Using both human and synthetic blood, they were unable to find a single position in which the blood flowed onto experimental cloths to create the stain pattern on the Shroud of Turin. Now, researchers are using forensic techniques to argue the blood stains on the shroud couldn’t have come from Christ.įorensic anthropologist Matteo Borrini and chemistry professor Luigi Garlaschelli used a live volunteer and a mannequin to study how blood from Jesus’ crucifixion and spear would have flowed onto his burial shroud. As recently as 2009, researchers discredited the Shroud of Turin by claiming they’d found Jesus’ “real” burial cloth. It’s not the only possible relic associated with Christ-others include a crown of thorns at the Notre-Dame Cathedral and Christ’s supposed foreskin, allegedly stolen from Calcata, Italy around 1983-but it’s produced one of the most heated debates. The Shroud of Turin, a 14-foot linen cloth bearing an image of a crucified man, first surfaced in 1354. However, new forensic research suggests the holy shroud might not be the real deal. ![]() John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, since 1578. One of the most famous candidates is the Shroud of Turin, so named because it has been housed in the Cathedral of St. ![]() The Vatican continues to encourage scientists to study the shroud, and Christians to venerate it as an inspiring image of Christ.Over the past several centuries, many people have claimed to have found Jesus’ original burial cloth. The burial sheets have a significant role in the Resurrection Gospels, and both Luke and John describe them as inspiring Peter’s faith when he saw them in the empty tomb: “He saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the cloth that had been on Jesus’s head, not lying with the linen wrappings but rolled up in a place by itself.” (John 20:6-7) Pope Francis made a pilgrimage to see the shroud in 2015. It is believed that the shroud was brought to Europe from Constantinople at the time of the Fourth Crusade – its history cannot be traced further back.Īlthough recent popes have not commented on the shroud’s authenticity, St John Paul II described it as “a mirror of the Gospel” and arranged for public viewings, as did Benedict XVI. “They said it was knocked up by a medieval conman, and I say: well, if he could do it, you must be able to do it as well,” Rolfe continued. “If this is a forgery it’s the most ingenious forgery in history,” he said, “and of course it dates back almost 2,000 years, to a time of far less sophisticated forgery techniques.”Īlthough the manufacture of the cloth has been carbon-dated to some point between 12, it is still unknown how the image on it was produced. Rolfe, whose research into the shroud led to his conversion to Christianity, has now released a new film, Who Can He Be?, which argues that its authenticity remains an open question. It has reposed at Turin cathedral since the sixteenth century, traditionally revered as the burial cloth mentioned in all four Gospel versions of the Crucifixion – “They took the body of Jesus and wrapped it with the spices in linen cloths, according to the burial custom of the Jews.” (John 19:40) ![]() The shroud is a strip of linen cloth bearing the shadowy imprint of the body of a crucified man, as if it had been folded over him at the head. He has challenged the museum, which ran the tests, to create a replica, promising a $1 million donation if they can. A film-maker has issued a million-dollar challenge to the British Museum to prove that the Turin Shroud is a fake.ĭavid Rolfe, whose 1978 documentary The Silent Witness investigated the mystery surrounding the relic, said that he remains unconvinced by the 1988 tests which seemed to show that the shroud was a medieval forgery.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |