The Shroud of Turin is an ancient burial cloth imprinted with an image of a crucified man claimed by many to be Jesus Christ. The image on the cloth is anatomically correct and shows both the front and back of the man. The cloth is kept in a church in Turin, Italy.
Although I have been a Christian for many years, I had always been skeptical of the Shroud of Turin. I vaguely remember seeing a documentary on TV earlier in my Christian walk. It most likely gave enough of the skeptical perspective that I figured it was probably not real even though I never really investigated in any detail the evidences for and against.
My skepticism has changed recently, however. A few weeks ago I watched a documentary called Jesus: The Great Debate. A good portion of dvd was devoted to the Shroud of Turin. I was so intrigued after watching it that I rented a second dvd documentary titled "Jesus and the Shroud of Turin". After being presented with the evidence for the authenticity of the Shroud in these documentaries, I have now become convinced it is most likely the image of Christ and a artifact that supports the historic account of the resurrection of Christ!
The historic accounts of Jesus in the Bible hold that he was crucified, buried and on the third day risen from the dead. The accounts of his burial describe a rich man named Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin council, wrapping Jesus in a clean linen cloth (Matthew 27:59, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53) and laying him in a tomb. Is this piece of fine linen described in the Bible and the Shroud of Turin one in the same?
Analysis of the image on the cloth shows not only a man crucified but also severly beaten. Crucified criminals were not brutually beaten before being crucified, but Jesus was. The wounds on the back image match that of the Roman flagram with which Jesus was flogged. The image also shows a puncture wound to the side and no broken bones, uncharacteristic of a typical crucifixion but corroborating the crucifixion account of Christ. It also shows the man with a crown of thorns on top of his head, unique to Jesus' crucifixion.
How did the image get on there in the first place? This is where I was totally fascinated. On the skeptical side of the controversy, it is a midieval hoax that is actually a painting. However, when a photographer in the late 1800's was allowed by the church to photograph the shroud for the first time ever, a shocking discovery was made. A positive image appeared when he produced the negatives. In other words, the image on the shroud is a negative, as if it were photographed. The scientific community on both sides of the controversy are unanimous in that the shroud is at least 700 years old. Photography had not yet been invented and artists had no concept of painting negative images. Why would a forger in the 1300's paint a negative to attempt to trick the masses? This discovery was a pivotal point in the history of the shroud a it sparked a century of scientific investigation making the shroud the most studied artifact in human history.
It gets even more fascinating. In the 1970's, the scientific community was allowed to analyze the shroud. Thousands and thousands of hours have been spent analyzing the data they acquired and they are still baffled as to the cause of the image. One piece of equipment that was used to analyze the shroud was a VP8 image analyzer used by NASA to process photos of space. Two dimensional photos and painting appear distorted (the dvd demonstrated this) whereas the image appears to be a perfectly three dimensional which would be impossible for a painter to achieve. The conclusion is that the image on the shroud was formed while draped over a three dimensional object!
The analysis showed the wounds on the shroud were actually blood of type AB that was soaked into the cloth. The image, however, was a different story. The image only affected the surface of the cloth and is not soaked into the fibers as would be the case if it were painted. The image is not uniformally spread over every fiber of the linen at a microscopic level. One fiber would be affected while an adjacent fiber would not be--something an artist could not achieve. The dvd shows a visual of this that is difficult to describe. UV photography showed that the image was not scorched on. So how did it get on there? The scientists are mystified.
One of the scientists said that the image appears to be projected as a radiation phenomenom like an x-ray. Skeletal features and internal structure such as skeletal teeth and bones in the hand are visible on the cloth. The source of the radiation needed to produce the image is unknown to the scientific community. It is a mystery. Of course, this could be explained if this were the burial cloth of Christ and the resurrection really occured. As Jesus lie in a state of death, a burst of radiated power emitting as light from every pore as life energized his body could have produced such an image.
Although I have been a Christian for many years, I had always been skeptical of the Shroud of Turin. I vaguely remember seeing a documentary on TV earlier in my Christian walk. It most likely gave enough of the skeptical perspective that I figured it was probably not real even though I never really investigated in any detail the evidences for and against.
My skepticism has changed recently, however. A few weeks ago I watched a documentary called Jesus: The Great Debate. A good portion of dvd was devoted to the Shroud of Turin. I was so intrigued after watching it that I rented a second dvd documentary titled "Jesus and the Shroud of Turin". After being presented with the evidence for the authenticity of the Shroud in these documentaries, I have now become convinced it is most likely the image of Christ and a artifact that supports the historic account of the resurrection of Christ!
The historic accounts of Jesus in the Bible hold that he was crucified, buried and on the third day risen from the dead. The accounts of his burial describe a rich man named Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin council, wrapping Jesus in a clean linen cloth (Matthew 27:59, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53) and laying him in a tomb. Is this piece of fine linen described in the Bible and the Shroud of Turin one in the same?
Analysis of the image on the cloth shows not only a man crucified but also severly beaten. Crucified criminals were not brutually beaten before being crucified, but Jesus was. The wounds on the back image match that of the Roman flagram with which Jesus was flogged. The image also shows a puncture wound to the side and no broken bones, uncharacteristic of a typical crucifixion but corroborating the crucifixion account of Christ. It also shows the man with a crown of thorns on top of his head, unique to Jesus' crucifixion.
How did the image get on there in the first place? This is where I was totally fascinated. On the skeptical side of the controversy, it is a midieval hoax that is actually a painting. However, when a photographer in the late 1800's was allowed by the church to photograph the shroud for the first time ever, a shocking discovery was made. A positive image appeared when he produced the negatives. In other words, the image on the shroud is a negative, as if it were photographed. The scientific community on both sides of the controversy are unanimous in that the shroud is at least 700 years old. Photography had not yet been invented and artists had no concept of painting negative images. Why would a forger in the 1300's paint a negative to attempt to trick the masses? This discovery was a pivotal point in the history of the shroud a it sparked a century of scientific investigation making the shroud the most studied artifact in human history.
It gets even more fascinating. In the 1970's, the scientific community was allowed to analyze the shroud. Thousands and thousands of hours have been spent analyzing the data they acquired and they are still baffled as to the cause of the image. One piece of equipment that was used to analyze the shroud was a VP8 image analyzer used by NASA to process photos of space. Two dimensional photos and painting appear distorted (the dvd demonstrated this) whereas the image appears to be a perfectly three dimensional which would be impossible for a painter to achieve. The conclusion is that the image on the shroud was formed while draped over a three dimensional object!
The analysis showed the wounds on the shroud were actually blood of type AB that was soaked into the cloth. The image, however, was a different story. The image only affected the surface of the cloth and is not soaked into the fibers as would be the case if it were painted. The image is not uniformally spread over every fiber of the linen at a microscopic level. One fiber would be affected while an adjacent fiber would not be--something an artist could not achieve. The dvd shows a visual of this that is difficult to describe. UV photography showed that the image was not scorched on. So how did it get on there? The scientists are mystified.
One of the scientists said that the image appears to be projected as a radiation phenomenom like an x-ray. Skeletal features and internal structure such as skeletal teeth and bones in the hand are visible on the cloth. The source of the radiation needed to produce the image is unknown to the scientific community. It is a mystery. Of course, this could be explained if this were the burial cloth of Christ and the resurrection really occured. As Jesus lie in a state of death, a burst of radiated power emitting as light from every pore as life energized his body could have produced such an image.
There is more but I don't want to make this positing too long. Stay tuned for part 2. I would recommend the dvd's.
John
1 comment:
Amazing!
Post a Comment