Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Study: The Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo Covered the Same Person
Aletelial ^ | April 11, 2016 | Paraula

Posted on 04/12/2016 4:26:25 AM PDT by NYer

The Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo “almost certainly covered the cadaver of the same person.” This is the conclusion from an investigation that has compared the two relics using forensics and geometry.

The research was done by Dr. Juan Manuel Miñarro, a sculpture professor at the University of Seville, as part of a project sponsored by the Valencia-based Centro Español de Sindonología (CES) (The Spanish Center of Sindonology).Transparency acetate on three-dimensional model used in the investigation of Juan Manuel Miñarro . LINTEUM Transparency acetate on three-dimensional model used in the investigation of Juan Manuel Miñarro . LINTEUM

The study thus supports what tradition has held for more than two millennia: that the two cloths came from the same historical person, who, according to this tradition, was Jesus of Nazareth.

The Shroud of Turin would have been the linen that covered that body of Jesus when he was placed in the tomb, while the Sudarium would have been the cloth used to cover his face on the cross after he died.

Both cloths would be those found by Peter and John in the tomb, as the Gospel recounts.

The study “doesn’t prove in itself that this person was Jesus Christ, but it does clearly advance us along the path of being able to indisputably demonstrate that the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium were wrapped around the head of the same cadaver,” Miñarro explained to Paraula.

Blood stains

In fact, the investigation has found a number of correlations between the two relics that “far exceeds the minimum number of proofs or significant points required by most judicial systems around the world to identify a person, which is between eight and 12, while our study has demonstrated more than 20.”

Specifically, the research has discovered “very important coincidences” in the principal morphological characteristics (type, size and distances of the markings), the number and distribution of the blood stains, the unique markings from some of the wounds reflected on both of the cloths or the deformed surfaces.

There are “points that demonstrate the compatibility between both cloths” in the area of the forehead, where there are remains of blood, as well as at the back of the nose, the right cheekbone and the chin, which “present different wounds.”

Regarding the blood stains, Miñarro explained that the marks found on the two cloths have morphological differences, but that “what seems unquestionable is that the sources, the points from which blood began to flow, correspond entirely.”

The variations could be explained by the fact that “the contact with the [cloths] was different” in regard to duration, placement and intensity of the contact of the head with each of the cloths, as well as the “elasticity of the weave of each linen.”

Certainly, the coincidences demonstrated on the two cloths “are such that now it is very difficult to think that they came from different people,” according to Jorge Manuel Rodríguez, president of the CES.

In the light of this investigation, he said, “we have come to a point where it seems absurd to suggest that ‘by happenstance’ all of the wounds, lesions and swelling coincides on both cloths. … Logic requires that we conclude that we are speaking of the same person.”

For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.Luke 8:17

Related:

The Exposition of the Holy Tunic of Argeneuil.

 

Translated from the Spanish by Kathleen Hattrup.



TOPICS: Catholic; History; Religion & Science
KEYWORDS: catholic; christ; christian; christianity; easter; jesus; medievalhoax; orthodox; oviedo; resurrection; shroud; shroudofturin; sudarium; sudariumofoviedo; turin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101 next last
To: LS
I don’t follow this much and certainly don’t want to argue but have heard that one of the main “dis proofs” is that the wounds on the shroud are in the hands while crucifixion occurred through the wrist bones?

Nope, LS, it is actually that's just the opposite. The image on the Shroud shows exit wounds coming out the back of the wrist of one crossed over arm, but there is a place on the base of the palm, where a natural pathway opens between the bones of the hand that Roman soldiers skilled in the art of crucifixion would know that exits exactly at the point seen on the Shroud.

If the nail were driven in the center of the palm, as artists depicted it for centuries, the weight of the body would tear through with the motion of a man in agony during crucifixion. Even the dead weight of a deceased body would do so, and multiple accounts of historians tell of bodies remaining on crosses for weeks show this did not happen.

The one extant example of a 1st Century crucifixion victim we have, Jehohannan, has a nails still in his arm, shows that the nail was driven through even farther up, through the forearm.

So the image on the Shroud is right, the images drawn by artists wrong.

61 posted on 04/12/2016 10:00:13 AM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: papertyger
The 13th century result has been proven erroneous due to a repair known as "French reserving."

Make that "French Invisible Reweaving" and you'd be right. It was a technique developed in the 16th Century to repair tapestries and arrases that had frayed or been moth eaten so that the original images woven into them would not show the patch by "reweaving" new threads invisibly into the old, pre-dyed and matching the old ones. It required very skilled artisans to do the work.

62 posted on 04/12/2016 10:05:34 AM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: LS
My point is, does anyone find it odd that the Old Testament prophets would write about this form of punishment when, in fact, in their world stoning was the typical means of capital punishment?

I don't know if crucifixion was common in the ancient middle east, though my guess is that the Greeks and Romans probably copied it from someone else. The ancients were pretty creative in their modes of execution. I'm not inclined to put much weight to put on the Old Testament references to crucifixion. The prophets might have written that Jesus would be stoned. Or beheaded. Or burned. Or struck by lightning. Or whatever. The important thing is not the particular mode of death; the important thing is that the prophets called it ahead of time.

63 posted on 04/12/2016 10:06:32 AM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

A pox on auto-correct!


64 posted on 04/12/2016 10:09:10 AM PDT by papertyger (-/\/\/\-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: wbarmy
The Bible states again and again that the holes are in the hands.

