I have long believed the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth. My beliefs are based upon faith, knowledge of the Biblical facts, knowledge of scientific analyses, and the simple conclusion that it could not have been created by anything less than a miraculous event.
The Shroud of Turin is a burial cloth where bears certain blood stains and markings which appear to match well with the Biblical descriptions of the brutalities suffered by Jesus at the hands of Roman soldiers, including the beating, the crown of thorns, the nails through the hands and feet, and the spear stuck into his side.
For many centuries, the cloth’s appearance of the man crucified was two dimensional, and hazy at best. Then we entered the era of modern photography, and something amazing occurred: it became apparent that the cloth was actually a photographic negative. More importantly, there is simply no way the photographic image could have been created by any known man-made methods during the 1800 years from the death of Jesus until the advent of modern photography.
If one believes the resurrection story, if one imagines the power of the almighty God transforming and re-animating the broken body of Christ, the process thereby embedding the face, the body, and the wounds of the Son of Man becomes a reality. Even now, even those who claim there could have been processes to achieve such a thing many centuries ago, have been unable to create anything remotely similar. The “models” such men have made look like the drawings of pre-schoolers compared to the quality and perfection of the image on the Shroud of Turin.
The Shroud has been viewed as a relic for at least the past 800 years. Its history includes surviving a fire which left some of its edges scorched. The cloth has been the subject of repairs due to the fire and due to handling of the fringes of it by believers. Because of these two factors, some believe (including me) that the small pieces of cloth used in modern times for carbon 14 dating may well have tested only cloth which was part of the repair jobs done on the shroud. This would account for the carbon 14 dating accomplished several decades ago which date that portion of the cloth to the 1200s.
Recent efforts by believers among those in science have supported the point of view I have espoused here. If the methodology employed tested only replacement cloth, which seems likely, the value of such faulty carbon 14 dating would be negated in the argument over authenticity of the cloth.
Here is a link to an article which discusses the points I have addressed in this column: https://townhall.com/columnists/myrakahnadams/2019/07/21/shroud-of-turin-new-test-concludes-1988-medieval-hoax-dating-was-a-fraud-n2550263
I strongly encourage believers and doubters alike to read the material and make your own conclusions. It’s likely to come down to a matter of faith. Those who do not believe it could have happened will not believe it happened. Believers likely will. Count me in.
Copyright 2019, Jim “Pappy” Moore. All rights reserved.