Turin Shroud Is Not the Burial Cloth of Jesus

While I understand the desire to have Christian philosophies conform to the teachings of The Urantia Book, a close examination of the text and a comparison to the so-called "Shroud of Turin" should clearly illuminate the facts. And the facts, as I interpret them based on the details presented in The Urantia Book, wholly disprove the belief that this Christian relic is a genuine artifact associated with Jesus's burial and resurrection. Here's a short breakdown of my conclusion.

When we conduct an in-depth comparison between the detailed accounts of the burial and resurrection in Papers 188 and 189 and the theory surrounding the Shroud of Turin (a linen cloth bearing the negative image of a crucified man), several inconsistencies emerge. Based on the revelation, the Shroud of Turin is not the burial cloth of Jesus. 

The Urantia Book’s narrative contradicts the assumption of the Shroud’s authenticity on three fundamental points: the method of wDrapping the body, the timing and nature of the body's disappearance, and the theological prevention of relic worship.

The Wrapping of the Body

The Shroud theory: The image on the Shroud of Turin depicts a naked man, front and back, with wounds clearly visible1. For this image to form (via radiation, scorch, or contact), the cloth would need to be in direct contact with the skin, or at least not separated by thick layers of other material.2

The Urantia Book account: The text explicitly describes a burial process that would prevent the formation of such an image on an outer sheet. 

1. Bandages first: Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus brought large quantities of myrrh and aloes. They "wrapped the body with bandages saturated with these solutions.3"

2. Face covered: They "tied a napkin about the face."4

3. Sheet last: Only after the embalming with bandages and the placement of the face napkin did they wrap the body in a "linen sheet."4