[DoodleBob]

Ping. As I wrote to Hebrews, a big "a ha" moment for me, was in Mel Gibson's "Passion," when I realized how ravaged was Our Lord's body at the end. Yes, it's Hollywood...but in comparison with many paintings, clearly the artists weren't aiming for realism. Gibson's movie REALLY moved me in a way by no other piece of art (except for Mercer's Flight into Egypt...). Indeed, the scene where Jesus is talking to the two thieves, where you see their relatively "clean" bodies and His mutilated Body was VERY striking.

I feel like I have a greater appreciation for His sacrifice, and the depravity of sin, because of that movie.

However, The Shroud provides an IMMENSE amount of detail into Our Lord's suffering, and it's not Hollywood or fakery.

I'm sure many people will reply to this thread "I don't need the Shroud" and other dismissive comments. Good for you.

My faith doesn't hinge on the Shroud. But it is certainly bolstered by it.

[j.havenfarm]

Amen, Bob. Your last sentence in particular
Dominus meus et Deus meus.

[alstewartfan]

As a Baptist, I am convinced of the authenticity.

[Hebrews 11:6]

You react strongly, Bob, to the film, as do I. Interesting that God timed the crucifixion for an age when photography did not yet exist.

He is completely capable of generating saving faith without it, so He did not need to wait for photography’s invention nor to hasten its development.

Nor, as you noted, does faith depend on the Shroud.

[nwrep]

All good points. The utter depravity and savagery of the ritual of crucifixion in Roman times is unfamiliar to the world today, and these exhibits (like the movie) help familiarize people with the true nature of the event.