[Nameplate] Partly Cloudy ~ 82°F  
High: 84°F ~ Low: 69°F
Saturday, Aug. 30, 2014

The face of Jesus?

Posted Wednesday, March 31, 2010, at 7:09 AM

(Photo)
The Shroud of Turin
This morning, as I was working on the day's editorial page, I was hunting down a column to go in an empty hole and came across an interesting story.

Some graphic experts have taken the much controversial Shroud of Turin and used it to create a 3-D who they believe to be Jesus Christ. A show, which will air soon, will show a 3-D rendering of what they believe Jesus (assuming that's who was in the shroud) would have looked like.

While there have been questions for centuries surrounding what some believe to be the burial cloth that covered Jesus after his crucifixion, I've never really decided how I feel about it. In my heart I would like for it to be real, well basically because it would be awesome to have that kind of physical evidence around.

If it's not, oh well, I just thought this was an interesting story with some interesting photos. Take from it what you wish.

What are your thoughts on the shroud?


Update!!! 3-31-10 7 a.m.

Ok...so the show aired last night. I was only able to watch about half of it, but what I saw was wuite interesting. Did anyone else watch? If so, what did you think?

I know the general consensus seems to be that the image doesn't resemble the popular images we have seen over the years.

I did record the midnight replay on my DVR so I can hopefully watch the rest later this week.


Comments
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

You may have noticed, Corey, that only topics which are politically charged will get very many comments. Personally, I have always been intrigued by the Shroud of Turin and enjoy reading any new info about it. Maybe if I suggest that the shroud depicts the face of Jesus showing disgust at all the hate rhetoric, you might get some bloviators on here.

-- Posted by L2L on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 5:42 PM
Corey Noles
Yeah I've noticed that over they years, but that's ok. To be honest I enjoy both. This story just really stood out to me.

Corey, I have always been intrigued by the Shroud, I'd like to hear the story of how it was located and where it had been these thousands of years.

-- Posted by Dexterite1 on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 7:10 PM
Corey Noles
Well, I was wondering the same thing so I did a little bit of research. Here are a few websites you can check out. I won't say anything about the reliability of the information, but it's interesting none the less.

http://www.shroudstory.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_T...

http://www.shroud.com/

Hope these help!

Yes, I find the shroud of Turin fascinating, too, but, unfortunately, I thought the issue was put to rest a couple of years ago, when some new test proved that it wasn't as old as it would have to have been to be the shroud that covered Jesus.

Like you, I'm hoping still that it can be proven to be authentic --- but, then, think about it. We're supposed to accept on faith - not proof. Would the true believers believe any more strongly if they knew the shroud was really his?

-- Posted by goat lady on Thu, Mar 25, 2010, at 8:26 PM
Corey Noles
I agree, GL, that we are supposed to accept on faith, but I still think it would be amazing if it was real. If the shroud is real, it wouldn't prove divinity or any of the other beliefs, only that the shroud had covered Jesus. So, I don't think anyone would believe "stronger" but it would certainly be interesting!

Good points, gl. Even though on the worldly side, I am skeptical of most things and require proof..but not in this case...I walk in faith. And the true believers aren't the ones who need proof anyway. Unfortunately, the ones who don't believe would probably not accept it in the first place...we humans have ways of skewing and manipulating the facts.

-- Posted by BarbaraNTexas on Fri, Mar 26, 2010, at 1:50 AM

L2L--I would be remiss if I did not suggest to you that you seem to be looking for another reason to be smug. Bloviating, indeed! Never let it be said you are above name-calling!

Corey, I am watching the scientific developments on the shroud and find them extremely interesting. I enjoy reading (and learning) about relics.

-- Posted by geezerette on Tue, Mar 30, 2010, at 5:45 PM

Boy, you guys must keep score sheets!

-- Posted by goat lady on Tue, Mar 30, 2010, at 9:50 PM

gl, any opportunity to hit it over the fence.

-- Posted by Dexterite1 on Wed, Mar 31, 2010, at 6:30 AM

You will find that most interesting people are those who are interested in multiple subjects. I do not keep a score sheet but I cannot tolerate the eye-rolling, smugness that accompanies the whiners of the world. I cannot miss the comments if you put them in front of me.

-- Posted by geezerette on Wed, Mar 31, 2010, at 4:04 PM

It's a matter of perspective, geezerette. What one person calls "curious," someone else calls "nosy;" What one person calls "whining," another calls "disagreeing."

On these blogs, the term "whiner" is usually a derogatory term used by the Right to describe anyone they consider too far Left for their tastes.

-- Posted by goat lady on Thu, Apr 1, 2010, at 1:42 PM

Concerning this, I stared at it to try and see if the face of Jesus appeared and was not able to. We have a pretty good description of Jesus in His glorified body in Revelation 1 where John recieves a vision of Him.

It is the opinion of most conservative Bible scholars that the common or popular picture of Jesus we see on walls or in books is probably not very accurate. We know that Jesus was a descendent of Shem and would probably have had the complexion and facial features of modern Arabs or Jews by racial blood. He no doubt followed the teachings of the Mosaic Law and thus had a beard. His hair would have been in the style of the orthodox Jews of that day.

It is also the opinion of most conservative Bible scholars and teachers that it is probably not God's will that we ever find a portrait or image of Jesus dating back to His time for one reason. There is a strong possibility that we would be tempted to worship such relics instead of worshipping Christ alone. Remember that true Christianity is a religion of faith, and remember that believing on Him alone gives us salvation.

This will put this shroud and the study of it into proper perspective. Interesting? Sure it is! Will we ever know if it truly reveals what Christ looked like? Probably not, but we can still study it.

-- Posted by swift on Fri, Apr 2, 2010, at 12:44 PM

GL, you were right in your 1st post on this. You have the right perspective.

-- Posted by swift on Fri, Apr 2, 2010, at 12:46 PM

Thank you, swift. I guess we do agree on something.

-- Posted by goat lady on Sun, Apr 4, 2010, at 9:21 PM

Wow! I am really surprised by the comments here. Everyone is making the comment about we are supposed to take everything on faith. Also, my hackles are raised whenever I hear Christianity called a religion.

God does not expect us to surrender to a blind faith. Every story in the Bible point to God proving Himself time and time again regardless of our devotion. So faith should not be used as a go to argument for things we don't understand. That only makes the Christian look weak and stupid. We don't need to do that when to not believe in God takes a completely blind faith. Especially in the faith of the abundant proof, if you actually choose to look. If I could know and explain EVERYTHING about God then He wouldn't be much of a God. In fact if God truly exists then there will be way more about Him that I don't understand than the stuff I do.

Secondly, religion is a set of rules or edicts that are followed in the worship of a deity or some supernatural force. Christianity is NOT a religion. To be honest, neither is Judaism. Never has God wanted us to follow a set of rules. If that comment seems untrue to you or if you find yourself yelling at me through the computer screen then you may want to go back and read the Bible again (that is assuming you have even read it through at all. If you haven't then please do before commenting). Christianity is God's last ditch effort at a loving relationship with His creation. It is not about what you do as much as it is about why you do it. It is a relationship and not a religion.

Last and actually least, the testing done on the shroud was inaccurate at best due to the fact it went through a fire and that changed the amount of carbon in the sample to be dated. Not to mention the fact that carbon 14 dating can only go so far and after a certain amount of time it is depleted. The reason they no longer use that method to prove anything is because it is easily affected by so many things.

The shroud would just be another small piece of evidence of God's awesome love. It pales in comparison to the evidence given to us by His son Jesus the Christ. Sorry, I hope I am not being a blovinator but I don't even know (or care) what that means. ;)

-- Posted by Roy3 on Sun, May 30, 2010, at 4:34 PM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


Corey Noles, staff writer for The Daily Statesman and Editor of The North Stoddard Countian, is the author of a regular baseball/St. Louis Cardinals column and also uses his blog to sound off on various happenings in sports. He also operates a weekly baseball mailbag column.

UCB logo
UCB logo
BBA logo