Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is the Shroud of Turin Real or Fake? New Research May Shed Light on Its Authenticity
PJ Media ^ | 08/21/2024 | Chris Queen

Posted on 08/21/2024 8:04:03 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Sometime in the mid-'80s, I remember going to Atlanta with a group from my church to see the Shroud of Turin, the linen cloth that some have claimed was the cloth that Joseph of Arimathea used to bury Jesus and place Him in the tomb. I remember images and videos in that crowded exhibit hall that told the story of the shroud, and of course, the shroud itself was on display in a glass case.

I was probably 12 or 13, so I wasn’t mature enough in my faith to be able to conclude whether it was real. I do remember the controversy surrounding the dating of the artifact even then, and there were rumors that people were experiencing healing after coming near the shroud. Nevertheless, it fascinated me enough to keep an eye on any news I see about it even today.

The Shroud of Turin first came to prominence in the 1350s, and by the 16th century, it had a permanent home in Turin, Italy. For hundreds of years, the faithful believed that it was Jesus’ burial cloth, and plenty of people believe it today. But in the ‘80s, some researchers concluded that the shroud only dated to the Middle Ages.

Now, a group of Italian researchers have used a new technique called Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS) to study the shroud. Comparing the shroud to another linen sample that dates to the New Testament era, they conclude that the cloth dates back to the time of Jesus.

Scientific Technique Dates Shroud of Turin to Around the Time of Christ’s Death and Resurrection

Liberato De Caro discusses his peer-reviewed findings, based on an X-ray method of research, used to determine the age of the shroud’s fibers.⤵️ https://t.co/uLzCh09gCt— National Catholic Register (@NCRegister)


(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...


TOPICS: General Discusssion; History
KEYWORDS: alreadyposted; authenticity; crucifixion; medievalfake; medievalfraud; medievalhoax; medievalhumbug; middleages; shroud; turin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last
To: fidelis

“If that were universally true, God would not have commanded Israel to make them at certain occasions...”

I think everyone can agree if God gives a specific command that can serve to bypass a general rule God has given. Absent such a specific command, however, the general rule is still in effect.


21 posted on 08/21/2024 9:39:46 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
I think everyone can agree if God gives a specific command that can serve to bypass a general rule God has given. Absent such a specific command, however, the general rule is still in effect.

In commanding the making of images for the Temple and other instances, it is clear that God is not by-passing his own rules at all. After all, the First Commandment doesn't forbid the making of images; it forbids making them for the purpose of worshipping them:

“You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them... (Exodus 20:4-5)

22 posted on 08/21/2024 10:00:18 AM PDT by fidelis (Ecce Crucem Domini! Fugite partes adversae! Vicit Leo de tribu Juda, Radix David! Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PeterPrinciple

“My question to you, is WHY would you kneel and pray to an IMAGE of Mary when God invites you into a personal relationship with him as FATHER through the Holy Spirit and Jesus.”

In my question is why do people hold the Apostle Paul in such high regard? He never really even met Jesus, he talks about Jesus coming to him but this was 40 or 50 years after Jesus had already passed away and risen.

That’s why we have theology.

How many have taken college level theology classes? I certainly have and it almost turned me into an unbeliever because it is so factual in regards to the documentation and the validity thereof in a historical context. Theology rarely delves into faith.

Theology is an investigation into the authenticity of all things relating to Christianity and Hebrew, all things; documents, historical documents validity of documents validity of translations validity of people, the archaeological tepresentations... the screening of texts, comparative studies of various translations of text from differing ancient origins.

To study Faith go to Sunday school, a lot of times people take a few years theology, which is a facinating “science” and come away less a Christian than before. TMI? Perhaps, it can become a quest, or a pursuit. A gut feeling or inner peace may be the only explaination some would ever need.

Heart knowledge? Yes! I also think head knowledge is important to comprehend the historical times, idioms, practices and surroundings.

There’s not a day goes by when I see some representation of a Biblical scripture primarily because there is nothing new Under the Sun, and Human Nature might be finite.

But it’s very interesting to me when I hear or see something or read something or catch a news item that it just clicks in my head that is like just like what happened in this particular chapter or verse, or book... it’s amazing.

It’s also very helpful to understand that it was all understood during ancient times thousands of years ago.


23 posted on 08/21/2024 10:18:17 AM PDT by Clutch Martin ("The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dan in Wichita

You’d need a Transporter, wouldn’t you?


24 posted on 08/21/2024 10:23:08 AM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: fidelis

“the First Commandment doesn’t forbid the making of images; it forbids making them for the purpose of worshipping them”

No, there’s two sentences which both contain a prohibition on a different thing. Both are forbidden.

If I said to my kid: “Don’t borrow the car without my permission. Don’t return the car without filling up the gas tank.”, then nobody would assume I meant the kid could borrow the car without my permission as long as he filled up the gas tank.


25 posted on 08/21/2024 10:32:54 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Flag_This

Yeah, that’s a good counterargument. Forget this is a religious relic; just look at the history of forgers. None of them made much attempt to acquire materials from the proper time period until tests were invented that could differentiate such materials from simply materials that “looked old enough”.


26 posted on 08/21/2024 10:36:16 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Where’s the “Not this shit again” meme?


27 posted on 08/21/2024 10:37:38 AM PDT by Poser (Cogito ergo Spam - I think, therefore I ham)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; lightman

The Shroud is authentic, and Christ is Risen!

All those “proofs” that the Shroud is a medieval fake have fallen by the wayside.

And the Shroud was originally an Orthodox relic. But the Orthodox Church does not base faith in the Resurrection on the Shroud or other relics!


28 posted on 08/21/2024 10:56:48 AM PDT by Honorary Serb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Honorary Serb; SeekAndFind
Christ is Risen!
29 posted on 08/21/2024 11:14:44 AM PDT by lightman (I am a binary Trinitarian. Deal with it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
“the First Commandment doesn’t forbid the making of images; it forbids making them for the purpose of worshipping them”
No, there’s two sentences which both contain a prohibition on a different thing. Both are forbidden.

No, there is no punctuation in the original Hebrew; it is a translators choice. Likewise, even the numbering of the commandments came into practice and the verse numberings were added much later than that. The command to have no other gods and to make statues to worship them is clearly one commandment.

30 posted on 08/21/2024 11:40:25 AM PDT by fidelis (Ecce Crucem Domini! Fugite partes adversae! Vicit Leo de tribu Juda, Radix David! Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The "new research" being touted as proof of the Shroud of Turin's antiquity was published in April 2022, "X-Ray Dating of a Turin Shroud’s Linen Sample" (Heritage 2022, 5(2), 860-870), by Liberato De Caro, Teresa Sibillano, Rocco Lassandro, Cinzia Giannini and Giulio Fanti.

Previously Liberato De Caro, had his June 30, 2017, PLOS ONE article, "Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud," retracted becauses the data were not sufficient to support the conclusions presented.

De Caro's still has another published article, "Turin Shroud hands’ region analysis reveals the scrotum and a part of the right thumb" (Journal of Cultural Heritage, Vol. 24, March-April 2017, 140-146).

31 posted on 08/21/2024 11:41:11 AM PDT by Carl Vehse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flag_This
So some guy in the 1300s went to the time, trouble and expense, to purchase a thousand year old piece of linen? Assuming he could even find something like that, why would he do it? To fool people 700 years in the future, using tests he could never even conceive of?

Sounds like a very scientific and believable explanation. That does it, your explanation is now "settled science"

--sarcasm tag required by law

32 posted on 08/21/2024 11:50:22 AM PDT by frogjerk (More people have died trusting the government than not trusting the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Carl Vehse

One doesn’t even need the “new” research here. The Shroud is authentic already.


33 posted on 08/21/2024 11:53:29 AM PDT by frogjerk (More people have died trusting the government than not trusting the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Alberta's Child: "The shroud is basically a photographic negative, and if the Carbon-14 dating was accurate then it was produced at least 500 years before photography was even invented."

The expression, "photographic negative," refers to a image of a scene where the bright parts of scene appearing dark and the dark parts of a scene appearing bright. It doesn't mean that the Shroud of Turin image was actually a photographic negative produced by the same chemicals using in 19th-20th century photography.

34 posted on 08/21/2024 11:55:11 AM PDT by Carl Vehse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fidelis

“No, there is no punctuation in the original Hebrew”

I’m afraid you’ll have to do better than that, since there are two subjects, two objects, two verbs, so there are clearly two sentences giving two prohibitions even if we didn’t have the punctuation to clue us in on that.


35 posted on 08/21/2024 12:04:12 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: pburgh01

What a flippant attitude towards the burial cloth of our Lord which shows His Solemnity, Majesty, and intense Suffering. Not one paint stroke on the body of the Shroud. Carbon 14 only picked up a fire it was in. What I notice about Shroud scoffers is they tend to be very drive-by. Because anyone who studies it in detail starts to realize it’s real. We can’t replicate it to this day. The energy necessary to burn our Lord’s Image on the Shroud is equal to 8 billion watts. He has left us pictorial evidence of the power of His Resurrection and we get this ho-hum stuff. Do you not see why He did this? Are we not surrounded by unbelieving pagans? Your five words are very revealing. You hate it because many “Catholics” believe it’s authentic, don’t you? Your post is more about anti-Catholic hatred/bigotry than the Shroud. The woman who was healed by touching the hem of Jesus’ garment. those healed by Peter’s shadow or handkerchiefs that had touched his skin, just old worthless Catholic “relics”, right?


36 posted on 08/21/2024 12:05:21 PM PDT by MDLION ("Trust in the Lord with all your heart" -Proverbs 3:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
“No, there is no punctuation in the original Hebrew”
I’m afraid you’ll have to do better than that, since there are two subjects, two objects, two verbs, so there are clearly two sentences giving two prohibitions even if we didn’t have the punctuation to clue us in on that.

That would be true in contemporary rules of grammar, but in what is essentially one large run-on sentence in an ancient text, it is not so clear-cut and translators do the best they can. Without punctuation in the original, it is not at all certain that what we have here is two sentences.

37 posted on 08/21/2024 12:28:42 PM PDT by fidelis (Ecce Crucem Domini! Fugite partes adversae! Vicit Leo de tribu Juda, Radix David! Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: fidelis

“...but in what is essentially one large run-on sentence in an ancient text, it is not so clear-cut and translators do the best they can”

Using this argument, I can say every book of the Bible is a “large run-on sentence” that we can have no hope of interpreting or understanding. But that would be foolish, and obviously an argument simply constructed to avoid a plain reading of the text and what that plain reading would tell us.


38 posted on 08/21/2024 1:03:40 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
Using this argument, I can say every book of the Bible is a “large run-on sentence” that we can have no hope of interpreting or understanding. But that would be foolish, and obviously an argument simply constructed to avoid a plain reading of the text and what that plain reading would tell us.

There is no "plain reading of the text" if one does so apart from context and discerning the particulars of any given text. If we were native speakers at that time we could easily do it, but even scholars, 3000 years removed from the original text disagree and sometimes just flat-out don't know what the original writers intended. Translators do the best they can, but even they have biases and make mistakes. Most of us non-scholars rely on translations and there are bound to be differences in interpretation.

39 posted on 08/21/2024 1:35:23 PM PDT by fidelis (Ecce Crucem Domini! Fugite partes adversae! Vicit Leo de tribu Juda, Radix David! Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: fidelis

“Most of us non-scholars rely on translations and there are bound to be differences in interpretation.”

Yet you’re not doing that. You’re making arguments that maybe two sentences should really be one sentence and the translators just got it wrong. Because why? Well, I’ll refrain from “mind reading” and let everyone else make their own speculations as to why.


40 posted on 08/21/2024 1:54:41 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson