In terms of the historical claim, if one investigates the historical records and various theological writings, there are quite a few references to the burial linens of Jesus. I will also have a Postscript at the end of the article to highlight some important recent information regarding the damaged credibility of the Shroud’s C-14 test. See my eight-hundred-page book, The 1988 C-14 Dating Of The Shroud of Turin: A Stunning Exposé. But, serious problems have been noted about that dating test. Crucifixion was outlawed in the 4th century, so it’s unlikely that the Shroud dates later than that. It has real blood on it and was not produced by an artist. They concluded that the image was that a real form of a scourged, crucified man. Impressively, they published their findings in twenty-four peer-reviewed scientific journals. These claims conflict with the findings in 1978 of scientific team called the Shroud of Turin Research Project, which performed a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary testing of the cloth. That claim, along with the supposedly “95% confidence” factor of the 1988 C-14 dating of the Shroud to 1260-1390, makes skeptics feel confident that the Shroud is simply a medieval forgery. On the contrary, the Shroud of Turin (or Turin Shroud), as it is known today, was only called that starting in 1578, when the cloth was brought to Turin, where it has been ever since, apart from a few years during World War II, when it was moved from Turin to protect it from Adolf Hitler. One of the most common claims by those skeptical of the authenticity of the Turin Shroud, believed by many to be the burial cloth of Jesus, is that there are no references in history to Jesus’ burial shroud before it surfaced in Lirey, France about the mid-1350s.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |