It’s a real shroud...............
Just because the linen is that old, doesn’t mean the image is that old.
The image could have been added centuries after the linen was first woven.
I personally don’t have an opinion on its authenticity, but virtually no one who has a solid opinion will change their mind at this point.... no matter what “evidence is presented.
. But our faith in Jesus shouldn’t rest on the status of artifacts. As Jesus told the Apostle Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed”
But it only takes one generation to lose the original idea of a tradition/relic. Relics in the church have always been about power. “We have a class ONE relic!”
God did use common things like stones to help remember. But the slippery slope is remember.............venerate......worship.
We are not to use images. God is a thinking man relationship. He uses words and stories to communicate.
God can use this. If the discussion of this leads to a discussion of God’s word, then it is a good thing.
But note, the discussion is about is it real or not and minutia.
BTTT
Chain of custody. Just because a French knight stands up 1300 years after-the-fact, and declares it, doesn’t make it true.
Ridiculous we are not talking about the gospels, faith and repentance, and examining ourselves to see if we are actually in the faith; not being deceived.
Where’s the “Not this shit again” meme?
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!
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).