Skip to comments.3D-face creator says Shroud proves resurrection (scientific evidence of resurrection?)
Posted on 04/02/2010 1:16:24 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
3D-face creator says Shroud proves resurrection 'Jesus was more than just a spiritual event'
Ray Downing and John Jackson, a physics lecturer at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs who runs the Turin Shroud Center of Colorado (photo courtesy History Channel)
"People are not going to forget the face of Jesus this Easter," says Ray Downing, creator of the 3D computer technology that produced the "real face of Jesus" from the image of the crucified man in the Shroud of Turin. The image was seen in a highly watched History Channel special broadcast Tuesday. The program will be replayed Saturday night and Easter Sunday afternoon.
"Jesus was more than just a spiritual event," Downing said. "Studying the Shroud to produce the 3D face of Jesus, we encountered scientific evidence that the resurrection was a real physical event that happened in a moment of time 2,000 years ago."
In the two-hour documentary, Downing brought together science and religion by using cutting-edge computer technology to create a life-like image from the Shroud of Turin of the man millions have believed for centuries to be Jesus Christ.
The History Channel told WND the documentary was viewed by more than 2.2 million people, an 83 percent increase for the Tuesday 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. Eastern Time slot in which the documentary was first aired this week.
"The Shroud of Turin provides actual scientific proof that Jesus rose from the dead," Downing contended.
He said the shroud is encoded with a message undecipherable until the most recent advances of modern particle physics.
"Properly understood, the code contained in the Shroud of Turin records the moment of the resurrection," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Sorry, but a piece of cloth just will not prove Jesus’s resurrection. The most it could possibly prove is that a dead person was on it.
And I say this as a proud believer in the resurrection of Christ.
I don’t think it’s important. If you need scientific proof, then you don’t need faith. Besides, what Jesus looked like isn’t important either.
I agree, and the Shroud of Turin isn’t the real burial cloth of Jesus to begin with.
It’s the broiled fish that does it for me.
Happy Easter to all!
>>”Properly understood, the code contained in the Shroud of Turin records the moment of the resurrection,” he said.
I’m going to watch the show to see if they explain this. I don’t need scientific proof to believe, but it would be wonderful if proof existed.
I have a picture of Jesus on my wall that looks just like that. :-)
I don't entirely agree with that. His Incarnation was a real event, happened in the real world, he really walked around, ate, slept, preached, performed signs, was crucified, died, was buried, and rose from the dead.
He had a specific appearance, because He was really here. He was a man, not a woman; He was Jewish, not Chinese.
To say that what he looked like is unimportant could lead to suggesting that he wasn't real at all.
And I say this as a proud believer in the resurrection of Christ.
It all comes down to Faith. You either have it, or you don't.
I’ll be watching the history channel at 8PM on Saturday to see the special. I do not know what Christians of any stripe have to be afraid of. At worst, if disproven, you should still have your faith intact. If real, it will serve as a major buttressing to the Faith, and a starting point of curiosity for unbelievers. Bob
Not in the least. What does it matter what he looked like? Does it matter to you all that much beyond simple curiousity?
Me too. But it is interesting..............like a good mystery novel..........
I watched it earlier this week. What struck me most is the attitude of the 3D modeler. He was visibly changed by this and was almost moved to tears a few times during this program. The work that he and his team put into this was quite thorough and lots of background on the shroud was included in the show. I found it very interesting.
I just think it matters to God that the image God sees in our hearts is that of his son Jesus. What we see isn’t as important as what God sees in us!
How else will Roman Catholics know to worship an image of Jesus in a grilled cheese sandwich or under a bridge if they don’t know what he looked like?
...first, when Thomas expressed his doubts in the resurrection, Christ did not declare him a heretic and drive him from the community; He offered him physical evidence. Christ's corporeal nature and human form is central to our faith.
Second, if for argument's sake, one allows that the shroud is authentic, one has to ask whether or not our Lord and Savior left it here merely to be ignored by the faithful...
You must have the Bible translation where Christ ran Thomas off as a heretic and non-believer. The story turns out differently in my copy.
