Scientific, Scriptural evidence points to authenticity of image of Jesus on Shroud of Turin

For nearly two decades, a stubborn Barrie Schwortz remained skeptical about the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, even after having seen most of the overwhelming evidence in favor up close with his own eyes. Still this lifelong Jew and official photographer for the scientific study team that investigated the shroud in 1978 kept wondering — does this centuries-old burial cloth bear the actual image of the crucified Jesus, as millions believe, or does this widely venerated relic represent little more than a great medieval forgery, perpetuated by a clever artist?

“I was skeptical [about the shroud’s authenticity] for 18 years,” the Coloradobased Schwortz told an enthusiastic audience of 300 people March 16 at St. Paul Inside the Walls: the Catholic Center for Evangelization at Bayley-Ellard here during his PowerPoint slide presentation, “The Shroud of Turin: Myth or Miracle?” “Today, based on all the evidence, I believe that the image on the shroud is that of the historical Jesus.”

In an enlightening and often funny presentation, Schwortz presented compelling evidence from decades of rigorous and peer-reviewed scientific, Scrip tural and historical research — much of which he has seen with his own eyes. He also chronicled his own amazing journey from skeptic to believer in the shroud’s authenticity.

It all started in 1978 after Schwortz accepted what he called “the assignment of a lifetime” as the official documenting photographer in Italy of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) Inc., which has its own story filled with international intrigue.

“I am not an scientist. I’m an ex-hippie photographer,” said Schwortz, sporting a gray pony tail and laying out data that points to the shroud’s authenticity, including a piece of “smoking gun” evidence he learned about in 1995 that blew away his skepticism. “I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything. That’s between you and God. You come to your own conclusion,” he told the audience.

Slowly, Schwortz started coming to his own conclusions, when STURP — Scientific, Scriptural evidence points to authenticity of image of Jesus on Shroud of Turin See Shroud on Page 4 beach to serve diocesan poor consisting of some of the world’s greatest scientific minds started to examine the 14½-foot long, 3½-foot wide linen cloth. The shroud — which has been damaged by fire and repaired several times in its history — bears the frontal and rear images of a scourged, crucified man. The team examined at the shroud under the approval of his owners at the time, the Dukes of Savoy, the former ruling family of Italy.

From Oct. 8 and Oct. 14, 1978, STURP spent 120 hours with the shroud not in a sterile laboratory but in the royal palace adjoining the Shrine of Turin, which houses the relic. Researches carefully planned out most of the examination, even designing a special steel table for the shroud that rotated. They also anticipated the “ad-hoc” conditions of the palace, designating a bathroom as the darkroom, which required a water source. They also ran up against interest groups that lobbied to prevent research on the shroud, now the property of the Catholic Church, said Schwortz, founder of the Shroud of Turin Education and Research Association, who lectures widely on this controversial subject.

“One day, I went to see the long line of people [at the Shrine of Turin]. I was baffled. Why would they stand for hours to see this piece of cloth?” Schwortz said. “But then I looked into the people’s faces and saw how meaningful it was. It was then that I took my work [photographing STURP’s work] more seriously,” he said.

Actually, Schwortz’s skepticism started to soften within minutes of casting his eyes on the shroud for the first time. Through a magnifying glass, he noticed that the marks on the cloth were not pigment. Later research showed that the blood remained red and had not turned brown with age. UV fluorescent photos showed a “halo” at the edge of a wound and the pattern of blood flow on the cloth, he said. “This could not have been the work of an artist,” said Schwortz, whose photographs over the years have been used by shroud researchers and have appeared in many books, magazines, scientific journals, films and television documentaries.

“The level and quality of the science was incredible.” In Turin, STURP also conducted infrared imaging and chemical analysis on the shroud. The evidence points to the Scriptural and historical accuracy of the crucifixion marks on the cloth — from the bloodstains at the hands and feet to the crown of thorns smashed on his head to the scourge marks, Schwortz said.

