Shroud of Turin—real or fake, and why?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,312
3,618
113
#41
John 19:40 also suggests the linen was wound around him. with spices..aloe and myrrh, of which there seems to be no trace of in the shroud of turin.

They would have totally drenched it in those spices and herbs...aloe heals skin and myrrh is anti fungal.
This is a good point. However, the synoptics make no mention of spices, only that Jesus was wrapped in a clean linen shroud.

What are we to make of the differences between the synoptics and John? One describes Jesus wrapped in a shroud with no mention of spices; John says He was wrapped in linen "cloths" with a separate piece for the face, and with spices.

I do agree though, if the shroud image is actually Jesus, and spices were used, one would expect to see them in the image.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#42
If it was really Jesus original cloth they would have given it back to Jerusalem to put in their musuem or what is said to be Jesus tomb but they didnt.

anyway who has the clothes that were offered when he was crucified, the Bible was saying people actually gambled for them. Wouldnt they have kept those rather than a burial cloth, just saying!

Like how Princess Diana auctioned all her clothes for charity, but nobody is picking up the car wreck she was in and memorializing it.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#43
another thing, I dont think anyone touching the shroud has ever claimed they were healed by touhing or seeing it.

If it was any article of Jesus clothing, wouldnt more people be healed by just touching it like the woman who touched the hem of his garment and was healed.

in the book of Acts Peter and Paul were healing by handkerchiefs.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#44
This is a good point. However, the synoptics make no mention of spices, only that Jesus was wrapped in a clean linen shroud.

What are we to make of the differences between the synoptics and John? One describes Jesus wrapped in a shroud with no mention of spices; John says He was wrapped in linen "cloths" with a separate piece for the face, and with spices.

I do agree though, if the shroud image is actually Jesus, and spices were used, one would expect to see them in the image.
there are differences between 'synoptics' and John bebcause simply eyewitnesses have different points of view and remember different things about Jesus. This is like that with anyones account of anyone. Just cos one person remmebered about the spices doesnt mean everyone else did or recalled to mention it. Some people just dont recall every single detail.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,312
3,618
113
#45
there are differences between 'synoptics' and John bebcause simply eyewitnesses have different points of view and remember different things about Jesus. This is like that with anyones account of anyone. Just cos one person remmebered about the spices doesnt mean everyone else did or recalled to mention it. Some people just dont recall every single detail.
This might be true if Matthew, Mark and Luke used the same source, and only one source. Then it would be one person's memory against another's. But surely Matthew, Mark and Luke had multiple and different sources. That would mean all these people remembered it one way and John another.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#46
no Luke also mentions spices as well.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#47
When you take a rubbing of something, you do end up with a negative image. Its really not that hard to do.
My thought is someone made a waxwork dummy or statue of a crucfied man that they thought looked like Jesus would have looked, covered it with cloth and rubbed it to transfer the image.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#48
People make tombstone rubbings, so its not hard to believe someone can make a rubbing of a statue if they have a big enough cloth.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,312
3,618
113
#49
no Luke also mentions spices as well.
Luke mentions spices but it's not describing the same thing John does. John describes Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus wrapping Jesus in 75 pounds of spices. The women who prepared spices in Luke 23 didn't get a chance to use them. Thus in Luke there's no mention of Jesus being wrapped with spices.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,312
3,618
113
#50
When you take a rubbing of something, you do end up with a negative image. Its really not that hard to do.
My thought is someone made a waxwork dummy or statue of a crucfied man that they thought looked like Jesus would have looked, covered it with cloth and rubbed it to transfer the image.
It's possible I guess.
 
Jul 9, 2017
133
9
18
#51
Based on the evidence, it would appear that the Shroud is authentic.
 

ewq1938

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2018
5,020
1,268
113
#52
since it was radiocarboned dated back to the middle ages then we know it wasnt the original cloth.
In 2013 it was tested and dates from 1,802-2,302 years old.

https://blog.magiscenter.com/blog/how-old-is-shroud-turin


How Old is the Shroud of Turin? 1,970 years (Give or Take 200).

by Magis Center | May 20, 2019 |
How Old is the Shroud of Turin? 1,970 years (Give or Take 200).

