Skip to comments.Shroud of Turin Hits Airwaves Amid New Claims That It's Real
Posted on 03/29/2013 1:24:39 PM PDT by marshmallow
A viewing of the The Shroud of Turin, thought by many to be the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, will reportedly be televised Saturday on Italian State TV in what is said to be former Pope Benedict XVI's parting gift to the Catholic Church.
The televised viewing of the shroud on Holy Saturday will be the first in 40 years, according to a report in the Guardian newspaper.
The centuries-old linen cloth - one of the world's most famous relics - contains a faint impression of the front and back of a human body, along with blood, dirt and water stains from age. Many Roman Catholics believe the impressions were left by the body of Jesus after his crucifixion.
"There was no portrait made of Jesus so, really, the shroud still remains the best single thing that we have," said Russ Breault, president of the Shroud of Turin Education Project Inc., an organization "dedicated to raising awareness and understanding" of the shroud, according to its website.
The shroud's authenticity, however, has long been a subject of deep debate.
Skeptics believe the 14-foot cloth was faked during medieval times. Scientists have used various methods, including carbon dating, to test the authenticity of the fabric, and some results have supported the belief that the cloth is a medieval forgery. But there might be new evidence to support the view that the shroud is real.
Scientists at the University of Padua in Northern Italy have conducted experiments that show the shroud dates back to around the time of Christ's life, according to an article in the Daily Telegraph newspaper.
(Excerpt) Read more at gma.yahoo.com ...
But not as many "scientists" as the global warming gang.
They can’t even fake the shroud with today’s technology to show how the shroud was supposedly faked 1,000 years ago.
Telecast - when, what channel, on the internet or live TV? I can’t find details.
Paint a banana with ink or die or paint, put it on a hankie and drape it so it will touch the whole banana ... when you open the hankie up, you've got a Rohrshach (sp?) of the finest quality.
Now, before anyone accuses me of being an unbeliever in miracles, I firmly believe Jesus rose from the dead ... I also believe he told the rich man; "(your brothers) have the prophets, if they will not believe them, they will not believe as if one has risen from the dead" (or something like that)
Of course it’s real. No one can duplicate it, which tells you all you need to know, really.
It may help to explain a few things...
In the parable, Abraham tells the rich man, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” (Luke 16.31)
The argument that it’s a medieval fraud is really difficult to support ~ you’d have to ask yourself why photography then disappeared for the next 700 years.
Yeah ... yep ... I just couldn’t remember the exact wording ... thanx
So, do it and get the same image here, not just a banana impression.
I don’t know the details either but I’m betting it may be on EWTN. What time, I don’t know. I can’t find anything on their website. I’d try sometime early morning on EWTN tomorrow though, maybe early afternoon.
I used a banana ‘cuase if I said a GI Joe doll, you’d all think I was Jeff Dunham
Cavemen put palm prints on their walls, beating your banana trick by tens of thousands of years.
The scientific tests done on The Shroud of Turin show much more improbable forgery then your inked banana and explain the detail.
It is always amusing to see people get desperate about what they don’t believe, as if what others belief causes them turmoil.
There will probably also be delayed broadcasts on other channels such as EWTN but I'm not sure when. There is nothing mentioned on the EWTN web site as of now.
The Dark Room Ages.
The best explanation I've seen of the Shroud is that it's not a two dimensional "illustration" at all. Instead, it's a two-dimensional image created from a three-dimensional process -- much like an X-ray or MRI. This would mean that the image was created through some kind of supernatural -- or even totally "natural" from the standpoint of physics -- event that cannot be replicated even by the top scientists in the world today.
By all accounts, that event in question was the resurrection of a human being.
So, my statement of fact (the fact is, I don't believe the Shroud is what it is claimed to be) makes me a bad person, or someone to slur?
I'm just of a different opinion
Stay off my lawn.
It's worth noting that the Shroud of Turin did not attract much attention around the world until the end of the 19th century. The reason for this is simple: the Shroud itself did not seem to be all that spectacular -- it was an ancient piece of fabric with what appeared to be the image of a man on it. What changed all of this was the advent of photography. An Italian photographer named Secondo Pia received permission to photograph the Shroud during one of its rare public displays, and while he was developing the film he produced a negative that had far more detail than the original image (the dark image of the Shroud that you often see in pictures is the negative, not the original).
The implication of this was immediately clear to Pia: The "negative" he was looking at was actually the real image, and the "original" image on the Shroud was actually the negative -- which meant that whatever process was used to produce that image was identical to a photographic process that the world had only discovered recently.
Certainly there were artists in the days of Jesus ... no one thought to draw a sketch?
Granted, there are a lot of things we don't know, but there are a lot of things we DO know, and no longer look through a glass darkly.
That does not prove it is the burial shroud of Christ. But until someone can reproduce the image and the same negative test results on a similar first century material with demonstrable origins in the then Roman province of Judea it is the best explanation which fits all the facts. That happens to be by definition "incredible" so your skepticism is understandable. The team of scientists who examined it, and probably the Vatican, assumed they would find it to be an easily explained painted fraud. Didn't happen.
It remains at the least a fascinating enigma and at the most a photograph of the moment of Christ's resurrection.
Well good for you.
I gave my observation and opinion. You could have done likewise without involving me.
Next time try instead of making the baseless accusation of slur.
You'll find here on FreeRepublic that when a topic is posted, there are quite a few people with a lot of knowledge about it.
Perhaps the most compelling evidence in favor of the Shroud's authenticity is the evidence surrounding what is known as the "four-finger" phenomenon on the image. While most artwork from the Middle Ages depicting the Crucifixion shows Christ nailed to a cross with nails driven through his hands, the image on the Shroud does not show this. Instead, it clearly shows nail wounds in the wrists, which is exactly how a person would have been nailed to a cross -- because nails driven through the middle of the hand would not support the weight of a human body without tearing through the hand. If someone in the 12th century was intent on making a realistic forgery of Christ's burial shroud, then why would he depict the crucifixion in a manner that did not match the prevailing view of how the crucifixion occurred?
More importantly, the hands shown on the image appear to only have four fingers -- leading to speculation that perhaps the person whose image was on the Shroud had his thumbs cut off before "burial." The reality is that the image is anatomically correct, because driving a nail through the wrist between the two bones of the forearm (the radius and the ulna) damages one of the key nerves in the wrist and produces a reflexive reaction in which the thumb is drawn across the palm in such a way that it is not visible from the back of the hand. I find it extremely unlikely that a forger in the Middle Ages would have known such minute detail about human anatomy that he would have been able to replicate the results of this reflexive action.
I took this;
"It is always amusing to see people get desperate about what they dont believe .. "
as a slur
No one knows what he looks like
Go around the world and look at the crucifixi ... black, white, yellow and red men on crosses with varying degrees of garments, vestments and stories.
MY comment was to say .. simply .. no one knows what Jesus looks like, but The Shroud is supposed to be Him.
If so, he looks amazingly like Renaiasance artists depict him
Not a slur.
You have posted at least 6 times in a thread about a shroud you don’t believe in. That’s turmoil!
But no problem. Peace to you.
It may seem unspectacular to us here in the U.S. in 2013, but one of the remarkable attributes of the image on the Shroud of Turin is that it is the image of a man who is nearly six feet tall. That probably would have been at least 6-8 inches taller than the average male of the Middle Ages, and taller than average men in ancient times by a wider margin. Some of the Gospel passages make a little more sense in this context if you think of Jesus Christ as a physically imposing figure compared to other men at the time.
I suggest that all who have questions about the Shroud should read one of the many books about the evidence. “The Blood and the Shroud” by Ian Wilson is my favorite because he uses the detective method look at the evidence. He left me with no doubt that is is the real deal.
I saw a show once where some bozo in Italy proved to show how the Shroud was made by taking a sheet and putting it over a bronze bust of a man and sticking it in a pizza oven for 25 minutes at 375 degrees. The result looked like a burned sheet to me but he swore it was a replica of the Shroud.
You are implying with those statements that the Shroud is a 13th century fake. It has already been proven not to be as has been posted to you above and without any specific response on your part to the cited evidence. If you want to have some credibility you would respond to the cited evidence by either debunking it, or coming up with a plausible alternative explanation for it.
The Shroud is either a fake; real and the image of Christ; or real and the image of someone else. Scientific studies of the Shroud have already eliminated, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is fake. So we are left with the other two options. Its either Christ or someone else. The likelyhood of it being someone else is extremely small.
Global warming is a scientific fact and the discussion is closed
If the Shroud was made in such a way as that, it would easily be debunked with minimal analysis. Besides, whoever may have faked the Shroud would have had to have had access to the suderium (separate cloth that was wrapped around the head) to make sure they replicated the blood stains on the head to match the blood stains on the suderium. In addition to this extreme unlikelyhood (The Shroud and the Suderium took two different paths through history) the faker would also have had to have had access to microscopic pollen native and local to Jerusalem and implanted it on the Shroud. Plus have the ability to irradiate the image onto the cloth.
Now that is quite a task, and would require incredible forethought, ingenuity, planning, and perfect execution. I think it is pretty safe to say that Shroud Fake = LOL!
WTH does that mean? LOL! Forget it, I know what it means. You have no response to the evidence and therefore in an act of desperation you somehow compare believing the Shroud is real to believing that Global Warming is real. LOL! But what you are actually doing is exactly what the Global Warmers do by ignoring the evidence, or cherrypicking it.
But there might be new evidence to support the view that the shroud is real.Of course the Shroud isn't imaginary and is real, but there is no conceivable way to show that it served as the burial shroud of Christ. "Journalism" strikes again.
Do you have an opinion about the Sudarium of Oviedo?
link to links sent to me today from one of the original STURPA Team members -
He also noted that he's excited over the positive reception The Shroud is receiving this time around - even from the press -
he writes: "I am always thrilled to see positive news about the Shroud in the popular media, rather than the negative, skeptical attacks that happen so frequently, and particularly at this time of year. Yet the past few days have been filled with positive stories! "
I meant to add: "The 90-minute broadcast will be shown on Rai, the Italian state channel, (there are 3 Rai channels - Ital's channels can be accessed online with TVPC - scroll down for Italy - and then listings. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't)
Keep in mind that Italy is 5 hours ahead of us - so it's the middle of the night there now.
