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!)
You ought to take your caution to heart, for you are miss applying the Words of Jesus by taking them out of the context in which He delivered them. Try counting the number of times in that John 6 passage HE says eternal life comes by believing in Whom God has sent, as compared to how many times He said ‘unless they eat His flesh and drink His blood’. THEN, if you seek to be truthful, look at what GODS said about eating the blood, and which admonition against that practice the First Ekklesia Council spoke in their letter to the new believers.
No. But it shows that I'm not repeating something I was taught by rote.
How is it that non-Catholics seem to know more about Catholicism and what it teaches than Catholics do?
Selection bias on your part.
I have no idea what happened to it.
Let it go, then.
No aspersion intended just humor.
The point is, there exists New Testament, canonical scripture, which speaks of losing Salvation.
You know, not written by a...Papist!
Which contradicts not Scripture, but the bombastic assertions of some on this thread.
Stompy-foot is not sufficient to demonstrate your dogmatic, man-taught assertions.
(It really *is* ironic, that the doctrine of sola scriptura and all the corollaries and penumbras (in the "Supreme Court ruling" sense), it itself merely the teaching of ... fallible men.)
A single counterexample suffices to disprove a universal assertion.
***
Really?
From the way the thread was playing, it seems that metmom had already provided a single counterexample to the Roman Catholic universal assertion.
You’re not helping to grow faith just by contradicting; you have to answer the points and counterpoints and provide evidence to back up your claims.
While I certainly appreciate that you’re using Scripture, which is more than many do, there’s an additional step beyond just quoting verses.
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Each one must examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.
'Recognize the body refers to The Body of Christ made up of ALL believers regardless of age, ethnicity, sex, national origin, or 'denomination'. The Body of Christ on this Earth is made up of the believers and all are equal before God, equally forgiven and sealed by The Holy Spirit of Promise.
You asserted so authoritatively, “Yes, God seals the deal when we reach the place that is past change: heaven.”
Heretical assertion Catholicism teacher! The seal is placed once for all time while a person is alive. You really should stop your writing when you are in the dark. Do you need for me to post the Scripture proof of that assertion that it is here in the now that God seals the human spirit?
I already did.
I have posted those Scriptures dozens of times and the spiritually blind still do not see.
You actually have to *read* instead of cut and pasting.
John 5:24 says "and believes him who sent me."
OK, so someone stops believing.
Do they fulfill that condition anymore?
John 6:37-39 "and whoever comes to me I will never cast out."
What if you turn around and jump out the door all on your own power, without being cast out?
John 10:25-30. "and no one will snatch them out of my hand."
You somehow form the impression from this that people can't rebel, out of their own will, that snatching is the only method for being lost.
Romans 4:16 -- seeming non-sequitur. What of those who have denied the faith and are worse than an infidel (hint: that's another New Testament passage, again, not a Papist council). And it says "He [Abraham] is the father of us all". Gee, someone else on this thread says to call no man father.
Yes, I'm yanking your chain. You are cherry picking, while ignoring other Scriptures which warn of losing the faith.
Notice I said "Scriptures" and not "writing from some Pope 1400 years ago."
Uh-huh. He said, “Yet in *your* case, beloved” — meaning that there was yet again, the case of some others.
The warning remains valid.
Grow up.
Are you going to tell me that something sent of God is going to lie?
If it lies, it's a guarantee that it's demonic.
As Han told the Wookie, “Laugh it up, fuzzball.”
Why bother having prayer chains, then? Why ask *anyone* to pray for you?
C. S. Lewis covered this one pretty well in Narnia.
"Well, tuck in," said Fledge, taking a big mouthful of grass. Then he raised his head, still chewing and with bits of grass sticking out on each side of his mouth like whiskers, and said, "Come on, you two. Don't be shy. There's plenty for us all."
"But we can't eat grass," said Digory.
"H'm, h'm," said Fledge, speaking with his mouth full. "Well - h'm - don't know quite what you'll do then. Very good grass too."
Polly and Digory stared at one another in dismay.
"Well, I do think someone might have arranged about our meals," said Digory.
"I'm sure Aslan would have, if you'd asked him," said Fledge.
"Wouldn't he know without being asked?" said Polly.
"I've no doubt he would," said the Horse (still with his mouth full). "But I've a sort of idea he likes to be asked."
It'd be nice if the Sola Scriptura crowd realized that themselves! :-D
Satan hates God's word and will do anything and say anything to convince people it's not authoritative.
It's too bad Catholicism fell for that lie so long ago.
Incidentally.
Are you going to tell me that something sent of God is going to lie?
Two Old Testament counterexamples.
From 1 Kings.
Chapter 22.
20And the LORD said, ‘Who will entice Ahab to march up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one suggested this, and another that. 21Then a spirit came forward, stood before the LORD, and said, ‘I will entice him.’ ‘By what means?’ asked the LORD. 22And he replied, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ ‘You will surely entice him and prevail,’ said the LORD. ‘Go and do it.’…
Chapter 20.
35Meanwhile, by the word of the LORD, one of the sons of the prophets said to his companion, “Strike me, please!” But the man refused to strike him. 36Then the prophet said to him, “Because you have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, as soon as you depart from me a lion will kill you.” And when he left, a lion found him and killed him. 37Then the prophet found another man and said, “Strike me, please!” So the man struck him and wounded him, 38and the prophet went and waited on the road for the king, disguising himself with a bandage over his eyes. 39As the king passed by, he cried out to the king: “Your servant had marched out into the middle of the battle, when suddenly a man came over with a captive and told me, ‘Guard this man! If he goes missing for any reason, your life will be exchanged for his life, or you will weigh out a talentc of silver.’ 40But while your servant was busy here and there, the man disappeared.” And the king of Israel said to him, “So shall your judgment be; you have pronounced it on yourself.” 41Then the prophet quickly removed the bandage from his eyes, and the king of Israel recognized him as one of the prophets. 42And the prophet said to the king, “This is what the LORD says: ‘Because you have let slip from your hand the man I had devoted to destruction,d your life will be exchanged for his life, and your people for his people.’”
....did you notice how the prophet hadn't *really* been entrusted to guard someone? It was kinda like a parable or morality play, or hypothetical. But certainly not literally specifically true, was it? So did God order a prophet to lie?
Hence, your assertion is disproved.
From the sublime to the ridiculous.
"He who does not receive the Kingdom of God as a child shall never enter it."
Who said that again?
Your attitude towards Scripture reveals a lot about you.
You ought to stop and consider just WHOSE word it is that you are speaking of so disparagingly.
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.