No picking on Catholics! It ain’t cool.
I for one believe this is the shroud that covered Jesus, I see no reason not to, and there is nothing on that shroud to prove it is false.
It was not painted, it is a visual of a man who was crucified. Only a resurrection energy could have caused that imprint to happen, that's Jesus.
I believe his mother saved that shroud, as any grieving mother would and it was passed down to her family.
There is no reason to believe that GOD would care if we knew what he looked like in the human. None that I can see.
Do believers need this to have the faith in our Lord Jesus? NO.
Thomas was doubting that the man he saw before him was Jesus. Not the resurrection. And from that we can assume that Jesus did not look the same as he did before the crucifiction. He wasn’t recognized. So, I say again it doesn’t matter what he looked like. It won’t matter what I looked like once I’m gone. It won’t mean I didn’t exist.
He offered him physical evidence.
Good point. I was particularly impressed by the over-laying of another blood stained cloth that they used to show how the blood stains on the face matched up. I first heard of the Shroud in 1964 and believed in its authenticity then. To see how advances in technology over the years have failed to detract from it, but have rather enhanced its legitimacy, is nothing short of miraculous.
I saw the show early this week (Tuesday). I was leery because of the rather anti-Christian bias that as crept into a lot of History Channel programs lately, but I was pleasantly surprised. The show was reverent, and produced by Christians. It's a good show. However, it's a good 40 minute story crammed in to 2 hours.
As for the naysayers that claim the shroud isn't important or that it's not Christ's burial wrappings: it is important; it has been part of Christendom's hard evidence of Jesus’s reality and resurrection for almost 2 thousand years. (No, it wasn't made in the 1300s as the faulty radiocarbon test indicates; there is written and pictorial proof that the shroud was venerated much earlier in the Byzantine empire.)
As for knowing what our Lord actually looked like in human form; it IS fascinating to see one of Akiane’s paintings certified as authentic portraiture!!!
Is the shroud essential to belief? Of course not. Is it fascinating, and does it bring the observer closer to Christ? YES.
Enjoy the show!
It matters that He had one, particular specific appearance, same as you or me.
Otherwise, He didn't have a true human nature.
If He wasn't true God AND true Man, if He didn't live, die for our sins, and rise to bring us eternal life ... all for real, not play-acting, not just a story, not some sort of simulation ... then our faith is in vain.
Yes and no :-) One critical belief of Christianity is that Christ was a corporeal, flesh and blood man. One quality and characteristic of all humans is "appearance," and consequently, this was also a quality of Christ...just as having ten finger, two eyes, a nose etc. Now, Christianity isn't contingent on whether Christ was tall, short, handsome, homely, bearded, clean shaven, etc...those things don't matter, but what does matter is that He did have a human appearance.
Christians of vastly different cultures and races have portrayed Christ in a manner that has made it easier perhaps for them to form an identity and more personal relationship with Him, and in and of itself, I don't see anything wrong with that. Having said that, He did have an earthly, human persona and image, and I think any person with a burning desire to know Christ as fully, intimately and personally as possible can help but speculate about and want to know what he truly looked like...
Just my two cents...
We seem to be on the same track, here.
Nichts zu Danken!
He looks remarkably like a French Lord of the Middle Ages.
So he believed Christ had risen from the dead, but some body else was pretending to be Him?
Just my two cents...
I like your 2 cents, and I agree.
He doubted the man before him was Jesus.
But let’s not get away from the topic of whether this shroud face is Jesus or not. The shroud has never been a big thing to me. Even when Jesus was walking the earth people did not believe He was who He said He was. Some seem to think a shroud will cinch it with non-believers. I’m not one of them.
Of course he had a specific appearance. Isn’t that a given? It has nothing to do with our faith though.
And to others, it is a big thing. Vive la difference.
Even when Jesus was walking the earth people did not believe He was who He said He was.
And some did believe He was who He said He was. Consider, just for three examples, Simon Peter, the Roman centurion, and the one of ten cured lepers who returned to thank Him. There were many others.
