Do you believe in the Shroud of Turin?

Question

Shroud of Turin: is it Jesus? Or maybe its some dude who sacrificed himself as a martyr, to model for Jesus in death and portray his likeness as a symbol and idol in the infancy of Christianly.

Answer 1

I believe it is the real thing. Made by the radiation the resurrection of Christ may have created. I could be wrong but I tend to think the science behind the Shroud and the evidence is very strong. Peace to you.

Answer 2

We serve a risen saviour - no piece of cloth should make any difference to that, but I find it very interesting.

I wonder how much research some of these contributors have done. Have you read the books? seen the scientists film's? seen the museum exibition? or even googled the huge Shroud of Turin menu. Although it cannt be 'proved', a lot of scientific research is definately NOT pointing to a 'proven fake'



1) many scientists have reported it to be consistant with a burial cloth from Jesus time. it is the right weave, contains spores of plants found in the right area etc



2) the wounds and blood flow paths are all exactly as they would have been (note the nails through the wrist part of the hand. The traditional pictures of nails through the palms does not hold the weight of a man)



3) For many centuries the image remained a mystery. it was only with the advent of photography that the true sugnificance, minute details, became obvious in the negative image. If this was a fake how could they, and why would they, produce an image which has proved to be perfect when viewed in the negative. This was produced long before photography was dreamed of.

Answer 3

is it Jesus?

-No.



the shroud is a lie.



Larry:

2) If it was a fake, there would be more than one of these.

-Not all hoaxers copy their work.



3) If it was a rare but natural phenomenon there would be more of these.

-That's like expecting more sub-species when only one species exists. It is not a necessity that there would or 'should' be more shrouds. Natural phenomena aren't always common.



No, the only logical answer is that it IS Jesus and either the carbon test data was thrown off by the fire it was in, or perhaps by the resurrection process itself.

-Nothing is true because you say it is true. A shroud isn't evidence that the biblical character actually existed.



The Shroud arrived in Turin in 1578 from Chambéry, then the capital of the Duchy of Savoy, and it has been kept in Turin Cathedral ever since. Reliable historical documents record the Shroud's movements, without interruption, from the mid-fourteenth century. It is known that in 1350s the Shroud was in Lirey, France, and perhaps previously it was in the East, initially in Edessa and later in Constantinople, before being brought to Europe during the Crusades.

-So, the shroud has been moved.

That doesn't stop it from being a hoax.



Also the ferric oxide they talk about made stains, much like the blood stains on the Shroud, "blood-like marks" but they don't explain the photograpich image, much less the photo negative image.

-Photograph and Photographic negative images

still don't prove it to be the face of the biblical character.



The Gospels don't even describe Jesus' facial features, you just take it as it is because that's what you believe in. Which is fine with me, believe whatever you want. However, none of this proves the existence of the biblical character.



I have no expertise to provide criticism within any field to back up what I've said, aside from theology. Even then, the shroud isn't sufficient evidence that Jesus 'Christ' actually existed.



If I make a shroud, and over time the outline forms something familiar to your memory. This doesn't make the shroud consistent with your memory. In like manner, your familiar and obsessed with 'Jesus' by cultural indoctrination and depictions of the biblical character, however the Gospels do not provide facial descriptions of Jesus and therefore the face on the Shroud of Turin could be anyone - it doesn't 'have to' be Jesus, because that's what makes you emotionally comfortable.

Answer 4

It would be interesting if it was.



I notice that a lot of people answered automatically and categorically that it is a fake. They then cite one item of evidence as proof. It's as though, to them, there isn't really a debate, or it isn't an interesting question.



Someone put a link to shroud.com. Barrie Schwortz had Thanksgiving dinner at my house with me, my wife, my brother, my mom and his friend a couple years ago. That has nothing to do with whether the shroud is genuine, but it is strange to me that he would be a believer in the shroud and a non-messianic Jew at the same time. He gave me good conversation, to be sure.



Although that story might not be particularly interesting to all that read it, all would agree that it's possible. I tell you, it's true! If anyone actually cared enough to make an issue of my claims, they could probably come up with some scientific study showing that it wasn't possible. He and I are about 30 years apart in age. Someone might make historic claims that we never ate a meal together. No matter the evidence they come up with, and no matter how convincing, and no matter the preconceptions of the person who has yet to be convinced, I had dinner with Barrie Schwortz.



Science can't change history.



I don't know if it's true. It seems to me like it could be. It's pretty elaborate, and regardless of whether it's true or not, it gets the imagination running. Does it really matter that Elijah Wood isn't really Frodo Baggins?

Answer 5

Of course it is Jesus!



Who else could it be?



Look at this logically. There are problems with the carbon test data, but the explanations for the carbon test being off are easier to accept than the explanations of how it could be anyone other than Jesus.



The people who say it's not Jesus have several big holes in their arguments.



1) They can't say how it was made. It's not scorched. It's not painted. It's not woven into the fabric.



2) If it was a fake, there would be more than one of these. Anyone who went to the trouble to fake one of these things (and it would have been a HUGE amount of trouble) wouldn't have just done one. They would have done one, sold it to the local lord...then moved on to another country and sold it again. You wouldn't have THE Shroud of Turin, you'd have shrouds in France, Italy, England, Norway, Germany, Poland, Hungary, all over.