According to 3 tests carried out by Dr. Giulio Fanti in 2013, the Shroud of Turin is between 1,802 and 2,302 years old.

Dr. Fanti’s tests were corroborated by the Universities of Padua, Bologna, Modena, Udine, Parma and London.
The Controversial 1989 Carbon 14 Test Results

Dating of the cloth has been surrounded by controversy since 1989, when a Carbon 14 test dated it to the 13th century, prompting a flood of articles proclaiming it a fake. Even currently, some of the most “popular” resources report the controversial 1989 Carbon 14 results as definitive.

Now, most scientists and scholars consider the results of this test worthless due to sampling issues. This result prompted an increase in research and generated new data coming from four new testing methods (see Section III here).
The Four New Dating Tests

There are four other dating tests performed on fibers from the Shroud (discussed in Section II and III here):

A vanillin test by Dr. Raymond Rogers.
Two spectroscopic analyses (of Dr. Giulio Fanti, et al.)
The compressibility and breaking strength tests (of Dr. Giulio Fanti, et al.). The results indicate a midpoint average of 50 A.D. (plus or minus 200 years) with a 96% confidence level.

The Three External Evidences

In addition to the new dating tests, there are also three types of external evidence indicating 1st century origin (see section IV here).

Pollen grains unique to Judea.
Roman coins on the eyes of the image—minted by Pontius Pilate in 29 A.D. in Judea.
Correspondences with another relic, the Sudarium Christi, including: similar pollen grains, 124 exact matches to wounds on the Shroud, and the same AB blood type. Its documented existence began in the 600’s AD making the Shroud at least that old and definitely not a medieval forgery.

ch_-3-chrys-1© 1997 Alan Whanger

One more external evidence worth noting is that the reflectance spectrometry revealed dirt on the nose, knee, and heel that containing a form of travertine aragonite—a rare limestone identical to that found in Jerusalem (see page 16 here).
Learn More About the Shroud of Turin

If you would like to learn more about the Shroud of Turin, see the 5 other articles in this series:

What is the Shroud of Turin? Here’s What Science Says.
History of the Shroud of Turin (Cutting through the Controversy!)
Where Did the Shroud of Turin Come From?
How Did the Shroud of Turin Get Its Image? (Hint: think radiation.)
Facts About the Shroud of Turin (Age, Dimensions, Blood Stains)

shroud-of-turin-blood-stains-cta

Cover image: Researcher Mark Evans examines the Shroud of Turin with a special photographic microscope during the 1978 scientific examination of the cloth / © 1978 Barrie M. Schwortz Collection, STERA, Inc. All Rights Reserved


Magis Center

The mission of the Magis Center is to create content that helps people find higher purpose in life, an awareness of their transcendent dignity, a sense of the transcendent providential power who guides them, and a determination to live ethically responsible lives. To that end, the Magis Center produces and distributes media that provides contemporary commentary on timeless topics.
Categories

Science, Reason & Faith
Virtue & Freedom
Evidence for God
Philosophy
Faith

see all
Recent Posts

Fr. Spitzer to Offer Course on Faith and Science at New Online Academy

July 12, 2021

Why Trust the Catholic Church (in Good Times and in Bad)?

July 08, 2021

Maybe I’m The Problem

July 02, 2021

Aesthetics and Spirituality Part IV: Tombs

June 28, 2021

4 Major Differences Between Human and Artificial Intelligence

June 22, 2021
 
Dec 9, 2011
14,127
1,803
113
#53
For those of you saying it doesn't matter, let me ask you something. Does truth matter to you?

If someone's out there peddling a lie don't you want to know? I'm not saying it's a lie, I'm just saying it's worth talking about and it's worth investigating. Those who say the Shroud of Turin holds a genuine depiction of Jesus of Nazareth make a very extraordinary claim. If it's true it should hold up to scrutiny.

