Tag: Shroud Turin

The Shroud Of Turin: Scientists Produce Latest Evidence To Prove The Authenticity Of The Relic

The Shroud Of Turin: Scientists Produce Latest Evidence To Prove The Authenticity Of The Relic

3D carbon copy of the Shroud of Turin

Sceptics may dismiss the Turin Shroud, but there is good evidence the relic is authentic

In the letter of St. Paul to the Hebrews, he asserts that faith is “the substance of things hoped for – the evidence of things not seen.” The resurrection of Jesus Christ is an event forever hoped for, but it is also an event unseen.

Believers in the Shroud of Turin, however, insist that the Shroud is the substance of this hope and the evidence of this unseen event. It is, they believe, the burial cloth of Jesus Christ. It has been venerated as such for centuries, and since the 17th century, when it came to Turin, has been the cathedral’s best-known treasures. Popes have come to gaze on the Shroud; Benedict XVI said when he visited in 2010 that “we see, as in a mirror, our suffering in the suffering of Christ”.

Sceptics pooh-pooh the whole story. They refer to the 1987 Carbon-14 dating and say, “It’s medieval. Science has spoken. That settles it.” But the believers bounce back, and year by year, as modern technology advances, more and more evidence accumulates which causes anyone who reads the research to be sceptical of the sceptics. The most recent claim – that the blood on the Shroud is from a torture victim – has re-opened the debate.

The delicious irony is that it is our sceptical, scientific society that has empowered all the new evidence. The Shroud’s relationship with modern technology began in 1898 when Secondo Pia took the first photographs of the Shroud. When he developed the negative he noticed that it showed a positive image of a human face. He concluded that the image itself was therefore, in effect, a photographic negative. The question immediately arises, “If the Shroud is a medieval forgery how did they do that?”

Professor Nicholas Allen of South Africa proposed that the materials and knowledge to produce a “photograph” existed in the Middle Ages. He then proceeded to produce a Shroud-like image on a piece of linen using his theoretical process. However, the imaging expert Barrie Schwortz, not himself a Christian, has challenged Allen’s work, which he says only accounts for some of the Shroud’s properties.

Like a tennis ball, the hypotheses are whacked back and forth. One scientist proposes a new idea of how the mysterious Shroud could have been produced only to have another researcher argue that it was impossible.

In 1987 the Shroud was subjected to carbon-14 dating technology which dated it to the 13th century. Predictably, the result has been criticised for a range of reasons. The most recent critique argues that the samples used for the 1987 test were taken from an edge of the Shroud that was not simply patched in the middle ages, but patched with a difficult-to-detect interweaving. The Carbon-14 tests (it is argued) were therefore compromised.

A different sort of dating test was conducted by Giulio Fanti of Padua University in 2013. This technology uses infra-red light and spectroscopy to measure the radiation intensity through wavelengths, and from these measurements a date can be calculated. Fanti’s method dated fibres from the Shroud to 300 BC–400 AD. Of course, there are critics who argue that Fanti’s methods are unreliable.

There is now a mountain of evidence about the Shroud, but too many dismiss the possibility of the Shroud’s authenticity based on the Carbon-14 dating alone.

However, a good detective does not rely on one piece of evidence. Instead he gathers and weighs all the facts. Here are the pieces of evidence which are find compelling.

1) The image. It is not a stain, nor is it painted on the Shroud. It is not burned on in a conventional heat application method. Instead it is seared on to the cloth with a technology that has yet to be explained. Not only can scientists and historians not reproduce the image using medieval technologies, they can’t reproduce it with modern technology.

Italian scientist Paolo DiLazzaro tried for five years to replicate the image and concluded that it was produced by ultraviolet light, but the ultraviolet light necessary to reproduce the image “exceeds the maximum power released by all ultraviolet light sources available today.” The time for such a burst “would be shorter than one forty-billionth of a second, and the intensity of the ultra violet light would have to be around several billion watts.”

2) The 3D capabilities of the image. The image of the man on the Shroud can be read by 3D imaging technology. Paintings fail this test.

3) The evidence of crucifixion. The wounds of the crucified man are all consistent not only with Roman crucifixion, but the details of Jesus’ particular crucifixion – the scourging, the crown of thorns, no broken bones, and the wound in the side. In addition, medieval paintings show the nails in the palm of Christ’s hands, the Shroud shows the nail wounds in his wrists which is anatomically correct. The flesh of the palms would not have supported the weight of the man’s body.

4) Geography. Pollen from the Shroud is not only from the Jerusalem area, but from Turkey and the other places the Shroud is supposed to have resided. Dust from the area of the image by the knees and feet is from the area around Jerusalem.

5) The evidence of Jewish burial customs. The Shroud details are perfectly consistent with first-century Jewish burial customs. There are even microscopic traces of the flowers that would have been used in the burial-flowers that grew locally and were known to be used for burial. In addition, traces of the spices used for Jewish burial have been discovered.

6) The blood and the image. The bloodstains on the Shroud are real human blood, not paint. The flow of the blood accurately reflects crucifixion and subsequent burial. The image was seared on the linen after the bloodstains. The fact that the bloodstains retain their reddish colour is evidence that the blood came from a person under extreme duress. The most recent finding again suggests that the crucified man was tortured.

