Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

CNN ireport: Face of Jesus while Alive, discovered on Shroud of Tourin

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   
ireport.cnn.com...

I was skeptical of the authenticity of this shroud, for such a crisp imprint and other disparities, such as carbon dating. Now some researchers/scientists are claiming to have confirmed a 2nd face, imprinted while he was still alive with his eyes open. I'm not sure why they're concluding alive (eyes can be open after death) and what if any spiritual belief this shroud adds to faith of believers. Foremost, I see it as possibly sacrilegious since no shroud is needed for faithful believers, and if it has been faked (ie, for fame or fortune) then what a shame on so many counts, including tarnishing not just world view of Christianity, but the 'reputation' if there is on, of this global proclaimed prophet & earthly icon born in Palestine, Jesus Christ.

What do you think or have to share about it?



The alive photographic face of Jesus Christ was discovered in 2013 by the experimental film scientist Vincenzo Giovanni Ruello in the second face on the back of the Shroud of Turin. Originally detected by Fanti and Maggiolo in 2002 during the restoration as faint red marks,they were thought to be spillover or leakage from the front. These astounding and now historical processed images show Jesus Christ with his eyes open and a different countenance to His face. Injuries sustained to the right eye from the bashing are also evident





edit on 25-4-2013 by tropic because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Thanks for sharing. I can remember being younger and how many people believed this was the shroud that Jesus was buried in. However, I'm skeptical and would like to learn more. Because it's an interesting topic.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   
well they can see the face of jesus in a 3 day old grilled cheese sandwich
why not on a shroud that already has someone alse's face on it?

its jesus becaus only jesus could imprint his face into a shroud...

...except for this other guy

ets
also:

Injuries sustained to the right eye from the bashing are also evident

from the off sight quote from the link in the OP

I always thought Jesus was unabashed




edit on 25-4-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:39 PM
link   
I do think that it warrants mentioning that this is an ireport on CNN, rather than a report by CNN.

I believe that CNN makes no claims as to the validity of ireports -- does not stand behind these as its own reporting.

May not make a difference to anyone's view on the claims, but I do believe that to be the case.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
well they can see the face of jesus in a 3 day old grilled cheese sandwich
why not on a shroud that already has someone alse's face on it?

its jesus becaus only jesus could imprint his face into a shroud...

...except for this other guy

ets
also:

Injuries sustained to the right eye from the bashing are also evident

from the off sight quote from the link in the OP

I always thought Jesus was unabashed




edit on 25-4-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)


unabashed? Is that a joke, or are you actually questioning whether or not Jesus was hurt beyond mere crucifixion?

Biblically the important point to note is that Jesus' legs weren't broken.
This was standard practice in a Roman crucifixion... but because Jesus was already dead, this practice was not carried out upon him. Instead, a soldier thrust a spear into his side, out of which came blood and water (indicative of heart trauma).

This is significant because of the passover practice in Judaism...
where the sheep to be eaten as part of that service had to be "without spot or blemish" and not have its legs broken in order to cook it.

...now, if it was a joke, you can just ignore all that



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:55 PM
link   
I believe the shroud is a fake and I'll tell you why.

John 20:6-7 says:

6:Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,

7:And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

If you notice verse 7 it says a napkin that was placed on his head was lying in a place by itself.... separated from the linen clothes. That tells me that his body and his head were wrapped in different pieces of clothing. So..how can the face of Jesus be on the shroud? It doesn't make any sense to me.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Awen24
 


yes Awen I do make jesus jokes from time to time
( also i have been known to make jokes about the toughest man in the universe Chuck Norris )

having said that your post was still interesting...
because of the word "bash"
I was playing up on not recalling the word "bash" in the biblical description of the cruci fiction and on jesus' apparant unrepantant unabashed attitude "forgive them father...."
not "forgive me"

thank you for taking the time to answer my post
edit on 25-4-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Jesus wasn't buried alive.


CNN iReports are about as reputable as Alex Jones, or various goofballs on Facebook, so I wouldn't put a lot of stock in it, even if it did make sense.

edit on 25-4-2013 by adjensen because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Wait, what is an ireport? Please don't tell me cnn has goofball reporters to go with their oh so credible normal reporting.

So the fake shroud has been investigated - again?

I can't read the op unless I remove them from my list and that's not happening, so I guess I have no choice but to ask - Who believes this hoax is still real? Seriously?

Why do people ignore the years of investigation into things, to seemingly post and imply it's valid? DO they ignore and refute the evidence for this being fake? Or are they just unaware, and if so why have they not looked into it themselves..

I guess I know the answers...

I mean it's a people who can't tell a joke when it's presented to them in an obvious way. Unabashedly so.

Oo



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen
Jesus wasn't buried alive.


Who said that!!!

Oh god.. lol..

that'd be embarrassing.



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 01:26 AM
link   
I thought this had been put to bed. I remember that it was found to NOT be Jesus, and that there was speculation that it could be Leonardo DiVinci. Why are they still testing it? I thought the Vatican ruled that there would be no more test. What gives?



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by tropic
 


To begin with, when was it established that Jesus was definitely a real person and not a myth?



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Not sure how that would work, considering he was supposedly dead when they took him off the cross...

