Is the Shroud of Turin a genuine relic of Jesus, a medieval hoax, or something else entirely? In this second episode on the Shroud of Turin, cold-case detective and Christian apologist J. Warner Wallace examines the shroud the way he would any piece of evidence in a homicide trial, focusing on chain of custody, historical silence, and what the earliest Christians actually relied on to make the case for the resurrection.
If you find this episode helpful, please follow the podcast so you never miss an update, and take a moment to rate and review the show—your review really helps more people discover Cold-Case Christianity. Here is the audio podcast (the Cold-Case Christianity Weekly Podcast is located on iTunes or our RSS Feed):
For more information about the reliability of the New Testament gospels and the case for Christianity, please read Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels. This book teaches readers ten principles of cold-case investigations and applies these strategies to investigate the claims of the gospel authors. The book is accompanied by an eight-session Cold-Case Christianity DVD Set (and Participant’s Guide) to help individuals or small groups examine the evidence and make the case.
Chris
June 23, 2026 at 10:27 am
Let’s say the following were true: (1) An atomic blast produced an effect on metal that no other event was capable of producing, and (2) There had only been one atomic blast ever.
If you came across some metal that showed the effects of an atomic blast, would chain of custody matter? Wouldn’t you know without question that that metal had been at the site of the blast, regardless of how many people had touched it, how it had been stored, or what it had come into contact with?
The shroud science I’ve seen and heard seems to show two things. (1) The shroud seems to be from the first century. Early dating saying it was from around the 1200’s were not based on original material, but on a piece that had been repaired. This was verified by original researchers looking at the weave from the piece that was dated, and original parts of the shroud. (2) The image on the shroud, looking at the linen fibers themselves and the depth of the discoloration into the core of these fibers, show the image was not just caused by contact with blood, but essentially (and simplifying) from a radiation burn. There is no other death that could have produced the radiation needed to produce the image on the shroud of Turin.
This has nothing to do with why I became a Christian, or my belief today. I just thing the science does provide strong evidence for the shroud of Turin, regardless of chain of custody issues.
I’d be interested in any thoughts you have on this.