>>17622578There was one test that was done which claimed the shroud was a medieval forgery, that is true. However, the test was dubious and the people conducting the test strangely didn't allow details regarding their experiment to be presented to the public and they never gave an explanation as to why. Because of this, another test was done recently which concluded it was from the time of Jesus. Not only that, literally every other experiment done on the shroud except for that dubious test shows it is real and not a forgery, including fiber-testing, which revealed particles from plant-life found only in Israel. There's many sources on this if you want to learn more about it.
This video is good if you can get past the cringe editing. Looking at the evidence for and against the shroud, it's clear that there's far more evidence for its authenticity then against.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJymwctqo->how do you know its Jesus and not someone other person?Fair point. Because all the tests except one show its from the time of Jesus's life and the man on the shroud fits the description of Jesus given by Pontius Pilate and the injuries on the shroud fit exactly to how Jesus was described to have been injured in the Gospels, the chance of it being anybody else is low. Even if you want to disregard Pilate's description of Jesus as a dubious document, the fact that the tests on the Shroud show Jesus as having been injured the exact same way as described in the Gospels is pretty solid evidence.
>>17622583Maybe
