Knights Hid Holy Shroud, Vatican Says

  • Thread starter Thread starter OneTrueCathApos
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I definitely believe this is not a fake.

If this thing popped up in the twentieth century I would have serious doubts about it, that is not the case at all.

The image is a photographic negative, even today there are no camera devices that can fit a film that size and…supposing the front and back are the same person there is no way to explain the necessary light source, the light would have to have come from within the body, or statue, mannequin or model. The piece of cloth itself is so old no one knows for sure how old it is. The theories concerning photography are rather recent besides, as a hoax this would be way ahead of known technologies.

It seems like some kind of thermoprint. The idea that it is like atomic radiation from inside the form seems to make sense. Yet there is no ‘hot spot’, the image is uniform from top to toe. The form, or body, would have been uniformly ‘hot’.

There is no way to prove that this is the shroud of Jesus, and there is no way to prove that this is an image of Jesus. But if it is not, then what could it be?

Michael
 
kalt said:
Then why are you so upset that someone else doubts its authenticity? You admit that you believe it is real, and that if it isn’t your faith is unchanged.

I say that it’s probably a fake, and that if it is real, my faith will remain unchanged.

So really, what difference does it make if it’s real or fake? If it doesn’t change faith, it doesn’t really matter.

You asked if I would be in awe if it were real and I saw it in person.

I was in awe when I saw Lincoln’s hat in person. And my state’s charter. And the prehistoric artifacts in museums. I was especially in awe when I was able to handle the replicas of Lucy and other pre-human fossils, including Neandertal bones.

Being able to see artifacts from the past irl vs on TV or in books, is an experience that you might not understand if you haven’t experienced it.

So, if the shroud were real, I would be in awe to see it in person. To know that Jesus touched it would be amazing. But it’s not necessary. I doubt I would take a trip just to see itm unless they put it in a traveling exhibit and it came fairly close to home.
Click to expand...
I am not upset because you don’t believe in the authenticity of the Shroud, I was only curious has to why you perceive it as a fake. Also, you stated that it did not matter whether it was real or not, and well, to tell you the truth, I was a bit flabbergasted by this remark, because if it were discovered to be real, it would validate everything you had believed on faith alone and other things we could not have known (like how he looked). It rather humbles me to know that Jesus allowed us to retain an image of himself, I see the Shroud has a gift.
 
josie_L said:
It would reinforce your faith, as I think it was intended to do. And to give you/us a beautiful glimpse of our beloved Saviour.

P.S. Imagine all those skeptical people beholding the Shroud, who knows how many have or will be effected by its authenticity? I know it is real, the evidence is overwhelming.
Click to expand...
Josie, I share the idea that it would be marvelous to find proof that the shroud was in fact from the time of Jesus. Much more than that, I suspect cannot be proven. Of seminal importance to me, is that the Vatican has been conducting examinations of it, for how long now, and still they refuse to validate it. That does give one pause.

And I suspect, since no one can ever really prove it was Jesus’ shroud, no one who would not otherwise be convinced will change their mind, and actually, to base one’s faith on such a thing would be problematical itself.

If somehow it makes you feel stronger in your faith, then I guess it can be a good thing, but I really question why it would.
 
OneTrueCathApos said:
Like I said, you don’t want to know the truth in anything Catholic. you can’t even answer my questions. And since I started this thread, it only makes sense if you refrain from it because I will defend this true burial cloth of Christ if you continue to insult it.
Click to expand...

It’s only a bit of fabric, for crying out loud - what’s it going to: send a plague on the OP ? It’s not animate - it’s an object, without any inherent virtue, power, or any such thing. (And that, BTW, is Catholic teaching: relics & images & artifacts, no matter how venerable or sacred, have no inherent power, grace, or virtue in them, none at all. That’s why sacramentals are valuable only so far as they used devoutly. That cloth is a sacramental at most - not a sacrament,​

How can a bit of cloth be “insulted” ? LOL.
 
mark_a said:
I never knew this part of the story. If the story is as simple as it sounds, we should return it.

I’m curious as to how the Shroud came to be in posession of Constantinople.
Click to expand...

There’s a theory that it’s the same object as the mandylion of Edessa, which is said to have been venerated there in the sixth century:​

It would be interesting if the Oviedo Cloth were “part of the mix” as well:
 
SpiritMeadow said:
Josie, I share the idea that it would be marvelous to find proof that the shroud was in fact from the time of Jesus. Much more than that, I suspect cannot be proven. Of seminal importance to me, is that the Vatican has been conducting examinations of it, for how long now, and still they refuse to validate it. That does give one pause.

And I suspect, since no one can ever really prove it was Jesus’ shroud, no one who would not otherwise be convinced will change their mind, and actually, to base one’s faith on such a thing would be problematical itself.

If somehow it makes you feel stronger in your faith, then I guess it can be a good thing, but I really question why it would.
Click to expand...
I never stated that I base my faith on the shroud, but the shroud and other miraculous events have had a positive effect on people’s faith and those who didn’t have faith. There is nothing wrong with this.
 
SpiritMeadow said:
Josie, I share the idea that it would be marvelous to find proof that the shroud was in fact from the time of Jesus. Much more than that, I suspect cannot be proven. Of seminal importance to me, is that the Vatican has been conducting examinations of it, for how long now, and still they refuse to validate it. That does give one pause.

And I suspect, since no one can ever really prove it was Jesus’ shroud, no one who would not otherwise be convinced will change their mind, and actually, to base one’s faith on such a thing would be problematical itself.

If somehow it makes you feel stronger in your faith, then I guess it can be a good thing, but I really question why it would.
Click to expand...

How can anything prove true what is believed by faith ? That surely is a*** horrible*** idea. A faith that can be shown to be true or valid is not faith - it’s a riddle or a code or something like that; something that depends on human cleverness. But not everyone is clever; & the world is not saved by​

human cleverness but by God’s foolishness. A faith based on human cleverness leaves those who are not clever, whereas faith may be given to absolutely anyone. Love does not need proof - and love, surely, is what is at the heart of Christian faith, “not that we loved God, but that God first Loved us…”.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

There’s a theory that it’s the same object as the mandylion of Edessa, which is said to have been venerated there in the sixth century:​

It would be interesting if the Oviedo Cloth were “part of the mix” as well:
Click to expand...
The veil of Veronica is something of a mythical tale. I am not saying for sure that it is not true, but the story is classically mythical.

The name veronica actually means “True Image” or “the very image”. So right there that tells us that we don’t really know her name.

If it is a true story, then the same process that created the shroud could have created this image, some sort of radiance.

On the other hand, it could be a folk tale around the existence of the shroud. In the ‘Middle’ Ages the shroud was mostly known in it’s folded form, with the face out and had been largely inaccessible. Most people had not actually seen it, but knew of it as a story.

I think the disappearance of the veil, and then the burning of all copies is rather odd. I have to wonder if the veil that disappeared was actually a reproduction of the shroud image and as it aged and deteriorated it was mistaken for a fake.

The Sudarium is indeed an interesting study. I was not aware of it before…very impressive.
 
I believe it is real, if it isnt then why does science have no way of explaining what they’ve studied about it?
 
I don’t think a lot of people realize the significance of what we’re (sturp team) dealing with. People say , “well that’s nice”, which is characteristic of the attitude of our times. But if you assume that this is Christ; and this body left the cloth without any indication of decay; and whatever happened to this body that caused it to leave a photographic negative on the cloth; well, what we’re dealing here with quite simply is Christ’s promise of eternal life.
 
Right_Glory said:
You again manage to come off more like a child with hurt feeling than an apologist. Your almost comical anger at everything is probably not the best way to win people over.
Click to expand...
Call it what you may, I am not trying to win people over, if they remain ignorant it really isn’t my problem. Most here who are non-Catholic have trouble with my posts…:yawn:
 
OneTrueCathApos said:
I don’t think a lot of people realize the significance of what we’re (sturp team) dealing with. People say , “well that’s nice”, which is characteristic of the attitude of our times. But if you assume that this is Christ; and this body left the cloth without any indication of decay; and whatever happened to this body that caused it to leave a photographic negative on the cloth; well, what we’re dealing here with quite simply is Christ’s promise of eternal life.
Click to expand...
With or without the cloth, we know Christ’s promise of eternal life.
 
**JERUSALEM:

Images of flower and pollen samples that appear on the Shroud of Turin are those of plant species that grow in the area of Jerusalem, says an Israeli botanist. “The assemblage of plants…shows (the Shroud) could only come from the Middle East, and the best fit is Jerusalem”, said Hebrew University Professor Avinoam Danin, an expert on the flora of the Holy Land. Some 96% of the 28 flower species identified on the Shroud grow between Jerusalem and the Qumran Caves. Add the Dead Sea area to the equation and 100% of the species are found, said Danin.

**But I bet one of you here will knock this information.
Oh ye of little faith.
 
josie_L said:
I never stated that I base my faith on the shroud, but the shroud and other miraculous events have had a positive effect on people’s faith and those who didn’t have faith. There is nothing wrong with this.
Click to expand...
Josie, I surely suggested nothing like that.I merely indicate that given the limitations of what can ever be proven, it is most unlikely that it could bring a non-believer to faith. And one would seriously question what faith that would be in any case. I agree it can have a positive effect, of some minimal value to those who already believe I guess, as any sacramental can.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

How can anything prove true what is believed by faith ? That surely is a*** horrible*** idea. A faith that can be shown to be true or valid is not faith - it’s a riddle or a code or something like that; something that depends on human cleverness. But not everyone is clever; & the world is not saved by​

human cleverness but by God’s foolishness. A faith based on human cleverness leaves those who are not clever, whereas faith may be given to absolutely anyone. Love does not need proof - and love, surely, is what is at the heart of Christian faith, “not that we loved God, but that God first Loved us…”.
Click to expand...
My point exactly! The best that can ever be accomplished is proof that the shroud was made at the time of Jesus. That is not much I would say. I have pointed out many times here that faith is meant to be faith, and there is no proof of anything, and that is the way it is meant to be by God. You are 100% correct by my estimation.
 
SpiritMeadow said:
My point exactly! The best that can ever be accomplished is proof that the shroud was made at the time of Jesus. That is not much I would say. I have pointed out many times here that faith is meant to be faith, and there is no proof of anything, and that is the way it is meant to be by God. You are 100% correct by my estimation.
Click to expand...
Of course she is, you both have little faith.
 
I don’t understand why people are saying that if you believe in the shroud then you have no faith. My faith is very strong regardless if the shroud is real or not. I dont understand why people keep trying to revolve the shroud around faith.
 
John89 said:
I don’t understand why people are saying that if you believe in the shroud then you have no faith. My faith is very strong regardless if the shroud is real or not. I dont understand why people keep trying to revolve the shroud around faith.
Click to expand...
You want to know why John?? It is because this Shroud is the greatest gift (beside the Holy Mass…) that Christ could of left us. This IS the burial cloth of Jesus. Too much evidence points to this. My faith is also strong regardless, but the point is if Christ left this for us, and I know he did, why do you doubt it?
 
Yeah, it seems people are trying to indicate that we’re trying to find proof in the shroud so that it can reassure our faith… I dont understand why its so hard for them to believe its authenticity, after everything ive seen on the shroud and everything ive heard the sturp team say, to me it seems 100% real, it truly is a gift.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top