3) If it was a rare but natural phenomenon there would be more of these. They wouldn't all look like Jesus, but there would be enough similar cases that we could explain it. More so, it if was a rare but natural phenomenon, then what are the odds that it would happen to a guy who had been killed in EXACTLY the same way as Jesus?



4) There are to many details unexplained if it is fake. Like why does it show up better in photographic negative than in natural light? Why does the pollen data match?



No, the only logical answer is that it IS Jesus and either the carbon test data was thrown off by the fire it was in, or perhaps by the resurection process itself. That's a bit of a leap of logic, but it is a much smaller leap than the atheists are asking you to take, so Occam's Razor applies.



http://www.shroud.com/



EDIT: There are a lot of lies in the answers you have above. A lot of people say "It's fake" but don't know or say how. One girl said that it only came to light when it was for sale, which is not true. he Shroud arrived in Turin in 1578 from Chambéry, then the capital of the Duchy of Savoy, and it has been kept in Turin Cathedral ever since.

Reliable historical documents record the Shroud's movements, without interruption, from the mid-fourteenth century. It is known that in 1350s the Shroud was in Lirey, France, and perhaps previously it was in the East, initially in Edessa and later in Constantinople, before being brought to Europe during the Crusades.





The link to the science story says "Their study prompted the then archbishop of Turin, where the Shroud is stored, to admit that the garment was a hoax." Which is simply untrue. This is the official website of the Dioces of Turin...does it look like they say it is a hoax? http://sindone.torino.chiesacattolica.it/en/scient/hp_scien.htm

Also the ferric oxide they talk about made stains, much like the blood stains on the Shroud, "blood-like marks" but they don't explain the photograpich image, much less the photo negative image.

Answer 6

Archeologically, The Shroud of Turin cannot bear the imagine of Jesus.

Answer 7

I believe it exists as many television specials have featured the same object. Therefore, evidence shows it exists.



I do not believe it had anything to do with the original Jesus from the 1st Century CE because various dating procedures all date it to the Renaissance. Therefore, unless Jesus was still alive, it is a fake.



But a really good one!

Answer 8

I believe that it exists.

I do not really believe that it is the shroud that was laid over Jesus as part of his burial cloths. Because of the idea that when cloth is pressed to a wet face or wet body part the stain comes out wider and moon shaped.



That aside, I see nothing wrong with regarding it as an important religious artifact.



I only wish people didn't have to know so badly what it was. Proving that it didn't cover Jesus does not disprove his existence.

Answer 9

I believe that many people will reach out for any evidence that seems to support their belief system, and I believe that the Shroud of Turin is a fraud.

Answer 10

I think it is a fake. Honestly even if it is proven to not come from the middle ages, even if it is proven to come from around Jesus' alleged time/era, it will still be difficult to prove it was Jesus, or that he was ressurected.

Answer 11

The Shroud of Turin was confirmed as a hoax. http://www.physorg.com/news4652.html

Answer 12

I don't believe it really is the image of Christ, but I don't think its of a man who willingly died as such either.



Why I have serious reservations about the authenticity of this piece is that no one knew of it's existence until the very person who had it, just happened to have it up for sale.



Literally, no one ever heard of it before until then.



Very suspicious, me thinks.

Answer 13

No, I don't believe that it is the image of Jesus.

Answer 14

I know that it is an actual piece of cloth. It is not real, the creator/forger confessed to creating it shortly after wards. Further there are many pieces of evidence that show it to be a fake, for example blood turns black as it ages, and the perspective of the face does not match how a face print would appear on a cloth around the head.

Answer 15

Remember that guy who made thousands selling a piece of half-eaten grilled cheese on eBay with a burn mark vaguely resembling Jesus?



And the fact that whenever someone sees a nondescript image of a saint on some random object, it makes local, and sometimes national news?



I'm not saying the shroud was an accident, just that people will believe anything.

Answer 16

I believe it authentic. There are stories of it being a forgery, but no one can explain how it was made, even today. That is because it is miraculous, like the tilma of San Juan Diego, that still has the image of our Lady of Guadalupe after 500 yrs. Pax Christi

Answer 17

i desired to believe the turin shroud was authentic.



but someone came up with the theory that the representational image was more like davincci. or maybe my memory is failing me and a model was used who became a Convict and a prison inmate.

Answer 18

It's clearly a fake.

Answer 19

Of course not.



It isn't even as sophisticated as you claim. There are two types of pigment on the cloth, the front and back images are different sizes, the head is to big, and finally it dates to the Middle Ages, shortly before the first record of it appears.



It's a fake. A very cleaver fake, but still a fake.

Answer 20

In all honesty I am not sure it is authentic. But your reasoning is way off base.

Answer 21

I've seen the Shroud of Turin, and although it is a remarkable piece of work, I do NOT in any way believe that it is Jesus. It's a proven fake.

Answer 22

answer; No. The "wounds" are in the wrong place. "Relics" were faked all the time, especially in the dark ages.

Answer 23

I don't know the evidence certainly points to it, plus we know Jesus died and I believe he came back to life. I really don't think it matters though.

Answer 24

I believe it has possibilities but I do not hang my faith in Christ on a controversial piece of cloth.

Answer 25

Or it's an image made by a camera obscura

Answer 26

It is an actual shroud that was used on a man.............What man is the unkown part.......

Answer 27

14th century forgery.

Answer 28

no

Answer 29

lol no

Answer 30

no

Answer 31

complete rubbish, just like the people who embrace it

Answer 32

No.