Does the Shroud of Turin Capture the Resurrection?

On August 3, 2025, James Zumwalt had an interesting post at the American Thinker entitled What Moment in Time Did the Shroud of Turin Actually Capture? For anyone who has looked into it, the Roman Catholic Church seems especially enamored of relics and objects said to be imbued with spiritual power. Statues of the Virgin Mary, scapulars, crucifixes, icons of the saints, and of course true pieces of the cross. Most of those are don't have any power on their own. They are there as reminders to the Catholic faithful of who they are and how they are to act and behave. For Christians, every moment of every day is to be lived for Christ.  A rosary is a bunch of beads and a crucifix unless it is prayed with faith and purpose. Then it has power.

But the Shroud of Turin is a different matter. As you will find out from reading Zumwalt's article, the Shroud cannot even now be reproduced by modern technology.

The debate about the Shroud’s authenticity has led to extensive scientific scrutiny. Pieces of its cloth were subjected to carbon dating in 1988 suggesting its origin was between 1260 and 1390. However, the carbon dating tests have since been discredited not only because the Shroud’s exposure to the 1532 fire may well have impacted accurate testing, but also because its results conflict with other scientific methods.

Contributing to its authenticity is the fact that the three-dimensional image of Jesus appears to be a photographic negative. While linear perspective—i.e., three dimensional painting—was formalized around 1415, negative photography was not developed until the early 19th century. And, had the image been painted, the paint would have deeply penetrated the fabric, which it did not.

A new theory not only further supports authenticity, it suggests it was not the dead image of Jesus that was captured but rather that of a resurrecting Christ. It surmises the image is not one of a dead Jesus lying prone but one of Him in an upright position. Discrediting the former belief is that—consistent with the law of gravity—His hair falls directly down both sides of His head, covering His ears.

...snip...

In another surprising discovery, it is discernible as well from the Shroud’s image that the subject was not static, revealing some subtle signs of movement, typical of one still breathing.

While the image does not portray a supine Jesus, nor does it show Him standing or resting upon anything but, rather, “floating.” This begs the question why would He appear to be suspended in mid-air—unless it was the moment of the resurrection that was captured on the fabric.

As the image was not painted, the theory has emerged it was created by an intense burst of energy, similar to the vacuum ultraviolet radiation of lasers, that could have discolored the linen fibers, without scorching the cloth. This further supports a conclusion that the Shroud captured the resurrection itself.

Ultimately, everyone must decide for himself or herself whether the Shroud is real or not, and whether it depicts the risen Christ or not. For me, I don't need a Shroud of Turin to believe, but if someone's faith is perhaps wavering, it provides powerful reasons to believe.