Skip to comments.The Shroud of Turin
Posted on 04/20/2014 9:56:48 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
Our Lord is risen. Our God lives. The Shroud of Turin is speaking to all Christians now more than at any other time in our current history when so many of our religious freedoms are under attack by the US government. John C. Iannone is a Catholic writer and lecturer who is traveling throughout the South during our pre- Easter preparations to bring the story of the holy Shroud to us.
One can only marvel at what this holy garment reveals to us about the suffering Jesus went through to be one of us and to suffer in such horrible ways to draw out our sins and weaknesses into his own Divinity. The Shrouds authenticity was attacked in the late 1980s by the New York Times which was doing what it does best mocking the beliefs of Christians.
But Mr. Iannone has studied the issues around this Holy garment since 1978 and tells any and all listeners that...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Ignorant anti-Catholic remarks incoming in 3, 2, 1...
I viewed the Shroud of Turin, when it was on display at the Peachtree Plaza, Atlanta, Ga in 1979.
Anyway, it was a very spiritual experience, a Holy feeling, and I was glad to be able to actually see it while it was in the USA.
In the early 80’s I was a chemistry graduate student, and a professor asked me to serve drinks at the annual meeting of the American Chemical Society. In return, I could sit through the sessions and listen to the speakers. When I found out that one was going to report on the latest studies on the shroud, I immediately volunteered. To make a very long story short, the scientist claimed that the markings on the shroud (other than the blood) were caused by some form of energy that we had no knowledge about. He ended up his talk by saying that, in his opinion, the only explanation was that something happened to the shroud when Jesus rose from the dead. Not bad, for someone who called himself an agnostic.
The author has a way with a phrase that makes it impossible to tell what she’s trying to say.
In years past I dismissed it as a Catholic relic, but after looking into it, I believe it’s authentic.
Why? The physical evidence embedded in the Shroud has nothing to do with Catholics or Catholicism.
Yeah! If it’s Catholic, it’s got to be bad!
If this shroud be true, then I would suspect you would not find any GOD dna.
Think about that one. I do believe that this Shroud is The Christ shroud.......
The Shroud has never been to the U.S. , it must have been a replica! I viewed it in 1978 in Turin, it’s next exhibition was in 1989.
I wish I'd had that opportunity. I read a book about it a few years back, which told of the history and science. Even if it weren't the Shroud that Jesus was buried in, it sure is incredible. Personally, I believe it's probably the real deal.
A few years ago, on a city-a-day cruise, I chose the day trip to Monserrat in the mountains outside of Barcelona. The feeling of mystery and wonder had everyone on the tour in awe, even the cynics. The Black Madonna statue there radiated a mystery and aura that was undeniable.
I might be off the mark, but I do believe this stuff. Jesus left us evidence of his time on earth, yet man refuses to accept that at the very least there's something quite unexplainable about these mysteries. JMHO
Happy Easter. I pray for a year where the world listens, finally, to reason and love of man and the earth gifted to us.
Happy Easter, and yes I felt privileged to view The Shroud of Turin. Although, it was an accident that I was in Atlanta for a two week class at the same time as the display.
Just one example:
The Shroud of Turin didn't get much publicity prior to the 19th Century because it wasn't subject to the scrutiny of modern technology. What changed this was the advent of photography in the 19th Century. When the Shroud was photographed for the first time, it became clear that the Shroud itself is a photographic negative. For anyone to believe that someone in the Middle Ages fabricated such a thing -- hundreds of years before photography was even invented -- requires an enormous leap of faith (pun intended) that can't be supported by objective assessment of the subject.
Faith is a funny thing: it makes me confidently believe in a risen Jesus who marked a linen shroud as His body became glorified! I am not a scientist; I can’t prove it, but I still believe. I would rather have the faith of a child than the skepticism of a unfaithful adult. Someday my faith will become sight and I thank God for that!
I don’t think there’s any room for doubt that the Shroud is authentic.
Ever since 1898, when it was discovered that the image is a negative, there has been no room for theories that the image was “painted” by any human hand.
Now we know that the image is really made up of distance information—i.e., the shade of the image at any given spot corresponds to a distance between the body and the cloth.
It does not require faith to believe that the Shroud is the burial cloth of Christ, and that it is evidence of the Resurrection. It requires only intellectual honesty.
Jesus’ DNA couldn’t be the same as Mary’s, because then he would have been a girl.
A lot of energy has been expended trying to duplicate the Shroud with methods that would have been available to a medieval forger. None that I have seen are persuasive. Which is why I tend to think the Shroud is authentic.
If the Shroud is ever successfully replicated, I expect it will be the result of some very simple method that everyone has simply overlooked. But what that could be, I cannot imagine.
Anyone interested in the Shroud of Turin should consider reading the book: “The Face of God” by Paul Badde, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, ISBN 978-1-58617-515-3.
Dr. John Jackson, one of the members of the 1978 Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) study is a friend of mine. STURP was the very first scientific study of the Shroud.
Again, the Shroud of Turin has never been to America.
The Shroud will be displayed in Turin in 2015, for Easter and 45 days afterword (roughly).
I’m going — who’s with me?
I have created a 60-slide Powerpoint presentation on the Shroud; if you would like a copy, send me a personal note with your email address. The pdf is 4 MB.
When this topic comes up, and it is of interest to me, I always think of the scripture account of the apostle Thomas who declared that he would not believe in a risen Christ unless he could put his own hand in Jesus' side and in the wounds on his hands. As I recall, Jesus blessed him for seeing and believing but went on to say that those who believe without seeing possess greater faith.
I am not interested in making anti-Roman Catholic comments on this matter. If I remember correctly, the RC Church does not make the claim that it is the real deal.
I have attempted to keep up with the scientific analyses over the decades. I suppose Wikipedia would offer a decent summary of those results. As best I recall, all the tests to date have been inconclusive as to the age of the shroud, its geographical origin, and what physical-chemical event created the image.
I recall reading Josh McDowell's book, Evidence That Demands a Verdict ~ 1978 while in graduate school. My major advisor, a fundamentalist Christian, loaned it to me. McDowell went into great detail about the Jewish burial traditions of Jesus' time. As best I can recall, he said that the corpse was wrapped in a long strip of cloth, like the stereotypical Egyptian mummy, from the ankles up to the arm pits leaving the feet and arms/shoulders bare. A seperate cloth/napkin was placed over the face. Spices and perfumes were included in the wrappings.
McDowell's burial description is very interesting when you compare it with the NT gospel accounts of Joseph of Arimathea placing Jesus' body in 1 of his family's empty tombs. It was all done in a great hurry for several reasons ...
1. Jesus died on Good Friday afternoon - many place the hour around 3 p.m.
2. It was during the Passover feast in Jerusalem with large crowds and approaching sundown when the traditional Sabbath was also observed. Also, handling of a corpse made faithful Jews ritually unclean during this high holy day.
3. Joseph of Arimathea had to petition Pilate to claim the body, then transport the body to the tomb. Whoever was in the burial detail had to work fast and probably did not have the time to wrap Jesus' body in the traditional manner.
4. Mary Magadlena was returning Sunday a.m. to help prepare Jesus' body more properly with spices/perfumes. Of course, she would need for someone to roll the stone away for her.
I can rationalize that the burial party simply covered Jesus' body in a sheet like the Shroud of Turin because of the extreme time pressure with which they were faced.
McDowell's book ended with the simple declaration that accepting Jesus' ressurection is a matter of faith.
I am sure you were just jesting in your reply. Jesus would of course have the Mitochondrial DNA of the mother......I think every child has that.
BUT: what about the father's DNA.....? do you think there would be a DNA of GOD........I don't.
I do believe this is the actual shroud of Christ, but then too I really don't need any proof for my FAITH to survive.
The shroud of Turin is interesting but I ought not make a fetish.
