Posted on 04/17/2016 6:27:48 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A new study released last week included new evidence that links and further authenticates two holy relics that millions of Christians believe offer physical proof of the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But before we explore the research and the relics, let us recall a New Testament passage concerning faith in Christ and the need for physical evidence. I mean the familiar story of doubting Thomas (John 20:2429).
The apostle Thomas was absent when the resurrected Christ appeared to some of the apostles. On hearing the astonishing news, Thomas declared, Unless I see the nail marks in his hand and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe. A week later, Jesus appeared, giving Thomas the physical proof he demanded. Then Jesus said, Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.
If in your faith walk you identify with Doubting Thomas, keep reading.
Remarkably, two ancient pieces of cloth, the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo, are extant today. Both are revered as relics, and each bears the name of the city where it currently resides.
First and foremost is the Shroud of Turin. Secured in a vault in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, the Shroud is believed by millions to be the burial cloth of Jesus. It is a fine linen cloth, measuring 14.5 feet by 3.5 feet, and mysteriously displays a finely detailed negative photographic image front and back, head to toe, of an anatomically correct man who appears to have been tortured, beaten, and crucified. Note that, in their accounts of Christs suffering and death on the cross, all four Gospels mention a fine linen cloth.
Perhaps it is a coincidence, but clearly seen on the body of the crucified man in the Shroud are gruesome markings consistent with the Gospel accounts of Christs Passion. You can count over 100 whip marks, possibly from scourging by Roman flagra, and identify on his wrists and feet obvious wounds that could have been from large spikes. Other markings are compatible with what could have been a crown of thorns. On closer examination, you can spot bruises (from beatings?) on his face, knees (from falling?), and the back of his shoulders (from carrying a heavy cross?), and a large bloody mark (from a spear?) in his side. Like the crucified Jesus in Gospel accounts, the man in the Shroud had no broken bones.
The Shroud, the most studied, analyzed, and tested religious relic in the world, has spawned a vast, global field of scientific study, called sindonology, but still baffles scientists. Its mysteries are many and complex. For brevitys sake, I will only scratch the surface (so to speak).
First among the major mysteries is how the image was made. Second, what is the substance constituting the image, which can be scraped away with a razor blade? The substance is undetermined all man-made materials have been ruled out and only rests on top of the cloth; it does not penetrate the cloths linen fibers. The third mystery is related to the second: Blood from the crucified man penetrated the cloth, as one would expect, but also preceded the impression of the mans image. Blood first, image second is a mantra of Shroud researchers. This order is logical if the man in the Shroud was in fact Christ, who would have been wrapped in the linen Shroud days before the electrical event (see below) that accompanied his resurrection and resulted in the human image.
The only evidence that would conclusively authenticate the Shroud against naysayers and claims of forgery is Jesus DNA. It would be matched against the blood type AB found on the Shroud and considered rare.
Enter the Sudarium of Oviedo. It resides in the Cathedral of Oviedo, in Spain. The Sudarium is a piece of linen cloth, 34 by 21 inches, thought to have been used to cover the head of Jesus immediately after the crucifixion (John 20:7). Unlike the Shroud, the Sudarium does not display an image. The Sudarium contains male blood of type AB, however, which matches the blood on the Shroud. Moreover, the patterns of blood flow on the Sudarium are consistent with those of a crucified man.
Indeed, the Sudarium and the Shroud covered the same person, as Juan Manuel Miñarro, the author of a study sponsored by the Spanish Center of Sindonology, recently concluded. 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, said the centers president, Jorge-Manuel Rodríguez. Logic requires that we conclude that we are speaking of the same person.
The studys conclusion was no surprise to Sudarium expert Janice Bennett, author of Sacred Blood, Sacred Image: The Sudarium of Oviedo, New Evidence for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin (2001). Bennett, who has been studying the Sudarium since 1997, tells me that,
Although Miñarro stops short of linking the two cloths to Jesus, ample research has yielded staggering evidence. For example, both linens show bloodstains on the head, in approximately the same position, that were formed by sharp objects, similar to what thorns would produce. Jesus was the only person in recorded history to have been crowned with thorns before crucifixion.
Bennett explains as well that the Shroud and the Sudarium are consistent with Jewish burial customs of Jesus day:
Another important matter is that the cadaver that was wrapped by both the Sudarium and the Shroud suffered death by crucifixion, but was afforded a Jewish burial. This is highly unusual because most crucifixion victims were left on the cross for days and the bones were later deposited in common graves.
Bennett adds that the new research establishes approximately 20 points of correlation [between the Shroud and the Sudarium], which more than satisfies the standards of proof used by most judicial systems around the world, which require only 8 to10.
My own keen interest in the Shroud led me to visit Turin in 2010 and again in 2015, the last two occasions when the Shroud was on public display. Having written about it for years, I have forged relationships with some of the most renowned experts, including Russ Breault, president of the Shroud of Turin Education Project Inc., and Barrie Schwortz, who founded Shroud.com, the first and most comprehensive Shroud site.
Topping my list is Giulio Fanti of Padua University. In 2012, Fanti concluded that an electrical charge in the form of radiation is what likely caused the mans image to be imprinted on the Shroud. He has also dated the Shroud to the time of Jesus, debunking the flawed carbon-14 testing conducted in 1988.
While the Shroud of Turin shows both a double body image [the bodys front and back, as the cloth was wrapped around the body] and human bloodstains, the Sudarium of Oviedo only shows human bloodstains consistent with the blood principally coming out from the mouth and nose, Fanti tells me. He elaborates:
There are many coincidences between Shroud and Sudarium that lead one to think that both sheets were used for the same person: Jesus Christ. Both have been used for a bearded man with moustache and long hair who was crucified. A significant match has been found when overlapping the Sudarium bloodstains on the Shroud face: Even the two bloodstains caused by the crown of thorns on the forehead of the Shroud man show a correspondence with the bloodstains of the Sudarium.
If you have read this far but, like Doubting Thomas, still need physical proof to accept the resurrection of Christ, I recommend that you research first the Shroud and then the Sudarium. Both have survived centuries. Their markings are consistent with Scripture accounts of Christs torture and execution. Both contain not only the same rare blood type but also pollen of a kind found only in ancient Israel. The Shroud and the Sudarium authenticate each other.
Traditionally, the Sudarium has been considered a living testimony of Jesus passion and death on the cross, while the Shrouds mysteriously formed image was hailed as a proclamation of his Resurrection, Jane Bennett explains, in her beautiful description of this meeting of faith and science. In the studies conducted on the Sudarium and the Shroud, science has served to corroborate eyewitness accounts that have always been considered by many as a mere profession of faith. In this case, science and faith so often mistakenly believed to be incompatible have only served to enrich each another and, in the process, bring the world closer to the actual truth of the events that transpired two thousand years ago.
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free (John 8:32).
Myra Adams is a media producer and political writer.
You know, this is a nice break from all those Trump / Cruz food fights.
Grimaldi was not a painter but a secretary in the Vatican who documented that in 1616 or 1617, there were five copies of the Vatican Veronica made by Artist Pietro Strozzi. However, All five are known and there whereabouts accounted for. He mentioned nothing about eyes being open. All of the copies have their eyes closed.
The unfinished Grimaldi document is controversial because the frontispiece seems to show a representation of the Veronica that may, or may not, have its eyes open. That may have been an affectation of the artist who decorated the manuscript. At the size of the iconography of the image, it's a matter of interpretation of the observer whether the eyes or open or closed or not. The image is certainly not realism to the image itself.
There is also evidence that someone played hanky-panky with the dating on the unfinished manuscript, changing Grimaldi's 1616 dates= of authorship by a few years to 1620, making them later than Grimaldi actually penned the document. However they did not change the dates on which Grimaldi says Strozzi painted his copies of the Vatican Veronica.
But, iconography of the 1600s was not realistic to what they were portraying in any case. Every other painting of the Veronica of the period showed it with open eyes.. . and it did not look at all like the obscure Manoppello Veronica at all.
And my point is that there are no distinctive markers that say this blood is "Jewish" from any other semitic blood in the middle east. There are no specific DNA markers that will state categorically that this person is Jewish. We can state that the blood genotype is AB negative which is a good indicator as it is much more likely to be found in that region and among those people of Middle Easter descent than anywhere else in the world. But the DNA is now too degraded to do much more after 2000 years or so.
Somewhere on the Shroud there may be some that is not, but we do not have full access to the Shroud to find it.
Fenton is one of those who buys in to the strip definitions. IT was a SHEET. Nowhere was Sindon ever used to as a "winding." Ever. Kit is a stretch used to keep the mummy like bindings alive from the 18th century exegesis And they did not WIND it around the body they placed the body on it and wrapped it, up and over the head, the way they found the only other extant shroud burial. Don't ignore scholarship and the JEWISH words on the subject just because some 18th and 19th century pastors were convinced that mummies were they way that everyone was buried in the middle east in the 1st century and older because it was popular after Egyptology discovered them with Napoleonic wars in Egypt.
They made a lot of other mistakes too, like assuming that Moses interacted with Ramses II, called the great, and established that as one of the pillars of Egyptian time lines and that has played hob with Biblical time lines ever since! They made that mistake because of a name similarity. . .
Yes. I understand the point you made. I have the memory of seeing evidence that there are specific genetic markers.
So, according to you, Joseph of Arimathea didn't have even go and ask for the body. It was just the goodness of Pilate's heart. Right, sure. OK.
And no, I am not forgetting it. Once you explained which translation you got your 75 pounds from, I understood the reason for it. . . and where you are getting your mis-translations from. Simple English. . . too simple. Now you fall back on Fenton adding his interpretation that "Sindon" means "Winding cloth" when no where else in Greek or Biblical exegesis can we find it use in that manner. He CREATED that interpretation, literally out of whole cloth. What are supposed to think of people who ADD or take away to or from the Bible? That's what FENTON did by putting HIS made up definition to a word that everyone knew what it meant when they used it.
One of my favorite examples of this is passage in one of the letters. . . in the old version it states that "The teachers of God's word are Holy and you should honor them." A newer translation of the Bible puts it this way "The teachers of God's word are Holy and you should pay them."
Can you see an underlying agenda in the new translation and interpretation of the Greek word for honor? Which in some rare instances can mean fare, price, or fee. The choice the translator went off the deep end to get "pay" I can see his agenda if I were blind.
You are so mistaken. Judas was not an accident. It all had to do with fulfilling what was to be. Do you think Jesus did not know that Judas would be the one, when he chose him?
It is. . . just what we need, a break from the Political opinion food fights for the much calmer religious opinion food fights! I'm so glad I just follow the scholarship and the science. That way I can get attacked from all sides!
Really not sure what you mean by that....
“So, according to you, Joseph of Arimathea didn’t have even go and ask for the body.”
No offense or anything, but you must be insane.
there are dna haplotypes that identify regions of the world that have been used to map human migrations. there has also been a lot of dna studies of groups claiming Jewish ancestory (Lembas, Ashkenzi, etc), so identifying specific jewish related markers is possible. The key is whether or not enough dna survived to enable the identification of the haplotype (effects from exposure to fires, air, etc).
Godzilla,
Thanks for dropping by and sharing. I’ve always considered you about as deep as they come. I just had a vague memory of something you’d posted in a discussion once.
Hope all is well in your world!
ampu
apart from Kalifornia allergies, doing fine
Thank you Godzilla. That was the point I was making. Firstly, that there is no specific DNA strands that say this person was a person of Jewish descent. . . but perhaps of middle eastern, semitic descent which is a much broader stroke of the DNA brush. Secondly, that any DNA in the blood on the Shroud is too old, too degraded with that age, too broken, and too contaminated to be dispositive of any testing for haplotyping.
At this point the fact that the blood is, or may be, AB negative is about as dispositive as we're are likely to get until some more definitive method of testing the broken DNA strands is developed.
You are offensive. What can be offensive in asking legitimate questions when you claim that everything you say must have happened merely because YOU say it did based on a couple of sentences in one Gospel while you ignore the other three which show that other things had to have happened. Someone had to have gone to the Roman governor and pleaded for the release of Jesus' body, for a change in the normal procedure. He would NOT have merely broken Roman procedure out of the goodness of his heart just because a Centurion told him what happened out there. That makes no logical sense.
Going to the market as it was closing for the day in preparation for the Sabbath and buying the sindon, buying the 100 Roman Libre of spices and anointing oils had to take time. Taking the body off the cross had to take time. Doing the moving of the body to the tomb had to take time. AND persuading Pilate had to take time.
“Someone had to have gone to the Roman governor and pleaded for the release of Jesus’ body”
Well, the accounts say it was Joseph. I have no clue whatsoever why you claim that I tried to deny it. That is why I said you must be insane. There is no controversy, as far as I know, that Joseph did it.
You, however, seem to be denying John’s account of the spices and everything else, for that matter.
They accomplished everything they wanted except for wrapping Jesus’s face.
bkmk
I'm not aware of any more detailed studies beyond blood type. However, even the broad brushed data would prove valuable in showing that it is unlikely to be a forgery. If the blood is middle eastern/semitic - then the European forgery theories fall apart, imho.
I would agree, and a lot of scientists would love to do it. . . but the DNA on the Shroud is just too degraded to even start locating anything that is usable. Too bad.
Has that been established? I know one of the critical issues is obtaining samples for analysis and the SOT Church officials are very, very reluctant to allow a lot of sampling.
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.