Knights Templar & The Turin Shroud ...

I heard a very interesting tale recently and was wondering if any of you guy's could (or would be prepared to), confirm or debunk what I was told.
(appologies in advance if this has been asked/answered before) ... this is the first time I've posted at this forum.

My source told me that 'The Shroud of Turin' did not show the image of Christ ... but that of Jacques de Molay (the Knights Templar who was burned at the stake in 1314, by order of Philip IV of France).

It was not until the 16th century that the Catholic Church took posession of the shroud claiming it as a holy relic that portrayed the image of Christ.

I'm told that the Church gave permission for 'The Shroud of Turin' to be carbon-dated sometime during the late 80's ... and the results appear to back-up the idea of it being an image of Jacques de Molay by revealing that the cloth of the shroud was from the late 13th - mid 14th century.

If this is so why does the Church still insist that it's a holy relic ?

And have the Templars ever tried to retrieve it ?

Look forward to any replies ... I find the subject extremely interesting.

Woody

There are quite few links out there relating the shroud of Turin to Knights Templar as it was only last week i was looking into this myself. What i found is that stories change between the Knights Templar seeking and seizing the shroud and the shroud actually being from the Knights themselves

I find the theory to be quite possible. If you are interested there is a book called The Second Messiah by Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas that deals with this topic. They explain how the images came to be transferred on the cloth and, if I may say so, it is plausible. Also, they point out that it was the family of a former Templar that were in initial possession of the cloth; a family that may have been able to get in to see de Molay while he was being held in prison.

[edit on 16-2-2008 by TheComte]

Thanks for the swift replies 'Saint' and 'Comte'

I shall be trying to get hold of the book that you recomended.

Was it the family of Geoffrey de Charney who kept the shroud initially ?

Woody

reply to post by woodwytch

Yes. A quote from the book:

We believe that the family of Geoffrey de Charney's brother, Jean de Charney, was called in and ordered to care for both men, who were destined to die together seven years later, when both were slowly roasted over charcoal for their relapse into 'heresy'.
Knight and Lomas: The Second Messiah, pg 169

It's easy to see how they could have gotten their hands on the Shroud.

[edit on 16-2-2008 by TheComte]

[edit on 16-2-2008 by TheComte]

[edit on 16-2-2008 by TheComte]

Originally posted by woodwytch
My source told me that 'The Shroud of Turin' did not show the image of Christ ... but that of Jacques de Molay (the Knights Templar who was burned at the stake in 1314, by order of Philip IV of France).

HEY I read that book too it was a fiction Novel called "The Templar Legacy" or was it "Brotherhood of the Shroud".

If this is so why does the Church still insist that it's a holy relic ?

The Church does not officially recognize it as the shoud of Christ. They have said that it is ok to pray to though...much like say the visiting at Fatima or was it La Sallet or both that they say "Hey iot could have happened this one is ok to pray to and about. Those other sightings we dont want you praying to them." See the Church hardley ever says that something is real they only say if it helps your faith and draws you closer to us then ok we will indulged you and allow you to think that what you want. Smart people really.

It may not seem strange to yourselves but i am intrigued by the author mentioned above by the name of CHRISTOPHER KNIGHT. (Knight of Christ) is this just a coincidence? What is the background of this gentleman. I dont want to go off topic but that just stood out as an eerie coincidence for a person writing such a book

From the inside back jacket:

Christopher Knight has a degree in advertising and graphic design and is the managing director of a marketing and advertising agency. In 1976 he became a Freemason.

He also wrote The Hiram Key, again partnered with Lomas. Could be a pen name.

[edit on 16-2-2008 by TheComte]

Hi HizToyz,

I haven't read either of the books you mentioned ... it was just something that came up during a conversation with a friend the other day (she may have read the books ... didn't say). Either way it sounds like something else to add to my 'things to read list'.

I've noticed that authors quite often find it easier to put things 'out there' under the guise of 'fiction'. The only problem with that approach is that the reading public usually grab onto the wrong bits and the grains of truth remain hidden amongst the fiction.

Thanks for the information about the Churches take on the shroud.

Woody

reply to post by thesaint


Christopher Knight (Knight of Christ).

I thought exactly the same thing when I read that post too ...

Big coincidence !

(I got the u2u and will reply to it very soon) Woody

I was there in Turin about 7 years ago or something like that .. which was the last time that it was unfolded and put behind the glass.. I remember reading the explanation and it was very very convincing. Basically on the shroud of turin are visible the passion of christ...but then again this was in the explanation....

ciao

reply to post by woodwytch


It is very coincidental that the Shroud of Turin and the death of the Grand Master de Molay are from roughly the same time period.

DeMolay, supposedly wasn't burned at the stake, but was roasted alive on a spit. How this would translate to an image transferred to a cloth hasn't been tested to my knowledge.

The Shroud undisputedly exists in 1349 - a mere 35 years after the death of the Grand Master - owned by Geoffrey de Charny.

Leonardo da Vinci is supposedly linked to the Shroud as well ... he wasn't born until 1452.

The only Achilles Heel to the theory thus far is that - as far as I know - only Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas have put this theory forward. And they're not known as being 'scientifically minded.' They tend to make their own theories up then refer back to them as if it's fact (for example, they refer to their fictional first book in their second book as a serious reference). In other words, there's no factual evidence to back this claim up. Their books - "The Hiram Key" and "The Second Messiah" are both considered works of fiction. The Second Messiah is the book that puts the DeMolay/Shroud theory forth.

Your pal,
Meat.

[edit on 16-2-2008 by mmmeat]

Thanks meat,

Very informative ... it's good to have information from both perspectives and I appreciate you taking time to reply.

I'm a total ignoramus about all this but I just found the things that came-up in conversation the other day very interesting and knew this was the place to find-out if there was anything to it or not.

