’s a medieval beach towel and that the image is made from that brown Nivea oil that my old fella used to cook himself with in the 70’s

thankyou! That raised a smile!

[Graham Breeze]

I actually hope it’s a medieval beach towel and that the image is made from that brown Nivea oil that my old fella used to cook himself with in the 70’s

Well if that disposes of the Shroud of Turin that just leaves the others to deal with:

A number of claimed relics associated with Jesus have been displayed throughout the history of Christianity. While some individuals believe in the authenticity of Jesus relics, others doubt their validity. For instance, the sixteenth-century philosopher Erasmus wrote about the proliferation of relics, and the number of buildings that could be constructed from wooden relics claimed to be from the crucifixion cross of Jesus.[1] Similarly, at least thirty Holy Nails were venerated as relics across Europe in the early 20th century.[2] Part of the relics are included in the so-called Arma Christi ("Weapons of Christ"), or the Instruments of the Passion.
Some relics, such as remnants of the crown of thorns, receive only a modest number of pilgrims, while others, such as the Shroud of Turin, receive millions of pilgrims, including Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.[3]
As Christian teaching generally states that Christ was assumed into heaven corporeally, there are few bodily relics. A notable exception is the Holy Foreskin of Jesus.

[Dave_Mole]

Holy Foreskin of Jesus

wasn't that Batman's catchphrase?