Shroud of Turin

Do you believe that the Shroud of Turin is the real burial shroud of Christ, a forgery, or are you agnostic on the matter?

I am personally agnostic about it. However, I am starting to take a great interest in it. I’ve known about it for a while but it has never interested me really till now for some reason.

Yes, though not as an article of faith. If it were determined to be a forgery, it wouldn’t shake my faith in Christ.

Did you ever have a moment were you became convinced that is was? If so, what did it for you?

I lean toward authentic, but it is adiaphoron, and nobody should be bound to believe it as an article of faith. As Per said, my faith in Christ is not influenced by it authenticity, or lack thereof.

Jon

The fact that image, as it exists on the Shroud, is not a painting, drawing, etc. It is, in fact, a photographic negative. That such a technique can be applied to a garment from any point in time prior to the modern era, is too far fetched to believe.

I think it is totally valid to believe it to be authentic. If it weren’t authentic I can see how it would not affect your faith, but I imagine it could only increase your faith if it was truly confirmed as authentic. The reason I say this is because, it would truly be a miraculous relic and one that was left by the Lord himself.

If you mean by “agnostic” that one is not sure if the shroud is real or not, then I would consider myself agnostic.

Indeed, that is what I mean.

Considering St. Joseph has about 38 toes, I’ve never been one to cling much to relics. And that’s probably why I don’t know enough about it. Though for something that Christ actually touched, well…

Who wants to suggest some good reading?

I think that was my opinion up until, well today. haha. I have found this claim to be more worthy of research than most relics, like the “true cross” and stuff. I listened to a podcast that got me thinking more on it. Below is the link:

premierchristianradio.com/Shows/Saturday/Unbelievable/Episodes/The-Turin-Shroud-a-relic-of-the-resurrection-Unbelievable

Also, fairly interesting read:

nationalreview.com/article/416411/what-does-shroud-turin-prove-about-easter-myra-adams

Agreed.

Jon

It was found to be a forgery using an early, crude photographic process. I saw that on the Shroud of Turin episode of the CNN series “Finding Jesus.”

cnn.com/2015/03/03/living/finding-jesus-q-a-shroud-turin/

That’s interesting. From what I’ve read and watched so far most people agree that researchers have dismissed the carbon dating that was done in 1888. As mentioned in this article:

nationalreview.com/article/416411/what-does-shroud-turin-prove-about-easter-myra-adams

Neither disagreeing or agreeing with you, just mentioning it. I’m still in the “don’t know” category. Thanks for your input!

I don’t know for sure about the shroud. The biggest block I have to it is from the description of a head cloth rolled up in a place all by itself in a place separated from the other linen ( John 20: 7).

I lean more undecided. It would be really cool if it were. If it is fake then nothing lost either. I do not need a shroud to believe in Jesus.

Sometimes these relics tend to become like a side show.

The imprint on the shroud resembles what we typically imagine Jesus looked like, but we really don’t know what he looked like. Our popular image of Jesus is all based on western art and literature. There was never a portrait or painting of him and certainly no photographs.

The fact is we really have no way of knowing if it is his image or not any more than we know what his voice sounded like.

Even if the shroud was proven to be from the time of Christ, there is no way it could ever be proven that this was Jesus’ actual burial cloth.

I think it is authentic because out if several hundreds of tests that have been done over it, the only one that came out with a result to support the theory of being a fake was the C14. And the big problem with that test was that it created a million more questions than before that no one can anseer. The C14 has been dismissed and contested by a huge number of members of the scientific community. Moreover, if the date in the C14 is accurate how in the world someone I’m the medieval ages was able to do such a perfect fake. Some have come up with the theory that it was done through a photographic technique already available during medieval times which may explain the negative issue. But the problem with that theory is that the shroud does not contain painting it has human blood. The proposer of that particular theory stated that after the negative came out the faker painted the surface (see the finding Jesus program) but it is a proven fact that the fact contains human blood. So basically this theory suggest that a faker in the medieval age kidnapped someone (because I don’t anyone would have volunteer to be killed) tortured that person and crucified that person just to be able to make a fake. That makes absolutely no sense to me.

If the shroud is indeed from medieval times, where the blood came from and how? And how someone from medieval times (with no crystal ball to look at the future and know that six of seven centuries after human would have technology to determine the difference between red paint and blood) knew that the shroud will be tested for authenticity to make the faker go to the extreme of murdering someone just to make? Wouldn’t it be more logical to think that someone from medieval times would have painted it with red paint?

Again, the medieval fake theory just creates more problems and based on that plus the fact that are so many experts questioning the use of the C14 plus the presence of polen from plants from the middle east, I lean towards its authenticity.

Granted, our faith does not require us to believe that the shroud is real and if indeed it was a medieval fake (or if it was someone else’s burial cloth) it wouldn’t have any impact on the faith or on my faith. To me is more that the theory of medieval times makes absolutely no sense and that if you look at the results of tests that are not disputed, the likelihood of it being Jesus’ cloth seems high.

The big big problem with this theory is that completely obviates the fact that there is actual human blood stains in the cloth. So how did the author do that? Hired someone to be killed in the name of a fake?

Don’t believe everything you hear or see on TV.

I read that one of the scientists working on the shroud said, If this is not the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, then you better start looking for someone that was killed the same way he was. Not sure who said it but I think hes right. The blood type matches the blood type on the Eucharistic Miracles !! Amazing. God Bless, Memaw

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.