I watch more foreign news on TVPC from other countris - much more news on what's really going on here!
I'm currently watching one of the BBC channels -
There are several features on the Shroud that can be seen on depictions of Jesus from around 500 A.D. onwards. So, it may actually be that the Shroud influenced the later artists.
Has anyone mentioned that Pope Francis is doing an INTRO to the TV event ~ I heard.
By Sunday, Italy will be 6 (SIX) hours ahead of ET.
I think I heard it will be on UTube - since the widest possible availability is desired.
Has anyone mentioned the study that showed coins on the eyes of the shroud person - a custom back then !
Any mention of seventy five pounds of burial spices? see John’s Gospel.
Not well said at all, at least with respect to the purpose of the post which was to cast doubt on the genuineness of the Shroud. See post 33.
The denial on this thread by the skeptics is as mind boggling as the Shroud itself. The Shroud is either a fake;, the image of Christ; or the image of someone else. There is no other option. The scientific evidence collected to date indicates beyond a reasonable doubt that it is not a fake. Now if someone wants to continue calling it a fake, or implying it is a fake, then they need to deal with the evidence by either debunking it or coming up with a plausible alternative for it, and not simply put their head in the sand and ignore it. .
So the Shroud either shows the image of Christ or the image of someone else who was crucified in exactly the same way at about the same time and place, and either resurrected as Christ did, or put the image on the cloth in some other way. So in reality, contrary to your statement that there is no conceivable way to show that the Shroud is the burial cloth of Christ, it is actually inconceivable that it is NOT the burial Shroud of Christ.
Why is it that so many know so much without taking the time to read the information or even watch the video in post 8. As God said in the Book of Job, “Who is this who questions me without knowledge?”
Of course they he does. That's because those artists copied from what they could see on the shroud. It was displayed for all to see. There is usually the gap in his beard that is seen in the Shroud. There is the whisp of hair in the middle of his forehead as seen in the Shroud. There are many little details that the artists picked up from the cloth. So which came first, the chicken or the egg?
The Israelites showed extraordinary reverence for the Ark of the Covenant. Was this idol-worship?
Elisha was eager to possess Elijah's cloak. Was this idol-worship?
In Acts 19:11-12, people were touching cloths and handkerchiefs to St. Paul, so that they might be applied to the sick for their healing. Was this idol-worship?
And if people were eager to have cloths which had touched the Prophet Elijah or the Apostle Paul, wouldn't we be even more interested in the burial cloth wrapped around the body and marked with the blood of our blessed Lord? If such indeed it is, it's not because we care about cloth, but because we care for the crucified Savior.
A widower kissing a photo of his departed wife is showing love for the wife, not a confused belief that the image actually *is* the wife or that he is married to the photo. In a similar way, the respect shown for this burial shroud shows respect for the One whose body imprinted the shroud.
Moreover, idols are representations of false gods. Jesus Christ is not a false god. We are convinced that He is actually the true God.
While some people don't believe that, I think most (normal) people understand the distinction between a love for some trace of a loved one's mortal remains, and idolatry.
Remember Jezebel's priests of Baal, that cut themselves to try and get their god's attention? Wounding one’s self to make a ‘shroud’ is not very far fetched. Especially if the result could get one’s self a nice payday/news worthy attention. Imagine: Jerusalem 100A.D., town crier shouting “Man looking in cave finds blood stained cloth with resemblence of a man that had been crucified!”.
Through the centuries, there have been (mentally unsound) people that have willingly been crucified, to be like Jesus Christ. How many were wrapped in a big cloth to further duplicate the event?
Is it also possible that some sicko disabled some poor soul, then wounded him in the same locations as described by the Christ's crucifiction, then rolled him up in the cloth?
Scammers have been around a long time, even before Rebekah briefly ‘transformed’ Jacob into Esau.
One thing is certain, the shroud has been a money maker. We shouldn't declare it a fraud, for fear of possibly offending those that have profited from it. (think the ‘silversmiths of Diana’)
God chose the foolishness of preaching to save the lost. If a piece of blood stained cloth pricks the heart of a soul, creating a desire to hear the word of God, then that's a positive.
The two pieces; linen wrapped around the body, and the cloth that was wrapped around the head, would seem to make the whole matter more complex. Where is the cloth that was wrapped around his head? Don't tell me that your dog ate it. If the entire body was wrapped with one big cloth, then why was the separate cloth for the head even needed? was it wrapped around the head after the big cloth was wrapped over the body? If so, why?
I'm trying to wrap my head around all this so-called expert/scientific analysis, but will believe the Lord regardless.
disclaimer: I am not a wrapper.
**Any mention of seventy five pounds of burial spices? see Johns Gospel.**
There you go again, using the scriptures to make a point. Shame on you. lol