New Chemical Testing Points to Ancient Origin for Burial Shroud of Jesus

Yahoo ^ | January 19, 2005

[swilhelm73]

DALLAS, Jan. 19 /PRNewswire/ -- The American Shroud of Turin Association for Research (AMSTAR), a scientific organization dedicated to research on the enigmatic Shroud of Turin, thought by many to be the burial cloth of the crucified Jesus of Nazareth, announced today that the 1988 Carbon-14 test was not done on the original burial cloth, but rather on a rewoven shroud patch creating an erroneous date for the actual age of the Shroud. The Shroud of Turin is a large piece of linen cloth that shows the faint full-body image of a blood-covered man on its surface. Because many believe it to be the burial cloth of Jesus, researchers have tried to determine its origin though numerous modern scientific methods, including Carbon-14 tests done at three radiocarbon labs which set the age of the artifact at between AD 1260 and 1390.

"Now conclusive evidence, gathered over the past two years, proves that the sample used to date the Shroud was actually taken from an expertly-done rewoven patch," says AMSTAR President, Tom D'Muhala. "Chemical testing indicates that the linen Shroud is actually very old -- much older than the published 1988 radiocarbon date."

"As unlikely as it seems, the sample used to test the age of the Shroud of Turin in 1988 was taken from a rewoven area of the Shroud," reports chemist Raymond Rogers, a fellow of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Rogers' new findings are published in the current issue of Thermochimica Acta, a chemistry peer reviewed scientific journal.

"Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin which is currently housed at The Turin Cathedral in Italy," says Rogers.

"The radiocarbon sample has completely different chemical properties than the main part of the shroud relic," explains Rogers. "The sample tested was dyed using technology that began to appear in Italy about the time the Crusaders' last bastion fell to the Mameluke Turks in AD 1291. The radiocarbon sample cannot be older than about AD 1290, agreeing with the age determined in 1988. However, the Shroud itself is actually much older."

Rogers' new research clearly disproves the 1988 findings announced by British Museum spokesperson, Mike Tite, when he declared that the Shroud was of medieval origin and probably "a hoax." The British Museum coordinated the 1988 radiocarbon tests and acted as the official clearing house for all findings.

Almost immediately, Shroud analysts questioned the validity of the sample used for radiocarbon dating. Researchers using high-resolution photographs of the Shroud found indications of an "invisible" reweave in the area used for testing. However, belief tilted strongly toward the more "scientific" method of radiocarbon dating. Rogers' recent analysis of an authentic sample taken from the radiocarbon sample proves that the researchers were right to question the 1988 results.

As a result of his own research and chemical tests, Rogers concluded that the radiocarbon sample was cut from a medieval patch, and is totally different in composition from the main part of the Shroud of Turin.

[Swordmaker]

SHROUD of TURIN PING!

More on the Carbon Dating error...

If you want on or off the Shroud Ping list, Freepmail me.

[Swordmaker]

Doesn't look Jewish to me. Thought it was Di Vinci's handiwork...

Da Vinci was born 101 years after the Shroud was first displayed in Lirey, France.

[Mercat]

"a common conceptual image"

By that I assume you mean that it looks like the velvet pictures. :-D

Actually, the explanation of that is simple. He was extremely important to the people who knew him. They would have passed on information about how he looked. If the shroud had been around and seen by members of the early church, it would have served as a template. Finally, there is the Holy Spirit.

[Mercat]

"Is one's faith so dependent?"

Not at all. It's no more dependant on the issue than it is on whether Mel Gibson gets an Oscar for the Passion. But I'm interested in the subject. Early, ancient history is a fascinating subject.

[Just mythoughts]

"The title's kind of misleading. Proving that the patch was medieval doesn't prove that the Shroud is "ancient". It just leaves the question open. "


Actually it begs the question regarding the credibility of those who did the first test. I have no vested interest in the status of the 'Shroud'.

[NYer]

doesn't anyone think it's funny that it's a common "conceptual image" of Jesus?

Fake or real, the pictures on the Shroud of Turin are pictures of Jesus. If the Shroud is fake, then the artist intended us to believe that the pictures are pictures of Jesus. If the Shroud is real, and the pictures are the product of a natural phenomenon or a miracle, then they are almost certainly pictures of Jesus.

There are no descriptions of Jesus' appearance in the New Testament. Nor are there any reputable descriptions in any known early Church sources. St. Augustine of Hippo made a point of this when he wrote his monumental works in the fifth century. Yet, starting in the sixth century a new picture, a new common appearance for Jesus emerged in eastern art. We see it today in all manner of pictures of Jesus: icons, paintings, mosaics and Byzantine coins. This common picture quality seems to have started in the Middle East about the same time that the Image of Edessa was discovered. Prior to this time, pictures of Jesus were mostly of a young, beardless man, often with short hair, often in story-like settings in which he was depicted as a shepherd.

SHROUD STORY

Catholic Ping - please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[NYer]

You pose a good question, but I'd have to ask - where did the conceptual images *come* from? :D

Ping to post #46 and the embedded link.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!