Featured New Evidence for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin

In my view this posted video is the most thrilling and faith inspiring video ever posted on the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ:

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...D7AE9063394E8B1A66FAD7AE9063394E8B1&FORM=VIRE

7 facts stand out for me about the most recent Shroud of Turin research:
(1) Shroud fragments tested by C-14 dating have been scientifically shown to be a later Medieval repair job.
(2) Other independent dating techniques have dated the Shroud to a range that includes Jesus' crucifixion.
(3) Both the rare blood type AB and the blood spatter pattern are the same on both the Shroud and the Soudarion of Oviedo (Jesus' face cloth). But that face cloth was brought from Jerusalem to Spain around 400 AD. So that already shatters the alleged medieval date of the Shroud.
(4) Israeli fabric experts have demonstrated that ancient Hebrew measurements (Hebrew cubits) and composition requirements were meticulously used to satisfy ancient Jewish standards for the Shroud.
(5) The Shroud contains pollen from plants unique to the Palestine region.
(6) Scientists can't explain how the image on the Shroud was created, but it shows all the signs of having covered a body tortured by a Roman flagrum and then crucified.
(7) The Shroud's image seems to have been created by an unknow radiation source (not by a burn). I'm thrilled by the possibility that this radiation many have been produced by the act of bodily Resurrection!

 

Academically trained Bible scholars are unanimous in their consensus that our Gospels offer no "proof" of Jesus' resurrection. In fact, the Gospel resurrection narratives are riddled with inconsistencies that prompt many scholars to dismiss the reports as all legends. Eventually I intend to start a thread that outlines all the apparent contradictions and then seeks to reconcile them in a historical reconstruction that allows the Gospel record to retain credibility. The discipline of Christian apologetics needs every available source of evidence to support the Gospel witness to the resurrection. The shroud has convinced some who dismiss the Gospel evidence as rubbish. For that very reason and because Christians should revere the atoning blood of Jesus, the Shroud should be viewed as incalculably precious to honest Christian seekers. As already noted, the Shroud's image seems to have been made by radiation (but not by heat) and scientists speculate that this image may well have been made by the actual miracle of the resurrection event. what a thrilling and faith-inspiring thought!

I note once again that you pontificate from ignorance and have not even bothered to watch the video to see just how compelling it is. Other posters on this site marvel at your closed-mindedness.

 

Yeshua: "Your theology comes from Jesus Seminar, and not from reputable scholars."

An ignorant, false, and presumptuous accusation leveled by someone who has little or no contact with modern published reputable Bible scholars, in contrast to myself who has been in regular contact with them at annual meetings of the Society of Biblical Literature, other learned Bible conferences, and professors at both liberal and solidly evangelical seminaries!

You are the poster boy for Jesus' portrait of a presumptuous judgmental spirit. Though I have academic colleagues in the Jesus' Seminar, I myself am a devout evangelical apologist who recognizes the need to honestly acknowledge the troublesome issues that really matter as a foundation for mounting an effective Christ-honoring counter-argument in defense of the Gospel. Your closed-mindedness illustrates why many honest seekers shun the Gospel because of what they rightly perceive as an intellectual dishonesty that they find abhorrent.

The new evidence for the Shroud's authenticity has revived the faith of many disillusioned seekers and has brought glory to Christ's name. Also apologetically helpful is the Nazareth tablet authorized by either Emperor Tiberias or Claudius that pronounces the death penalty on grave robbers. The normal Roman penalty for grave robbing was a stiff fine, but this tablet has in mind the claims of Jesus' disciples that the empty tomb indicates Jesus' bodily resurrection. As such, it has apologetic value because it demonstrates that the Romans had not idea what happened to Jesus' corpse and because it helps refute the skeptics'; view that Roman soldiers removed Jesus' corpse after the Sabbath ended and followed the standard Roman policy of dumping it in an unmarked pit with the 2 thieves on the cross. On this view, when Jesus' followers found the tomb empty, they wrongly concluded that Jesus had risen bodily from the dead. Such efforts to explain away the empty tomb are refuted by the Nazareth tablet.

Yeshua: "You should have stated it as those so called scholars trained at liberal/critical schools, who deny that the scriptures are fully inspired by god, and are trustworthy in all that they affirm!"

The problematic inconsistencies of the Gospel resurrection narratives are universally recognized by evangelical and mainstream Bible scholars alike. Some of these scholars reject the historicity of ALL Gospel resurrection accounts just for that reason. Your faith is protected only by your blissful and naïve ignorance of the relevant issues and by your consistent refusal to even read posts and watch videos with evidence that disagrees with your blindly embraced pontifications. You will in for a rude shock when my proposed thread outlines these problematic inconsistencies. But fear not! I will then explore ways to harmonize them all in a narrative sequence that makes sense, removes the contradictions, and connects these stories with eyewitness testimony.

When I teach Christian apologetics, I remind students that a good apologist learns to summarize the case of his skeptic opponents more clearly, succinctly, and accurately than the opponents are capable of themselves. Most wannabe Christian apologists are ineffective because they create a bogus straw man of their opponents perspective, so they can knock it down and feel righteous. ​

 

Why do you assume that this thread is motivated by a desire to convince already committed Christians of Christ's resurrection? Why do you trivialize an effective evangelistic tool that opens skeptical hearts to the possibility of Christ's resurrection, hearts that previously dismissed the Gospel witness as legendary? To be an effective witness is to be alert to what opens unbelieving hearts to the Gospel. But it seems that some posters here are far more interested in feeling "right" about their own faith rationales than they are about seeking out ways tht help persuade the lost about the redemptive significance of Christ's death and resurrection.

I can only conclude that some posters here don't love Christ enough to treasure the thought of what He actually looked like. As for me, I treasure the possibility of Jesus appearing as He really looks: "Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day--and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing (1 Timothy 4:8)."

The first 10+ minutes of this shorter video eloquently makes the case that the soudarion (= face cloth) of Jesus at Oviedo in Spain was the cloth referred to in John 20:4-6):

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...B216A750D08734361C6AB216A750D087343&FORM=VIRE

 

Agedman: "Rejection of the Gospel accounts is exactly the typical modernist thinking of the "liberal and evangelical seminaries." They have ALWAYS brought discredit to the Scripture accounts in some manner. It is that which is part of their ungodliness."

Just the opposite is the truth. Naïve believers like yourself put your head in the sand and ignore the apparent inconsistences in the NT's resurrection stories that cause seekers to reject the Gospel. Evangelical seminaries and apologists like myself have a passion for souls great enough to wade into Bible difficulties that create stumbling blocks for faith to discover answers that are useful in winning the lost to Christ.

Agedman: "You, by representation, are in agreement with them and therefore are also of little credible stature in the Scriptures much less honoring the validity of the Scripture accounts. This is why historically such must rely upon relics, and signs, rather than that faith once delivered. They are one who claim to be alive, but are filled with apostasy."

How presumptuously judgmental, ignorant, and absurd! The apparently inconsistencies are recognized by every Bible scholar, fundamentalist and liberal alike. What I take seriously is the need to first acknowledge these difficulties and then solve them in a way that removes barriers to faith. In other words, unlike yourself, I take seriously Peter's admonition in 1 Peter 3:15:
"Always be ready to make a defense to anyone who demands an accounting of the hope that is in you "

 

agedman: "There are no "seekers," that is a myth and lie of the father of lies. The Scriptures state that non seek, that all have gone their own way. "

Spoken like a badly misinformed Calvinist. In fact, most sinners who come to Christ come as a result of a spiritual journey and hence are seekers. My family and I have had the privilege of bringing some such seekers to Christ. How many sinners have you brought to Christ?

agedman: "See that is what I ask of you to do, make an accounting, but how cunning you avoid the issue."
Your malignant spirit forces you to prejudge someone new to this site whom you barely know. My future threads and posts will offer personal testimonies and insights that you can't imagine.

agedman: "...if you find some who claim to be fundamentalists that hold to what you have stated, they are liars, and no not the truth."

On the contrary, every serious Bible student eventually encounters problems requiring resolution such as the apparent inconsistencies of the Resurrection narrative. Only your biblical ignorance has protected you from such questions and the doubts they often create. But to be a true believer is to have the courage to doubt in an effort to better discern the truth and the evidence for it. Your sad closed-mindedness and insulation against the big bad world of modern scholarship has protected you from this, thus making you a ineffective witness to those who need guidance to overcome their barriers to faith.

Now, quit avoiding the 1 Peter 3:15 and give an accounting of the hope that is in you.

agedman: "Your own statements indicate that such hope of yours is based on myths and signs, and not on the personal work of the Holy Spirit in conversion and preservation."

You are pathetically judgmental towards someone to whom you have had limited exposure. You will have to give an account for your negative spirit. Have you even bothered to read my testimony in my "Babbling against Speaking in Tongues" thread? I have actively practiced street evangelism and have helped others perform this difficult form of evangelism. Have you? I was so hungry to learn all I could about biblical truth that I was enrolled in theological grad school programs for 13 years to help make me a more effect witness and apologist for the faith. Have you made a sacrifice even remotely close to such dedication.

I consider Joseph Smith and The Book of Mormon to be totally fraudulent. But I have more confidence in the salvation of some Mormons I have met than I have in yours or Yeshua's. These Mormons are humble and are truly grateful to their salvation by grace through faith in Christ's finished atoning work on the cross and they testify to God's miraculous power as demonstrated by His answers to their prayers and guidance in daily living. Upon hearing those testimonies, I used my influence to change the minds of our evangelical ministerial association into allowing Mormons full membership. Praise God!

Your posts show you grasp at sand, and have nothing to offer but smoke and mirrors, trickery, and fable of no truth.[/QUOTE]

 

If the Shroud is authentic, then the most important witness to its ancient preservation is its ancient
Ivenerated at Edessa in what was then eastern Syria in the era of the early church. Ancient church tradition claims that the apostle Thomas brought Christianity to Edessa and was buried there. Scholars argue that the Coptic Gospel of Thomas (114 sayings of Jesus from oral tradition) was composed at Edessa in the late first century AD. No reputable scholar claims that Thomas actually wrote this Gospel, but its origin at Edessa may attest the fact that the version of the sayings of Jesus in this Gospel originated from Thomas's witness at Edessa.

"What is not legend, nor speculation, is that the cloth, with an image of what was in the sixth century believed to be a true and miraculous facial image of Jesus, was found in the walls of the city in the sixth century. During repairs of the city walls in 525 CE, or more likely, during a Persian invasion of the city in 544 CE, the cloth was discovered where it had been concealed above one of the city gates. At the time, a church was built especially for it. It was, to the people of Edessa, the lost cloth of the legend." (quoted from http://greatshroudofturinfaq.com/Definitions/edessa.html)

Despite various scientific tests that date the Shroud to the time of Christ, to be certain we must await further Carbon-14 testing from a portion of the Shroud that has not been contaminated by a Medieval interweaving of wool in damaged parts of it. When and whether the Vatican might authorize such a new effort at authentication is unknown.

 

That's like asking, "Why need do you need your family albums?" Because you love your family members and old friends and you love to revive old memories and see your loved ones at different stages of their lives. I don't know about you, but I revere the thought of gazing on His blood stains that atoned for my sins. I also long to one day see Him face to face and that love has a collateral longing to know what He looked like when He once walked this earth.

Also, because scientists can't explain the unknown radiation (not a heart source!) that created the Shroud's image, I',m fascinated by speculation that this image may have been produced by the actual event of bodily resurrection.