Cheers Woody

Originally posted by mmmeat
It is very coincidental that the Shroud of Turin and the death of the Grand Master de Molay are from roughly the same time period.
...
The Shroud undisputedly exists in 1349 - a mere 35 years after the death of the Grand Master - owned by Geoffrey de Charny.

The dates you mention are not correct if we consider the Ionization Resurrects The Shroud of Turin

An image of a coin appears over the right eye of the Shroud image. This coin, a very rare Pontius Pilate lepton struck in 29 to 32 A.D., was not found until 1977. more

Even if you reject the dating, what is with the coin?

According to these recent tests, which were conducted by scientists at the University of Arizona and Russian scientists in Moscow, the 1988 Carbon-14 dates were some 1200 years in error.
This dates the Shroud back to the first or second century.more

I believe it is a case of many hyenas pulling a Lion down... even when science provides answers and dates, it is rejected.

Ionization Resurrects The Shroud Of Turin

cheers

oh edit to add this:

Assuming the material has already been ionized(which is the main principle for carbon dating),then the method of carbon dating will give an incorrect answer to the actual date of origin for the shroudmore

[edit on 17-2-2008 by Thurisaz]

Originally posted by Thurisaz

Originally posted by mmmeat
It is very coincidental that the Shroud of Turin and the death of the Grand Master de Molay are from roughly the same time period.
...
The Shroud undisputedly exists in 1349 - a mere 35 years after the death of the Grand Master - owned by Geoffrey de Charny.

The dates you mention are not correct if we consider the Ionization Resurrects The Shroud of Turin

Actually ... no. I mentioned the date the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar was killed, and I mentioned an indisuptable date that the Shroud of Turin first appears. Therefore, BOTH dates I mentioned are not incorrect. You are reading more into what I wrote than what was actually printed in the post.

But, let's do examine what you wrote a bit more closely...

An image of a coin appears over the right eye of the Shroud image. This coin, a very rare Pontius Pilate lepton struck in 29 to 32 A.D., was not found until 1977. more

Even if you reject the dating, what is with the coin?

Well, to quote Barrie Schwortz, the technical photographer who took the pictures of the Shroud in 1978, and who has actually seen the Shroud:

"...My personal opinion, based on my photographic experience and my close examination of the Shroud itself, is that the weave of the cloth is far too coarse to resolve the rather subtle and very tiny inscription on a dime sized ancient coin...What he [Filas] saw as inscriptions, I saw as random shapes and noise. Such is the subjective nature of image analysis. For these reasons however, I cannot accept these coin "inscriptions" as viable evidence of a first century Shroud "date"...I do not argue that there appears to be something on the eyes of the man of the Shroud, and it may well be coins or potshards, since they were used in some first century burial rituals, but I do not believe we can resolve coin inscriptions..."

According to these recent tests, which were conducted by scientists at the University of Arizona and Russian scientists in Moscow, the 1988 Carbon-14 dates were some 1200 years in error.
This dates the Shroud back to the first or second century.more

I believe it is a case of many hyenas pulling a Lion down... even when science provides answers and dates, it is rejected.

My answer to that is: research.

The 1988 Carbon 14 tests were conducted on the Shroud. The 1993 tests were not. Now, I'm not a rocket scientist, but it seems to me that if you want to figure out the date of an object using Cabon-14 you use the object in question.

Carbon-14 dating from 3 separate independent tests conclusively (with a 95% probability) put the date of the Shroud between 1290 and 1390. As the first documented showing of the Shroud takes place in 1349, it easily follows the theory and science which have determined that the Shroud is mediaeval.

Furthermore, the coin-in-eye custom was not prevalent in the first century. In fact, it was a European custom to place coins on the eyes of the dead; many archaeological digs burial sites in England, France and Spain have discovered carcasses that show this. And, coincidentally, these sites are generally dated to the mediaeval period, and are primarily Christian.

Finally, the cloth of the shroud is too coarse to get details as small as the letters on a coin that is roughly the size of a penny. Looking at high resolution images of the space where the coins allegedly exist, it's virtually impossible to make out any significant detail. IF they are coins, they could be from any age up to the time the Shroud came into existence; I come across old coins all the time. If I were to be buried with coinage from 1790 that doesn't mean that I'm from that age.

While I'm not disputing that the Shroud of Turin certainly has an image on it, I'm not as closeminded as some that would believe that there is only one answer to who that image could be, or how that image was created. As a Roman Catholic, I don't worship images or idols anyway. I'm a food goup of faith ... but not blind faith.

Your pal,
Meat.

reply to post by HizToyz


It was the templar legacy. I thought it was a great book!

Originally posted by woodwytch
I heard a very interesting tale recently and was wondering if any of you guy's could (or would be prepared to), confirm or debunk what I was told.
(appologies in advance if this has been asked/answered before) ... this is the first time I've posted at this forum.

And a similar question to Woody's: has anyone heard anything about / is able to debunk a theory a friend was telling me about that there are codes somehow embedded in the Turin Shroud? I can't see how this would work and there's loads of hot air around the Turin Shroud so just wondered if anyone could shed any light?

Thanks,
Tex

This would make sense, the Knights Templar running around with the shroud of turin and all. Lets suppose thats true:

Wouldn't that mean that since like 99% of paintings of Jesus are based on the image within the shroud of turin, that most americans have paintings of Jacques Demolay in their home? Awesome stuff...

there is a huge resurgence going on right now to redo the carbon dating of the shroud.

The section that was carbon dated, had newer fibers weaved into the original shroud which many purport gave the dates they gave. Reason is they think the church ordered the corner sections be reweaved or fixed to look like original after a fire or some other damage was made to the shroud.

I think if they carbon date a middle section, that it would end up being around 2000 years old. we'll see.