The Shroud of Turin: What's Your Opinion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheOldColonel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pretty cool that the image is 5’11" to 6". I’ve seen that listed before. I’m 6’5". I wouldn’t want to be too much taller than our Lord 🙂
 
I’ve got some cool olivewood crosses I bought from Holy Land shops (I haven’t been to the Holy Land but they sell them online). It’s a pretty wood grain.
 
I do believe!

Scientific tests DO seem to agree with tradition. The original carbon dating sampling of the fabric was of a mended part of the fabric so was flawed. (Why did they mend it so meticulously?) We also have many reasons to believe it is the Shroud of Turin. The traveling of the shroud, the way the fabric is marked, the length of the body, and the very reason that it exists is the most compelling for me. It exists because it is sacred so people protected it. if something is special you don’t just throw it in the trash or discard it, you cherish it and protect it. The Jews and early Christians, and even todays modern Catholics consider the body to be sacred as well as the sacred burial cloths. There are many scriptures mentioning the burial cloths of Jesus so we know it was a very big deal to them to keep them preserved. So the early Christians, especially St. Paul, kept this Holy Relic for a very long time as a sign of the miracle of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. They wouldn’t have discarded it like any other cloth, no this was special and Holy! We know St. Paul, originally a scholarly Jew, went from town to town preaching of the Good News of Jesus Christ that Jesus Rose from the dead! Well I believe St. Paul used Jesus burial cloth to show just that! Picture St. Paul holding the Shroud up saying Jesus rose from the dead! And the movement of the Shroud prior to the middle ages suggests that St. Paul may have taken it on his evangelical journey. This scripture points to what I’m saying.

Acts 19: 8 Paul entered the synagogue and spoke boldly there for three months, arguing persuasively about the kingdom of God. 9 But some of them became obstinate; they refused to believe and publicly maligned the Way. So Paul left them. He took the disciples with him and had discussions daily in the lecture hall of Tyrannus. 10 This went on for two years, so that all the Jews and Greeks who lived in the province of Asia heard the word of the Lord.

11 God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, 12 so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them.

See the importance of cloth? Who’s to say those handkerchiefs weren’t the burial face cloths of Jesus, or, those cloths weren’t a second relic of the original linen soaked with Jesus blood (the Shroud)?? Miracles are the signs of Gods presence on earth and this one is a miracle.

This link describes the journey the Shroud took from where St. Paul would have preached till it’s present resting spot in Turin…

Journey of the Shroud
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the article which, btw, does not mention St. Paul, but instead the disciple Thaddeus as the bearer of the Shroud to Edessa. No legend that I know of attributes this role to St. Paul.
The article ends at the year 2002. In that year the Shroud was subject to a restoration process and its backing cloth was removed. This allowed textile expert Methchild Flury-Lemberg an opportunity to carefully examine the underside of the Shroud. She found no evidence of any repair work, “invisible” or otherwise. The Marino-Benford idea that an invisible reweaving repair affected the C-14 dates has been disproven.
The 1978 STURP examination proved that the Shroud is not a forgery, medieval or otherwise. Its unknown history and mysterious C-14 dating are no more that corollaries to that fact. The Shroud’s ancient history is simply that it was originally called the Image of Edessa.
Its C-14 dating is explained by the Historically Consistent Hypothesis** which holds that Jesus’ corpse vanished into another dimension leaving a very small radiation field of protons and neutrons. The Shroud collapsed into the resulting vacuum where the proton radiation caused the formation of the image while the neutron radiation caused some of the nitrogen in the linen fibers to be converted into carbon fourteen. That is why the C-14 dates become younger as the part of the sample tested becomes closer to the Image.

**TEST THE SHROUD, Antonacci, 2015 (with Robert Rucker, a nuclear physicts engineer of 30 years experience.)
 
Last edited:
Ok so Thaddeus brought it to Edessa which was an area St Paul was keenly aware of near Antioch and the Asia Minor. St Paul traveled all over that area and started churches. The same very spot where Thaddeus brought the Shroud. So it is very likely that is where St Paul got the shroud when meeting with the other Christians. I’ve watch some documentaries on St Paul and I remember Edessa as being a hold out for Christians. The very same spot known as Turkey today where it turned up during the Crusades.

Asia Minor

I defer to the above posts oppsing your claim on the scienctific aspects. It hasn’t been disproven scientifically.
 
Last edited:
TY. My understanding is that St Paul did NOT visit Edessa and that the founding of Christianity there was due to the preaching of Thaddeus together with the conversion of Edessa’s king, Abgar V.
Edessa was, at that time, an independent kingdom so the Jewish religious authorities had no jurisdiction there. In Antioch, which was under Roman authority, the Holy Image would have been at risk.
The legend is that, after Abgar V’s death, Abgar VI reverted to paganism and the Image of Edessa (the Shroud) was hidden in Edessa’s west gate, the Gate of Vaults, where it was not recovered for almost 500 years. All this is a very strong tradition in the Orthodox Churches and, especially, in the Armenian Church of the East.
 
Last edited:
It is my understanding that the Shroud was hidden in Edessa and perhaps for the very same reason that you’re talking about, it wasn’t safe in Antioch and the walls were structured in Edessa to protect people and the Shroud. And it’s also my understanding from scripture that Paul traveled throughout the Asian minor and live there for some time preaching the gospel. He knew this place having been born in Tarsus and all his traveling through the area. This is at the same time that the church was developing. Paul was unique in that he knew Jewish law and could go in and out through the different circles preaching to the Jews and the Gentiles in order to convert them. There is more reason to believe that Paul was in Edessa than not. Peace
 
Last edited:
I’ve just reviewed “Journeys of St. Paul” maps. None of them show St. Paul traveling to Edessa even though that city is shown on some of these maps.
 
Who kept all accountings if his locations? I’ll refer back to the scripture and what it says.

Acts 19: 8 Paul entered the synagogue and spoke boldly there for three months, arguing persuasively about the kingdom of God. 9 But some of them became obstinate; they refused to believe and publicly maligned the Way. So Paul left them. He took the disciples with him and had discussions daily in the lecture hall of Tyrannus. 10 This went on for two years, so that all the Jews and Greeks who lived in the province of Asia heard the word of the Lord.
 
I was very skeptical on the Shroud of Turin but i found a very interesting youtube video about it from a scientific viewpoint. turns out the first sample they took was a repaired area and the outcome came out in the middle of the two time periods that sample contained. it was very interesting and i think an hour long. convincing. I am still a little skeptical simply because i am a very skeptical person but i do believe there is a very good/fair chance the Shroud may be real. you should be able to find it on youtube very easily.
 
One of the main team members behind that original study is a secular Jew, who now thinks the Shroud may be real. And he hasn’t converted either… He has no motive. He’s just following the case. Which is pretty remarkable though.


Sorry if he’s been posted about already.
 
Last edited:
FYI, the “invisible repair” theory has been disproven by a close examination of the hypothetical repair area on both sides by a renowned textile expert.
 
Happymom said:
Scientific ‘Experts’ have shown that the Shroud of Turin was indeed repaired by the Poor Clair nuns in 1532.
Click to expand...
No “science” involved in that fact which is an historical record and does not mention any “reweaving” or other repair to the corners of the Shroud.
But TY for the article. As I have mentioned before, the Shroud was subjected to a restoration process in 2002 in which its backing cloth was removed. Textile experts were able to carefully examine both sides of the Shroud and paid special attention to the corner from where the C-14 sample was cut. They found no evidence of any kind of repair, “invisible” or otherwise. Flury-Lemberg noted that French invisible reweaving is invisible only on the outer side of the repaired cloth.
For the Benford-Marino theory to be correct, one would have to hypothesize that only the C-14 sample, and no other part of the Shroud, had been rewoven— an unlikely scenario.
Another problem with that theory is that the C-14 dates became younger as the part of the sample tested became closer to the Image and further away from the edge. If foreign material had been woven in, one would expect the opposite result.

In the Gospels Jesus mentioned something that He called the “Sign of Jonah,” which had to do with His death, burial, and resurrection. It’s my contention that the miraculous Image on the Shroud is an essential part of that Sign which makes it available for the “generation” (or multitude people) that He spoke of.
His miraculous Image testifies to His death and burial, but what about His resurrection? The C-14 dating tests resulted in dates that became younger as the part tested became closer to the Image. The Historically Consistent Hypothesis** holds that Jesus’ corpse vanished from inside of the Shroud, and, in doing so, left a residual radiation field of protons and neutrons. The proton radiation formed the Image while the neutron radiation caused some of the nitrogen in the linen to convert to C-14. That is why the C-14 dates recorded become younger as the part tested becomes closer to the Image.
The conclusion is that the 1988 carbon fourteen dating of the Shroud does not indicate a date of manufacture, but rather is proof that Jesus’ corpse vanished from the inside of the Shroud.
While that vanishing is not exactly the same as His resurrection, it so strongly implies the same that it must necessarily be taken as proof that it happened.
It is that proof that completes the final element of the Shroud as the Sign of Jonah. It is miraculous proof of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection.

**TEST THE SHROUD, Antonacci, 2015
 
Last edited:
Rat it is my impression that you’re following the science of a militant atheist who ignores any other science and research done thus far on the shroud. That speaks volumes on his authenticity and why his theories are not being taken seriously other than other athiest militants. I see this is your opinion anyway and you’re entitled to it but it does not make him correct.

Flawed science
 
Happymom; both you and Undead Rat are using good Catholic (or at least Christian) sources for your information - but they belong to different ‘traditions’ of authenticity, and they both depend for their credibility on misrepresentations of primary sources, mostly accidental, but in some cases deliberate.

Note that Undead Rat quotes Mark Antonacci’s ‘Test The Shroud’ book as if it were Gospel, when it fact it is a selective polemic for his own personal interpretation of the origin of the Shroud, some of which is a deliberate distortion of the facts. You do not say where your information comes from, but some of it is out of date and inaccurate.

There have been a number of attempts to discredit the radiocarbon dating, of which the Benford/Marino (and later Rogers) “patch” hypothesis is but one. The ‘miraculous radiation’ hypothesis is another. The first has been very largely discredited, although some of Ray Rogers’s findings are too peculiar to be easily explained away, and the second is not currently susceptible to investigation. At least Antonacci has come up with a clear prediction, the eventual, and inevitable failure of which will put his particular version of the ‘radiation hypothesis’ to bed.

There are also many hypotheses reading the alleged journey of the Shroud from Jerusalem to Lirey, where it turns up in 1450 or so. These depend almost entirely on written descriptions referring to images on cloth, and, taken all as referring to the Shroud, are clearly contradictory. The most coherent ‘cluster’ refer to the Jerusalem-Abgar-Edessa-Mandylion-Contantinople story. Neither St Paul nor St Peter nor the wife of Pontius Pilate (to name but three of the alleged custodians of the shroud) are mentioned in this account.
 
It is indeed, a very special shroud. For me, i truly think it is of Jesus. Its amazing!

Imagine, seeing the face of Our Lord!
 
The Hidden Agenda of the Baha’i Faith

What, you may ask, does the Baha’i Faith have to do with the Shroud of Turin? The answer to that question is to be found in two insidious essays written by that Faith’s secondary founder, Abdul’Baha.
He wrote that Jesus was not resurrected in a physical body at all, and that the Gospel accounts of that event were just spiritual allegories. He also demeaned the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ miracles, writing that any prophet could perform them, that in the end these had no value, and that Jesus did not really perform those miracles anyway.**

These writings were an attempt to “cut Jesus down to size” so that the primary founder of the Baha’i Faith, Baha’u’llah, could be elevated above Him. Thereby the Baha’i Faith could be represented as supplanting Christianity.

The miraculous Image on the Shroud contradicts Abdul’Baha’s erroneous statements and, thereby, cuts at the core of the Baha’i attempt to supplant Christianity. Certain well-read, intellectual Baha’is have a very strong agenda to discredit the Shroud of Turin and will go to great lengths to do so. We have seen on this very thread an attempt to discredit Jesus’ miracle of walking on water. Posters have made such silly statements as “The boat that He walked to could have been close to shore,” implying that this miracle was some kind of cheap magician’s trick.

So I would advise the legitimate participants on this thread to beware of those posters who seem to have an agenda that the Shroud of Turin’s Image is not miraculous. You can tell them by their obvious prejudice against the idea that Jesus actually worked bonafide miracles.

** Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 103-105

**http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/saq-22.html
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top