“I am the Resurrection and the Life’’. Amen!
Look into what was called a ‘’camera obscura’’. An early kind of photographic device sometimes used by Da Vinci.
What? You mean I paid to see a fake with hundreds of people lined up outside that hotel, who also paid to see The Shroud of Turin? That’s unbelievable!
I didn’t plan to go see it, I was there on business training for two weeks. I saw the exhibit and got in line. Who Wouldn’t? Of course I was young...
That may have been a replica, but I had a good feeling about it, and it was in 1979 because I went back and looked at my certificate for the two weeks of business classes for my position. That was during the controversy of it’s authenticity. Oh well.
Empireoftheatom48 said what I saw might have been a replica.
I guess at the time of the controversy from 1978, a year later this might have been an attempt to draw support for the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.
I felt good while viewing it, but it was an outside viewing and a long line of people. Maybe we didn’t pay, I know I paid for a lot of things in Atlanta those two weeks...a lot of money changed hands from mine to theirs.
It’s great you felt that way, I remember watching the people around me and how they were just in awe! Being so close it was remarkable! After dinner that night we walked past the Cathedral could look in an see them setting up for the scientific investigation that had been permitted!
The good feeling may have just been confirmation to me that The real Shroud of Turin was authentic....that was what I felt at the time. I was young and didn’t read everything on display, as I was in a time crunch and there for my career not a vacation.
Shroud of Turin discussion
Couple of problems. . .
First and foremost: DaVinci was born 100 years, almost to the day, after the Shroud was first displayed.
Secondly, the Shroud is not an artifact of light. It is an artifact that represents graphically the distance of the cloth from the skin and hair, and shows not effects of light and shadow. It is a terrain map that shows no directionality, which all light originated artifacts must.
Thanks for the ping!
He's right. . .
" In 1578 the relic is moved to Turin, Italy, and first became known as the Shroud of Turin. The move, says historian and Shroud expert Ian Wilson, "was partly because a Cardinal from Milan [Charles Borromeo] was going to visit the Shroud and was planning to take the journey on foot from Milan to Chambery, so they brought the Shroud to Turin to save him part of the journey." Apart from being moved into hiding (to a monastery in Southern ItalySwordmaker) during World War II, the Shroud has remained in Turin ever since."
Most likely you saw one of the full size high resolution photographs made by the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) official visible light photographer Barrie Schwortz in 1978. He founded the Shroud Website shroud.com, which has become the central clearing house of all scientific and scholarly papers on the Shroud. It's now run by a non-profit. Barrie is a Jew who is convinced the Shroud is authentic.
Thanks for the ping, Swordmaker.
Just check it out. You’ll be intrigued by it.
I truly felt the Shroud of Turin was authentic, replica or not. This was a huge viewing of a replica in Atlanta, if that’s the case, because I had to stand in line for quite awhile.
Not as long a line as the time I went to New Orleans to see the Monet exhibit, before it was returned to France.
That’s another story....and that was definitely not replicas. Some of those paintings covered walls.
If it was a photograph replica it was on a full size cloth in a protected area...and that part is what I remember, maybe the photo was projected onto the cloth?
I also went to New Orleans to see the Monet exhibit. It was fantastic! I haven’t been to NO since then and we used to go every couple of years. I love that place but after Katrina I just didn’t want to see the change.
I haven’t been there since the Monet exhibit. I didn’t go back after Katrina, as I felt the changes would ruin the memories.
I did two ‘special active duties’ there at CNR in the early 80s, and although I considered it a sinful place, the city atmosphere and architecture were great.
Sorry, Jmacusa, I am fully aware of the camera obscura theories and the Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince theory that Leonardo da Vinci created the Shroud. There is NO possibility that I will be "intrigued" by it because it is an impossibility once you understand the science behind the camera obscura and what is known of the image formation chemistry, physics, and history of the Shroud.
As I told you in my previous post the Shroud is NOT a photograph. It only bears a superficial resemblance to a photograph. Nor is it a painting.
