Stephen Jones corrects me. Correctly so!

. . . that I don’t believe there will be any more evidence found IN THE BIBLE that supports the Shroud being authentic does not mean that I believe the Shroud has not been proved to be authentic.

I DO believe the Shroud has been PROVED to be authentic. Not in an absolute mathematical or philosophical sense, but in the SCIENTIFIC sense of the preponderance of the balance of the evidence for and against.

Every day criminals are jailed and even executed, having been convicted by courts on far less forensic and circumstantial evidence than there is that points to the Shroud to be authentic.

In agreeing with Stephen’s point that more evidence is not to be found in the Bible, I accidentally implied that Jones and I were in agreement about proving that the Shroud of Turin is authentic. As you can see, Stephen thinks that authenticity has been proved. He is not alone. A significant number of scholars agree.

I don’t agree, however. I think it is real. I believe it is real. I think, as I say in my post, that we can infer it is. I think, however, that the proof is elusive. The whole argument may have to do with how we define proof and how we establish criteria.

My apologies to Stephen for misrepresenting his point of view. Stephen Jones on the Shroud of Turin blood evidence « Shroud of Turin Blog