The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection

This is a startling and eye-opening book, which is guaranteed a wide audience. At the core are the author's twin theories about the Turin Shroud and the Resurrection of Christ. On the first of these, the author argues that the Shroud is genuine, and that the 1988 carbon dating was flawed. On the second, he argues that the Shroud should be understood as the real source of the Resurrection story: instead of seeing a flesh-&-blood resurrection, the disciples experienced an animistic response to the image of Jesus in the shroud.Neither theory is 100% convincing - they still require too great a leap of faith (!) - but the author does more than enough to undermine existing preconceptions. Looking first at the theory of the Shroud's authenticity: I started the book by assuming we needed to apply Occam's rasor. That's to say, the simplest explanation is probably the correct one, and it's surely a medieval forgery. By the end of the book, my "faith" in the science of the 1988 test was effectively undermined and my understanding of "medieval forgery" greatly more nuanced. It seems that no-one has been able to produce a 21st century forgery of the shroud (despite some creditable efforts), so how on Earth was a forgery managed in the medieval period? Occam's rasor no longer yields the same answer at the end of this book as it did at the start: the medieval forgery seems almost as fantastical as the genuine shroud. At the very least, de Wesselow's arguments should, and doubtless will, lead to a reopening of scientific inquiries.To the second theory: the animistic interpretation of the Resurrection. Again, the author doesn't have enough evidence to be 100% convincing, but the theory is new, plausible and very exciting. The author does a reasonable job of shifting our perception from the media-rich, 21st century world to 1st century Jerusalem - where investing inanimate objects/idols/images with lifelike attributes was a much more potent process. The Resurrection and the few crucial years following Christ's death require an explanation, and at the very least this book advances an arresting and plausible interpretation.(As a quick aside: the author always describes his Resurrection theory as non-miraculous and I fear devout believers might take offence at the absence of the miraculous. But when is a miracle a miracle? If the Shroud is genuine, then in order to create it a large number of highly improbable, independent factors had to follow upon each other in perfect sequence. When these probabilities are multiplied together, the combined probability of the Shroud's creation becomes so infinitessimally small, that it could quite reasonably be considered a miracle...)While the theories in this book are exciting, the execution isn't always flawless. The author sometimes protests too much - all his conclusions are expressed with certainty despite the inherent slipperiness of the material. He should have the confidence to express doubt. Evidence is often used selectively and too much certainty is built on it. Finally, several of the arguments have a hint of circularity. For example, in the tomb story on Easter Sunday much is made of the angels at the tomb being reinterpretations of the Shroud (a fair point) but the stated absence of Jesus' body from the tomb is dismissed as fabrication by the Gospel writers. That may or may not be a fair point. But it doesn't permit the author's claim that the Shroud theory makes perfect sense of the Gospel story. Another example is Luke's account of the Resurrected Jesus' appearance to the 12, when he eats fish to prove his reality: this is dismissed by de Wesselow as fabrication, while other details from that story are selected in support. The slightly tenuous conclusion that the Shroud theory makes sense of the Gospels is then adduced in the final chapter in support of the Shroud theory, which seems a little circular. All in all, the book might have benefitted from (more) critical reviewing during its writing. That may not have been possible owing to the secrecy required. Hopefully there will be a second edition and it will provide the opportunity for closer review.These are quibbles. This is a provocative, exciting book that has been built on extensive academic research and considerable personal commitment. The book benefits from both dimensions. So while there is a great breadth of sources and footnotes, the narrative is also helped along by plenty of personal, even picaresque, details (apparently one of the author's key insights arrived one Summer's afternoon, while meditating under an apple tree, in Cambridge...!) The twin thesis at the centre of the book will run and run. The Shroud will eventually be tested again. And in the meantime, a new view of the Resurrection has entered Christian scholarship.

There was a lot of hype around this book which, given its subject and its controversial theory, is not surprising. It is a clever theory in many ways but I remain unconvinced by it. The author writes like an academic but, strangely, without the rigour I expected. There were too many gaps and assumptions for me and, in the end, the argument felt hollow and forced.

I wont tell you his theory but any sane person would think its nonsense.The Shroud is a fascinating object regardless of what you think it is.Nobody has come up with a plausible explaination of how it was created and it has many strange properties. it is not Leonardo da Vinci nor has it any trace of being painted.I will keep reading but this does not book does nothing to further Shroud scholarship.

exceptionally pleased with my purchase which met my requirements and search for truth. I would recommend this to enquirers.and chrsitian seekers

Excellent product, fast delivery, well packed.