Posted on 08/21/2024 5:38:05 AM PDT by Gary from Dayton
Filmmaker David Rolfe was a self-professed atheist when he set out to make a documentary about one of the most revered religious artifacts in history - the Shroud of Turin.
With the 1978 movie, the photography expert set out to find a prosaic explanation as to how a blood-soaked imprint of a man matching Jesus Christ's description manifested onto the cloth relic.
Instead, he was so convinced of its authenticity he converted to Christianity
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Honestly if you don’t believe it, then don’t. The poster to whom I responded was resurrecting, you’ll excuse the expression, the old saw that the shroud appears out of nowhere in 1354. My one point pushes that back 150 years.
I don’t understand peoples’ points. You’re not going to find a certificate of authenticity. My background is law. If you look at all the evidence, I think it plainly proves the case by the preponderance of the evidence—- I think more strongly than that. If you disagree, fine, but the world -weary tone of some of the posters is out of place, given the existence of the substantial evidence in support of genuineness
It’s just another religious scam.
Plenty of descriptions of how it was done from centuries before the Romans by the Persians, Carthaginians, Assyrians & the Babylonians. The Romans probably copied it from the Carthaginians. It can be done in various ways as long as you put the right pressure on the right anatomical region. There is a scarcity of the physical evidence because its victims were viewed as criminals that an example be made of them - traitors, slaves in revolt (1st, 2nd & 3rd Servile Revolts\wars. Spartacus was the 3rd revolt!) & anyone who challenged authoritarian rule. Since they were viewed as lowest of the low almost always their bodies were left to rot in place. It would be dangerous to express an interest in proper burial since it might indicate sympathy with the victim and cause. Currently there are two notable exceptions Jesus and one archeological example. Here’s a description of an archeological find that more or less backs up in part the Biblical description.
Being that vast resources and the entirety of the lefty press and scientific community have done everything in their power to disprove this artifact lends it overwhelming credence in my mind.
All they can conclude is the materials are from Jesus time. Is it Jesus’ face? I am not convinced yet.
In any case, if this guy’s endeavor made him believe in Jesus, I can only say, “glory to God!”
BTTT
The Big Bang, DNA code and Cosmological constants prove God exists. The Bible and Shroud proves Christ was the Messiah and rose from the dead.
Lots of skeptics and mockers in the replies.
To me, having read all the books, articles, and being both a Bible/World history and graphics geek....owned largish publishers/printers...yes, plural....it is real until proven a fake.
As Christ commands.....the relentless pursuit of Truth.
BUT it does not matter to me if it is or is not....
“Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.” John 20:29
God has left it not to help us in our belief....but rather to help some in their “disbelief”.
Pax Vobiscum. :->
so....science of the gaps....got it.
Science continues to seek “ the burden of truth”
This analysis just redated the shroud to the time of Jesus, if not to the identity of the torture victim it covered
- John 20 "Then comes also Simon Peter following him and entered the tomb. And he intently gazes upon the strips of linen cloth lying there and the handkerchief which had been upon His head, not lying with the strips of linen cloth, but apart, rolled up in one place. Then therefore went in also the other disciple who had come first to the tomb, and he saw and believed, for not yet did they know the scripture that it is a necessity in the nature of the case for Him to stand up [arise] out from among those who are dead. Then the disciples went off again to their own homes."
Seems clear.
1. The testimony of two Apostles is that they did not see a burial cloth.
2. They believed because the strips of linen cloth were not wrapped around Christ's body.
3. There was a separate handkerchief that was on His head, but was now laid aside carefully.
Update on dating
From Science section of DailyMail
so you were expecting a name label sewn in from 33 a.d.?
do you apply the same demands on any other items of antiquity?
I have NEVER doubted that it's REAL!!
I always thought you were smarter than this.
Two thoughts worth pondering:
1. Why would anyone keep around a burial cloth?
2. Why would it not still be in use?
There is no claim or proof from the Pray Codex that the illustration is exactly that of the Shroud of Turin. During the Middle Ages many paintings, illustrations, and carvings were made of the crucifixion, burial and resurrection of Christ. The illustration in the Pray Codex of Christ’s burial is similar to the image derived from the shroud. That one or more of such paintings or illustrations are similar to the image seen in the Shroud of Turin is not evidence that the Shroud of Turin is the actual shroud of Christ.
There are different legal levels of evidence, including preponderance, reasonable suspicion, clear and convincing, and beyond a reasonable doubt. There are also scientific levels of evidence, as well as Bayesian statistics used to determine a probability from prior knowledge updated with information from new and confirmed data.
Those with the burden of proof regarding the shroud’s authenticity should state the confidence level of the evidence they present.
“The shroud itself doesn’t mean anything to me.”
Ditto. The only thing that makes it relevant today is that some denominations don’t have ENOUGH idols, and want to add one more.
A shroud is meaningless in the whole scheme of things when it comes to where you’ll spend eternity.
How do you get that from the text? The Greek word they're translating as "strips of linen cloth" is "othonia" which is "fine [burial] linens". (The "strips" part is something the translator interjected into the text. It doesn't actually say "strips".)
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.