Jesus proof ‘dashed’ as study says Shroud of Turin does NOT show son of God & image couldn’t have come from human body
THE Shroud of Turin mystery continues as a bombshell study rules out the theory that the artefact was used as Jesus’ burial cloth.
Several theories have been made about the famed shroud which carries the imprint of the face and body of a bearded man that some believe resembles the son of God.
The shroud appears to show a man with sunken eyes who is between 5ft 7in to 6ft tall.
Some claim markings on the body resemble horror crucifixion wounds.
Signs of wounds from a thorny crown on the head, injuries to the arms and shoulders and lacerations to the back have all been reported by researchers.
However, a new study suggests that the impression of the print could not have come from Jesus’ head and that it is unlikely he ever touched it.
Various groups have repeatedly viewed the cloth with suspicion, as its documented history only starts in the mid-14th century in France when a bishop deemed it to be a fake.
Jesus’ death is believed to have taken place around 30-36AD.
While some believe it was the genuine material used to prepare the body of Christ for burial, others have disregarded the shroud as a medieval hoax.
Writer and researcher Cicero Moraes has added fuel to the fire by suggesting that the impression on the linen sheet could not have been made by a human body.
Instead, it was more likely created from a shallow carving, also known as a bas-relief, he claims in the new study.
To carry out this research, Moraes built a virtual simulation in which a fabric was placed over a body in a bid to replicate the famous shroud.
But the virtual fabric, when laid flat, showed “a distorted and significantly more robust image” than that on the shroud as a result of the change from 3D to 2D.
The imprints from the scalp and toes of the body were splayed outward in an odd manner while large parts of the torso, groin, and neck do not show at all, unlike the print on the original cloth.
The only time he could get an impression similar to the one on the historical artefact was when he used a shallow carving rather than a body.
“The explanation of the differences is very simple,” he said.
“When you wrap a 3D object with a fabric, and that object leaves a pattern like blood stains, these stains generate a more robust and more deformed structure in relation to the source.
“So, roughly speaking, what we see as a result of printing stains from a human body would be a more swollen and distorted version of it, not an image that looks like a photocopy.
“A bas-relief, however, wouldn’t cause the image to deform, resulting in a figure that resembles a photocopy of the body.”
As a result, Moraes is doubtful that the linen sheet was ever touched by Jesus’ body.
What are the theories about the Shroud of Turin?
SCHOLARS have wondered what caused the image on the Shroud of Turin for centuries. Here are some of the main theories.
- It’s a painting – Some believe that the Shroud was painted but investigations into this theory haven’t shown any signs of paint being present on the cloth
- It’s a natural process – Raymond Rogers of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico argued in 2002 that a chemical transformation could cause it. He suggested that even moderate heat of around 40C or so, a temperature that post-mortem physicians told him a dead body could briefly attain if the person died from hyperthermia or dehydration – could be enough to discolour the sugary carbohydrate compounds that might be found on the surface of cotton fibres.
- It’s a photo – Scholars have concluded that the image is a “negative” meaning that it is dark where it should be light. This has led to some scholars suggesting it could be a form of primitive photography. The key to the idea is the light-sensitive compound silver nitrate which was known in the 8th Century but no evidence has been found that they could use it in this manner.
- It was caused by the Resurrection – The final theory is that the image was caused by the divine process that brought Jesus back to life. Some Christians believe that the picture on the cloth was caused by energy released when Christ was revived on the first Easter Sunday.
“I think the possibility of this having happened is very remote,” the Brazilian graphics expert concluded.
However, when addressing which side of the debate he falls on, he did not commit to calling the artefact a total forgery, saying that its qualities are more artistic than historic.
“I am inclined towards another approach: that it is in fact a work of Christian art, which managed to convey its intended message very successfully,” he explained.
“It seems to me more like a non-verbal iconographic work that has very successfully served the purpose of the religious message contained within.”
CONFLICTING THEORIES
Moraes’ study comes just months after a group of scientists claimed to have found evidence suggesting that the imprint of Jesus is real.
Researchers in Italy used X-ray technology to determine the age of the cloth and concluded that it was made around 2,000 years ago – the same time when Jesus was said to have lived and died.
Most estimates say Jesus was crucified in AD 33, based on the Julian calendar, Bible passages and gospels from the time – 1,990 years ago.
This study directly conflicted with findings from 1988 when the shroud was radiocarbon-dated to 1260-1390AD which does not correspond with the dates of Jesus’ life and death.
In 2013, another Italian researcher claimed to have dated the fibres of the Shroud to between 300 and 400 AD.
Five years later in 2018, researchers claimed the blood flow on the shroud was not consistent with that of what a bleeding body would produce.
It seems that the mystery is set to continue with experts from both camps going back and forth about the origins of the cloth.
Even The Vatican has held different positions on the artefact.
In 1390, Pope Clement VII declared that it was not authentic, but was “a painting or panel made to represent or imitate the shroud”.
Then, in 1506, Pope Julius II reversed course and declared it was authentic after all.
Modern popes have spoken of it with reverence, but have generally stopped short of declaring it genuine.
Pope Francis has referred to the Shroud as an “icon of a man scourged and crucified.”
However, it has not been labelled as a relic which are artefacts that the Church believes to be real.
Despite this, the Shroud remains one of the most important artefacts in the world and its mystery is set to continue.
The artefact has been preserved in the royal chapel of the Cathedral of San Giovanni Battista in Turin, Italy since 1578.