Shroud of Turin a Fake?

SCIENCE-US-ITALY-SHROUDAnother person has weighed in on the legitimacy of the Shroud of Turin.  An Italian scientist has figured out a way to reproduce the Shroud and the image it contains using material and techniques available in the middle ages.  Scientists have previously used carbon dating to determine that the Shroud was from somewhere between 1260 and 1390.  The ability to reproduce the Shroud seems to support this date-range.

I am sure some Christians will be up in arms over this and ready to defend the Shroud at all costs.  Personally, I do not really care.  In fact, I am probably one of the last people who will ever be convinced that the Shroud (or the Ossuary of James) is not a fake.  I think that many, if not most, Christians would concur with me.  That is why this story will not even be discussed at most churches in the coming days and weeks.  It simply is a non-issue.  (I write from a Protestant perspective.  Catholic Christians may have a much different view than mine.)

What do you think?  Am I wrong?  Should Christians be prepared to defend the Shroud at all costs?  Will your church discuss this issue any time soon?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Church History and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Shroud of Turin a Fake?

  1. Ben A says:

    I don’t care too much except for the purposes of knowing the truth. I had my doubts about it.

  2. Jakob says:

    You are dead on-
    It actually shouldn’t matter as we worship the man who is God and not the clothes he might have worn.

  3. Not that I disagree about the authenticity, but WHY do you think it is a fake?

  4. Tim Farley says:

    Hi Terry. I am skeptical because testing has shown the shroud dates to between 1260 and 1390. Plus, as the article I link to above shows, the shroud can be reproduced using techniques that were available during that same time period (between 1260 – 1390). I am aware of no evidence that suggests the shroud is authentic.

  5. Daniel says:

    Another shroud debate.. I don’t understand why Christians get so caught up in Shroud of Turin, why are some Christians so eager to be skeptic of this shroud? And why are some so eager to prove the authenticity of the shroud? I don'[t understand either side.

    After all, it is Jesus we are worshipping. If the Shroud is a fake, it shouldn’t affect us, because it is just a material thing. However, if it turns out to be real, then maybe it is God’s way for 21th century Christians to eye witness the resurrection of Jesus, through the shroud..

    The latest developments of the shroud are:

    1) in 2010 there are scientific research that shows the radiocarbon dating done in 1988 contains errors, because the samples were contaminated.

    2) Scientists have no idea how the image got onto the shroud. It is simply one of the biggest puzzles in scientific research. (it will make sense if the image got onto the shroud during the resurrection, because it is a supernatural phenomenon).

    3) The pollen found on the shroud matches a special type that only exist in Jerusalem

    4) They used another artifact, that was supposed to be the cloth that covered Jesus’ face (as mentioned by John), they took that cloth, and matched it with Shroud of Turin, and found that the blood stains on the two pieces of clothes matched well.

    5) They argued that the sample used for the 1988 carbon dating was from the corner of the shroud which belonged to the part of the repair done in the medieval era. In other words, the real shroud was used for dating.

    6) The weaving pattern of the shroud actually matches the 1st century Syrian method of weaving shrouds.

    so on and so forth..

    Look, I don’t think Christians should so quickly judge if the shroud is fake or real. While it is an interesting artifact, but we should not worship it. However, I do think we should continue to study it, to see if it is real or not.

Comments are closed.