Shroud of Turin—real or fake, and why?

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

So do you think this is the shroud? I still disagree that it is.
People will start to worship and hold this as a holy relic like the saints bones and such.
I don't believe it's a counterfeit but a 1 in a million happenstance.

Yeah I think it's the real deal.

 

[Cranberry]

So do you think this is the shroud? I still disagree that it is.
People will start to worship and hold this as a holy relic like the saints bones and such.
I don't believe it's a counterfeit but a 1 in a million happenstance.

The Bible exists as evidence in writing of Jesus' existence and teachings. Though today there are different versions relating the history and words of our one and only God. People believe the Bible.

I think our Father knows we are people who sometimes need to see to believe.

I'm thinking of the Apostle known as doubting Thomas. Who didn't think their risen Lord appearing in the upper room and not by way of the door was post-crucifixion Jesus.
That is until Jesus guided the hand of Thomas to his wounds.

I think the shroud is authentic. The fibers impregnated with the image of Jesus through photon energy therein penetrating the core of every fiber with his image is not the stuff of early century fraud. In my opinion.

Rather,it is God's will and work insuring in the future when time passed and technology allowed, future doubting Thomas' would know Jesus was real. And his death and resurrection was too.

 

[ZNP]

There are two items, the head covering which has a documented history all the way back to the crucifixion so that is considered real and the Shroud. The Shroud has the same blood type as the head covering and the odds of that are 1 in 10. Most would have expected a fraud to use animal blood, not human, and yet the odds of a scam artist getting the right blood type when they don't even know about blood type is not great. They found pollen from 70 different plants that flower at the time of Passover in Jerusalem, so that is pretty conclusive that the Shroud was in Jerusalem during Passover. They also found limestone fragments that matches the limestone in Golgotha (limestone has trace elements that make every outcrop unique). So if it is a fraud this was done with real human blood that just happened to be the same blood type as Jesus and they then laid this in a tomb in Golgotha. The weave of the fabric is correct for the time of Jesus' crucifixion and the thread is from Egypt. So if this was a fraud they had to have been an expert in textiles to recreate the weave. It was done properly according to the Jewish tradition so they had to have been well educated in Rabbinical law. They also had to be an expert seamstress to sew that strip back on, and we still don't know why anyone would do that for something that was fraudulent. From the blood stains on the back they were able to match the wounds to the instruments the Romans used to scourge criminals, so if it is fraudulent they had to have access to Roman artifacts.

One theory is that they just took the shroud off of another person who was crucified, but that doesn't work. For many years people complained about the account saying you wouldn't scourge someone that was going to be crucified. Not only so there is evidence of a thorn bush put on the head of this victim. So how many people were crucified around Passover in Jerusalem that were also scourged and had a crown of thorns on their head?

There are other details as well. The nail wounds were accurate and not done according to the paintings. That is important because you would think a fraudster would try to replicate what people expect to see. There is also evidence of a serious bruise to one knee matching the account where Jesus stumbled. Also the wounds on one shoulder seemed mashed down compared to the other, which could be a result of His carrying the cross. Like I said, if you think it is fraudulent the forger was meticulous at hitting every detail.

But suppose it is fraudulent. What happened to the real Shroud? They kept the face covering all these years as a holy relic. Does anyone really think they just threw out the Shroud? So what happened to it?

One other very interesting point is that all the artwork of Jesus has many different renditions of his face for the first 200 years after the crucifixion, but then suddenly it is as though all the artists are using the image on the Shroud for their face of Jesus. Very peculiar. The reason this is so peculiar is that forgeries are done to make money. But there is no account of anyone two hundred years after the crucifixion trying to make money off of the Shroud. So you are looking at the greatest forgery of all time but the dumbest forger?

Now I appreciate that many people do not need the Shroud to be real to believe in Jesus and His resurrection from the dead. But what about Doubting Thomas? The Lord provided physical evidence for him to believe. If the Shroud causes some to believe, why wouldn't God do that?

 

[Cranberry]

There are two items, the head covering which has a documented history all the way back to the crucifixion so that is considered real and the Shroud. The Shroud has the same blood type as the head covering and the odds of that are 1 in 10. Most would have expected a fraud to use animal blood, not human, and yet the odds of a scam artist getting the right blood type when they don't even know about blood type is not great. They found pollen from 70 different plants that flower at the time of Passover in Jerusalem, so that is pretty conclusive that the Shroud was in Jerusalem during Passover. They also found limestone fragments that matches the limestone in Golgotha (limestone has trace elements that make every outcrop unique). So if it is a fraud this was done with real human blood that just happened to be the same blood type as Jesus and they then laid this in a tomb in Golgotha. The weave of the fabric is correct for the time of Jesus' crucifixion and the thread is from Egypt. So if this was a fraud they had to have been an expert in textiles to recreate the weave. It was done properly according to the Jewish tradition so they had to have been well educated in Rabbinical law. They also had to be an expert seamstress to sew that strip back on, and we still don't know why anyone would do that for something that was fraudulent. From the blood stains on the back they were able to match the wounds to the instruments the Romans used to scourge criminals, so if it is fraudulent they had to have access to Roman artifacts.

One theory is that they just took the shroud off of another person who was crucified, but that doesn't work. For many years people complained about the account saying you wouldn't scourge someone that was going to be crucified. Not only so there is evidence of a thorn bush put on the head of this victim. So how many people were crucified around Passover in Jerusalem that were also scourged and had a crown of thorns on their head?

There are other details as well. The nail wounds were accurate and not done according to the paintings. That is important because you would think a fraudster would try to replicate what people expect to see. There is also evidence of a serious bruise to one knee matching the account where Jesus stumbled. Also the wounds on one shoulder seemed mashed down compared to the other, which could be a result of His carrying the cross. Like I said, if you think it is fraudulent the forger was meticulous at hitting every detail.

But suppose it is fraudulent. What happened to the real Shroud? They kept the face covering all these years as a holy relic. Does anyone really think they just threw out the Shroud? So what happened to it?

One other very interesting point is that all the artwork of Jesus has many different renditions of his face for the first 200 years after the crucifixion, but then suddenly it is as though all the artists are using the image on the Shroud for their face of Jesus. Very peculiar. The reason this is so peculiar is that forgeries are done to make money. But there is no account of anyone two hundred years after the crucifixion trying to make money off of the Shroud. So you are looking at the greatest forgery of all time but the dumbest forger?

Now I appreciate that many people do not need the Shroud to be real to believe in Jesus and His resurrection from the dead. But what about Doubting Thomas? The Lord provided physical evidence for him to believe. If the Shroud causes some to believe, why wouldn't God do that?

This is the 3D image Ray Downing extrapolated from the shroud.

 

[Gideon300]

When I taught forensics I picked three examples for forensic studies and we did a month long dive in each one. JFK assassination, 911 and the Shroud of Turin.

JFK obviously a good example of an assassination with just a whole lot of evidence left behind.

911 was both an engineering problem, a fire problem and a bomb problem.

Shroud of Turin was an example of studying artifacts to determine if they are authentic. More studies have been done on the Shroud of Turin than any other artifact. As one of the investigators said, they would have authenticated it long ago if it were not for the fact that the implication of authenticating it was so big.

Personally I became convinced it is authentic. But what I would tell others is that either this item is authentic or we are dealing with the single best counterfeit in human history. If you think this was a counterfeit then you must also agree that the counterfeiter was the most stupid and foolish counterfeiter in human history. He had to have been long dead before this ever was used. I also pointed out that according to the rules of forensic analysis of artifacts no one can claim this item is a forgery. The reason is that before saying an item is a forgery you have to demonstrate how it was done and no one has been able to do that.

I doubt it is genuine. Calvin doubted its authenticity also. He pointed out that the shroud does not represent the actual burial practices of Jesus' time. You might recall that the disciples saw the burial cloths folded up in the tomb.