About 18 years after STURP concluded its research, Schwortz remained troubled that the blood on the cloth stayed red. Then in 1995, a Jewish chemist explained that Jesus suffered unimaginable trauma — from the beating and whippings to the crucifixion — that left him in shock and dehydrated. This caused the body to produce a substance called bilirubin, which stays red forever.

Later data also debunked a major piece of evidence that pointed against the shroud’s authenticity, which caused further international intrigue. In 1988, three labs claimed that radio carbon dating tests placed the age of the cloth at between 1260 and 1390. But in 2000, researchers discovered that cloth that had been tested came from a corner that had been rewoven. They found two pieces of thread spliced together with cotton — not linen — which violated Jewish law at the time of Jesus’ death, Schwortz said.

“I think that the shroud bears the image of the historical Jesus, but I’m not convinced that Jesus is the Messiah,” said Schwortz, adding that his skepticism about Christ’s divinity gives him further credibility, when laying out the Scriptural, historical and scientific evidence for the shroud’s historical authenticity. “But I can elect [to accept Christ as Savior] at any time. Right now, I am serving God dong this, because I am a Jew,” he said.

After a question-and-answer session, Father Geno Sylva, St. Paul’s director and diocesan vicar for evangelization, thanked Schwortz for “teaching and inspiring us.” “This has been a night of devotion — delving into the love of the Savior — and evangelization,” Father Sylva told the audience. “Mr. Schwortz had challenged us to share the information we learned tonight about the shroud and share it with others. We are all called to be evangelists,” he said.

Afterward, Betsy Sullivan of Christ the King Parish, New Vernon, called Schwortz’s presentation “enriching.” “It [the presentation] helps us embrace Lent,” said Sullivan, who came to St. Paul’s with her nephew. “I feel empowered in giving up something for Lent, because I saw Jesus’ wounds [on the cloth] and realized what he did for us.”

“Yeah, well, guys like you frustrate the hell out of me, in return. No matter how many times it’s said, no matter what you hear or read time and time again (e.g. it is NOT about validating your faith, it is NOT to be worshiped, etc., etc., ad nauseum), you and your ilk always just HAVE to post the same old, tired nonsense.”

I agree with you—I absolutely cannot fathom why such people would post on a thread about the Shroud. We really don’t need to hear their whiny, immature posts about us “worshipping” the Shroud and about how their faith is so superior to ours.....

Barrie S. has chronicled all of his own work and research on the Shroud along with any and all other research - he updates constantly -
He has compiled and added to his web site for decades - if you haven’t already, you might want to bookmark it for it is quite massive in it’s information

http://shroud.com/

One of the earliest ? depictions of Jesus? “Isa” discovered in Turkey in 2002 - dated to 1st/2nd Cent.

As a portrait artist, I have followed ‘the face of Jesus” for decades - particularly the iconic paintings, whose similarities point to one origin.

That would seem to be The Shroud.

The image in The Shroud, in the beginning, was much clearer than we see it now.

A few Easters ago, Nat Geo did a documentary on The Shroud, ending with a forensically aided depiction of what the man in The Shroud looked like. (”The Real Face Of Jesus?”)

No surprise. He looks like he has been depicted for 2,000 years.

A few years ago, others decided they’d deduce what He must have looked like, based on a skull from the area and time of His life. They came up with a short, swarthy, man with absolutely no resemblance to what we are familiar with.
What was their reasoning or agenda, I wonder? After all, look at the people in a supermarket at any given time. They are all sizes, all colors, widely differing skull structures, hair, eye color - etc - That’s like digging one of them up 2,000 yrs from now and saying ‘this is what (some famous person of today) looked like. Totally bogus.

The newly discovered tile:

http://shroudofturin.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/paper-chase-face-of-the-god-man/

The iconic connection to the Shroud.

http://www.shroudofturin4journalists.com/pantocrator.htm

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.