The Shroud of Turin: What's Your Opinion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheOldColonel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TheOldColonel

Guest
What do you believe about the Shroud of Turin? Scientific tests do not seem to agree with tradition on the topic. But I’ve yet to draw a conclusion.
 
If it’s real - AWESOME!

If it’s fake - I know the Church would not willingly deceive me,
(EDIT- not an accurate statement, see post 12 for more)
and take its preservation and veneration as an honest mistake.

It’s still an amazing image, either way.
 
Last edited:
I feel the same way. I think I would still like the shroud even if it was proven not to be real. But it would be nice to know. Thank you.
 
If it’s real it’s both an incredible icon and a piece of evidence for the Lords Passion and a first class relic.

If it’s “fake” then it’s simply just another holy icon - no different from any other holy icon which we venerate.
 
Last edited:
I always come back to the idea that scientific tests may not really apply to miraculous events because the very miracle itself changes the item in ways beyond the laws of physics as we know them.
 
The story of the shroud has gotten more and more interesting as the technology that has been developed in the last 100 years has tested the shroud’s authenticity.

I remember the 1988 testing, and the ensuing head scratching. That test has since been determined to be flawed. In addition, the flawed testing spurred on newer more technologically advanced tests that took greater precautions with the methodology.

The more testing the shroud undergoes, the more difficult it would seemingly be to prove that it is a fake.
 
We’d be smart to take our lead from the Church on this question.

Simply treat the Shroud as a holy icon - nothing more, nothing less.
 
I basically agree with Maximilian.

Also, I think there is a reason why Jesus walked the earth, and things like the Shroud arose, back in times that didn’t have the greatest historical record or a bunch of newsmen videotaping everything and subjecting it to scientific tests. God didn’t want to make things too easy. He wanted to see who would believe in the absence of proof.
 
Maximilian75 said:
If it’s fake - I know the Church would not willingly deceive me, and take its preservation and veneration as an honest mistake.
Click to expand...
The Church does not say it is genuine. It does not take a position. The Shroud is not part of the Deposit of Faith or any Church teachings. Catholics may believe it is real or not.
I believe it to be a medieval piece of art only.
Before all the fanatical believers jump in with all the so-called evidence in the cosmos that they post in every thread about the Shroud it has NOT been proven to even be 2000 years old never mind being the actual burial cloth of Christ.
This will be my one and only post because the thread will undoubtedly become heated over something that is not required for our faith or salvation.
 
Last edited:
I never knew that. Thank you for enlightening me- I will edit my post as such
 
It is the real deal.

Look what they found

The Shroud of Turin: Detailed Analysis

 
I totally agree! The burst of light when He rose through the fabric.
 
I view the Shroud of Turin in much the same way as the Tilma of Guadalupe. Way too many unanswered questions that continues to baffle many scientists. I’m a firm believer in the authenticity of both of these awesome relics.
 
It’s not faith to believe in made-up stories. Unless there’s truly good evidence, and not just speculation, it’s just a piece of marked cloth.

Believing every mysterious story you hear just because you believe in God and God’s capacity to work miracles is dangerous. You could end up being led astray by every quack and snake-oil salesman that comes along.

Better to believe in God and in the known works and words of God than in questionable or possibly superstitious claims, I think.
 
I did some personal research on it and believe it is probably real. If it was not than that would not effect my faith.
 
Last edited:
Actually this was updated. Apparently when they did the Carbon dating they accidently took the sample from a section which had been repaired in the 13th century. This fact did not come out to later. A story can be found on it here:


An updated story can be found here:


To Summarize from the later article:
Many experts have stood by a 1988 carbon-14 dating of scraps of the cloth carried out by labs in Oxford, Zurich and Arizona that dated it from 1260 to 1390, which, of course, would rule out its used during the time of Christ.

The new test, by scientists at the University of Padua in northern Italy, used the same fibers from the 1988 tests but disputes the findings. The new examination dates the shroud to between 300 BC and 400 AD, which would put it in the era of Christ.

It determined that the earlier results may have been skewed by contamination from fibers used to repair the cloth when it was damaged by fire in the Middle Ages, the British newspaper reported. The cloth has been kept at the cathedral since 1578.

He also said his tests also supported earlier results claiming to have found traces of dust and pollen on that shroud that could only have come from the Holy Land.

The latest findings are contained in a new Italian-language book — Il Mistero Della Sindone or The Mystery of the Shroud, by Giulio Fanti, a professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at Padua University, and Saverio Gaeta, a journalist.

Fanti, a Catholic, used infra-red light and spectroscopy – the measurement of radiation intensity through wavelengths – in his test. He said the results are the outcome of 15 years of research"
Click to expand...
So while again it is not a matter of faith that it is true, I think there is ample evidence that it may indeed by true.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top