$1 million offered to prove Turin Shroud forgery claim
By T.K. Randall
April 20, 2022 · 5 comments
Is the Turin Shroud really a medieval forgery ? Image Credit: CC 3.0 Mogadir
Filmmaker David Rolfe is challenging the British Museum to recreate the iconic shroud to prove that it is a forgery.
The famous shroud, which many believe to be the burial cloth of Jesus himself, has been the subject of debate for years.
Radiocarbon-dating has suggested that the shroud is not actually from the time of Jesus at all but from the medieval period, however conflicting studies and opinions have made it difficult to reach a definitive conclusion over its origins and millions of people continue to believe that it really does bear the image of Christ.
One man who remains convinced of the shroud's authenticity is filmmaker David Rolfe, creator of The Silent Witness
- a 1978 documentary which helped to popularize the Turn Shroud in modern times - as well as Who Can He Be?
which releases in the near future.
Rolfe remains adamant that carbon dating carried out on the shroud in the 1980s by the British Museum was flawed and that the evidence suggesting its forgery is insufficient.
He is so convinced by this in fact that he has issued a $1 million challenge to the museum.
"If... they believe the shroud is a medieval forgery, I call on them to repeat the exercise, and create something similar today," he said.
"Because from all the evidence I've seen, if this is a forgery it's the most ingenious forgery in history - and of course it dates back almost 2,000 years, to a time of far less sophisticated forgery techniques."
"They said it was knocked up by a medieval conman, and I say: well, if he could do it, you must be able to do it as well. And if you can, there's a $1m donation for your funds."
The museum, however, does not appear to be interested in taking on the challenge.
"Any current questions about the shroud would be best put to those who currently care for it in the royal chapel of the cathedral of Turin," said a spokesperson.
Source: The Guardian
| Comments (5)