Posted on 07/28/2019 6:02:04 AM PDT by Kaslin
In an imaginary “ranking” of Christian topics that elicit the most fervent discussions, Jesus Christ is No. 1. But near the top is the Shroud of Turin — believed by millions of Christians to be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus. This “ranking” was inspired by you — Townhall readers who wrote over 500 impassioned comments in response to my July 21 piece, “Shroud of Turin: New Test Concludes 1988 ‘Medieval Hoax’ Dating Was a Fraud.”
I purposely read all your comments to gain insight into my role as an adviser and fundraiser for a groundbreaking exhibition about the Shroud of Turin at the Museum of the Bible in Washington D.C. This spectacular museum, among the largest and highest rated in the city, is located only three blocks from the Capitol. And just prior to the January 20, 2021, presidential inauguration is when this high-tech Shroud exhibit is scheduled to open.
Threaded throughout hundreds of your responses about all aspects of the Shroud was one overarching theme summarized by these three comments:
“Anyone who requires physical evidence to underpin their faith doesn’t understand the concept of faith.”
“JESUS CHRIST died for all. HE is what is important. Making such a fuss about this piece of cloth is a distraction from HIS work of SALVATION.”
“I respectfully submit that the only ‘relic’ which really matters is the one which was left us on that first Easter morning: The tomb is empty! He is Risen! He is Risen indeed! Alleluia!”
Of course, “He is Risen” is also the foundation of my Christian faith, (made slightly more complicated by having been born Jewish). But I feel compelled to discuss and explore the comment that reads in part, “…such a fuss about this piece of cloth...”
And my response is simple: The Shroud of Turin exists because HE exists. An answer that echoes what God said to Moses, “I Am Who I Am. Say this to the people of Israel: I Am has sent me to you” (Exodus 3:14).
Thus, the existence of the Shroud of Turin raises two questions that I will attempt to address: First, what exactly is the Shroud? And second, a deeper dive into “Why does the cloth exist?”
The Shroud of Turin is a 14.5-by-3.5-foot linen cloth with a linear front to back mirror image of a crucified man. The Shroud has the distinction of being the most studied artifact in the world, yet the cloth’s numerous mysteries remained unexplained by modern science.
At this moment the Shroud lies in a fireproof box in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, as it has continuously since 1578. (But secretly relocated between 1939 and 1946 when Italian authorities feared Hitler was seeking possession.)
Dating the Shroud has been controversial and the subject of my July 21 piece.
Among Shroud historians, there is no dispute that in 1352, over 200 years before the Shroud was housed in Turin, Geoffrey DeCharney displayed the cloth in Lirey, France marking the beginning of the Shroud’s documented "modern" dating.
There is also much circumstantial Shroud evidence through art, artifacts, and coins that pre-dates 1352. Moreover, scientifically verified botanical evidence found on the cloth in the form of pollen, dust, flowers, and even the weave and type of linen traces the Shroud back to first-century Jerusalem.
The cloth with its mysterious properties has survived wars, invasions and the ravages of time including numerous fires — most recently in 1997 at its home cathedral in Turin.
Most harrowing was the 1532 fire in Chambéry, France. Miraculously the entire cloth was not destroyed but left those distinctive linear markings along both sides of the Shroud that we see today. Hard to imagine, but the linen cloth was stored in a silver box, folded in 48 layers, when drops of molten silver burned through the cloth’s outer folded edges.
The point is, against all the odds, the Shroud exists. And, as stated earlier, because He exists. There is also a significant Bible-based reason found in the Gospel of John known as “Doubting Thomas” (John 20:24-31).
But first, a “guest” who will explain this passage needs a proper introduction:
It turns out that the many Townhall readers who commented about not needing the Shroud’s “physical evidence to underpin their faith,” represent a large swath of Christian believers. I learned this when asking Russ Breault— my fellow Shroud exhibit team colleague, and a world-renowned Shroud expert and speaker — if he had experienced similar attitudes after over 30 years of hosting his popular “Shroud Encounters” to sell-out crowds.
Breault replied:
“I get that statement all the time! When someone says, ‘I don't need the Shroud for my faith,’ I usually say, ‘That is fantastic! But that doesn't mean the Shroud was not meant for someone else.’ ”
Breault continued: “In the Doubting Thomas story, Jesus pronounced a blessing on those who ‘believe yet have not seen,’ but Jesus did not condemn Thomas for his unbelief. In fact, a week after the Resurrection, Jesus appeared a second time, and the first person he spoke to was Thomas, who was not there to witness Jesus’ first appearance. Jesus then quotes Thomas' words back to him, ‘Thomas, thrust your hand into my side and place your fingers into my nail wounds and be not faithless but believe.’
At this point, Thomas — forever known as "Doubting Thomas" — makes the strongest profession of faith in the New Testament saying, "My Lord and my God." Then Jesus pronounced a blessing on those who can believe without seeing. So we are blessed if we can believe without seeing, but we are not cursed if we can't get there without some additional evidence.
Therefore, perhaps the Shroud is a silent witness to the world offering all of humanity the same opportunity Jesus gave to Thomas. In some proverbial sense by looking at the Shroud, we too can thrust our hand into His side and place our fingers into His nail wound and find our faith in the process.”
Thank you, Russ! And now my final thoughts for Townhall commenters.
If blessed with great faith, you are free to ignore or downplay the image on the Shroud showing Christ’s great suffering and victory over death. Yet, take comfort in knowing that the Shroud is there to supplement or reinforce the faith of others while potentially witnessing to the ever-increasing number of Doubting Thomases found throughout the world.
In the end, I believe that the Shroud exists as proof of God’s greatest gift to mankind —the Lord Jesus Christ — who lives and reigns forever and ever. Alleluia!
(Now, let the comments begin!)
How very Mormon of you.
Do your best and God will do the rest.
His grace only kicks in after you've done all you can.
You can NEVER reach the lifeboat on your own.
You can't even come close.
God commands to be holy as He is holy.
ONE sin is all it takes to damn someone. It's all it took for Adam and Eve and death to enter the world.
You could live an otherwise perfect life except for ONE sin, and you still could not and would not be saved.
If righteous were by the law, or works which is what law keeping is, Christ died for NOTHING.
He does NOT.
Grace comes through Jesus Christ, NOT Mary.
John 1:17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
Then I trust you’ll get back to me after criticizing St. Paul for calling Timothy his son, or for calling himself a father in faith to the Corinthians? Because clearly, that’s hard evidence of Paul denying the words of Jesus.
So by what authority do you have the ability to sit in judgment of the Catholic hierarchy?
You do realize, don't you, that you have condemned yourself by an ex cathedra statement of a previous pope?
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam: (Promulgated November 18, 1302) “We declare, say, define, and pronounce [ex cathedra] that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”
"If, therefore, the Greeks or others say that they are not committed to Peter and to his successors, they necessarily say that they are not of the sheep of Christ, since the Lord says that there is only one fold and one shepherd (Jn.10:16). Whoever, therefore, resists this authority, resists the command of God Himself. " — Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (Promulgated November 18, 1302)
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/b8-unam.html
This happened BEFORE Vatican 2, FWIW.
Where did Jesus say that?
So many assumptions.......
You awake?
Yes, I am awake, cuz I had to get up to answer your post. 😁 It is now 7:12 AM in my neck of the woods.
Chapter and verse, please?
If you have issues interpreting Holy Scripture, I would suggest taking some reading comprehension classes then.
It says what it means and means what it says.
Read these:
John 6:29
Romans 10:9-10
Acts 16:31
What do they mean to you? Why do Catholics call balderdash on these verses? Why do they add “works” to them?
Anybody can read Scripture for themselves - since you claim you need a ‘higher authority figure’ to interpret it for you in order to understand, I suggest you take it up with the Lord Himself at the Great White Throne Judgement. Good Luck too!
Philippians 2:12
You tell us.
YOU'RE the ones whose church demands you disobey Jesus' clear command about using *Father* as a religious title and justifies it at every turn.
And it's CONTEXT, taking the entire passage and not just one verse out of it, that sets the stage for interpreting it.
In this situation, Jesus is talking about the taking of titles by religious leaders.
It has NOTHING whatsoever with a child calling his male parent *Father*.
Matthew 23:1-12 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.
They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others.
But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
The Council of Florence from 1442 contradicts your claim:
***
Wrong. Incorrect. Other such words of gainsaying and rejection.
This council doesn’t make their canon *infallible.* In the canon law language at the time, it is a suggestion, nothing more. Trent was the only one that did.
That’s why Cardinal Cajetan wasn’t excommunicated like his nemesis Luther for removing the exact same books from canon that Catholics like to claim that Luther did.
Yet a good number of the "doctors" of the Roman Catholic church have strongly alluded to this. Some even say it is necessary to have Mary to be saved.
And so many wrong ones at that!
It’s Roman Catholic.
You're not a sedevacantists are you?
I am not a sedevacantist. Nor am I an omnicompetent doctrinal thread Nemesis. That’s my temptation, not my vocation.
This isn’t gonna take quite as long as I expected.
I believe that you are misconstruing the idea of the invisible church into being something that it’s not.
Even Catholics believe in an invisible church because they insist that you can’t know if you have salvation and that whoever DOES have salvation is known only by God.
Or are you saying that unrepentant sinners are part of the Body of Christ just because they claim to be Christian?
As for the church organization itself being the Body of Christ, that’s balderdash. Paul states in 1 Corinthians 12 that “You are Christ’s body.” Plural ‘you’ in Greek, not singular, and Christ is the head.
So here is your dilemma: Either the Body of Christ has unrepentant sinners in it, or true membership in the Body of Christ cannot be seen on the outside, thus invisible.
(I personally don’t like the terminology of ‘invisible church’ myself, but it’s close enough without expending paragraphs.)
As for the rest of your comments, you’re largely making assertions without evidence and thus I will ignore that because the basis of your assertions rests solely on ‘because I say so’ or ‘because Rome says so.’
Convince me that the Vatican is an authoritative source for the truth of the Christian faith WITHOUT resorting to a circular argument, and I’ll be happy to become Roman Catholic.
We may all be guilty of that!
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.