Search Results: interest he's trying to show

Do you believe the ‘Shroud of Turin’ is Authentic/ Legit?

I watched a religious film with my Dad, and one of the scenes previews or insinuates the ‘Shroud of Turin.’

I seen another (based on a true story) film (The Case For Christ if anyone’s interested; it’s more data-collective, by an Atheist Journalist) once before, that also showed the cloth.

I didn’t know what the cloth was called- if it even had a name- until I had searched it up.

I read/skimmed a research article to follow this up, and apparently the major facts and mysteries/ “x-factors” by these scientists/scientist, can be summed up as:

• (X) the visual quality in photographic/ art terms
• (X) the chemical makeup
• (X) alongside the biological matter on/within the cloth

so

visual (scheme) quality: the cloth, if it were a painting was “painted” as a negative, meaning colors and shading is reversed than normal paintings or pictures, and for the time the cloth was discovered: no artist could possibly know of this method of *Paint.* Photography was not a thing.

chemical make-up and biological matter:

it appears that the print could only have been made, really, by a source of light and radiation, specifically. The dried blood also would’ve been impossible to transfer, unless again, direct radiation was involved.

—————————————————————

Some speculate it was when the man named Jesus of Nazareth had “rose again on the third day,” as told and described, by Jewish and Christian religious texts.

So what do you think?

Did some religious enthusiast try to make it “appear believable?” Or is the ‘Shroud of Turin’ credible evidence, of a ‘religious figure/individual,’ who transfigured in a tomb long ago?

(All images sourced from Google)