Jesus Christ's 'death certificate' found on Turin Shroud

There is no way a Jew would have touched a body after sundown. Maybe, he wasn't a Jew.

I've always felt it was authentic.

Turns out it was a forged death certificate from some Kenyan dude. And it wasn't even a Certificate of Live Death.

On top of that, the shroud was proven to be a counterfeit.

No it hasn't. If you have no faith nothing anyone says to you will make any difference. No sense in anyone wasting their time trying to enlighten you.

The same people who carried out the execution, namely the Romans, would have had authority over the body. This explains why it was necessary to go to Pilate to obtain the body.

According to the New Testament accounts it was Joseph of Arimathea, a follower of Jesus who acquired the body from the Roman authorities. This is recorded in all four Gospel accounts.

Matthew 27:57-60

Mark 15:42-46

Luke 23:50-54

John 19:38-42

Apart from Joseph some of the women who followed Jesus are mentioned although it is not stated that they actually assisted in the burial. Their interest seems to have been to determine exactly where the tomb was so they could return after the sabbath rest and anoint the body.

John mentions specifically that Nicodemus helped Joseph to bury the body, mentioning that this was the same one who came to Jesus by night (see John 3).

Your statement is incorrect.

In January, 2005, an article appeared in a peer-reviewed scientific journal Thermochimica Acta, which proved that the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was flawed because the sample used was invalid. Moreover, this article, by Raymond N. Rogers, a well-published chemist and a Fellow of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, explained why the Shroud of Turin was much older. The Shroud of Turin was at least twice as old as the radiocarbon date, and possibly 2000 years old.

Peer-reviewed scientific journals are important. It is the way scientists normally report scientific findings and theories. Articles submitted to such journals are carefully reviewed for adherence to scientific methods and the absence of speculation and polemics. Reviews are often anonymous. Facts are checked and formulas are examined. The review procedure sometimes takes months to complete, as it did for Rogers.

It was Nature, another prestigious peer-reviewed journal, that in 1989, reported that carbon 14 dating ‘proved’ the shroud was a hoax. Rogers found no fault with the article in Nature. Nor did he find fault with the quality of the carbon 14 dating. He defended it. What Rogers found was that the carbon 14 sample was taken from a mended area of the Shroud that contained significant amounts of newer material. This was not the fault of the radiocarbon laboratories. But it did show that the carbon dating was invalid.
Immediately after the publication of Rogers’ paper, Nature published a commentary by scientist-journalist Philip Ball. "Attempts to date the Turin Shroud are a great game,” he wrote, “but don't imagine that they will convince anyone . . . The scientific study of the Turin Shroud is like a microcosm of the scientific search for God: it does more to inflame any debate than settle it.” Later in his commentary Ball added, “And yet, the shroud is a remarkable artifact, one of the few religious relics to have a justifiably mythical status. It is simply not known how the ghostly image of a serene, bearded man was made.”

Ball, who understood the chemistry of the Shroud of Turin images, rejected a notion popularized by conspiracy theorists that Leonardo da Vinci created the Shroud's image using primitive photography. He called the idea flaky. He also debunked the sometimes reported speculation that the image was “burned into the cloth by some kind of release of nuclear energy” from Jesus’ body. This he said was wild.

Almost all serious Shroud of Turin researchers agree with Ball on these points. When flaky and wild ideas appear in newspaper articles or on television, as they often do, scientists cringe. Rogers referred to those who held such views as being part of the “lunatic fringe” of Shroud research. But Rogers was just as critical of those who, without the benefit of solid science, declared the Shroud of Turin a fake. They, too, were part of the lunatic fringe.

The idea that the Shroud of Turin had been mended in the area from which the carbon 14 samples had been taken had been floating around for some time. But no one paid much attention. In 1998, Turin’s scientific adviser, Piero Savarino, suggested, “extraneous substances found on the samples and the presence of extraneous thread (left over from ‘invisible mending’ routinely carried on in the past on parts of the cloth in poor repair)” might have accounted for an error in the carbon 14 dating. Longtime shroud researchers Sue Benford and Joe Marino independently developed the same idea and explored it with several textile experts and Ronald Hatfield of the radiocarbon dating firm Beta Analytic. The art of invisible reweaving, Benford and Marino discovered, was commonly used in the Middle Ages to repair tapestries. Why not the shroud, they thought? They believed they saw evidence of it.

But the skeptically minded Rogers did not agree. He had already debunked every other argument so far offered to explain why the carbon 14 dating might be wrong. According to Ball, “Rogers thought that he would be able to ‘disprove [the mending] theory in five minutes’.” Instead he found clear evidence of discreet mending. He also showed, with chemistry, that the shroud was at least thirteen hundred years old. And he proved, beyond any doubt, that the sample used in 1988 was chemically unlike the rest of the shroud. The samples were invalid. The 1988 tests were thus meaningless.

Please, if you are going to make statements as if they are fact, stay up-to-date on the current events regarding the topic of which you choose to speak.
Peace

notice hand position hugging the balls. An impossible position for the hands of a dead person and a holy man would not be seen dead holding his scrote

The shroud can't have wrapped around the face of a human being because the imprint of facial features on the unwrapped cloth would have been distorted by the wrapping. What you see is a PROJECTION onto a flat surface, not a curved one. This is only consistent with the image being the photographic negative of an image projected by a camera obscura onto a cloth soaked in a photo-sensitive chemical.

The image found by an Italian scientist several years ago was the result of the first attempt to create the image by photography. That's why the head and torso are not to scale. The image of the head was added afterward and the forger did not get the scale quite right.

Was is a 'vault' one?? if not we can't accept it, lolo
Now if they could only find obama's!!!!!!!!

that should have read obama BIRTH certificate' not death, i don't wish any one dead.. just to be clear, it a joke.. like this thread...:)