It has nothing to do with our faith in what? That He was true God AND true Man? The latter demands, as you acknowledge, that He had a specific appearance.
Perhaps (just maybe, IMHO) He left the shroud as a sign to a materialistic and unbelieving age that "Yes indeed, folks, I REALLY WAS HERE".
They'll just compare it to the image on the tortilla, stupid!
We might want to watch this tomorrow night.
I, and I suspect most Christians of any denomination would love to believe that our faith is rock solid, unshakeable and we have all we need. As much as I would like to believe that, I know that's not the case, and any evidence, words of advice, turn of events, etc. that reaffirms and bolsters my faith is welcome. If the shroud were to be definitively proven to be a forgery, it would not affect my beliefs. If, on the other hand, it were proven beyond any doubt to be authentic, I would admit that would strenghthen my faith...and no doubt that of millions or even billions.
You say the shroud has never been a big thing for you. As I stated elsewhere, supposing that indeed it is the miraculously rendered image of Christ. Do you think that Christ would have left it here simply to be ignored? I know that's an academic question since it's authenticity is not established, but if it came to your knowledge that it was authentic, would you regard it differently?
I suppose in one sense I can say it's not a "big thing" for me as I would believe in the life, death, resurrection and divinity of Christ had I never heard of or seen the shroud. Yet, in my constant desire to know Christ as completely as possible, the shroud is a clue...perhaps one that may or may not pan out, but certainly one that, at this time, I can hardly ignore.
Yes, the many miracles He performed as “evidence” convinced some, and to others the miracles were from Satan. And others didn’t need to see miracles to have faith.
Same goes for the Shroud. Based on the evidence so far, I believe that it is Christ’s. As they said in the show - is that a fact? No. If it were a courtroom drama would the evidence “convict” the shroud? Probably.
It was interesting watching it with my young daughters and trying to answer their questions and bring the science and discussion down to their level.
“So this could be just some other dead guy?”
PERHAPS. But I doubt it.
Unknown source of image.
Other burial shrouds don’t leave such images.
Scourging AND crucifiction.
Crown of thorns wounds.
But yeah. My faith doesn’t depend on it. Not sure about others. It is interesting to note the folks that started off being sceptical about it having a change of heart after studying it.
Oh, I don’t disagree with you on your statements per se, Jesus was indeed a man as well as God on Earth. Yet I think the same reason we don’t have a physical image of Jesus is the same reason God hid the bones of Moses when he died...our unfortunate propensity to venerate bones and images as idols.
The disciples who were with Jesus on the mount of transfiguration had seen Jesus’ physical form in their travels with him...THEN(drum roll and trumpets please) they got a glimpse of his TRUE FORM standing with Moses and Elijah, also glorified transcendently! What he saw prompted Peter to state” we should build a temple here “ to which a voice stated “This is my beloved son...Listen to Him!”
Even should the image on the cloth be that of Jesus, the Bible says his true glorified form is something utterly fantastic. The Bible also says that Christians are “the sons of God, and it doesn’t yet appear what we shall be; for we know that when he shall appear, that we will be like him for we shall see him as he is” Thus our real “true selves” will have Christ’s same glorified incorruptible bodies!
So much for image!
At the end of the program the narrator asked him -- after all of the investigative work had been done -- what his final determination about the origin of the Shroud was. He wouldn't answer the question directly and tried to defer it by saying he was only an expert on some matters and wasn't brought on board to render a professional opinion, but the narrator didn't let up on him.
Finally, he said quietly: "I believe this is the burial shroud of Jesus Christ."
The narrator was stunned, and had to gather his thoughts for a few moments before asking him: "Do you understand the personal implications of what you've just said to me?"
The guy smiled very weakly, nodded, and said something to the effect of: "There was no other conclusion to reach about this relic; I'll be thinking long and hard about those personal implications."
That's incorrect. Thomas wasn't present with the other apostles when Jesus first appeared to them. He was doubting the story they told him about Jesus' appearance while he was absent.
So, yes -- I'd say he was doubting the Resurrection.
As did I. My heart skipped a beat when the face of my savior was revealed - and the blink was awesome.
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.