Both photographs and paintings would require a residue of either a optically alterable fixable chemical or an applied pigment of which the image is composed; the Shroud has neither on its surface nor imbued into its threads or fibers. In fact, there is no residue of any every having been applied down to the limits of electron microscopic examination. . . and it has been examined down to the molecular level. Electron-microscopic spectrometry shows no residue of applied chemicals or pigments. THAT is definitive.
In addition, the image DOES NOT exist under the blood stains, indicating the blood stains pre-existed the formation of the image. Since many of the blood stains require registration with body parts, this precludes a camera obscura method of creation where the blood stains would be logically applied post image creation.
We DO now know of what the image is composed. It exists in the exceedingly thin layer of the soapwort starch in which the Flax was fullered (washed and bleached) in before it was even woven into the Shroud form. We know this layer was done before weaving because of pattern in the cloth that shows the use of hank bleaching. This layer is just 70-100Å (Angstroms) thick on just the surface of the fibers, about the thickness of a soap bubble.
The image exists on the ephemeral surface in a sugary caramel like substance formed by a Maillard browning reaction similar to that which causes bread to brown. We do not know why one portion of the starch made this conversion forming the image, while another portion right next to it did not. Heat, electricity, chemical reaction, and/or age, or a combination of any can cause Maillard reactions in any carbohydrate based substance such as this soapwort coating and as time passes the rest will brown and will eventually match the image, causing the image to fade to nothingness. This is why older natural cloth turn brown with age.
Fire can cause a rapid Maillard reaction. . . this can be seen around the scorch marks on the Shroud from the fire of 1535but leaves a distinctive signature under Ultra-violet light. Chemical Reaction Maillard reactions will leave residues of the chemicals that cause the reaction. These are not present.
The late Raymond N. Rogers, the Pyrolysis Chemist who proposed the Maillard hypothesis in a peer-reviewed and duplicated study, explains the findings". You should find this REAL science far more intriguing than Lynn Picknett's and Clive Prince's fake scholarship about Camera Obscuras and Leonardo da Vinci creating the Shroud.
By the way, the camera obscure was known in antiquity far predating even da Vinci's era. . . with mention in literature as early as 1000 AD, and there is evidence the Roman's had such rooms for tracing art. However, the ability to concentrate light over long periods of time onto a single area necessary to FIX and burn an image into a photograph, that was a technology that was not mentioned in literature anywhere until the 19th century.
Consider the following Scriptures in light of the Shroud as we see it today.
Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.What did he see in the tomb, and what did he believe? Why wouldn't he have assumed that the Body had been moved?
So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have put him!"
So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb.
Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first.
He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in.
Then Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus' head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen.
Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed.
(They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)
But what if the disciple had seen Christ's image on the Shroud?
In Luke, Peter seems to be perplexed by the evidence:
"Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass"
And even more than that, in the 1970s, NASA scientists discovered that it was a 3D terrain map, encoded in 2 dimensions. Their terrain analyzer was probably a lot like the one Leonardo da Vinci had.
If that was true, the image would look like this:
The above is what a 2D map of a human head looks like for use in a 3D computer graphics program.
The 2D image above is virtually wrapped around the head model. This is also called a "normal map," as the map lays tangent to the terrain surface.
Obviously, this image differs from the image on the Shroud.
What's intriguing about the Shroud is that the 2D "terrain map" on the Shroud seems to indicate that some form of energy, emanating in parallel from the body, "scorched" the image into the cloth that was most likely laid out flat, above the prone body, and parallel to the body.
For a 3D artist like me, it's absolutely fascinating. 3D terrain maps don't "just happen" in nature.
I have an appreciation of art exhibits, paintings, sculpture, art history, and all things created by one’s hands. I see that missing from our education in today’s public schools which is sad.
The same is true of music appreciation for something other than rap and noise. So much lost that cannot be regained.
The manners, culture, and appreciation of all things grand no longer exists in most of the teens who live tech, social media, and whatever!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.