Vanity: Shroud of Turin Program on Now on Discovery

12/13/2008 | Swordmaker

[Swordmaker]

The bible accounts don't support a shroud but rather a wound around cloth. (Mark 15:46 and John 19:40)

But a wound cloth does not agree with Jewish burial practices of the period. You are also using an English translation of a Greek word that has multiple possible connotations, one if which is "placed around".

[count-your-change]

John, chapter 19 describes a crown of thorns, Jesus being offered vingar, him speaking and finally calling out before death. one can speculate about a sweatband/face covering but there isn't anything there to suggest it. And what is said argues against it.

Either his body was completely wrapped with cloth including the head, or just the main body with a separate cloth for the face. Either way the wrapping, the winding of the body in a cloth is inconsistent with what Shroud is, a sort of coverlet.

The words of verse 40 carry the sense of binding the body up with the spices not just draping a cloth over the body.
This would be especially true if the “mixture” of the spices was dry. (I assumed ointment because of the weight involved, but admittedly an assumption).

The two passages cited, Gen. and Lev., have to do with eating blood and I can find nothing in the Torah about needing to avoid cleansing the body of a person who died violently so as to include every bit of blood in their burial. Is this part of the Mosaic Law or just tradition?

While “sindon” could be a garment by context it is not being used that way. It's being used as a piece of cloth as at Mark 15:46. No, it's not Egyptian mummy strips but I don't believe I suggested it was.

John's account of Jesus death and burial is quite detailed yet the words he uses (and as translators have chosen to translate) carry the sense of simply wrapping Jesus’ body in a large cloth with the spices. No images on a shroud or garment are mentioned or hinted at anywhere in the Bible or needed as Jesus himself appears to confirm his resurrection.

“The Sudarium of Oviedo has been in the Cathedral in Oviedo, Spain, since the 6th Century. It bears blood stains that match the blood flows shown on the Shroud of Turin in 79 points of congruity.”

This means what? That the Sudarium (of unknown origin) supports the Shroud (of unknown origin) and vice versa?

“However, there is evidence on the Sudarium that it was used to cover the head of the Crucified Christ while he was still on the cross and remained there until his body had been removed and brought to the tomb. It may have then served a double purpose... covering the face on the cross... and then binding the jaw shut in death.”

What evidence connects it to Jesus death and burial?

[Swordmaker]

The words of verse 40 carry the sense of binding the body up with the spices not just draping a cloth over the body.

Binding does not necessarily mean tying it or even tightly wrapping it. You state that "John's account of Jesus death and burial is quite detailed yet the words he uses (and as translators have chosen to translate) carry the sense of simply wrapping Jesus’ body in a large cloth with the spices." when all of the Gospel accounts are actually very cursory. They cover the burial in just a few sentences. There is no mention of the tahara, the ritual cleaning a normal burial would require.

"39 He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds.[d] 40Taking Jesus' body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs." John 19:39-40, NIV.

Jewish burial practices have not changed essentially in 3500 years. The body is usually buried with a simple shroud, not elaborate bindings. The practical use of strips around the extremities to keep the body from sprawling while lying in the stone niche are probably the source of the "binding" comments. The body is to be touched as little as possible, which would not be the case of trying to wrap it in bindings of any kind. The assumption that the body is wrapped around the body leaves open whether it was wrapped from left to right, right to left, or the body laid down on the cloth and wrapped up and over the head, down to the feet. We know about 1st Century Jewish burial practices and the Gospel accounts and the evidence on the Shroud comports fairly well with a burial that would be accorded a fairly prosperous person if it was done in a hurried fashion and not completed due to severe time constraints.

My understanding from conversations with a friend who is a conservative Jew, is that the constraint about trying to bury all of the blood with the body is more Mosaic Law and tradition than anything found in the Torah, although the concept of "Life being in the Blood" is definitely in the Torah and the prohibition about drinking or eating blood is based on that concept. If you have watched Mel Gibson's movie The Passion of the Christ, you will see some scenes based on this as Mary collects the bloody earth below the Cross.

No images on a shroud or garment are mentioned or hinted at anywhere in the Bible or needed as Jesus himself appears to confirm his resurrection.

This is true... but an inordinate amount of attention is spent on the grave cloths in the Gospel's descriptions of the empty tomb. Something was important enough about them to cause the mentions... especially the positioning. It is possible, if the Shroud is genuinely related the Jesus' death, that the images developed over time, and were not instantaneous appearances.

[Aquinasfan]

It did establish that what was tested in 1988 by the C-14 labs was a skillfully rewoven patch that incorporated non-original material from the 16th century, thus giving a combined dating... an error.

Amazing. Given all of the evidence, the carbon-dating was the only piece of evidence that didn't fit.

[Aquinasfan]

This means what? That the Sudarium (of unknown origin) supports the Shroud (of unknown origin) and vice versa?

They would likely derive from the same source, since type AB blood occurs in just 3% of the population. This would make the odds of separate forgeries 1 in 1000.

But there's much more.

This blood type also matches the blood type in the flesh of the Eucharistic miracle of Lanciano.

The odds of the blood type of the Shroud, Sudarium and Lanciano matching are at least 1 in 1000. More importantly, the blood type in the Shroud and Sudarium, relics which the Church has approved for veneration for millenia, matches the blood type in human flesh which has remained uncorrupted for centuries (a miracle regardless of one's religion), and which has been believed by Catholics to be the Body and Blood of Christ. The Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano links both the Shroud and Sudarium to Christ!

Remember that these claims by the Catholic Church were made many centuries before the advent of modern biology. And these are not minor relics. These are some of the greatest relics in Church history.

[MHGinTN]

Soliton is imminently ignorable

[FBD]

bookmark

[count-your-change]

Matt. 27:59 says Jesus body was “wrapped”,Greek-entulisso,
Mark 15:46 says Jesus body was “wrapped”, Greek-eneileo,
John says Jesus body was “wound”, Greek-deo,
Each of the Greek words carries a meaning of winding or wrapping the linen cloth around the body of Jesus (whether left or right is unimportant and unstated).
They are not draping him with a shroud, they are wrapping in just the sense we understand the word, as John said “wound”.
Were the hand and feet tied? Most likely as the description of Lazarus resurrection indicates but that is not what is being described as being done in the above verses.

Only John gives any details at all with Luke only mentioning Peter picking up some of the cloths.

Yes, I saw Gibson’s movie but I would hardly go to Hollywood for Biblical instruction, Mel just made that scene up about the blood.

“My understanding from conversations with a friend who is a conservative Jew, is that the constraint about trying to bury all of the blood with the body is more Mosaic Law and tradition than anything found in the Torah, although the concept of “Life being in the Blood” is definitely in the Torah and the prohibition about drinking or eating blood is based on that concept.”

What part of the Mosaic Law did he say this burying of all the blood with the deceased is based upon? Tradition perhaps, Mosaic Law? where?

“It is possible, if the Shroud is genuinely related the Jesus’ death, that the images developed over time, and were not instantaneous appearances.”

Now you’re really stretching! Do you think Jesus’ disciples were collecting relics? And from a tomb?

John says the Roman soldiers took Jesus’ garments and Joseph took the body and wrapped in a piece of cloth with spices. No shrouds with Kodak-like images appearing.

[count-your-change]

Do you have any links to Linoli’s tests reports and results?

[PasorBob]

It appears that the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t accept Roger’s theory of a patch and neither does the founder’s of STRP of which he was a member.

It’s all so confusing.

[MHGinTN]

“Either way the wrapping, the winding of the body in a cloth is inconsistent with what Shroud is, a sort of coverlet.” Um, no, it is very consistent with the method of dealing with the body when taken dwon from the cross. The first thing before taking his body down that Joseph and the women would have done is lay a long linen cloth down upon which the body would be placed onhalf and the remainder brought up and over the body. As the body is being taken down, a cloth would have been placed over the dead face/death mask and would have remained there until the body is cleansed and the spices applied. Peter testifies that the wrappings were still in the shape of a man and folded cloth lay separately (either the face covering or the shroud or both, folded and left in the tomb) with the words he chose to use in describing what he saw when he looked into the grotto.

[count-your-change]

Simplify, forget the dead men’s bones, the relics.
God’s Word equips the Christian for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16,17)

[count-your-change]

“Peter testifies that the wrappings were still in the shape of a man”.

Where do the Gospel accounts say this, please?

” The first thing before taking his body down that Joseph and the women would have done is lay a long linen cloth down upon which the body would be placed onhalf and the remainder brought up and over the body. As the body is being taken down, a cloth would have been placed over the dead face/death mask and would have remained there until the body is cleansed and the spices applied.”

