Tuesday, 06 October 2009
-
Religious Relic or Holy Hoax: Does The Shroud of Turin Matter?
When I was a kid, I wanted to be an archaeologist. Artifacts and relics always fascinated me, and having grown up in the Catholic church, I have had many chances to see relics up close. A relic supposedly from the true cross of Jesus is housed at a chapel just a few miles from my home town, along with hundreds of other relics said to belong to saints and Christian figures. I've spent many hours gazing at these relics, wondering about their origins and their legitimacy. Perhaps the most widely known—and hotly debated—relic is the Shroud of Turin. Said by many to be the burial cloth of Jesus, it has come under much scrutiny, in part due to carbon dating tests conducted in the 1980s that suggested it was made sometime in the 1300s, well after the death of Jesus. Debated, too, is the nature of the image on the shroud, which skeptics claim is a forgery, perhaps a painting or some sort of chemical wash made to appear as though the crucified body of Christ was wrapped inside.
Though the subject has taken a bit of a back seat in recent years, debate has flared up again this week with the announcement that an Italian chemist has replicated the shroud using methods that would have been available to artisans and chemists in the 1300s. Luigi Garlaschelli, professor of organic chemistry at the University of Pavia, showed Reuters photographs which he will present to a conference on the para-normal later this week.
According to the published report, Garlaschelli and helpers used a very simple method, in which they “placed a linen sheet flat over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid.” The article goes on to say:
The pigment was then artificially aged by heating the cloth in an oven and washing it, a process which removed it from the surface but left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud. He believes the pigment on the original Shroud faded naturally over the centuries.
They then added blood stains, burn holes, scorches and water stains to achieve the final effect.
The end result is convincing; a side-by-side comparison can be seen on the Reuters website.
While many will rebuke Garlaschelli, claiming he is just another of those seeking to debunk honest Christian heirlooms, his is the most seemingly realistic attempt at recreating the Shroud of Turin, or any holy artifact for that matter. It certainly begs the question: what if it really is a fraud?
Would it matter to you if the Shroud of Turin was a hoax?
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: modernmelody
- Name: Rebecca
- About Me: I'm the lead editor for Revelife!
-
True
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 3 162 Views: 3433 163383 Comments: 36 2662 View all posts by modernmelody
Comments (24)
I read about that this morning. The picture scared me and i had to turn on the lights. I don't know about it though...I'm skeptic but at the same time i want to believe. I wouldn't care though if it was a hoax. Oh well, but either way, you gotta admit that religion makes really good mystery, thriller and horror movies.
This is what is termed "fantastic archaelogy". All these supposed artifacts - the holy grail, the shroud of turin, the real cross, the nails, the spear, etc - even if they were the real ones related to Christ... there is no way to prove them. As for the shroud of turin, even if it was dated to the 1st century, it could have belonged to any man.
Furthermore, these items don't really contribute to the development of theology and the faith of a follower of Christ. In fact, Jesus himself said that a person is more blessed to believe without seeing. I think that most of these original artifacts have been lost through time, and that somewhere further along the line, people created these hoaxes. What one should focus on is what is NOT there; the dead body of Christ.
not really. i never believed in the shroud anyway.
I have no idea why it would matter. I don't believe in the concept of relics, though I think they're historically interesting. I've never thought the Shroud was real, though. What's the point? Jesus rose from the dead, shroud or not.
It wouldn't affect my faith if it's not authentic, but I'm still not convinced 100% that it's a forgery. Here's a site with more info. LINK
I'm one of the least sentimental people you will ever come into contact with, so I wouldn't care if they were able to prove that the Shroud of Turin was, in fact, the one that was wrapped around the body of Jesus. It wouldn't increase my faith, and the evidence suggesting its falsity doesn't do anything to dwindle it. That goes for all relics, including, though not limited to, the face of Christ or the Virgin Mary on a piece of toast (I'd probably eat it...toast is yummy). I don't know if that's just one more way I'm jaded, but I don't get how having the Spear of Destiny, true or false, would do anything for anyone's faith.
if it really is a fraud you, as a Christian, shouldn't let ur faith be rattled by something like this.
My faith is not in a shroud, it is in Christ. Now, if they found Jesus of Nazareth himself, driver's license and social security number, birthmarks and DNA and all to prove it, I might wonder.
It wouldn't affect me much, as I already believed it was a hoax. (More specifically, it was a 13th-century piece of pious artwork that got taken way too seriously in our credulous age.)
Now if they disprove the image of St. Columba that appeared on my French toast this morning.... I'll have to become a Pastafarian!
How about just silly? Way too much time and money has been spent on this nonsense. Another way Christians make themselves look stupid.
no it would not matter... to suggest the importance of some thing where people can idolize it and venerate it is just plain stupid... especially when Jesus is already alive and there's no need for a shroud...
Nope, no,0, never had and never will make a different. Just a piece of cloth.
The question is: Is carbon dating accurate? They mess up on this one
If the shroud is a fake...it's unfortunate, but not the end of the world or my faith.
I'm in agreement with all of you. I'd be disappointed, having been interested in it for quite some time and having been raised to believe it's the real thing, but I don't think it would affect my relationship with Christ.
@tau_1@xanga - C14 dating is extremely accurate. It's fairly straightforward particle physics.
@GodlessLiberal@xanga - Not so accurate:First, for carbon-14 dating to be accurate, one must assume the rate of decay of carbon-14 has remained constant over the years. would you agree?
@tau_1@xanga - You make it sound like guesswork. I assume it has a standard rate of decay the same way I assume a carbon atom has six protons.
It wouldn't matter to my faith if the shroud is a hoax after all. The controversy is interesting to me because of all the effort and technology that has gone into trying to find out about the Shroud of Turin, and because hey, it would be cool if it were real and it would still be very interesting as an elaborate hoax. But it can't be proved to be real, anyway. Disproved, perhaps, or close enough.
It is hard to over look carbon dating. Until that obstacle is overcome, there is little to conclusively indicate that the Shroud is authentic.
@GodlessLiberal@xanga - changing the environments surrounding the samples can alter decay rates. The reason why i stated this was:The Shroud of Turin, claimed to be the burial cloth of Christ, was supposedly dated by a blind test. Actually, the control specimens were so dissimilar that the technicians at the three laboratories making the measurements could easily tell which specimen was from the Shroud. This would be like taking a piece of wood and two marbles and submitting them to the lab with the instructions that “one of these is from an ancient ponderosa pine, guess which.” The test would have been blind if the specimens had been reduced to carbon powder before they were given to the testing laboratories. Humans are naturally biased. We tend to see what we want to see, and explain away unwanted data.
And what you personally described is the basic building block of matter. And this is a fact.
I believe that I have a piece of the True Cross. If you go to my postings at http://www.scribd.com/people/documents/10919180-robert you will find more pictures and do read: Unbelievable Story: Holy Artifact and The Rest of the Story and you decide.
Always assumed that Catholics were the only ones interested in relics, golden statues, crucifixes etc. I was raised Protestant and we looked upon these "proofs" as heathenism; you know like Dostoyevsky's "authority, miracle, mystery" [Grand Inquisitor]. Real faith needs no materialistic show, miracle or things to "gaze upon". I have the Son, and so have the Father too. What need of there is anything else? These so-called proofs are allowed so that many may be deceived and unfortunately many have been and will continue to be.
It matters because it shows te length to which people will go to keep there myth alive and fool the weak of mind, uneducated, the sick and the old. The shroud of Turin has been PROVEN - through the latest in scientific technology - the same technology that we all accept in court as evidence beyond a reasonable doubt- to be a cleverly crafted FRAUD.
I cant wait for the google search experts to present "evidence" to the contrary.Keep the myth alive Christians -- your credibility and your imagined power over others demands it!