This article advances an explanatory proposal regarding the Shroud of Turin using a Critical Theist framework to address “explanatory preclusion”—the a priori exclusion of non-naturalistic causes in transdisciplinary research. By distinguishing methodological from metaphysical naturalism, the study evaluates the Shroud’s “Full Feature Set”—including distance-correlated luminance and micron-level superficiality—under symmetric evidentiary standards. The analysis applies a two-stage IBE framework: naturalistic hypotheses are evaluated against the Full Feature Set, yielding a stalemate integrated with historical testimony under a Critical Theist framework permitting transcendent agency as a candidate. A resurrection-based radiant-energy interpretive model (heuristic, not mechanistic) provides greater explanatory parsimony than naturalistic mechanisms unable to account for the image’s unique physical constraints. The article proposes a model of “intentional ambiguity,” suggesting the artifact’s sustained evidential uncertainty is a predicted feature preserving epistemic distance rather than an evidential deficiency. This approach moves beyond the authenticity–forgery binary, framing the Shroud as a boundary object where empirical anomalies and scriptural claims converge.
Jonathan T. Williams (Tue,) studied this question.