I can accept the truth one way or another; but what I can't understand are those who say truth doesn't matter.
Are you Catholic?:)
 
Jun 22, 2020
1,231
741
113
Australia
#54
I challenge you to show me where I am claiming 100% that its fake
You also think its possible. Then we are in agreement

The fact that you are so wrong in your estimations shows a clear lack of logic on your part :oops::rolleyes::oops:
Well then... You could be talking about yourself because we are in agreement from what i understand... Both of us think there is a possibility of the shroud being authentic if you really say your not 100%

And my logic is baby grade stuff... Easy to comprehend. Used in civil our court rooms
If its fake then show me how... Its quite simple for anyone with half a brain

So i guess my question now would be why are you so against the shroud if your not 100% sure its fake?
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#55
Luke mentions spices but it's not describing the same thing John does. John describes Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus wrapping Jesus in 75 pounds of spices. The women who prepared spices in Luke 23 didn't get a chance to use them. Thus in Luke there's no mention of Jesus being wrapped with spices.
probably because by the time the women got there Nicodemus had already done it the night before.
Come on use your brain.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#56
It's possible I guess.
sure you could do it, go make one.

Im surprised Madame Tussauds doesnt have a waxwork dummy spouting real blood.

Apparently another museum is repurposing a Tom Cruise dummy as Jesus.

Doesn't Jesus reminded you of Tom Cruise?

anyway, link to where someone's recreated the shroud. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-shroud-idUSTRE5943HL20091005
Its like people who wanna believe in crop circles were made by aliens. When it was totally some guys going round smashing wheat with a board.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,312
3,618
113
#57
probably because by the time the women got there Nicodemus had already done it the night before.
Come on use your brain.
lol, use my brain.

According to John they did it the night before, but the synoptics are totally silent; and they say a different type of burial cloth was used. The question is: Why are the synoptics different?

We can't assume Nicodemus did it the night before when there's no evidence (except in John's gospel). If it wasn't for John it wouldn't even be a question.

The fact before us is: the synoptics differ significantly from John on this matter, that's undeniable. The question is why?
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
#58
lol, use my brain.

According to John they did it the night before, but the synoptics are totally silent; and they say a different type of burial cloth was used. The question is: Why are the synoptics different?

We can't assume Nicodemus did it the night before when there's no evidence (except in John's gospel). If it wasn't for John it wouldn't even be a question.

The fact before us is: the synoptics differ significantly from John on this matter, that's undeniable. The question is why?
you are clearly not using your brain.

I just explained to you why accounts are different. Do you think everyone remebers things exactly the same or has the EXACT same point of view as you do? speaks the same language? does everything the exact same time as you do? are you a clone of someone else? NO!
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,312
3,618
113
#59
I just explained to you why accounts are different. Do you think everyone remebers things exactly the same or has the EXACT same point of view as you do? speaks the same language? does everything the exact same time as you do? are you a clone of someone else? NO!
I get it. However, as I said before, what we have is a bunch of people (the synoptics' sources) remembering things one way. For example, if we follow what you're saying to its logical conclusion we would have in Matthew: "Nicodemus brought 50 pounds of spices and wrapped Him in a shroud"; in Mark: "Nicodemus and John wrapped Him in linen cloths"; and Luke: "Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea wrapped Him a shroud along with 25 pounds of spices." That is, everyone remembering the event in their own way; but what we seem to have is a bunch of people remembering it the same way and John remembering it another.

I know a of of people believe Mark was the source for both Matthew and Luke, I'm not one of them. It doesn't make any sense that they would just follow Mark blindly without doing their own research and interviewing their own witnesses. This is evident because of the fact that each gospel account contains its own unique material.

For whatever it's worth, this doesn't cause me to doubt any of the gospel accounts, it's just that something doesn't make sense.

For some reason you seem to want to make this personal which doesn't interest me in the least, so I believe we're done here. God bless.
 

Adstar

Senior Member
Jul 24, 2016
7,582
3,616
113
#60
What do you make of the fact that the synoptics (Matthew, Mark and Luke) disagree with John on the method of burial?

The synoptics say He was wrapped in a "shroud" and John says he was wrapped "in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews."
Matthew 27: KJV
58 "He went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be delivered. {59} And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,"

So in Matthew there is no mention of a shroud.. All it says is clean linen cloth.. It does not mention the shape of the Linen..

Mark 15: KJV
45 "And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. {46} And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre."

So in Mark there is no mention of a shroud.. All it says linen .. It does not mention the shape of the Linen..

Luke 23: KJV
52 "This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. {53} And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid."

So in Luke there is no mention of a shroud.. All it says is linen .. It does not mention the shape of the Linen..