7) The type of cloth. The cloth is consistent with fabrics from first-century Israel, but not with medieval Europe. A forger would have had to not only forge the image, but would have had to have detailed knowledge of linen weaves of the first century and then not only reproduce it, but age it convincingly.

We are not obliged to believe in the Shroud; it is undeniably mysterious. Having said that, it is also mysterious how dismissive most sceptics are. They cry out for scientific evidence, but when evidence is produced few really examine it closely. They simply shrug and say, “Well, we just don’t know. Nothing has been proven. All we have is an old cloth for which there is no explanation as yet.”

One of the principles of creative scepticism is that the obvious answer is usually the right one. The obvious answer, to my mind, is that the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ.

I believe the Shroud is authentic, but if sceptics come up with a convincing answer to the questions the Shroud presents I am open-minded. My faith is rooted in the Resurrection, not the Shroud itself. The fact that the Shroud remains a mystery is a reminder of that other verse from the New Testament that “we walk by faith and not by sight.”

Breaking! Watch Video: Scientists Creates 3D “Carbon Copy” Of Jesus Using The Shroud Of Turin! 

Breaking! Watch Video: Scientists Creates 3D “Carbon Copy” Of Jesus Using The Shroud Of Turin! 

The 3D “Carbon Copy” of Christ gotten from the Shroud of Turin

“We believe that we have the precise image of what Jesus looked like on this earth,” said Professor Giulio Fanti of the University of Padua.

Giulio Fanti, lecturer of mechanical and thermal measurements at the University of Padua, who also studies the Shroud of Turin explains:

“This statue is the three-dimensional representation in actual size of the Man of the Shroud, created following the precise measurements taken from the cloth in which the body of Christ was wrapped after the crucifixion”.

Based on his measurements, the professor has created a “carbon copy” in 3D which, he claims, allows him to affirm that these are the true features of the crucified Christ.

“Therefore, we believe that we finally have the precise image of what Jesus looked like on this earth. From now on, He may no longer be depicted without taking this work into account.” The professor granted exclusive coverage of his work to the weekly periodical Chi, to which he revealed: “According to our studies, Jesus was a man of extraordinary beauty. Long-limbed, but very robust, he was nearly 5 ft. 11 inch tall, whereas the average height at the time was around 5 ft. 5 in. And he had a regal and majestic expression.” (Vatican Insider).


Through the study and three-dimensional projection of the figure, Fanti was also able to count the numerous wounds on the body of the man of the Shroud:

“On the Shroud,” the professor explains, “I counted 370 wounds from the flagellation, without taking into account the wounds on his sides, which the Shroud doesn’t show because it only enveloped the back and front of the body. We can therefore hypothesize a total of at least 600 blows. In addition, the three-dimensional reconstruction has made it possible to discover that at the moment of his death, the man of the Shroud sagged down towards the right, because his right shoulder was dislocated so seriously as to injure the nerves.” (Il Mattino di Padova).

Here are more pictures below⏬

RECONSTRUCTED CHRIST

The questions surrounding the mystery of the Shroud are still intact; certainly, in that tortured man we see the signs of suffering in which we find also a piece of each one of ourselves, but also—seen by the eyes of faith—hope that this man was not just anyone, but the Man par excellence, that “Behold the Man” who appeared docilely before Pilate and who, after the terrible flagellation, was raised up on the cross as an innocent man; not only innocent, but taking upon himself the guilt of all people. While belief in the Shroud is not obligatory, even for Christians, the exceptionality of that piece of linen remains there to challenge our understanding and our certainties, almost like a certain Jesus of Nazareth, who challenged our certainties by loving his persecutors, forgiving them from the cross, and conquering death, 2,000 years ago …

Watch Video Below⏬

This article first appeared in the Italian edition of Aleteia

The Holy Shroud Of Turin: The Burial Cloth Of Jesus Christ

The Holy Shroud Of Turin: The Burial Cloth Of Jesus Christ

image
The Holy Shroud Of Turin

The Holy Shroud is a relic now preserved at Turin, for which the claim is made that it is the actual “clean linen cloth” in which Joseph of Arimathea wrapped the body of Jesus Christ (Matthew 27:59). This relic, though blackened by age, bears the faint but distinct impress of a human form both back and front.

The cloth is about 13 1/2 feet long and 4 1/4 feet wide. If the marks we perceive were caused by human body, it is clear that the body (supine) was laid lengthwise along one half of the shroud while the other half was doubled back over the head to cover the whole front of the body from the face to the feet. The arrangement is well illustrated in the miniature of Giulio Clovio, which also gives a good representation of what was seen upon the shroud about the year 1540.

The cloth now at Turin can be clearly traced back to the Lirey in the Diocese of Troyes, where we first hear of it about the year 1360. In 1453 it was at Chambéry in Savoy, and there in 1532 it narrowly escaped being consumed by a fire which by charring the corners of the folds has left a uniform series of marks on either side of the image. Since 1578 it has remained at Turin where it is now only exposed for veneration at long intervals.

Read More Read More

%d bloggers like this: