Controversial new theories on the Shroud of Turin

"What seems to have happened is that there was a chemical reaction between the decomposition products on the body and the carbohydrate deposits on the cloth," said de Wesselow. The conclusion of one of the STURP scientists was that a chemical process known as a Maillard reaction had occurred. (It's the same reaction that causes the crust of bread to go brown in the oven.)

High definition photography has brought new detail to the case made by the cloth itself. Its size, roughly 3 1/2 feet by 14 feet; its distinct herringbone weave; even the way a seam was sewn is consistent with ancient burial cloths found near Jerusalem. Pollen samples taken from it show that, at some time, it was near Jerusalem and in Turkey.

For just a moment, suppose Thomas de Wesselow's theory is right. The implication that the image on the Shroud is authentic, but can be explained by scientific evidence - and what it means to a cornerstone of Christianity - is stunning.

"I'm obviously not the first person to deny that the Resurrection happened," said de Wesselow. "Some people will dismiss [the book]. Some people will be intrigued by it. And some people may change their attitudes on one thing or another by it."

Yale Divinity School Dean Attridge said, "For many, many mainstream Protestants and Catholics, certainly evangelical Protestants, you have a notion that you need the resurrected body in the way that it's described in Luke and John. That was not Paul's belief. Paul did not have a belief in the physical resurrection of Jesus. And I tend to agree with Paul. But it remains something of a mystery."

. . . as does the history and meaning of the Shroud of Turin. There is, after all, the carbon dating evidence, confirmed by three different labs. The Catholic Church, owner of the Shroud, accepted those findings. But when it was on display in 2010, Pope Benedict called it "a burial cloth, which wrapped the body of a man crucified in total conformity with what the evangelists tell us of Jesus..."

So, what is the truth?

For more info:

• "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection" by Thomas de Wesselow (Dutton)
• The Church of St. Ignatius Loyola, New York, N.Y.
• Yale Divinity School

• « Previous Page
• 1
• 2

[WhatIfitsTrue]

If the image of the shroud could simply be made by the decomposition of a corpse, it would have been a commonplace occurrence with many dead bodies wrapped in linen in the 1st century. As a result, it would have been typical to see these shroud-type images. It is doubtful that people would have believed that Christ resurrected simply upon seeing just another typical burial cloth image. Even if the image were somehow unique though, it is still doubtful that Christianity would have flourished as a result of people seeing the image alone and somehow assigning resurrection to it. Would the early believers really have thought it worthwhile to suffer certain alienation, torture, and death for such a loose association?

[Calledtobeme]

I don't think an image on a cloth could talk to people or reason or comfort or philosophize. No one would have been fooled by a cloth and see it as the resurrected Lord. This art historian is crazy. I am surprised he is even bothering to put his hypothesis into a book. No one worships a talking cloth. Jesus had to come back in the flesh (Thomas) to be believed. I don't think scholars are going to be clamoring to talk to him (the writer). It's just mediocre journalists who would.

[skarlet36]

If I am close at all, then he would of had be left in the sunlight for an hour or more for the reaction to happen. But the more time the darker the image. It would really depend on the light sensitive blend of the resin/oil and the fluids that were on him at the time of death and after.

[susannahCBS]

My theory is,the oils used on jesus's body, that came from a rich man (Joesph from aramathea),that probably got transfered onto the shroud may cause it to age slower than any other material.Who knows that may be a silly theory.

[skarlet36]

my comment was cut short

[skarlet36]

Well if you look up the process(physautotype), it makes more sense. The oil itself would not be the light sensitive component, but the minute amount of resin residue introduced/mixed with an alcoholic substance creates a light/heat sensitive emulsion. the cloth would not have had to absorb much of it as long as the elements were mixed together. It can dry overnight in the dark for days but when introduced to light it can develop. An accident that "can" happen in this situation.

[skarlet36]

Well, I am a budding old school 1830's photographer, everyones first observation is that it looks like a negative. Well it probobley is, who would ever paint a negative, does that make any sense? really. pft. Well. This image looks a lot like a Physautotype pos/neg. Simply made from a resin, such as lavender, frankensense, viola resins and alcoholor another acidic substance, salt from sweat or vinigar etc. mixed together then introduced to the sun. If he had any of these elements on him from burial ritual then got wrapped in a linin the sun shining on the linin and onto him would reflect then burn the negative image into the cloth. I am currently experimenting with this using figurines. This is an easy accident to make happen. Well that is my 2cents of active speculation. thanks all.

[SrAntonio]

There is a movie coming out about Cloning Jesus starring Christopher Walken called "The Power of Few". Comes out in March 2013. In this film, the Shorud of Turin is stolen.

[dperson626]

Until someone can explain how a medieval artist could have produced a three dimensional photographic negative on a piece of cloth I will believe that the only explanation for the image is that it a message from God.

The image is produced by a single ocher color that does not permeate the cloth beyond the outermost fibers, and does not "soak" through them. It was definitely not painted onto the cloth. There simply is no way it could have been manufactured in the 13th century. It could not be done today with all our science.

Christ was laid out on the lower half of the shroud which was then folded over the body. Every wound suffered by Christ is represented on the shroud in clear detail, front and back. I don't have an explanation for the carbon dating except to say that the presence of the image is real and unexplainable, and tests can be affected by many factors.

It Is The Christ!

[nks1991]

Amen Bro! Why do people not go where the evidence leads them? Because they don't want to face the truth. Jesus said the one that loves him, is the one that listens to his commands. john ch10:2-4,9

[skarlet36]

A midieval artist did not produce a 3d image. I think you do not comprehend what a physiotipe is. Some call it a physautotype. It does seem as though the curiosity of the shroud had led to the discovery of the photographic process. Why?? Because it was the oldest photographic image that stayed "fixed" a feat that could not be accomplished by the modern people of the 1800's. The ingredients are Bituman and alcohol. Basicly resin residuals from frankincense and myrrh oils mixed with alcoholic substance could produce a light/heat sensitive photochemical mix that could be impressed upon a cloth.

That said, things like what caused the shroud to exist could of happened. Very easy and on accident. As Jesus was being punished, I think that he had alcoholic containing substances thrown on him, soaking his hair and entire body. When he was brought down after death, I can imagine crudely processed oils which likely contained resins from processing being wiped on him from head to toe as part of a burial process and respect paid. So now his body is soaked/mixed with alcohol, oils, containing resins, and maybe a litte water. After this the body is laid on the shroud and the imprint is made on the back side of the shroud. The shroud is then folded over his top side and tucked in, and now the imprint is made on the front of the shroud. Now what???? I would suspect that the cloth was removed from the body and was replaced by a fresh one, or not. The saturated one then was taken away then hung to dry. It would of dried and now the invisible imprint that "could of" been washed clean, but didnt now reacts to the heat and UV of the sunlight. The result of this is a miraculous image of Jesus. The first known photo image to stay "fixed" a genuine surprise/shock to be the first beholder.
In that time it was used as a proof of life after death. The spirit moving on. A very powerful image to promote the orgin of its faith in that era and the mindset of the time.
Why would somone take it and replace it with another? Heavy emotional sentiment, as well as respect.

My information can not be disproved only challenged or improved upon, meaning clarified in specifics and variables as to which there are.

The true miracle eludes the common. The miracle that out of all the people this incident could of happened to, it happened to the most outstanding figure in the world to this day. That is 1 in how many???as well as likely leading to the investigation and study of photography, which leads to all the imagery we have today.

Faith is faith, none of this information can nullify any faith in anything. You either have it or dont. Edification should not be necessary, if it were it would not be faith.

[earlybird4]

Also Mary Magdalene is not in the painting of the last supper - that suppossed "woman" was one of the desciples - Thomas or Timothy I believe. Wishful thinking on Dan Browns side.

[earlybird4]

Jesus was wrapped first in strips of bandages just like Egyptians were then placed in the shroud. Paul knew that Jesus was indeed the son of God when he saw the tomb because just the shell of the strips of cloth and the shroud were still there with no body! I don't know why some people like to deliberately leave info out. The shroud was supposed to be recarbon dated but has not been yet - why? I would think that the catholic church would be willing to get this done - what better thing could you do then to prove that it is true.

[luz_kalifah]

I have never seen so much ignorance in one place.

I will agree that Christianity is "questionable", as is there is no mention of it in the Holy Bible, and it is a man made organized religion.

I personally believe in spirituality, however, my opinion is derived strictly from a scientifiic standpoint.

Several facts were omitted in this article. You should conduct your own research.

*The shroud is obviously not an artwork as there is no medium.

*The image is a 3-Dimensional image on a 2-Dimensional cloth that can be referenced for information.

You should see the History Channel's doc on the S.T.U.R.P. project, at the least.

[mylilpony23]

christianity isnt questionable becuase christianity is to be Christ like that is why its not mentioned in the bible.Jesus created the relationship so not its not man made.catholicism was man made.

[cheubim]

The Da Vinci code pretend a secret marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene and the real blood of the grail is inside Mary based on the painting of the last supper by Leonardo Da Vinci.Even thousands have traveled to Louvre museum to see that painting.The truth is that the real Holy blood of Jesus is on His forehead and not in the womb of Mary Magdalene.This is shown in the real and true story The Coin Of The temple by Souheil Bayoud.The real idiots who believe a liar and travel to Louvre instead of Lourdes and Turin.