John 19:38,40 Luke 23:53 Mark 15:46 Matt. 27:59, Each say simply that Joseph took the body down, wrapped it in linen and laid it in the tomb. John adds that spices were included in the wrapping.

So where do you find the description of folding a cloth over Jesus?

[MHGinTN]

I was describing the Jewish traditional method for dealing with a dead person, as in one died in combat, with the long linen cloth. Read the Greek carefully which describes the episode where John and Peter hurry to the tomb and John gets there first (he's younger and more agile), then Peter describes what he sees when he arrives and looks in ...

[MHGinTN]

Peter uses a phrasing which would be used to describe—for instance—someone being left alone from being accompanied earlier. The wrappings were abandoned in tact, and another folded linen to the head or foot of the abandoned, empty wrappings.

[MHGinTN]

BTW, here is the sentence without the parenthesis which may have confused you:

"Peter testifies that the wrappings were still in the shape of a man and folded cloth lay separately ... with the words he chose to use in describing what he saw when he looked into the grotto."

[Swordmaker]

Each of the Greek words carries a meaning of winding or wrapping the linen cloth around the body of Jesus (whether left or right is unimportant and unstated). They are not draping him with a shroud, they are wrapping in just the sense we understand the word, as John said “wound”.

A Shroud is not necessarily "draped" which implies covering like a table cloth. It wasn't just flipped over the body with the ends and sides left draped. The Shroud of Turin is 14 feet long and it was laid down, the body placed on part of it and the rest was "wrapped" up and over the head to cover the rest of the body. The body was entirely surrounded by the shroud which implies it was wrapped.

Yes, I saw Gibson’s movie but I would hardly go to Hollywood for Biblical instruction, Mel just made that scene up about the blood.

Sorry, you are wrong. Mel did NOT make that up. My Jewish friend confirmed it is a requirement to, if possible, bury anything that is imbued or stained with blood with the body. Barrie Schwortz, also a Jew, has confirmed this. it is well founded in Jewish tradition and law. I found it interesting when I saw Gibson's movie because it was the first time I had seen that particular Jewish tradition—which I already knew about from thirty-five years of studying the Shroud and scholarship related to it—depicted on film. Whether Mary actually did such a thing at the Crucifixion might be a dramatic license taken by the movie makers, but the tradition is genuine.

What part of the Mosaic Law did he say this burying of all the blood with the deceased is based upon? Tradition perhaps, Mosaic Law? where?

I had this conversation with my friend several years ago. Where in Mosaic Law or the marginalia that has been built around it did not come up. I was not particularly interested in that beyond the burial traditions.

Now you’re really stretching! Do you think Jesus’ disciples were collecting relics? And from a tomb?

Not stretching. Some have claimed that the images did not develop immediately. I don't know. No one does. There was something very important about the grave cloths because they are discussed in all of the Gospels.

John says the Roman soldiers took Jesus’ garments and Joseph took the body and wrapped in a piece of cloth with spices. No shrouds with Kodak-like images appearing.

"...in a piece of cloth..." Note, singular. Joseph bought a shroud. In fact, he bought a "fine linen cloth," not strips, not bandages (as some translations have rendered the Greek words). A shroud is something that was and is used in Jewish burials. They did not swaddle or mummy-wrap their dead. They had to minimize contact with the body for fear of becoming ritually unclean themselves, especially one that was bloodied. Repeatedly lifting and running the cloth under and around would be unnecessary touching. They also had limited time, as it was "evening" before they even approached Pilate for permission to remove the body from the Cross... and, again, according to Jewish tradition, the dead had to be in their tombs or buried before sundown, especially a sundown that begins the Sabbath. They simply did not have time to wrap the body as you are claiming... nor have any Jewish burials from the period shown such a wrapping. Wrapping around the body from side-to-side is a confabulation of people who assume they were swaddled like mummies. They were not.

[count-your-change]

You say “Peter testified” but not in John chapter 20 as Peter is quoted NOT at all there and therefore absolutely no mention of any shape of a man is made by him.
What am I confused about?

[MHGinTN]

You seem given to arguing, as if trying to prove you are correct and others are wrong ... and that’s fine if you need that. I don’t need nor want an argument with you on this matter. I would refer you to the Greek text for John 20:4 - 7. Have a nice evening.

[MHGinTN]

Additionally, the body would have been scheduled for several visitations during the first year following death, to bring more spices and oils ... that is why the women were coming back to the tomb that resurrection morning, to finish the initial anointing.