"The cloth that had been around Jesus’ head was rolled up, lying separate from the linen cloths." (John 20:7)

It would be amazing if the image on the shroud was preserved when the cloth was rolled up. And the shroud itself appears to be a single piece, not two pieces.

My main objection is again from scripture. According to Isaiah 52:14, the face and body of the Lord Jesus was disfigured more than any man. I don't see that in the shroud image.

 

[JohnDB]

According to the Jewish burial custom of the time, bodies were wrapped in strips of cloth. For example, in John 11:44, Lazarus is described as being wrapped in "linen strips."

But the accounts in the gospels differ. The synoptics take their cues from Mark, saying He was wrapped in a linen shroud provided by Joseph of Arimathea. John, however, says "they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews."

In John 20:6-7, when Peter and John rushed to the tomb, it says: "Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself."

If there was a face cloth that was separate from the rest, then this obviously couldn't refer to the Shroud of Turin since it (the Shroud of Turin) is all one piece. John's gospel is the only one that records this detail.

I have mixed feelings. The shroud is a negative image of a person. If it's a forgery, how would that have even been done (in negative I mean)? But the idea of a single piece of cloth runs counter to the burial customs of the Jews at the time. However, Matthew, Mark and Luke says they wrapped Him in a linen shroud.

What are your opinions?

The shroud only shows the front of a person....not the back or sides. And the figure has a beard, Jesus's was pulled out as a form of humiliation.

That's the first clue it's a "fake" of sorts but in truth is simply reported as something it is not.

What it truly is....
A linen cloth used to cover an oil painting as was created during the first reformation.

The 3-D effect caused by the sun shining on the painting while the cloth covered it from sun up to sunset.
I'm forgetting the name of the painting....but they know the life sized picture that is an exact match. Paintings were very expensive to commission or replace. And the paints used were subject to bleaching and fading by the sun...so it was common for people to cover paintings when not on display.

The "shroud" was repaired at some point....as there has been a chemical analysis performed by laying tape strips across the fabric and analyzing what came off the cloth.
The "blood" on tbe cloth has iron in it similar to what exists in blood....but blood was used as a pigment for early paints...

There also exists all sorts of pollens and etc. But it's not Egyptian cotton. Dutch cotton. Egyptian cotton is antiseptic and unique. This ain't that.

But it is interesting to look at. And people have forever been selling "artifacts" of miracles God has performed. This is the origin of the Gospel of Thomas, Mary, and other relics like crucifixion spikes.

 

[Boughtwithaprice]

According to the Jewish burial custom of the time, bodies were wrapped in strips of cloth. For example, in John 11:44, Lazarus is described as being wrapped in "linen strips."

But the accounts in the gospels differ. The synoptics take their cues from Mark, saying He was wrapped in a linen shroud provided by Joseph of Arimathea. John, however, says "they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews."

In John 20:6-7, when Peter and John rushed to the tomb, it says: "Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself."

If there was a face cloth that was separate from the rest, then this obviously couldn't refer to the Shroud of Turin since it (the Shroud of Turin) is all one piece. John's gospel is the only one that records this detail.

I have mixed feelings. The shroud is a negative image of a person. If it's a forgery, how would that have even been done (in negative I mean)? But the idea of a single piece of cloth runs counter to the burial customs of the Jews at the time. However, Matthew, Mark and Luke says they wrapped Him in a linen shroud.

What are your opinions?

There is a face cloth, that has been believed to be the one that covered Jesus' head, which has blood stains that match the blood stains on the shroud of Turin. (I seem to recall it's been under the care of some church somewhere, I had an article on it, but I'm currently in a weak wifi zone and can't look it up.)

Some of the research I've read on the shroud is that there is evidence of radioactive influence and that the back panel indicates that the body imprinted was not lying on a surface, but seems to indicate the body was likely "levitating" when the image was imprinted.

Also, I read that there were traces of flower petals that are only found in the vicinity of Jerusalem.

Of course, all so-called "evidence," is subject to the interpretation of the researchers. I would never assert that it's real or fabricated; but, in opinion, (as you've asked for), I think that it's likely the real thing, providing the analysis hasn't been fabricated.

 

[posthuman]

I have mixed feelings. The shroud is a negative image of a person. If it's a forgery, how would that have even been done (in negative I mean)?

by soaking the cloth in silver oxide and then exposing it to light through a pinhole, on the other side of which is an actual corpse. you'd get a reversed, negative image, just like photo film.

like a primitive camera - - all of which techniques were known ((and kept by guilds)) in the 12th-13th century, which some dating puts the cloth at.

 

[posthuman]

The Catholic church -- since its inception -- majored on superstitions, and relics were a part of those superstitions. The Shroud is is one of those relics.

one thing i've learned recently from church history courses, is that every catholic altar must contain a relic of some kind.

this is because of their belief in transubstantiation. their tradition ((and i doubt every catholic believes this, that they even know it - so don't go around beating them up with it.. )) is that the power to turn the bread and wine into the flesh and blood of God comes from the mystical power of the objects. in short, the relics are magical totems that cause miracles.

paganism at its finest. the RCC spent a few hundred years in very, very dark places, and it had never yet shaken all the yuck off of itself. too invested, at this point.


so to your point, @Nehemiah6, for quite a while the rcc created an economy of relics, after they came up with this. no church could be built without one, and the more fantastic the better. there are enough 'pieces of the cross' out there to build a 3 story farmhouse.

how much do we believe any of this isn't fake? be skeptical, is all i'm saying.

 

[posthuman]

by soaking the cloth in silver oxide and then exposing it to light through a pinhole, on the other side of which is an actual corpse. you'd get a reversed, negative image, just like photo fi

BTW if this is how it was done, you'd probably also get a suspiciously European looking corpse, because it would have been done for a specifically European audience and most likely accomplished in an European country, where people with this kind of skill and know-how lived, and your access to a man you could maim and whose body you could spend a week exposing proto-photo-film to, would probably be also European, not Jewish.

ever wonder why probably all the pictures of Jesus you know of are blonde hair, blue eyes, and Renaissance-style classically attractive?

 

[ZNP]

Yes, reading from the comments of those who do not think it is real, same way I felt before looking into the research that was done, I have seen the same thing among all those who think it is a fake. They have not read the research. They always assume the scientists must have been complete idiots to not know if the image was a crude photo negative.

It is very sad to see people spouting ignorant opinions when the research has been fully documented and if you don't like to read there are several documentary movies made.

 

[Cranberry]

Yes, reading from the comments of those who do not think it is real, same way I felt before looking into the research that was done, I have seen the same thing among all those who think it is a fake. They have not read the research. They always assume the scientists must have been complete idiots to not know if the image was a crude photo negative.

It is very sad to see people spouting ignorant opinions when the research has been fully documented and if you don't like to read there are several documentary movies made.

Indeed.

Though I don't think it should come as that much of a surprise if we take a moment to reflect upon our encounters with those who don't believe God's word teaches what is written.

In my experience encountering skeptics that deny what is written in reams of research regarding the authenticity of the shroud that wrapped the body of The Word made flesh isn't a real stretch.

 

[daisyseesthesun]

The web says the Shroud of Turin will be viewable this 2025 it will be for the the first time in 10 years. The official site for the shroud is The Shroud of Turin Website - Home Page Shroud studies

According to AI our Lord Jesus Christ looked like this

 

[Leastofall]

The Bible exists as evidence in writing of Jesus' existence and teachings. Though today there are different versions relating the history and words of our one and only God. People believe the Bible.

I think our Father knows we are people who sometimes need to see to believe.

I'm thinking of the Apostle known as doubting Thomas. Who didn't think their risen Lord appearing in the upper room and not by way of the door was post-crucifixion Jesus.
That is until Jesus guided the hand of Thomas to his wounds.

I think the shroud is authentic. The fibers impregnated with the image of Jesus through photon energy therein penetrating the core of every fiber with his image is not the stuff of early century fraud. In my opinion.

Rather,it is God's will and work insuring in the future when time passed and technology allowed, future doubting Thomas' would know Jesus was real. And his death and resurrection was too.

I respect your position on this matter...I have no real evidence to debate such a issue as this. The evidence is strong in its authentication.
Perhaps your theory is right but I didn't need this personally to believe the death and resurrection of our Lord.
Granted there are some that are like minded as Thomas and if this is a testament from the Lord glory to him.

 

[Leastofall]

BTW if this is how it was done, you'd probably also get a suspiciously European looking corpse, because it would have been done for a specifically European audience and most likely accomplished in an European country, where people with this kind of skill and know-how lived, and your access to a man you could maim and whose body you could spend a week exposing proto-photo-film to, would probably be also European, not Jewish.

ever wonder why probably all the pictures of Jesus you know of are blonde hair, blue eyes, and Renaissance-style classically attractive?

In Ireland he has red hair and green eyes 🤑

 

[ewq1938]

 

[ResidentAlien]

Three of the gospel accounts (Matthew, Mark & Luke) state that Jesus was wrapped in a linen cloth; and one (John) states He was wrapped in linen strips according to the custom of the Jews. John 20:6-7 describes what Peter saw when he entered the tomb: a pile of linen cloths and a separate head cloth neatly folded in another place. When I went searching for information on ancient Jewish burial customs, some sources said they wrapped the body in a single shirt-like cloth and others say they used linen strips. But one thing they all agree on is the use of a separate covering for the head.

Personally I believe John, that linen strips were used. John sometimes fills in missing details, like the sabbath following Jesus' crucifixion being a high sabbath; and his account of Peter entering the tomb and seeing the linen lying there. If anyone would've had knowledge of Jewish burial customs of the time it would be someone who was actually there. I honestly don't know why the synoptics say it was a single cloth; I just believe the case for John's account is stronger.

If there was a separate head cloth, then the shroud couldn't possibly be authentic.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Personally I believe John, that linen strips were used. John sometimes fills in missing details, like the sabbath following Jesus' crucifixion being a high sabbath; and his account of Peter entering the tomb and seeing the linen lying there. If anyone would've had knowledge of Jewish burial customs of the time it would be someone who was actually there. I honestly don't know why the synoptics say it was a single cloth; I just believe the case for John's account is stronger.

If there was a separate head cloth, then the shroud couldn't possibly be authentic.

Please describe what σουδάριον (soudarion) and ὀθόνιον (othonion) looked like and how they were used.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

I think what likely happened is that Joseph of Arimathaea laid Jesus on the shroud lengthwise and then folded it over his head to cover his front, and left it like that because there was no time before dark to fully prepare his body. It makes no sense otherwise for the image on the shroud to me like it is.

Then the 2 Marys returned 2 days later with spices to prepare the body, which then would have been wrapped with the shroud. But that never happened because Jesus was no longer dead. It makes no sense that Joseph would have wrapped the body if further preparation was needed, which it obviously was.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

I think what likely happened is that Joseph of Arimathaea laid Jesus on the shroud lengthwise and then folded it over his head to cover his front, and left it like that because there was no time before dark to fully prepare his body. It makes no sense otherwise for the image on the shroud to me like it is.

Then the 2 Marys returned 2 days later with spices to prepare the body, which then would have been wrapped with the shroud. But that never happened because Jesus was no longer dead. It makes no sense that Joseph would have wrapped the body if further preparation was needed, which it obviously was.

This would also explain why the napkin, which supposedly was used to wipe sweat and blood from the body, was still in the tomb, ie they were coming back later to finish the job. Also it was off to the side and not with the shroud, which makes sense