Why The Shroud Of Turin Is A Good Reason To Think Christianity Is True

The Argument From The “Shroud of Turin”: The Fifth Reason To Think That Christianity Is True

In this series of videos we are building a cumulative case for Christ by looking at 10 reasons to think that Christianity is true.


This is the fifth reason in this series, The Argument From The Shroud Of Turin.


In previous videos we have seen that:


But now on top of all of that, in this video, I am going to argue that it also seems that Jesus left us a miraculous picture of His resurrection for modern science to study.


What is the Shroud of Turin?

I am talking about the Shroud of Turin. The Shroud of Turin is a 14 ft linen cloth that has a very mysterious image of a crucified man on it.

The Gospels say that after Jesus was crucified, he was buried with two cloths. A body cloth and a face cloth:

  • “Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away.” - Matthew 27:59-60
  • “So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.” - Mark 15:46
  • “Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body. Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid.” - Luke 23: 22-23
  • “Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.” - Luke 24:12
  • “Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen.” - John 19:40
  • “Then Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, 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.” - John 20:6-7

The Shroud of Turin is thought by many to be this burial cloth that wrapped the body of Jesus after His death.

Skeptics say this cloth is a medieval forgery. They say the cloth only goes back to the middle ages and that some con artist made it.

I say that, when you consider all of the evidence, the medieval forgery hypothesis is about as stupid as it gets.

In fact, in this video I’m going to tell you why I think the Shroud Of Turin is authentic and so gives us a good reason to think that Christianity is true. 

The argument runs like this:

  • Premise 1: If it is reasonable to think that the Shroud of Turin is the burial shroud of Jesus and that it has a miraculous image on it, then we have good reason to think that Christianity is true
  • Premise 2: It is reasonable to think that the Shroud of Turin is the burial shroud of Jesus and that it has a miraculous image on it
  • Conclusion: Therefore, we have good reason to think that Christianity is true

Now I am claiming here that the Shroud of Turin is AUTHENTIC and by “authentic” I mean two things: 

Historical Authenticity: First I argue for historical authenticity. Here I claim that it is reasonable to think that the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ. In other words, this single archaeological relic we now call the “Shroud of Turin”, although it was recognized by different names over the centuries, is still, nevertheless, identical to the same cloth that wrapped the body of Jesus.

Miraculous Authenticity: Second, I am going to argue for a miraculous authenticity. Here I claim that given all of the current scientific evidence available today, it is reasonable to think that the image on the Shroud of Turin has no natural cause. By “natural cause” here I mean that the image is neither one of human production nor is it a production of any natural force we commonly see in nature. If there is no natural cause for this image, then, given the religious nature and context of the Shroud, I argue that we are justified in thinking that the image on the Shroud has a supernatural cause. 

In other words, the shroud image is an authentic miracle.

So my argument is that we have good reasons to think that the Shroud of Turin is authentic in a historical sense, meaning that the shroud is the burial shroud of Jesus as talked about in the Gospels.

And I am arguing that the Shroud of Turin is authentic in a miraculous sense, meaning that there are good reasons to think the image of Jesus on the Shroud has a supernatural cause.

Now in order to do this I am going to proceed in three steps:

  1. First we will look at the case for historical authenticity
  2. Next we will look at the case for miraculous authenticity
  3. And finally we will close with a summary of the argument

DISCLAIMER - The study of the Shroud (sindonlology) is a huge topic. A search on  Google Scholar for “Shroud of Turin” returns over 13k academic articles and a search on Academia.edu returns over 5k. There is so much going on in Shroud studies that we cannot do complete justice to the issue here. My goal is to give a very quick primer based on what I know and why I think the Shroud is authentic.

Did A 1988 Carbon Dating Study Show That The Shroud Was Fake?

Now before we get into the evidence for historical authenticity, I want to address this myth that the shroud has been proven to be a medieval fake.

Most people, if they know anything at all about the shroud, they have probably heard that it was a medieval forgery. They likely say this because back in 1988 there was a news story that made headlines that the Shroud of Turin was a fake. 

This is based on a radiocarbon dating study done on the Shroud showing the origin of the Shroud to be in the range of 1260-1390 A.D. 

So in the minds of many skeptics this meant “case closed” the shroud is a medieval fake. If it was made in the middle ages, at least, the Shroud cannot be historically authentic.

But this radiocarbon dating test has been widely disputed, for three reasons.

Three Reasons We Cannot Trust The 1988 Carbon Dating Of The Shroud

  1. The Shroud Contains Contaminants That Can Upset An Accurate Test:
    1. Radiocarbon dating is not entirely trustworthy in itself, and there are well known difficulties of using this method to date textiles. In fact, scientists have found contaminants on the Shroud of Turin:
    2. “Textiles left alone in normal atmospheric conditions are prone to becoming highly contaminated. The first observations made of the Lirey-Chambéry-Turin Shroud under an electronic microscope by P.L. Baima Bollone, P. Coero Borga and E. Morano in 1978 showed a large amount of contaminating material that does not form part of the original cloth.” (https://www.shroud.com/heraseng.pdf, page 3)
  1. The Carbon Dating Test Cannot Be Trusted Due To A Sampling Error:
    1. It is widely held that the sample taken from the Shroud for the carbon dating test was from a corner that was likely a dyed medieval patch.
    2. A 2005 scientific study proved that the sample used was not representative of the whole Shroud.
    3. “Microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud." - Raymond N. Rogers, Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin, Thermochimica Acta, Volume 425, Issues 1–2, 2005, Pages 189-194
  1. There Are Other Scientific and Historical Reasons To Think The Shroud Is Much Older
    1. Carbon dating is only one form of evidence and it is not the sort of thing that can just trump everything else. In order to be accurate in our estimates we need to consider the other scientific and historical reasons to think the shroud is ancient. In fact, there is far too much evidence in favor of authenticity to think that the carbon dating is accurate.

So by no means did the carbon dating of 1988 settle the issue on the historical authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.


Let’s look at some reasons to think the Shroud is historically authentic.


Why The Shroud Of Turin Is Historically Authentic

Again, by “historically authentic” I mean that it is reasonable to think that the Shroud of Turin we have today is the same burial cloth that wrapped the body of Jesus.


In order to reasonably do this we would need to show two things, that the image on the Shroud is Jesus and that this Shroud is ancient, dating back to the first century when the historical Jesus lived.


I take it as self-evident that the image on the shroud is a picture of Jesus. As we will see, the blood stain evidence shows that the man on the shroud suffered a tortuous death, there are blood stains from being whipped, blood stains from a crown of thorns and evidence of crucifixion with nail wounds in both the hands and the feet. There is also a wound in the side of this man that forensically matches a Roman spear, just like the Gospels say happened to Jesus.


There’s no scientific test for “Jesus-ness” and we don’t need one. Clearly, we know of only one man in history who was killed like this so I’m going to assume that the image of the man on the shroud is an image of Jesus Christ.


So the only question we really need to look at when it comes to historical authenticity is the age of the cloth itself.


Everyone admits that the Shroud of Turin is at least, from the middle ages. There was a public showing of the Shroud in Lirey, France in 1355 A.D. and by everyone’s admission, the shroud is, at least, this old. The Shroud dates back to, at least, 1355 A.D. 


But there is significant scientific and historical evidence to suggest that it is much, much older.

 

Scientific Evidence That Contradicts The 1988 Carbon Dating Test By Dating The Shroud Of Turin To The 1st Century:


  1. 2005 Vanillin Chemical Test - A 2005 scientific study compared the shroud to ancient linens found with the Dead Sea Scrolls that are known to date back to the time of Christ.  This study measured the rate of loss of vanillin from lignin in old cloths. Vanillin is the main chemical we use to make the vanilla flavor and it comes from lignin which is a chemical on the cell walls of plants.

    1. This study concluded that the Shroud could be anywhere from 1,300 to 3,000 years old, due to how the fibers in the shroud have lost their vanillin.
       
    2. “The fact that vanillin can not be detected in the lignin on shroud fibers, Dead Sea scrolls linen, and other very old linens indicates that the shroud is quite old."  - Raymond N. Rogers, Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin, Thermochimica Acta, Volume 425, Issues 1–2, 2005, Pages 189-194, http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF
  2. Further scientific analysis of the Shroud by a group of Italian scientists in 2015 dated the Shroud to the 1st Century:

    1. “[These results] give a final date of the Turin Shroud of 90 AD ±200 years at 95% confidence level. While this date is both compatible with the time in which Jesus Christ lived in Palestine and with very recent results based on numismatic dating, it is not compatible with the 1988 radiocarbon measurements." (Fanti, G. & Malfi, Pierandrea & Crosilla, Fabio. (2015). Mechanical and opto-chemical dating of the Turin Shroud. MATEC Web of Conferences. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287294012_Mechanical_ond_opto-chemical_dating_of_the_Turin_Shroud
  1. 2022 X Ray Test - Study using a new X-ray dating method that looks at the degradation rate of textiles over time also dates the Shroud of Turin to the first century A.D.:

    1. “The degree of natural aging of the cellulose that constitutes the linen of the investigated sample, obtained by X-ray analysis, showed that the Turin Shroud fabric is much older than the seven centuries proposed by the 1988 radiocarbon dating. The experimental results are compatible with the hypothesis that the TS is a 2000-year-old relic, as supposed by Christian tradition.” - De Caro, Liberato & Sibillano, Teresa & Lassandro, R. & Giannini, Cinzia & Fanti, G.. (2022). X-ray Dating of a Turin Shroud’s Linen Sample. Heritage. 5. 860-870. 10.3390/heritage5020047.  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359904073_X-ray_Dating_of_a_Turin_Shroud's_Linen_Sample 

So in contradiction to the problematic 1988 carbon dating of the Shroud, we have other scientific evidence that dates the Shroud of Turin to the time of Jesus.


Historical Evidence Shows That The Shroud Is Ancient

In addition to these scientific tests, the historical evidence for the historical authenticity for the shroud is also very strong. 


We break down the historical evidence into three categories; historical documents, historical artwork, and historical artifacts.


Historical Documents That Support Authenticity

One needs to understand an obvious point. What we call the Shroud of Turin was not always called “The Shroud of Turin”.  The shroud was never in Turin, Italy until the mid 16th century. 

But history tells us that this same object that we call the Shroud of Turin, is actually the same object that some historians call “the Shroud of Constantinople”, that dates back to around 944 A.D. 

Additionally, historical records also show that this Shroud of Constantinople is actually the same object that was once known as the Holy Image Of Edessa (or the Mandylion). This Holy Image Of Edessa or Mandylion was described as a piece of cloth with a miraculous image of Jesus Christ imprinted on it and it dates back to, at least, the 5th century A.D. 


