The Shroud of Turin, The True Cross, The Holy Grail, The Lance, The Ark of Covenant and Other Relics

[Fidei Defensor]

Relics have always been fascinating. Stories of the Knights of Round Table searching for Holy Grail, Crusaders riding into battle with the True Cross, The Ark of Covenant's fate, and the Shrouds that purported to have the portrait of Jesus upon them.

Consider this a thread for discussion of all of these relics and more. Where they the obsession of Medieval Christians or something more? Should we dismiss them or relish them? Do they violate the command to make "not an image of worship," or are they simply objects of veneration that draw us closer to Christ? The legends surrounding them and those who claim they possess them are intriguing. The Knights Templar are said to have hidden them. Adolf Hitler is said to have wanted to possess them. Stephen Spielberg has made them treasures for his fictions.

Some Questions to get conversation started:

Do you believe the Shroud of Turin is the handkerchief from Jesus' tomb?, "and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself." (John 20:7). Do you believe any of the shrouds are real?

Did Helena, Constantine's mother, find the True Cross? What did Saladin do with it after capturing it at Battle of Hattin?

Is the Holy Grail a cup or dish? Is it made of wood, alabaster, or precious metals? Where did it go?

Is the Ark of Covenant somewhere in Arabia, Sinai, or Israel? Or has it return to God (Revelation 11:19).

Feel free to contribute answers or ask more questions. This isn't a pro relic or anti relic thread, it is to explore these objects, their relationship with God and us.

 

 

[Neighbor]

And there is the pyramid the great Pyramid, and the possibilities of it: As a geographic marker, a teller of history and prophetic tool - for the ages past and yet to come.

Overall could be a long and fun thread, thanks.

The shroud?  I believe it to be real  not contrived, but is it  an artifact from Jesus temporary entombment? And even if it is- so what, it is an object, a creation not the creator, it is not holy it is historically interesting for sure, but not to be worshipped.

History is interesting and objects declare of history so they too are interesting. Yet they are not my Lord. They are not to be worshipped. God has used some, very specifically in worship instructions, but the worship is to be of Him, not the object.

We do not worship angels nor any inanimate object. We are to worship God, we are to know the gospel of Jesus  and we are to have the Holy Spirit indwelling us as comforter lest the turmoil of evil around us be too much to bear in His absence as He prepares a place for us with God. 

And so while chasing history is fun and informational useful too. It is God we are to worship.

Edited May 8, 2017 by Neighbor

[Guest shiloh357]

There isn't any way that Helena could find the "true cross"  as the Romans re-used both parts of the cross many, many times.   tens of thousands of men before and after Jesus were crucified in the same area, just in front of the cliff face of Golgotha.  The cross on which Jesus died was likely reused multiple times, bot the stake and the cross piece.  So there is no  way to identify the "true cross."   That has to be Medieval myth.

The ancient, first Christians didn't collect or venerate relics so anything Jesus used or he apostles used, in addition to any body parts of biblical characters (also used as relics), would be irretrievably lost.

[Fidei Defensor]

I am enjoying your contributions already. 

I agree, the objects or relics shouldn't be worshipped. But they are props and pieces of the True events and accounts which makes them fascinating.

Helena claims the True Cross was found with two others and the "True One" healed the sick. However, by 70 A.D. there had been mass crucifixions and finding the True Cross in circa 312-323A.D. would have been like looking for needle in a haystack. 

You know what's curious? Why isn't the sign that read "Jesus King of the Jews or INRI" on the cross beam a relic? I mean no Roman would have reused it and Pilate was meticulous about it (John 19:19-22). 

Another relic is Jesus' robe and tunic. 

[Guest shiloh357]

1 hour ago, Fidei Defensor said:

You know what's curious? Why isn't the sign that read "Jesus King of the Jews or INRI" on the cross beam a relic? I mean no Roman would have reused it and Pilate was meticulous about it (John 19:19-22). 

Another relic is Jesus' robe and tunic. 

The sign was probably on a cheap piece of wood or even papyrus.   It was common to nail the offenses one had committed to their cross in order to show passersby why this person was crucified.   It was probably destroyed when no longer needed.  

The RCC and other groups that revere these things project this on to the first believers retroactively, as if they would have saved everything Jesus touched or wore or whatever.    They made up a lot of stuff and they held some pretty strong control over their followers and they were seen as above questioning.  So people were liable to believe anything they were told.  

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

5 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Did Helena, Constantine's mother, find the True Cross?

What I've heard is that during an excuvation a bunch of crosses were found and when one was touched and a miracle was performed (I thought it brought someone back to life, but it might have been a healing) and that is why it's believed to be the true cross. Doesn't matter is 1000 people were crucified in the same cross as Jesus... it's still the cross our Lord was nailed to. If all this true cross stuff is true.

As for the Shroud of Turin, don't know. There was carbon dating done on it but samples were only take from one spot and during the Middle Ages it had been exposed to smoke during a fire. I wasn't there so I don't know. It might be...... and it might not be.

Heres my take on relics, we see bones of the dead performing miricles (2 kings 13:21) we see articles of clothing healing (Matt 9:21), we see that even Peters shadow was believed to have the power to heal (acts 5:15).  

So for someone to say that veneration of relics is a midevil creation or a Catholic Church creation is mistaken. We see God using bones and clothing as tools for miricles. We see as early as Acts 5 people believing in the power of relics. So it doesn't go against scriputre, that they exsist and that people recognizes their power to perform miricles. 

Relics are a way to draw us to Jesus. The objects themselves have no power onto themselves. All healing power they possess comes from God and God alone. It's through the power of God that Elisha's bones raised the dead and Jesus tunic healed the woman. 

So if someone is so weak in their faith that they do not recognize this, than they should not be visiting relics or praying before relics.

Ive been to the mayrters shine in Ontario Canada and they have 1st Class relics of Priests that were killed because of the faith. I kneeled before them and prayed. I prayed to Jesus to give all those being persecuted because of their faith in him the power and strength to remain faithful, like the Priests did. I also had a 2nd class relic touched to my forehead and while it was being done I asked Jesus to help me to always keep him as the center of my thoughts and my heart.

never did I worship the relic or believe that they themselves have magical powers. They point to Jesus and if any miricle comes from them it's coming from Jesus not the relics themselves. 

Just my 5 cents (because we don't have pennies in Canada anymore).

Cheers

  

Edited May 8, 2017 by Judas Machabeus
Auto correct... changed "on side" to "of"

[other one]

To quote Hillary Clinton, "what difference does it make"

Is people's  faith so weak we need trinkets to believe?

[TheMatrixHasU71]

2 hours ago, Judas Machabeus said:

Heres my take on relics, we see bones of the dead performing miricles (2 kings 13:21) we see articles of clothing healing (Matt 9:21), we see that even Peters shadow was believed to have the power to heal (acts 5:15).  

Meant to be one time things only. That is why God called some of them "special" miracles

[TheMatrixHasU71]

1 hour ago, CuteInTheLord said:

Not something that was possible decades ago. To my knowledge "Veronica's Veil", has not yet been subject to this investigative technique. But I'd like to hear of that happening in near future too

There are some art critics and historians who examined Veronica's veil and say that the image is nothing but the shabby scratchings of an amateur artist.

[TheMatrixHasU71]

7 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Did Helena, Constantine's mother, find the True Cross?

No. This same Helena also claimed to have fount Mt. Sinai but there is no archaeological evidence that the traditional place is in the Sinai region. In fact scripture and science have shown it to be in Arabia. Look for  video called the Search for Mount Sinai the Mountain of Fire; I believe you can still find it on Youtube. 

The evidence there makes that mountain look like an abandoned Ten Commandments set.

Unlike the traditional place in the sinai region where there is ZERO evidence for a million plus people having been there.