Why isn't the shroud of turin in the bible

[BreadOfLife]

We're told to test all things against the Scriptures. Catholic doctrine, dogma traditions are not Scriptures.

I see nothing in the Bible says to use anything other than the Bible for study and testing.

SHOW me where Scripture states what YOU have said above in RED . . .

 

[gadar perets]

His face fits the time.. Short hair with no beard.

I don't understand this comment. The image on the shroud has shoulder length hair and a beard. Yeshua also has a beard.

 

[gadar perets]

John 21:25 holds the answer.
John writes:

John 21:25
There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.

Jesus performed PLENTY of miracles in the Gospel which are written about.
If these can’t convince you – NOTHING will.

This last statement is true, but the opposite answers Andrew's question better. He asked, "However another factor to consider is this there is no mention of a linen cloth with the image of Jesus ANYWHERE in the bible, so the question I have is, if the shroud of turin is the burial cloth of Christ why would such a miracle be left out of the bible"

The answer is in John 21:25 - Because many things that happened concerning Yeshua are NOT written about.

 

[gadar perets]

Does the shroud violate the teachings of the bible

Since it was and is venerated to the degree of idolatry as was the brazen serpent (2 Kings 18:4), then yes, it violates Biblical teachings. The shroud should be destroyed just as the brazen serpent was in order to prevent further idolatry. If it is a true image of Yeshua, then it will continue to be worshiped and must be destroyed. If it is not an image of Yeshua, then nothing is lost by destroying it. It is only a piece of cloth. If one claims it cannot be destroyed because of its archaeological value, that did not stop Hezekiah from destroying an ancient artifact.

 

[CoreIssue]

The burial customs of the Jews agree with what the Bible said.

John 20:7 New International Version (NIV)
7 as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen.

I don't understand this comment. The image on the shroud has shoulder length hair and a beard. Yeshua also has a beard.

I was not clear enough. It does not have the massive beard and hair many envision.

1 Corinthians 11:14-15 New International Version (NIV)
14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15 but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.

 

[Nancy]

Why wouldn't a miracle like that not be in the bible

John 21:25 New King James Version (NKJV)
"25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen."

As far as signs and wonders are concerned: "Blessed is he who believes without seeing..."
1 Corinthians 1:22
19For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. 22For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: 23But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; 24But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. 25Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

 

[Nancy]

The burial customs of the Jews agree with what the Bible said.

John 20:7 New International Version (NIV)
7 as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen.



I was not clear enough. It does not have the massive beard and hair many envision.

1 Corinthians 11:14-15 New International Version (NIV)
14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15 but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.

View attachment 5185

"14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15 but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering."

Cannot help but think about Samuel here (hair?..lol) For him, a Nazarite, long hair was his power...will have to look up some ancient BC pics I guess, ha!
I looked up pictures of 1st century Israelites and pretty much all of the paintings/engravings I saw...the men pretty much all had beards and shorter hair. I know that does not prove Jesus had shorter hair but, from what I read...it was the custom back then to have their hair "shorn".

 

[Enoch111]

Cannot help but think about Samuel here (hair?..lol) For him, a Nazarite, long hair was his power...will have to look up some ancient BC pics I guess, ha!

Did you mean Samson? That's a sad story. And that is Nazirite ( נָזִ֔יר
na·zir), not Nazarite.

 

[Nancy]

, lol. Thanks for being on it, lol.

Did you mean Samson? That's a sad story. And that is Nazirite ( נָזִ֔יר
na·zir), not Nazarite.

Oh wow...yes indeed I did . ..the mind has been going in many directions at once as of late. Thanks for being on top of it, lol.

 

[Nancy]

, lol. Thanks for being on it, lol.

Oh wow...yes indeed I did . ..the mind has been going in many directions at once as of late. Thanks for being on top of it, lol.

BTW- It can be both:
"Nazarite [N] [H]
(Heb. form Nazirite), the name of such Israelites as took on them the vow prescribed in Numbers 6:2-21 . The word denotes generally one who is separated from others and consecrated to God. Although there is no mention of any Nazarite before Samson, yet it is evident that they existed before the time of Moses. The vow of a Nazarite involved these three things, (1) abstinence from wine and strong drink, (2) refraining from cutting the hair off the head during the whole period of the continuance of the vow, and (3) the avoidance of contact with the dead."

 

[Marymog]

It is not in the bible because it is a clever Myth and fable.
Have you not seen and read the debunking of the whole thing?
Easy to find. Google works.

All the test done by STURP on the Shroud point to it's authenticity and can't be explained away. The only test that is questionable is the carbon dating test and it is has been shown that it is very likely that it was taken from a piece that was sown on by nuns hundreds of years later.

Google works wonders. One can find just as many reports supporting it's authenticity as well as debunking it.

Do we need the Shroud to affirm our faith? No.....so it does not matter if it is THE cloth that wrapped Jesus.

Mary

 

[Helen]

All the test done by STURP on the Shroud point to it's authenticity and can't be explained away. The only test that is questionable is the carbon dating test and it is has been shown that it is very likely that it was taken from a piece that was sown on by nuns hundreds of years later.

Google works wonders. One can find just as many reports supporting it's authenticity as well as debunking it.

Do we need the Shroud to affirm our faith? No.....so it does not matter if it is THE cloth that wrapped Jesus.

Mary

No one can say either way. Nothing is proved at all.
We will probably never know while in this life.

 

[Marymog]

No one can say either way. Nothing is proved at all.
We will probably never know while in this life.

I agree with your statement with one word added: no one can DEFINITIVLY say either way. However, science isn't always definitive and the scientific test done on it thus far point towards it being an authentic burial clothe of a man that was scourged, tortured and crucified.

The possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image was ruled out.

Using a VP-8 image analyzer it showed that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it.

Microchemical test showed no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death HOWEVER it is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. While this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography.

The Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist.

Experiments in physics and chemistry with old linen have failed to reproduce adequately the phenomenon presented by the Shroud of Turin.

There are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately.

The stitching pattern is similar to the hem of a cloth found in the tombs of the Jewish fortress of Masada. The Masada cloth dates to between 40 BC and 73 AD.

Three tests (two chemical and one mechanical) date the Shroud of Turin to the 1st century AD. These three text refute the radiocarbon test which were possibly taken from a newer piece of the Shroud that was sewn on by nuns after the fire that damaged it.

The answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains a mystery.

The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made the problem remains unsolved.

SUMMARY: There is NO evidence of it being a fake, however, that does not mean it was the burial clothe of Jesus.

Scientific Mary

 

[Marymog]

Do you suppose that any answer received from men is going definitely resolve the question you have asked?
We do live for God by faith, do we not?

Hi Amadeus,

I generally agree with you. We do believe by faith. How did we obtain that "faith" that Jesus was the Son of God?

Short answer: The testimony put forth in Scripture about what the Apostles saw that made them believe. The Apostles needed signs to help them believe and the first of his signs (in Cana of Galilee) revealed his glory and his disciples believed in him (John 2:11).

Paul even acknowledged that what Christ has accomplished through him to win the obedience from the Gentiles was by the power of signs and wonders (Romans 15:18).

I think the words of Jesus in John 10:37-38 summarizes it all: If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”

So @Andrew Kind @Nancy @Acolyte @ByGrace @Willie T you can rest assured that there is nothing wrong with looking for an answer from men, like what the writers of Scripture have given us and possibly even the men who studied The Shroud. There is nothing wrong with picking up a book on miracles and using all those miracles attested to by men (and women) throughout the last 2,000 years to affirm your faith. The people who walked and talked with Christ needed miracles to believe so there is nothing wrong with us needing them also. The Shroud of Turin may just be one of those things that you need to help re-affirm your faith in Him.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

No one can say either way. Nothing is proved at all.
We will probably never know while in this life.

Hi BG,

I am always curious how someone comes to a different conclusion than I do with the same evidence in front of them. I believe the STURP team's scientific study of The Turin is fascinating. They can't even explain how the image got onto or into (VP8 imaging) the clothe which compels me to believe it is PROBABLY authentic.

You said "Nothing is proved at all." Does that mean you totally disregard the STURP conclusion or you believe some parts of it? Have you found a study done by someone else that I am not aware of that is irrefutable?

Curious Mary

 

[amadeus]

Hi Amadeus,

I generally agree with you. We do believe by faith. How did we obtain that "faith" that Jesus was the Son of God?

Short answer: The testimony put forth in Scripture about what the Apostles saw that made them believe. The Apostles needed signs to help them believe and the first of his signs (in Cana of Galilee) revealed his glory and his disciples believed in him (John 2:11).

Perhaps people do need signs at times in order to help with their doubts or their lack of belief, but is it not better to be able to simply step out by faith alone?

Gideon put out his fleece twice in order to confirm it was God's will for him to proceed. But then remember what Jesus said to Thomas:

"Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." John 20:29

Paul even acknowledged that what Christ has accomplished through him to win the obedience from the Gentiles was by the power of signs and wonders (Romans 15:18).

I think the words of Jesus in John 10:37-38 summarizes it all: If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”

1
Yes, signs and miraculous occurrences are a witness to truth, but we also know that some who witnessed the miracles of Jesus and heard him speak still seemingly held to their human leaders instead of following the Master [see John 7:44-47]. Sometimes a great truth may be spoken by a really anointed man of God and yet for so many it is as water running off of a duck's back instead soaking into their hearts. Is this not explained in the parable of the sower? [Matt 13:4ff]

So @Andrew Kind @Nancy @Acolyte @ByGrace @Willie T you can rest assured that there is nothing wrong with looking for an answer from men, like what the writers of Scripture have given us and possibly even the men who studied The Shroud. There is nothing wrong with picking up a book on miracles and using all those miracles attested to by men (and women) throughout the last 2,000 years to affirm your faith. The people who walked and talked with Christ needed miracles to believe so there is nothing wrong with us needing them also. The Shroud of Turin may just be one of those things that you need to help re-affirm your faith in Him. Mary

Again, as you say, there is nothing wrong with considering the answers of men, but the one who believes without seeing is indeed blessed perhaps even more than the one who has witnessed a miracle.

 

[Willie T]

"Why aren't avocados in the Bible?" Because, just like the Shroud, they have nothing to do with Jesus.

 

[Helen]

Hi BG,

I am always curious how someone comes to a different conclusion than I do with the same evidence in front of them. I believe the STURP team's scientific study of The Turin is fascinating. They can't even explain how the image got onto or into (VP8 imaging) the clothe which compels me to believe it is PROBABLY authentic.

You said "Nothing is proved at all." Does that mean you totally disregard the STURP conclusion or you believe some parts of it? Have you found a study done by someone else that I am not aware of that is irrefutable?

Curious Mary

I'd love it to be true...but at the moment I can't 'Hang my hat on it'
I'd love them to un-ice Noah's ark too. If indeed what they see, IS Noah's ark.

 

[Marymog]

Perhaps people do need signs at times in order to help with their doubts or their lack of belief, but is it not better to be able to simply step out by faith alone?

Gideon put out his fleece twice in order to confirm it was God's will for him to proceed. But then remember what Jesus said to Thomas:

"Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." John 20:29


1
Yes, signs and miraculous occurrences are a witness to truth, but we also know that some who witnessed the miracles of Jesus and heard him speak still seemingly held to their human leaders instead of following the Master [see John 7:44-47]. Sometimes a great truth may be spoken by a really anointed man of God and yet for so many it is as water running off of a duck's back instead soaking into their hearts. Is this not explained in the parable of the sower? [Matt 13:4ff]



Again, as you say, there is nothing wrong with considering the answers of men, but the one who believes without seeing is indeed blessed perhaps even more than the one who has witnessed a miracle.

You make (quote) some very good points.

Thomas, one of the Apostles, did not believe that Jesus had risen from the dead. It was the MIRACLE of Jesus being alive after being crucified that made Thomas believe. Once again, it took a MIRACLE for him to believe....not that he just started believing because he saw Jesus. So John 20:29 re-affirms what I have said.

Basically it comes down to this: If He hadn't performed the miracles then no one would have believed Him. Without those miracles, and the continuation of miracles to this day, YOU wouldn't have even believed what was written in Scripture because they never would have believed Him. Our entire belief on Him being the Son of God rest on the TESTIMONY of the miracles. Scripture makes it clear: No miracles, no belief.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

I'd love it to be true...but at the moment I can't 'Hang my hat on it'
I'd love them to un-ice Noah's ark too. If indeed what they see, IS Noah's ark.

Thank you. That would be cool (un-ice the Ark). My family and I went to The Ark Encounter in Kentucky. Have you been?

Do you totally disregard the STURP conclusion or do you believe some parts of it? Have you found a study done by someone else that I am not aware of that is irrefutable in showing The Turin is NOT a burial clothe of a man?

Mary