After that, there are plausible historical reasons to think that this Holy Image of Edessa is the actual burial cloth of Jesus.


So the case for historical authenticity covers three stages or connections:


  1. Shroud of Turin -> Shroud Of Constantinople
  2. Shroud Of Constantinople -> Holy Image Of Edessa (The Mandylion)
  3. The Holy Image Of Edessa -> The Actual Burial Cloth Of Jesus

Starting from the middle ages and going backwards in time, what we know call the Shroud of Turin from the middle ages was once the Shroud of Constantinople, and the shroud of Constantinople was once known as the Holy Image of Edessa, and this Holy Image of Edessa can be historically linked to the actual burial cloth of Jesus.


There are numerous historical documents that attest to this (For more information on this, I recommend any of historian Ian Wilson’s books on the Shroud.).


When you gather the different documents together, documents like a Letter Of Emperor Constantine VII (958 A.D.), “The Narration Of The Image Of Edessa” (Narratio de Imagine Edessena, 944 A.D.) , “The Sermon of Gregory Referendarius” (944 A.D.), “The Acts Of Thaddeus” (500’s A.D.) and so on, what we find is a consistent narrative.


Arrival Of The Mandylion In Constantinople

Icon of King Abgar V, a contemporary of Jesus, receiving a miraculously imprinted cloth of Jesus.

In 944 A.D. there was a great celebration in Constantinople of a certain Holy Image Of Edessa (or sometimes called the Mandylion) coming from Edessa in Turkey to Constantinople. 

The Holy Image Of Edessa (or Mandylion) was described as a cloth with the face of Jesus miraculously imprinted on it. At that time, the cloth was stretched out on a board and mounted in a case so that you just see the face only. 


These documents also describe the history of the Image of Edessa.


They say that a first century contemporary of Jesus, a King Abgar, received this cloth that had a miraculous image of Jesus on it. This cloth had been held in Edessa for centuries. Now, they say, this image is arriving in Constantinople.


Here’s how the eyewitnesses describe this Holy Image of Edessa:


  • They say the image of Jesus is extremely faint, and one source says it's more like a “moist secretion without pigment or the painter’s art.”
  • They say the image is acheiropoietos (“not made by human hands”).
  • They say this cloth wrapped the “un-outlined (aperilepton), dead, naked, body” of Jesus.
  • Another eyewitness source says the image wasn’t painted but maybe formed by “the perspiration of death on [Jesus’] face”.
  • They say the image had a BLOOD STAIN on its face. So it has real blood and it is not just a painted icon.
  • Another eyewitness source mentions that this Image of Edessa has another blood stain on its side where Jesus had been stabbed (suggesting it was not just a face cloth but a larger size).
  • Another eyewitness source says “You can see not only the figure of the face but the figure of the whole body”
  • Some eyewitness sources call this cloth the sindon, “in which Our Lord had been wrapped”.  The word sindon is particularly significant since the Greek word sindon is the same exact Greek word used for Jesus’ burial cloth in the Gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke. So by using this term these sources are identifying The Holy Image of Edessa with the “sindon” or burial cloth, mentioned in the Gospels.

The main point here is that these historical documents, dating around 1000 A.D., describe a burial cloth of Jesus arriving in their city with a faint and miraculous image of Jesus on it. The image is not painted but looks like it was made from sweat or something when it contacted Jesus’ face. There is real blood on the cloth on the face and side areas. 


Clearly these seem to be verbal descriptions of the Shroud of Turin. 


Moreover, the artwork of this period supports this claim as well.


The Birth Of The Threnos Or Epitaphios Icon Genre

At the same time these documents are written, we have the birth of the Threnos or Epitaphios icon genre. 

An example of a threnos or epitaphios icon with Christ on a long body cloth.

Within a short period of time after the arrival of the Edessa Icon in Constantinople, Byzantine art suddenly produces these “lamentation” art forms that show Jesus laid out on a large shroud in a manner resembling the Turin Shroud. 

Another example of this style of art form.

The birth of this brand new art form, never before seen, seems to indicate that the artists either know about, or are inspired by, the existence of a linen cloth that carries a full-length image of Jesus’ body.

But there’s more, and it’s a big one.


The Pray Codex (1192 A.D.) - The Single Most Important Piece Of Artwork In Shroud Research

The medieval Hungarian Pray Codex has been called “the final nail in the coffin” of the 1988 carbon dating test. 


This work can be dated around 1192 and so has convinced many researchers that the Shroud of Turin was the authoritative model at that time for other forms of Christian artwork and therefore the Shroud must have existed at this time if not earlier.

 

This Pray Codex is a collection of medieval manuscripts that show the body of Jesus being prepared for burial. 


In these pictures we see three main points of similarity with the Shroud.


First, we see a naked Jesus, with arms folded on the pelvis, with fingers and no thumbs showing, matching what we see on the Shroud.


Next, we see a plausible artistic depiction of the herringbone weave that is found on the Shroud. Note that this manuscript is Hungarian and so the author would likely be drawing the Shroud from memory.

Finally, the third point of similarity is the most important. The Shroud of Turin has two sets of distinctive “L-shaped” burn holes. 


These holes are arranged in a certain pattern, like the way a knight moves in chess, “up one and over two”. 

There are two sets of these holes suggesting that the Shroud was likely folded and something burned through it. 


Another diagram showing the matching L-shaped burn hole pattern on both the Pray Codex and the Shroud of Turin.


Most remarkably, we seem THE SAME DISTINCTIVE L-shaped pattern of small holes on the Pray Codex. 


They serve no other artistic purpose on the Pray Codex, they are just there.  


Given these similarities, especially the distinctive L-shaped burn marks, makes it very plausible that the author of the Pray Codex in 1192 had seen the Shroud of Turin.


So the historical record, both in written documents and artistic expression, give us enough evidence that we can say, with confidence, that the Shroud of Turin existed in Constantinople in the year 1000 A.D. 


But we can push the dating of the Shroud back much further.


The Acts Of Thaddeus (500’s A.D.)

There is a much earlier source from Edessa dating from the 6th c. called the Acts of Thaddaeus. The Acts of Thaddeus was a document written in the 6th century A.D.

  • The Acts Of Thaddaeus also talks about a first century King Agbar V in Edessa who receives a cloth from Jesus with a miraculous picture of him on it. And it gives us more details.
  • It says there was this first century burial cloth of Jesus, that was much larger than just a face towel.
  • It calls this cloth a sindon (which is the exact word used in the Gospels for the burial cloth of Jesus)
  • It says this miraculously printed cloth of Christ is acheiropoietos (not made by human hands)
  • This burial cloth had a miraculous picture of Jesus' face on it
  • It also describes this burial cloth as a tetradiplon (“four-doubled” = eight layered)

This is huge since, as modern scholars have now shown, when you fold the shroud up four times you get a landscape image of just Jesus' face on the shroud that matches this description of the Holy Image Of Edessa perfectly

The Holy Image Of Edessa (Mandylion) Icon Genre

Again, we can see this idea confirmed by the iconography from that time. 

A Mandylion style icon in typical landscape format.

This genre of artwork depicts just the face of Jesus in an unusual landscape format with a lot of “white space” on the sides. 

An 11th Century Mandylion Style Icon. The white space created by the landscape layout seems artistically useless and a waste of space.

Some may wonder why should we should connect this Edessa image with the shroud? Indeed, many people have thought since the Holy Image of Edessa was just a face it had nothing to do with the shroud.

But now, from the Acts of Thaddeus, we know that the Holy Image of Edessa was BOTH a sindon and a tetradiplon. It was a burial cloth folded four times.

Scholars have shown that the Shroud, folded up four times, would look like the Mandylion/Holy Image Of Edessa.

Diagram showing how the Shroud of Turin folds into what resembles the Holy Image Of Edessa/Mandylion.

Strikingly, when we fold the Shroud we get this same landscape view of the face of Christ with much unused white space on the side, suggesting that the folded Shroud was the inspiration for this genre of iconography.

Moreover, shroud scholar John Jackson has noticed that there are what appear to be “Mandylion foldmarks” existing on the Shroud. (See John P. Jackson, Foldmarks As A Historical Record Of The Turin Shroud at https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/ssi11part4.pdf


If the Shroud was folded up for a thousand years we would expect such fold lines to exist and the existence of these possible fold lines suggest that the Holy Image Of Edessa/Mandylion was the folded up Shroud of Turin.

All of this so far, makes for a powerful historical case that the Shroud of Turin was indeed the Holy Image of Edessa and so existed before the Acts of Thaddeus was written.

But there is one more piece of historical evidence that is arguably the “smoking gun”.

The Sudarium Of Oviedo (“The Other Shroud of Jesus” - 614 A.D.)  

The Sudarium Of Oviedo

What is the Sudarium Of Oviedo? The name comes from sudarium which means “face cloth” and Oviedo is where the Sudarium has resided in Spain for centuries. 


The Sudarium of Oviedo (also known as “The Cloth of the Lord” for centuries) has been venerated for centuries as the face cloth of Jesus mentioned in the Gospels.


Like the Shroud of Turin, the Sudarium of Oviedo has been the subject of numerous studies (See for example The Investigation Team of the Spanish Centre for Sindonology (EDICES) work “The Comparative Study Of The Sudarium Of Oviedo And The Shroud Of Turin” at https://www.shroud.com/heraseng.pdf)


Here is what we know:

  1. The Sudarium dates back to at least the 7th century, if not earlier.
  2. This cloth does not have any image on it.
  1. Forensic study of this cloth shows us that:
  1. The Sudarium is covered in real human blood.
  1. The blood type on the Sudarium is AB, the same as the blood type on the shroud.
  1. The man whose face this cloth covered had a beard, mustache and long hair, just like on the Shroud.
  2. The wounds on the Sudarium are consistent with the Gospel account of Jesus' crucifixion; the man was beaten, whipped, and crowned with thorns, just like the wounds on the Shroud
  1. The shape and size of the blood stains on the Sudarium match the blood stains on the Shroud. This can be easily shown when viewing the two cloths at scale and superimposing one over the other.
  1. The wounds reveal that this man died in an upright position, just like on the Shroud.
  1. Both the Sudarium and the Shroud have unusually large amounts of dirt and calcium in the tip of the nose area, indicating an unexpected amount of soil dirt in this area.

Scientific evidence from both the Shroud of Turin and The Sudarium of Oviedo strongly suggests that the Sudarium and the Shroud covered the head of the same man (and the only person in history that we know of who was beaten, scourged, crowned with a crown of thorns and crucified was Jesus Christ). It is entirely unreasonable to think otherwise. 


Animation between the Shroud Of Turin (left) And The Sudarium Of Oviedo (right), at scale, showing the matching blood stains. Given that on both cloths the blood type is the same, the wounds are the same, and the shape of the stains match, there can be little doubt that the Shroud and the Sudarium covered the head of the same man. But since we know the Sudarium can be firmly dated to at least the 7th century, we should think the same for the Shroud of Turin.

Given that on both cloths the blood type is the same, the wounds are the same, and the shape of the stains match, there can be little doubt that the Shroud and the Sudarium covered the head of the same man. But since we know the Sudarium can be firmly dated to at least the 7th century, we should think the same for the Shroud of Turin.


Does anyone really want to say, with a straight face, that it is more probable that these are two sets of blood stains formed at random different times and by different faces? But since these two cloths covered the same person and that we know the Sudarium dates back to at LEAST the 6th century, the Shroud must date that far back too.


Earlier sources referring to the first few centuries of the shroud are relatively brief but there are two important points of agreement amongst them. They do not agree about who saved the shroud from the tomb of Jesus but they all agree that it was in fact saved. Many sources confirm some version of the story that an “image not made with human hands”, was sent by Jesus to King Abgar. (A lot of the elements of the King Abgar story are clearly legends but it is plausible to think that there is a kernel of truth to them.)


Summary Of Historical Authenticity

Skeptics of the shroud cite the radiocarbon dating of the shroud and say its a medieval forgery. 

Given the other evidence we have we know that there is NO WAY THIS CAN BE TRUE.


  • Several other scientific experiments contradict the carbon dating experiment and can date the shroud to the first century.
  • Historical documents show that the Holy Image of Edessa that arrived in Constantinople in 944 A.D. and this cloth was unmistakably the Shroud. 
  • Historical artwork, most especially the Hungarian Pray Codex, confirms this.
  • Finally the “facecloth of our Lord” the Sudarium of Oviedo, which verifiably dates back to at least the 6th century A.D. if not earlier, most certainly covered the head of the same person as the Shroud.
  • Other historical documents link the shroud all the way back to the Gospels themselves.

All of this gives us a good reason to think the shroud is historically authentic - meaning that the shroud of Turin is the actual burial cloth of Jesus.


But what about the most exciting part, the image on the shroud? Where did that come from?


Miraculous Authenticity: What Are Miracles And How Do We Recognize Them?

When talking about the Shroud of Turin or any other possible miracle for that matter, it is important to get an accurate understanding of what miracles are and how we might recognize them.


A good theological definition of a miracles goes something like this:


“A miracle is a sensible event, done by God, outside the order usually observed in things.”


We say a miracle is a sensible event because if it is hidden from us, we can’t recognize it as a miracle.

We say it is “outside the order usually observed in things” since by a miracle we mean something that is contrary to the normal course of nature.


We say it is something “done by God” meaning that God is not only the efficient cause of the miracle but also God is the final cause of a miracle meaning that God’s purpose for doing a miracle is to show that He is acting.


That is a basic definition of a miracle and we can use this definition to define when it is appropriate to think a miracle has actually happened.


When we witness a very unusual event that seems to have no natural cause, occurring in some sort of religious context, we can, at that point, reasonably infer that a miracle has occurred.


Take for example the Gospel story of Jesus multiplying the loaves and fishes to feed 5000 people. This is a very unusual event with no known natural cause occurring in a religious context. It is perfectly reasonable to think a miracle occurs here.


The same criteria applies to the Shroud of Turin. Here we have some observable data, this cloth with a mysterious image on it. The burial cloth is clearly situated in a religious context, it appears to be a picture of Jesus and has been revered as such for centuries.


The only question that remains is this - what caused the image on this cloth? Did this image have a natural cause or not?


If, after a critical investigation, we cannot determine that the image on the Shroud of Turin has a natural cause, we can reasonably infer that this image has a supernatural cause and therefore is another miracle associated with Jesus.


Why It Is Reasonable To Think The Image On The Shroud Has A No Natural Cause

In order to show this we will look at the image on the shroud. We divide the image into two categories:
the blood image and the body image.

It’s important to consider both the blood and the body image. As we will see, technically speaking it is the body image on the Shroud that is miraculous. However, the blood itself also needs to be considered because the blood image puts a constraint on what natural causes we need to consider when determining what caused the image on the shroud. 


For example, if someone says the Shroud is just a painting and that’s all, that hypothesis wouldn’t explain the blood because the blood is real and can’t be painted on. So this so-called “painter hypothesis” would have to be coupled with another hypothesis like someone actually being murdered first, then having the cloth applied to the murdered person in order to transfer the blood to the cloth, and then painting an image around the blood.


So while technically speaking it is the body image that is possibly miraculous, still the blood image can play an important role in ruling out natural explanations for the overall image.


The Blood Image Is Real And Medically Convincing

It is undeniable that there is real blood on the shroud that is forensically correct and not painted on. It is not red paint nor is it even painted blood. 


  • The blood on the shroud had to have come from contact with a body. 
  • The blood on the Shroud is anatomically perfect in relation to the body image.
  • The stains on the Shroud of Turin are human blood group AB. 
  • The blood contains a high concentration of bilirubin which suggests trauma and that this is the blood of a tortured man.

So whatever it was that made the image on the Shroud, there must have been real traumatic injuries involved and the blood from those injuries were transferred to the Shroud by way of contact.


Unlike artwork from that period, the blood stains on the shroud are medically convincing in every way. If the shroud is a medieval forgery we would expect the blood wounds on the shroud to be like all the other artistic blood wounds from that time period, but they are not.


Moreover, from a microscopic analysis we also know that the blood stain was made on the shroud before the body image. This is because there is no image under the blood. So the sequence of events was blood stains first, body image second.


This fact also makes it extremely unlikely that the image on the shroud is the work of a medieval forger. It would be very difficult to make the blood on the shroud first, and then, somehow, get body image on there in such a way that the two match in an anatomically perfect way.


The Wrist Wounds Are Forensically Correct And Go Against Medieval Artistic Convention

It is highly unlikely a medieval forger would have made the  wounds on the wrist that we see on the shroud. 


One of the reasons why is because on the shroud the nails are driven through the wrists. This goes against ALL medieval artistic convention which placed them through the hands. But we now know that putting the nails through the wrists was necessary and standard practice with the Romans since studies on cadavers have shown that putting the nails just through the hands would not hold the weight of the human body. It is highly unlikely that a medieval forger would have even known this let alone want to break standard artistic convention.


The Flow and Amount Of Blood From The Wrist Wounds Is Realistic

Another reason the wrist wounds are significant is because the blood flow and amount on the wrists and forearms is realistic. 


Forensic science did not exist in the middle ages and it shows in the artwork of that time. The blood flow in standard medieval art is not forensically realistic at all.


But forensic experts studying the shroud have noticed that the trickles of blood on the forearms are realistic and consistent with real crucifixion. 


The relatively small amount of blood on the forearms tells us the heart was not pumping when the nails were removed. If the heart were still pumping, there would be a lot more blood pouring down the arms.


Trickles of blood on the top of the forearms is also medically accurate and consistent with the arms being outstretched with the person face up on the ground when the nails were removed. 


It is highly unlikely that any medieval painter would know how to make forensically correct blood stains. 


For these reasons the wrist wounds on the shroud are incompatible with the idea that the shroud is a forgery from the middle ages.


The Flagellation Wounds Are Real And Historically Correct 

There are scourge marks all over the body of the shroud. 

Dumbbell shaped scourge marks on the Shroud.

Medical examiners have noticed the “dumbbell” shape of these wounds. This sort of injury is consistent with what we know about Roman whips. We know from archaeology that the Roman flagrum had leather thongs with these dumbbell shaped weights attached to the ends.

The Roman flagrum with dumbbell shaped weights at the end of the leather thongs.

It is highly unlikely that a medieval painter would have known these details about the flagrum, let alone represented them in his artwork. No other painting from the middle ages has them.


The Spear Wound Is Real And Forensically Correct

The spear wound in the side is realistic and matches the known size of a Roman spear. 


The blood flow from this wound has been recognized as forensically correct with realistic blood clotting patterns. Modern UV light has also revealed blood serum marks around the wound.


On the right side of the chest there is a large stain of blood and serum (no medieval forger could have known that this is a consequence of sudden death by rupture of the heart wall, a recent discovery of medicine.)


It is highly implausible that a medieval forger would be able to pull this off.


This is unlike anything else from the artwork of the middle ages. Medieval artists did not know how to realistically represent the flow of blood, let alone create the blood serum marks on the shroud which would not be discovered for another 600 years.


The Wounds From The Crown Of Thorns Are Forensically Correct And Go Against Medieval Artistic Convention 

Unlike medieval pieces of art however, there are small puncture wounds all over the head of the man in the shroud.  

A crown of thorns that would cover the entire head.

The wounds are not consistent with just a circular crown around the head but the wounds cover the top of the head too. 


Also, again unlike the blood flow in medieval art, the blood flow on the shroud from these wounds is irregular and forensically correct.


For these reasons it is absurd to think that the head wounds on the shroud were created by a medieval forger. 


What The Blood On The Shroud Tells Us


  1. These Are The Wounds Of Jesus: The blood wounds clearly point to one historical person, Jesus. The man in the shroud was really killed by crucifixion and has the exact same wounds the Gospels say Jesus had. It strains credulity to think this is an image of anyone else. If it’s supposed to be a counterfeit, then its a counterfeit of Jesus. 
  2. The Blood Image Is Real And Medically Convincing: It is undeniable that the blood on the shroud is real blood from real wounds
  3. Real Death Was Involved - Whatever it was that made this image, there had to be a real death involved. Someone had to be tortured and killed to make the shroud. Remember that anytime someone says the shroud is a forgery.
  4. The Overall Image Cannot Be Just A Painting Or Photograph: Any hypothesis about how the image on the shroud was formed must account for the blood too. Just explaining the body image as some sort of early “proto-photograph” is not enough to explain the blood image.

  5. The Blood On The Shroud Makes The Medieval Forger Hypothesis Absurd: It is ridiculous to think that a medieval artist somehow made these forensically correct wounds, given the reasons stated above.

The Body Image On The Shroud Of Turin

The blood stains on the shroud are real. And we know that the image of a crucified man was imprinted after the blood stains.  Now we ask the question, what, exactly, made the body image on the Shroud of Turin?


Scientific investigation has shown us that this image is unlike any other image in the world for several reasons.


The Body Image Was Not Made By Any Known Artistic Medium

This may be the most important fact about the body image. The image is not a painting, not a pencil drawing, not a photograph, no brushwork at all, not a scorch, not a charcoal, not a rubbing, not made by crayons, etc. The image has no directionality in it like a paint stroke. 

Every artistic possibility has been tested and it is not any of these. 


If the image were a forgery, some known, scientifically detectable art medium would have been used. 

But there is no such medium. 


It is highly implausible that a medieval forger would be able to create an image like this without it being detectable by modern scientific methods. 


The Body Image Is Exceptionally Superficial And “Thin”

Another very unique aspect of the body image is that it is extremely thin. It is very superficially imposed onto the cloth and has to be measured in nanometers. One nanometer is one billionth of a meter. A sheet of paper is about 100,000 nanometers thick. The Shroud image is 200-500 nanometers deep. 


So there is not anything soaked into the fibers(The blood soaks into the fibers but the image does not). That means the image cannot be a pigment or dye or ink. It also can’t be the result of chemicals, body vapors or anything of that nature since the would stain the deeper fibers.


Even if a natural art medium were used, it’s difficult to explain how razor thin the image is. 

Again, it's highly implausible that a medieval forger would be able to pull this “thin image” off.


The Image On The Shroud Is Best Seen As A Photographic Negative

The image on the Shroud is best seen as a negative.

One incredible and underappreciated fact about the Shroud is that it is best seen as a photographic negative. When photographed, the details of the Shroud become much more clear in the photographic negative than they do in the photopositive. 


But of course, seeing something as a photonegative was not even possible until the discovery of photography in the 19th century.


This means that for centuries, nobody was able to fully see and appreciate the shroud. It is only in the era of photography, from the 19th century forwards, that people have really been able to view the Shroud in detail. It is no exaggeration to say that whoever made the Shroud, the details of that image would not be seen for centuries.


This fact alone renders the medieval forger hypothesis extremely implausible. How could a medieval forger create such an image? Why would they even want to?


Some skeptics have actually wondered if someone didn’t invent a form of photography in the middle ages for precisely this reason.


But are we really supposed to believe that someone secretly invented photography, without any traceable historical precedent, made ONE piece of artwork with it and no more, didn’t tell anyone about, didn’t tell anyone how they could really appreciate his unique masterpiece, and then let photography “die” again for centuries? Surely this strains all credulity.


This point is significant and damning to the medieval forger hypothesis. Anyone can see it. You don’t need any microscope or scientific device. Download a high resolution of the Shroud on your computer and open it up in a photo editing program and flip the image to a negative. Everyone can see that the negative image gives us much more detail than the positive. 


It seems impossible that a medieval forger would be able to pull this off.


The Image On The Shroud Contains 3D Information 

A VP-8 Image Analyzer is a modern device that can convert image density into vertical dimensions. It has been used to determine the topography of planets.


When you use the VP-8 on a photograph or painting you get just a distorted image.


But researchers were astonished when they discovered that when the VP-8 is applied to the shroud you get an accurate topographic image, suggesting that the image was made when a cloth was draped over a real human body.


This means that the Shroud contains spatial or “3-D” data encoded into the body image.


No other painting or photography in the world has this feature. It would have been impossible for a medieval forger to create an image containing 3D information.


This single 3-D feature of the shroud itself eliminates both painting and photography as a possible explanation for the formation of the image.


Again, it is impossible for a medieval forger to pull this off.


Double Superficiality: “The Shroud's Second Image”

We know that the Shroud was damaged in a fire in 1532. In response to this event, a group of nuns made some repairs to Shroud and one of the things they did was that they sewed a protective backing on the shroud.


This new backing prevented anyone from seeing the back of the shroud for over 450 years.

In 2002, the backing was taken off for another restorative project, and for the first time, photographs were taken of the back of the actual shroud.


For the first time scientists found a new faint image on the now exposed back side of the cloth. This image of the face was directly behind the more familiar front image of the face. Both sides of the facial image are "superficial", involving only the outermost linen fibers that do not penetrate.

When you make a cross section of the shroud, you find that one extremely superficial image is on the front of the shroud, and another extremely superficial image is on the back of the Shroud, but there is nothing in the middle.


The image of the face is on the front of the cloth and on the back of the cloth but not in the middle. So it can't be body vapors or anything that would stain the middle of the cloth.


This "double image" is another feature that needs to be taken into account when coming up with an explanation of the body image formation.


This aspect of “double superficiality” means that we have one mysterious image on the front of the cloth, and now another matching mysterious image on the back of the cloth, with nothing in the middle of the cloth.


Clearly, it would be exceedingly difficult to fake this.


So What Caused The Image On The Shroud?

Nobody knows. The Shroud is the most scientifically tested archaeological object in the history of mankind and we have no idea what made the image on the Shroud and in spite of all of our modern technology, we cannot recreate this image today.


To date, every single attempt to reproduce this image having the same microscopic and macroscopic qualities as well as having the same chemical and physical characteristics has FAILED.


As Shroud researcher Dr. Paolo Di Lazzaro remarks:

"...up to date all attempts to reproduce an image with the same microscopic and macroscopic aspect as well as all the chemical and physical characteristics have been unsuccessful. In this respect, the origin of the body image is still unknown." (Paolo Di Lazzaro and Daniele Murra, “Deep Ultraviolet Radiation Simulates the Turin Shroud Image”2010, Journal of Imaging Science and Technology 54, 040302-(6) (2010) emphasis mine)

Why The Image On The Shroud Cannot Be Explained Naturally

Why would Di Lazzaro say this? Why is the image so hard to reproduce?


Let's put this problem in perspective.


ANY SUCCESSFUL THEORY OF IMAGE FORMATION ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN MUST ACCOUNT FOR ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS 


First, a forger would have to create the blood image accounting for these facts:


  1. The blood on the Shroud is real, not painted on, and all forensically correct; unlike all other medieval works of art.
  1. The blood on the Shroud came before the body image, and was applied by real contact (not paint strokes).
  2. The blood on the Shroud contains high levels of bilirubin, which is indicative of real trauma
  3. The blood on the Shroud from the scourge marks matches the Roman flagrum, unlike all other medieval works of art.
  4. The blood on the Shroud from the spear wound indicates someone really had to die to make the blood image. 
  5. The blood on the Shroud matches the wounds of Jesus' crucifixion we read in the Gospels. Hence to get the result we see on the Shroud, one would have to find some male victim, really him with a Roman flagrum, place a crown of thorns on his head, put nails through his wrists and feet and stab him in the side to kill him. In other words, just to create the blood image  a medieval forger would have to really recreate the Passion of Jesus. You would have to really torture and kill a person as it says Jesus was in the Gospels.  
  6. But even then you wouldn’t be done, since we know that the blood on the Shroud matches the ancient "facecloth of the Lord" (Sudarium of Oviedo) in blood type (AB), shape of the stains, and the characteristic wounds of crucifixion, indicating both cloths covered the face of the same man, which would be impossible for a medieval forger to pull off since the Sudarium dates to the 6th century).

Assuming for the sake of argument a forger could create the blood image, next the alleged forger faces an even more difficult task - creating the body image in a way that accounts for these known facts:

  1. The body image contains no artistic mediums; no paint, ink, charcoal etc., unlike all other human works of art.
  2. The body image is anatomically correct, unlike all other medieval works of art.
  3. The body image is exceptionally superficial and "thin", only 200-500 nanometers deep and cannot be the result of chemicals, vapors, or anything of that sort.
  4. The body image on the front is duplicated on the back side of the cloth, with nothing in the middle.
  5. The body image is a photographic negative, but photography didn't exist until the 19th century.
  6. The body image contains 3D information that wasn't detectable until the 20th century.
  7. The body image is unique, there is nothing else in the world like it, and it cannot be replicated by anyone today in spite of all our modern science and technology.

In short, there is nothing in the world like the Shroud of Turin.


Here is what we know. We have a cloth that can be historically traced to the time of Jesus.  This cloth contains an image of Jesus.

WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT FORMED THIS IMAGE.


We have NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS.


WE ARE NOT ABLE TO REPRODUCE ANYTHING LIKE THIS.


IF IT IS A HOAX THERE IS NOBODY IN THE WORLD RIGHT NOW THAT CAN DO IT AGAIN

If this image was made by a human being, it is one that has never been duplicated. 

Perhaps you don’t agree. Perhaps you still want to bit the bullet and say it was still made by a medieval forger?

Think It’s Fake? Prove It And Win A Million Dollars!

Producer David Rolfe has offered the British Museum $1 million dollars if they can replicate the Shroud. He says if a medieval con-man was able to do it, then somebody today should be able to do it too.

So if you think it was fake then go for it. Make your fake and submit it for scientific scrutiny. Maybe you will make a million dollars.

So far, nobody has taken David Rolfe up on his offer.

Summarizing The Argument From The Shroud Of Turin

That was a lot of data, let’s summarize our argument this way:

  • Premise 1: If it is reasonable to think that the Shroud of Turin is the burial shroud of Jesus and that it has a miraculous image on it, then we have good reason to think that Christianity is true

  • Premise 2: It is reasonable to think that the Shroud of Turin is the burial shroud of Jesus and that it has a miraculous image on it

  • Conclusion: Therefore, we have good reason to think that Christianity is true

This is a valid argument meaning that if those two premises are true then the conclusion follows necessarily.


It is pretty clear that the first premise is true.

And as I have said here, we have good reasons to think that the second premise is true as well.


Given the historical evidence regarding the shroud of Turin being traced back to the shroud of Constantinople, and that being traced back to the Holy Image Of Edessa and its plausible connection to the shroud of Jesus we hear about in the Gospels, we have a historical case that plausibly links the Shroud to the burial cloth of Jesus. 

Moreover, this historical conclusion is corroborated by recent scientific findings that dated the Shroud to the first century A.D. based on things like the X ray test, and testing the vanillin levels in the Shroud. 

So we have good reasons to think that Shroud is historically authentic and is the actual burial cloth of Jesus.

And given the nature of both the blood image and the body image on the Shroud, it is ABSURD to think this was the result of a medieval forger.

Moreover, it is reasonable to think that this image is NOT a product of ANY human artwork or natural process for that matter. Given that we cannot even recreate this image today, in spite of our modern technology we have every good reason to think the image on the shroud HAS NO NATURAL CAUSE AND IS THEREFORE MIRACULOUSLY AUTHENTIC.

All of this then gives us, yet another, reason to think that Christianity is true.

The Aquinas School Of Theology And Philosophy

ONLINE COURSES TAUGHT BY DR. SULLIVAN

The Aquinas School Of Theology And Philosophy