IF this was true it might ruin Christianity though... but its CNN

Soo...




posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cogito, Ergo Sum
reply to post by tropic
 


To begin with, when was it established that Jesus was definitely a real person and not a myth?


This is pure gold on a website that states "Deny Ignorance". Guess you dont read much
www.reddit.com...

If He was God and performed miracles is debatable but His existence.
Good luck



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by Cogito, Ergo Sum
reply to post by tropic
 


To begin with, when was it established that Jesus was definitely a real person and not a myth?


This is pure gold on a website that states "Deny Ignorance". Guess you dont read much
www.reddit.com...

If He was God and performed miracles is debatable but His existence.
Good luck


Glad I could supply you with such copious amounts of precious metals (in the poetic sense). Apart from the logically fallacious rebuttal you have provided (appeal to authority, appeal to numbers etc.) are you, or the (ahem) "scholars" able to provide genuine evidence that might unburden myself of the ignorance you so graciously claim is all mine?

We are not really talking about something verifiable by experiment here (his non/existence to begin with), as much as opinion. From what I see, generally the relevant "scholars" are not so much that, as religious delusionals who begin with the acceptance of the myth and take it from there. Looking for/interpreting anything that might strengthen their position with the word "scholar" in such instances, quite an exaggerated claim of it's own. In this context, I don't see religious based scholar as any more relevant than a "bigfoot" scholar might be (except that bigfoot has slightly better evidence for existence IMO, with many first hand claims, though I have reservations about it also).

In the end it doesn't really matter who believes what, secular, religious or otherwise. It matters more what (genuine) evidence can be provided. Where is it?

We know the stories of magic are just that, tall stories (they can't happen, unless you can show how such observable laws of nature can be/ have been broken). With no reliable first hand accounts of such, or that the claimed progenitor of such supernatural things even existed, it doesn't seem unreasonable to wonder if the whole thing might be mythology. It would seem consistent with similar mythology.

edit on 27-4-2013 by Cogito, Ergo Sum because: for the heck of it.



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cogito, Ergo Sum

Glad I could supply you with such copious amounts of precious metals (in the poetic sense). Apart from the logically fallacious rebuttal you have provided (appeal to authority, appeal to numbers etc.) are you, or the (ahem) "scholars" able to provide genuine evidence that might unburden myself of the ignorance you so graciously claim is all mine?

We are not really talking about something verifiable by experiment here (his non/existence to begin with), as much as opinion. From what I see, generally the relevant "scholars" are not so much that, as religious delusionals who begin with the acceptance of the myth and take it from there. Looking for/interpreting anything that might strengthen their position with the word "scholar" in such instances, quite an exaggerated claim of it's own. In this context, I don't see religious based scholar as any more relevant than a "bigfoot" scholar might be (except that bigfoot has slightly better evidence for existence IMO, with many first hand claims, though I have reservations about it also).

In the end it doesn't really matter who believes what, secular, religious or otherwise. It matters more what (genuine) evidence can be provided. Where is it?

We know the stories of magic are just that, tall stories (they can't happen, unless you can show how such observable laws of nature can be/ have been broken). With no reliable first hand accounts of such, or that the claimed progenitor of such supernatural things even existed, it doesn't seem unreasonable to wonder if the whole thing might be mythology. It would seem consistent with similar mythology.

edit on 27-4-2013 by Cogito, Ergo Sum because: for the heck of it.


I can provide nothing but written words, written words justify everything scholars know of people before images of them came in to existence.
www.allaboutjesuschrist.org...

Can you prove anybodys existence from 200 years ago, definitely? Aside from written words?

Look it doesnt matter if you dont believe Jesus ever existed, my point is that historical evidence supports He did exist and to contradict that is a little strange

Christianity is a faith, belief in Christ the Messiah and His nature is a faith. To believe He didnt exist at all though!



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Awen24
 


a soldier thrust a spear into his side, out of which came blood and water (indicative of heart trauma).

Or indicative of the pleural lining of the lung being punctured - my husband suffered the same injury when a rib broke and the lining of his lung became infected. They drained about 8 liters of bloody watery fluid out of his lung. I saw it, I was at the hospital with him for 11 days. Not a thing wrong with his heart, yet he was in critical condition, and after they drained the lung he recovered.

This idea that it was "heart trauma" is a weak and unsubstantiated claim. His heart was not pierced - his lung was punctured. Empyema. Pleural effusion.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by tropic
 


I have only one question regarding this story. Even if this is proved authentic, how do we actually know it is the face of Jesus? (as opposed to some random person from history).

The Church has always peddled in fakes. For instance, back in the Middle Ages, at least 6 churches across Europe claimed to have the Holy Grail (and had pilgrimages). I have also lost track of the amount of nails from the "true cross". If they are all correct then that was one hell of a mighty cross!


Basically, is there anything (apart from the Church) to actually corroborate that this is the actual burial shroud of Christ? I just find the whole thing highly dubious considering they can't even agree where he was buried.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 10:38 AM
link   
You dont understand what he has done,he has provan from the Shroud second face that Jesus Christ was resurrected. This is phenominal and yes i am a believer too. The pictures are grainy but I see the face and eyes



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Saw a documentary on this about a year ago (I believe on the discover channel).
Surprised I haven't seen it on here before.

S&F





new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution