Customer Reviews

The Turin Shroud Is Genuine: The Irrefutable Evidence Updated

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The author ends a fantastic bit of detective work with a rather novel, yet disatisfying twist. While concluding that the Shroud is genuine, the author then concludes that Christ did not die, but was merely comatose, was helped from the tomb, and then lived a normal life. What a pity to waste a great book with such an inconsiderate and unnecessary ending! The author seems to "forget" the Ascension altogether as he trudges through his quest to destroy the fundamentals of Christianity almost in the same breath that he proves that the shroud is genuine. Would have been five stars if not for his ludicrous, unsubstantiated and Anti-Christian conclusions. Read it but skip the last few chapters and be spared the twaddle.

Let me first say a couple things about myself so you can better know how to interpret my review. First of all I am a physician who was previously a biochemist, and I have been an assistant professor of medicine at a major university; and secondly (actually primarily as a person) I am a devout Catholic Christian. Now for my review.

Mr. Hoare starts his book out with a solid review of the scientific research done upon the Shroud. This does help for those who want to review what has been studied. And to his credit Mr. Hoare does this rather even-handedly. Where the author really fails is what he does after reviewing the data. And what contributes to his failure is his very poor understanding of Christianity, despite the fact the book describes him as a "protestant". This quote from the book should help explain what I mean:

"Experience and studies have shown that on this earth there are certain laws that operate. Is the only answer really that God stepped right outside those laws in the case of Jesus?" (p. 130)

This short quote fairly clearly shows how the author either doesn't realize that Jesus Christ is Himself God (in the second person of the Holy Trinity) and therefore not subject to the laws of nature since He is the creator of all that is, or it shows that Mr. Hoare does not believe in Christ's divinity. Either way it leads him to draw seriously flawed conclusions about Jesus. He basically suggests that Jesus was in a coma in the tomb and removed by followers who nursed Him back to health!

This brings us back to the basic truth that how we see and interpret everything depends on our belief (or disbelief) in God. A poor analogy might be that if someone saw a jacket hanging on a door and had no knowledge of "hooks on doors" then their entire interpretation of gravity would be incorrect since they would postulate reasons why the jacket did not fall to the ground. This of course would not be reality - infact it is the layman's definition of insanity (failure to recognize and live in reality).

So in essence his book reviews the evidence fairly soundly but draws conclusions from that evidence that simply are far beyond what the evidence is able to say. Mr. Hoare arrives at the correct conclusion about the shroud being that of Christ but simply takes too much liberty beyond that.

If other researchers along with forensic scientists say that the body on the shroud is in rigor mortis state, how can the man on the Shroud be "Comatose"? Although this book tries to give proof of the Shroud's authenticity, it turns into a "sour" experience once you find yourself with such a contradiction (not only for researchers and readers in general, but for Christians that believe in the death and resurrection of Christ).

The reputed resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth has given rise to many possible explanations. One naturalistic theory, first formulated about two hundred years ago by Bahrdt and Venturini, in works of fiction, yet still being advanced today, is that Jesus went into a coma/swoon on the cross and later revived in his tomb or was resuscitated there by helpers. This Jesus who did not die then appeared, alive, to his followers, who, however, misinterpreted the Jesus they saw as having been supernaturally resurrected.

In recent decades, this theory has been given a new lease on life (hopefully not much longer) by the additional factor of the Shroud of Turin. Rodney Hoare's book The Turin Shroud is Genuine represents one such attempt to support the old "swoon" theory using new evidence from the Shroud, which Hoare believes is the authentic burial shroud of Jesus. Other authors holding or promoting the view that "Jesus survived and the Shroud of Turin proves it" include H. Naber, H. Kersten, and H. Felzmann. But Hoare's book in its various versions or editions (1978, 1984, 1994, 1999) is probably the best known, certainly in the English-speaking world. That is partly due to its misleading title, which emphasizes the authenticity of the Shroud while not revealing the very dubious coma-resuscitation claims of the book. In any case, all such researchers as those listed above believe that some of the markings on the Shroud indicate that the man inside it was not dead but alive.

However, the problems with this swoon theory - that Jesus survived his crucifixion - are many and insurmountable. Due to limitations of space here, I'll focus on some of the Shroud-related evidence, skipping all the abundant historical evidence from the gospels and other ancient accounts of crucifixions. And so:

1. The vivid bloodstains on the Shroud are actually relatively minor ones, found in only a few areas, as would not have been the case if the body enveloped in the Shroud were alive, with its beating heart still pumping blood throughout the body - and out of its wounds, onto the cloth.

2. Rigor mortis (the "rigor of death") is evident in the body, as virtually all Shroud experts are agreed. For example, both legs are slightly bent, and one knee is raised slightly higher than the other. By far the best explanation for this posture is that the legs are frozen stiff in almost the same position they were in on the cross (one foot was nailed atop the other, therefore one knee raised higher), where rigor mortis set in soon after Jesus' death. Those preparing his body for burial, hurriedly, obviously did not feel the need to straighten his legs completely, but merely to separate the feet. If his leg muscles were relaxed as in (comatose) life, why would one knee be raised higher than the other, as it clearly is? Furthermore, the thighs and buttocks are not flattened as they would be in the case of living and relaxed muscles lying on a horizontal surface, with gravity pressing their soft mass against that surface. They are instead rounded, and by far the best explanation for that still-rounded shape, indeed the only explanation for it, is that death occurred and rigor mortis set in quickly (as it often does in cases of agonizing death) while the body was still hanging vertically on the cross.

3. Finally, the British medical experts cited by Hoare in support of his theory (pp. 66-70), who told him that the spear wound to the side/chest would not have been fatal, were previously unfamiliar with the Shroud. At his sudden request, they examined two photographs (positive and negative) of the Shroud, but only briefly, for about one hour, and apparently sometime in the 1960s or 1970s (Hoare oddly supplies no date). The photographs were only three feet high. Thus, the entire 14-foot length of the Shroud was reduced to three feet. The human figure on it would therefore have been barely one foot high (Hoare does not inform his readers of this fact), hardly an ideal size for discerning bodily details. Moreover, those scientists were from the East Midland Forensic Science Laboratory, surely respectable local experts but neither infallible nor world-renowned authorities. Hoare's account also reveals, though he himself does not fully appreciate it, that those police scientists looked upon the whole Shroud question with an attitude of mirth and mischief. This group presumably also rendered its collective judgment under the influence of a single leader or two (Norman Lee?). Furthermore, they looked at the crucial side/chest wound for only a few minutes. Hoare quotes one of them as saying about the spear thrust: "Put your hand where the point entered as on the Shroud photograph, and then lift your arms to the side in the crucifixion position, and it was too high to damage anything if the wound came from below." This statement is strange and incorrect, though it may sound clever and valid in the abstract. Actually, the moment one experiments, one discovers the truth: the skin over the lower ribs, where the entry wound clearly was, does not rise when the arms are raised into the crucifixion position. The material of a lab coat does rise, but Jesus was not wearing a lab coat, nor any other such garment. So the wound was, in fact, lower than those scientists speculated, and was thus perfectly located for a penetration of the heart by the spear. Those scientists seem also not to have considered any other cause of death for a crucifixion victim (asphyxia, heart attack). Hoare's account also unwittingly reveals that those forensic scientists assumed that the mysterious image was caused by body heat from a living body, since that was the only image-formation option known or believed by them to provide the necessary evenness of the full-body image. Thus firmly believing that heat from a living body was the cause of the image, those scientists, and Hoare with them, ignored the signs of rigor mortis, the signs that the spear wound would have been fatal, and other possible causes of death. If they could be located today (2008), some 30 years later, and asked to study the evidence at greater length, with better photographs, I feel certain that those several scientists would soberly conclude that the spear did indeed enter between the ribs at a place where its tip would have pierced the heart and killed the man were he still alive at that time. Can someone in the U.K. please locate those (retired?) pathologists soon and request their careful reconsideration of this matter?

4. As for the body image again, if it had been caused by body heat, and if the man enveloped in the Shroud were really alive and breathing at the time, his image would surely look different than it does. It would not exhibit such an even, uniform, photographic quality. The area under the nose, in particular, would exhibit more darkness/density due to the warm breath exiting the nostrils there. The fact that the precise imaging process has not yet been identified does not mean that we should accept, as the image's cause, a known imaging mechanism (body heat) which, however, does not agree with several aspects of the image in question here. If any shrouds of other crucifixion victims were extant, we might have some intriguing images to compare with that on the Turin Shroud and might be closer to ascertaining the precise process involved.

One could go on and on, but space is limited. Incidentally, the absolute deadness of the body seems to me also incompatible with the claim by conservative Christians that the image on the Shroud shows a resurrection in progress (that is, a coming-to-life). All that we see on the Shroud is a very dead body, though superficially it may look "alive" or even "resurrected."

With regard to a resurrection, Hoare deserves great credit for his skepticism toward the supernatural accounts related in the gospels. Unfortunately, he is almost alone in the Shroud field in that regard. The vast majority of experts and others in the field are conservative Christians who fervently believe in a bodily, supernatural resurrection of Jesus. Some misinterpret the evidence as much as Hoare did. This whole situation is unfortunate, but hopefully will soon change. The addition of non-Christian scientists to the field would surely provide more balance and represent a positive step forward.

I am not a Christian (though once I was), but I do believe that the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial shroud of Jesus. I further believe that the body was dead, that its image was formed on the shroud by some perfectly natural though as yet undetermined process (biochemical? bioelectrical?), and that there was no resurrection. Alas, extremely few other people, if any, apparently share these four reasonable positions. May I sincerely request that some readers consider doing so?

While the FBI repeatedly has declined invitations to comment on the Shroud of Turin, the British authorities are not so reticent and they do have much to say.

Forensic science is a field that had not previously weighed in on the authenticity of The Shroud of Turin.

This fine book should be read by all Shroud buffs.

The explosivness of the shroud of turin is that if you assume that the man under the shroud was dead, there is no natural explanation for the formation of the image. But if you assume a living body, not only the formation of the image can be explained by a natural process, but also alle the other findings (like the padle of blood under the back) can be explained.
Rodney Hoar dared to brake a tabu: Yes - under the shroud lay Jesus, but the man of the shroud was not dead - the evidence for this is clear.

What a deceptive Title.

"Yes, the Shroud of Turin is real, but Christianity is NOT," should be the actual title.

Five facts "horribly" ignored by Hoare:

The amount of body trauma, especially the side wound... indicates this man was dead. The Roman spear ruptured the "pericardium," causing the fluid described as "blood AND WATER" being released. The side wound stain consists of this fluid.

The man's legs are UNBROKEN. Thus, the Romans considered this crucifixion victim dead.

The body image gives the appearance of RIGOR MORTIS.

The blood stains are merely the oozing that occurs after trauma... it's a little known fact that bodies that have suffered long and traumatic deaths will continue to ooze blood post mortem. The majority of the blood that covered this man had been washed away. This fact has been established just recently by Shroud researchers.

And obviously, no "natural" explanation for image formation will suffice. If a natural process did occur, it is most certain that duplicates to the Shroud of Turin would have been found and collected.

The evidence that legitimatizes the Shroud is otherwise documented in this book, thus it escapes my one star rating. "Irrefutable" indeed!

Jeff Messenger, author of the novel "The Shroud of Torrington."

A book worth reading! But, as another reviewer mentioned, an ending not consistent with the main part of the book. That reviewer speaks of "ascention" and there just is no such thing. Ascending to where? The clouds? The heavens? The Kingdom of God is within, not 'out there'! Everyone knows that, on a cellular level, the physical body dies and re-creates itself daily and death is when that event no longer takes place.

The author of this book may well be right, when he states that Jesus possibly lived on. What most Christians, and others, are uncomfortable with is the question: What did Jesus do after such an event, and why hasn't anyone heard about that part of his life? We'll never know for sure. That corrupted "apostle" Paul saw to that!

What might help the curious reader is to form a larger backdrop to this sort of information. Here, a few other authors provide an interesting tapestry: "Evolution's End" by Joseph Chilton Pearce (odd title, but one of the best books I've read), "Jesus, A Revolutionary Biography" by John Dominic Crossan, "The Gospel According to Jesus" by Stephen Mitchell and perhaps "The Five Gospels" by Funk(?)

The answer to "Who is MY Jesus" comes to each of us differently, just like every fingerprint and every snowflake is different, but this book will make up one of the mileposts we all need to become the being we want to be.