And so they would be, from the front view. At the base of the palm, there is a depression in the muscles you can feel yourself. Place the nail there and it will naturally find the channel through the wrist bones and come out exactly in the place on the back of the wrist seen on the Shroud. The wrist bones encircle the nail and keep the body on the cross, not allowing it to tear thrower as would be the case if it were placed in the center of the palm. The Roman Soldiers who performed crucifixions would have been taught this technique and location by their leaders.

65 posted on 04/12/2016 10:09:39 AM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

That was not a wise place to take a piece for the purpose.


66 posted on 04/12/2016 10:10:51 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

With which I totally agree. And the word “hand” can be broadly translated to mean anything in that area. And you can be sure that the holes were big enough to go into the palm part of the hand also. Which would help explain why the men in Emmaus did not really recognize Him until He stretched out His hands with bread.

I am of the mind that the shroud and Sudarium are what is claimed, the actual facial covering and shroud of Jesus Christ. The image was made when the Holy Spirit regenerated Him.

If I am wrong and it isn’t, no problem. It does not negate His resurrection or salvation. I just feel there is enough evidence to back up the claim that the cloths are what I think they are.


67 posted on 04/12/2016 10:23:51 AM PDT by wbarmy (I chose to be a sheepdog once I saw what happens to the sheep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: sphinx

“Cursed is he who hangs on a tree” was pretty specific.


68 posted on 04/12/2016 10:24:38 AM PDT by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the Sea . . . Eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Thank you


69 posted on 04/12/2016 10:39:40 AM PDT by GregoTX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: mumblypeg
“Wacked out conspiracy theory” I hadn't heard that.. but I'll take your word on it ....
Question ... Was it not the custom of the time for Rabbis to be married ????

70 posted on 04/12/2016 10:54:04 AM PDT by Robe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Pride in the USA; Stillwaters

Ping for new update on the Shroud of Turin.


71 posted on 04/12/2016 11:07:32 AM PDT by lonevoice (Life is short. Make fun of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

“The one extant example of a 1st Century crucifixion victim we have, Jehohannan, has a nails still in his arm, shows that the nail was driven through even farther up, through the forearm.”

Correction: I mis-remembered Jehoannan’s case. The nail was through the ankle bone. The forearm showed scrapes of the passage of the nail through the on both the ulna and radius. There are some broken bones in the hand bones which some interpret to mean a nail was driven through there, but it is an outlying interpretation and an unlikely result of driving a nail in the hand as no pathologist has ever seen the metacarpal bones broken by a nail driven through a cadaver’s hands during testing.


72 posted on 04/12/2016 11:11:05 AM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
What no one can EVER prove is that they covered Jesus. People are so gullible. Research money is so available.

The people doing this research usually pay for it themselves. Scientific evidence that is replicable has nothing to do with gullibility.

73 posted on 04/12/2016 11:14:09 AM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Campion
I wouldn’t assume that crucifixion was always done exactly the same way.

True...one of the apostles (I think Peter?) was crucified upside-down, wasn't he?

74 posted on 04/12/2016 11:16:55 AM PDT by Nea Wood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Robe
Was it not the custom of the time for Rabbis to be married ????

Celibacy was uncommon but not unheard of. As far as we know, John the Baptist was celibate. Celibacy was also practiced in the Essene community at Qumran.

75 posted on 04/12/2016 11:17:53 AM PDT by trad_anglican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: wbarmy

All the way back in Daniel five you will see ‘hand’ is including forearm.


76 posted on 04/12/2016 11:27:14 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Democrats bait then switch; their fishy voters buy it every time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
“There was a hundred pounds or so of ointments and herbs smeared all over and covering Jesus’ body..”

The women came to the Tomb with the ointments but the tomb was empty

There would have been no way to keep the ointment on the body of Jesus with just a shroud...The ointment would have fallen right off...Plus, the shroud would have been smeared severely with ointments...And even had the shroud been washed numerous times there still would have been residue from the ointment in the fibers...

77 posted on 04/12/2016 11:30:00 AM PDT by Iscool (Trump/Kasich...A winning team...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
The carbon dating was botched. The piece of cloth used wasn’t part of the Shroud.

It was part of the Shroud we have today, just not part of the Shroud as originally made. The C-14 test sample was a melange of original 1st Century Flaxen Linen and Seventeenth Century cotton patch threads interwoven together to repair a worn corner using a technique called "French Invisible Reweaving."

78 posted on 04/12/2016 11:46:02 AM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: al_c
That’s been debunked. The sample used in the carbon dating test came from an area that had been patched. Microscopic views of that particular area showed a much different material pattern than the rest of the shroud.

Actually, no. The skilled reweavers replicated the weaving pattern and the color by dying the threads they were weaving into the damaged area to match the original cloth. There were discrepancies to the original cloth but they were not visible to the naked eye. These discrepancies were, however, visible under ultraviolet light because that area of the Shroud fluoresced while the rest of the Shroud did not.

This was due to the different chemical make up of the fullering, retting, and dyes used to make the patch threads match. Also, the dyed cotton threads were, on average, just slightly thinner overall than the average size of the Linen threads of the main body of the Shroud. The biggest difference was that the threads in the patch were an "S" twist, while the threads of the main body were an opposite "Z" twist. The opposite twist is apparently to better allow the joining of the threads together, so they will lock. At least that's one weaver's explanation. The weave pattern of the Shroud and the patched area were both three over one twill.

79 posted on 04/12/2016 11:58:33 AM PDT by Swordmaker (This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

The ointment was never put on in the first place. See your Bible for the explanation as to why.


80 posted on 04/12/2016 12:08:12 PM PDT by Campion (Halten Sie sich unbedingt an die Lehre!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson