Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FRESH CLUE SHOWS TURIN SHROUD MAY BE GENUINE BURIAL CLOTH OF CHRIST
The Mirror ^ | April 2, 2004 | David Edwards

Posted on 04/05/2004 7:13:37 AM PDT by NYer

IT'S been called the longest-running hoax in history - an 800-year-old religious riddle that's taken in popes, scientists and believers from all faiths.

The Turin Shroud has been either worshipped as divine proof that Christ was resurrected from the grave or dismissed as a fraud created by medieval forgers.

But new evidence suggests the shroud might be genuine after all.

HAUNTING: The face on the shroud

As Mel Gibson's film The Passion Of The Christ rekindles interest in Jesus, stitching on the shroud which could have been created only during the messiah's lifetime has been uncovered.

At the same time, tests from 1988 that dated the shroud to between 1260 and 1390 have been thrown into doubt.

Swedish textiles expert Dr Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, who discovered the seam at the back of the cloth during a restoration project, says: "There have been attempts to date the shroud from looking at the age of the material, but the style of sewing is the biggest clue.

"It belongs firmly to a style seen in the first century AD or before."

Her findings are being hailed as the most significant since 1988, when scientists controversially carbon-dated the 14ft-long cloth to medieval times, more than 1,000 years after Jesus died.

Yet experts now say the team unwittingly used cloth that had been added during a 16th-century restoration and it could have been contaminated from handling.

Mark Guscin, of the British Society for the Turin Shroud, says: "The discovery of the stitching along with doubt about the carbon-dating all add to the mountain of evidence suggesting this was probably the shroud Jesus was buried in.

"Scientists have been happy to dismiss it as a fake, but they have never been able to answer the central question of how the image of that man got on to the cloth."

Barrie Schwortz, who in 1978 took part in the first scientific examination of the shroud, says: "I was a cynic before I saw it, but I am now convinced this is the cloth that wrapped Jesus of Nazareth after he was crucified."

THE history of the cloth - which bears the ghostly image of a bearded man - is steeped in mystery.

The first documented reference was in 1357, when it was displayed in a church in Lirey, France. The cloth astonished Christians as it showed a man wearing a crown of thorns and bearing wounds on his front, back and right-hand side.

He also had a wrist wound, which confused some pilgrims who thought Jesus was nailed to the cross through his hands. Scientists have since discovered the wrists were used as the hands could not support the body's weight.

Before it arrived in France, it is thought the shroud was known as the Edessa burial sheet, given to King Abgar V by one of Jesus's disciples.

For the next 1,200 years it was kept hidden in the Iraqi city, brought out only for religious festivals. In 944 it is thought to have turned up in Constantinople, Turkey, before being stolen by the French knight Geoffrey de Charny during the Fourth Crusades.

It soon became Europe's most-revered religious artefact, although it was scorched in a fire in 1532. In 1578 it was moved to Turin in northern Italy and was frequently paraded through the streets to huge crowds.

Yet while the shroud attracts hundreds of thousands of pilgrims when it goes on display, it was not photographed until 1898. The photographer, Secondo Pia, was amazed at the incredible depth and detail revealed on the negative.

There were even rumours that the shroud had healing qualities after the British philanthropist Leonard Cheshire took a disabled girl to see it in 1955. After being given permission to touch it, 10-year-old Josephine Woollam made a full recovery.

But it wasn't until 1978 that scientists were allowed to examine the shroud for the first time.

The Shroud of Turin Research Project spent 120 hours examining the cloth in minute detail but was unable to explain how the image had got there. Barrie Schwortz, the project's photographer, says: "We did absolutely every test there was to try to find out how that image had got there.

"We used X-rays, ultra-violet light, spectral imaging and photographed every inch of it in the most minute detail, but we still couldn't come up with any answers.

"We weren't a bunch of amateurs. We had scientists who had worked on the first atomic bomb and the space programme, yet we still couldn't say how the image got there. The only things we could say was what it isn't: that it isn't a photograph and it wasn't a painting.

"It's clear that there has been a direct contact between the shroud and a body, which explains certain features such as the blood, but science just doesn't have an answer of how the image of that body got on to it."

A SECOND study was carried out in 1988, when scientists cut a sliver from the edge of the shroud and subjected it to carbon-dating.

Carbon has a fixed rate of decay, which means that it is possible to accurately measure when the plant materials that formed the basis of the cloth were harvested.

The announcement that the shroud was a fake was made on October 13, 1988, at the British Museum. Scientists compared those who still thought the shroud was authentic to flat-earthers.

It led to the humiliating spectacle of the then Cardinal of Turin, Anastasio Alberto Ballestrero, admitting the garment was a hoax.

The Catholic Church also accepted the scientists' findings - an embarrassing admission given that Pope John Paul II had kissed the shroud eight years earlier.

But experts now say the carbon-dating results are wrong. Ian Wilson, co-author of The Turin Shroud: Unshrouding The Mystery, says they were flawed from the moment the sample was taken.

He says: "What I found quite incredible was that when they had all the scientists there and ready to go, an argument started about where the sample would come from.

"This went on for some considerable time before a very bad decision was made that the cutting would come from a corner that we know was used for holding up the shroud and which would have been more contaminated than anywhere else."

Marc Guscin, author of Burial Cloths Of Christ, believes the most compelling evidence for the shroud's authenticity comes from a small, blood-soaked cloth kept in a cathedral in Oviedo, northern Spain.

The Sudarium is believed to have been used to cover Jesus's head after he died and, unlike the shroud, its history has been traced back to the first century. It contains blood from the rare AB group found on the shroud.

Mark says: "Laboratory tests have shown that these two cloths were used on the same body.

"The fact that the Sudarium has been revered for so long suggests it must have held special significance for people. Everything points towards this cloth being used on the body of Jesus of Nazareth."

Yet despite the latest discoveries, there are still many sceptics.

Professor Stephen Mattingly, from the University of Texas, says the image could have been created by bacteria which flourish on the skin after death. "This is not a miracle," he says. "It's a physical object, so there has to be a scientific explanation. With the right conditions, it could happen to anyone. We could all make our own Turin Shroud."

Another theory, put forward by South African professor Nicholas Allen, is that the image was an early form of photography.

However fierce the controversy, the shroud is still a crowd-puller. When it last went on display in 2000, more than three million people saw it. Many more visitors are expected when it next goes on show in 2025.

Mark believes the argument will rage on. He says: "The debate will go on and on because nobody can prove one way or another if this was the shroud that covered the body of Jesus. There simply isn't a scientific test of 'Christness'.

"But there are lots of pointers to suggest it was."



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Philosophy; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: britishtabloid; medievalhoax; shroud; shroudofturin; sudariumofoviedo; turin; veronicaveil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 401-406 next last
To: mtbopfuyn
When the Shroud was examined in 1978, the backside of the cloth was not accessible. At that time, the Shroud was sewn to a backing cloth. Now that the backing cloth has been removed, faint imaging of the face and hands have been discovered. This imaging echoes the images on the front. There is no image between the two superficial layers as would be the case if a liquid had soaked through.

When, in the production of ancient linen, the cloth is open-air dried, most of the evaporation concentration of residuals will take place at one surface if it is exposed to sunshine. The backside of the cloth will have a lesser carbohydrate layer.

The fact that there is some imaging on the backside of the cloth makes artistic and photographic methods significantly more implausible. It does, however, lend credence to the possibilities that gaseous amines released by the body reacted with the carbohydrate layers. Some gases would have penetrated through the weave of the cloth and reacted with the backside carbohydrate layer. For more details see http://shroudstory.com/faq-image-is-not.htm but first read http://shroudstory.com/faq-chemistry.htm for some background about the image chemistry.

Shroudie
141 posted on 04/05/2004 10:07:54 AM PDT by shroudie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Was that in the Gospels, or another text of the time?
142 posted on 04/05/2004 10:09:14 AM PDT by sheik yerbouty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Cool.
143 posted on 04/05/2004 10:10:15 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
How would one go about proving this?

I guess you may be right in that you can only prove relation, and not paternity. However, it still could prove sticky if those claiming to be His decendents are a DNA match for the shroud.

144 posted on 04/05/2004 10:11:05 AM PDT by Snowy (Microsoft: "You've got questions? We've got dancing paperclips.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Jesus had no descendents. He died celibate.

Read more carefully - I said "supposed" decendants. Surely, you've heard that claim. If DNA can be taken from either cloth try a match with those who claim to be Mary Magdaline and Jesus' decendants.

145 posted on 04/05/2004 10:11:20 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"The reflex is the result of a complete severing of the nerve in question"

Amazing that both would have hit the exact spot to sever the correct nerve and that severing a nerve causes clenching - one would suppose then death would result in the same type of "clenching" that severing would, since the nerve no longer can carry impulses, and that the muscles causing the clenching would not relax in death.
146 posted on 04/05/2004 10:11:30 AM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Graymatter
Then why does the Bible give us the genealogy of Jesus as the son of Joseph?

It was important to show that Jesus came from the house of David. King David had been promised hundreds of years before that the messiah would come from his family. The lineage is the first historical evidence to show that Jesus is the fulfillment of prophecy.

BTW, the Bible also gives Mary's lineage.

147 posted on 04/05/2004 10:13:30 AM PDT by pgyanke ("The Son of God became a man to enable men to become sons of God" - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: mtbopfuyn
If DNA can be taken from either cloth try a match with those who claim to be Mary Magdaline and Jesus' decendants.

As I have said above, this will never be done. What if the DNA is a match?

148 posted on 04/05/2004 10:13:50 AM PDT by Snowy (Microsoft: "You've got questions? We've got dancing paperclips.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: RS
The technique of making concrete was known to the Romans, then "lost" for hundreds of years.

The technique was lost, but there was still plenty of actual concrete lying around. This is the one-and-only Shroud. There's more 1st-century linen around, but that's the only piece with an image. If whatever created the image were a natural phenomenon, surely it would have occurred more than once. If it were artificially created, science should have some inkling as to how.

I'm not completely convinced it's genuine, but I lean strongly that way.

149 posted on 04/05/2004 10:14:10 AM PDT by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
"But the real point is that this image was not visible in any detail until seen as a photographic negative. Thus, no one could have painted it since they couldn't see what they were doing."

Sure... IF they painted it yesterday... Perhaps it faded over the centuries, after being exposed to handling,water, fire, sunlight, incense, and whatever else ?
150 posted on 04/05/2004 10:15:04 AM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke
Another problem with this approach... Jesus is blood relative to Mary and "adoptive" son to Joseph. Joseph was the blood relative to David. Jesus came from the family and lineage of David but, through the work of the Holy Spirit, He was born of a virgin.

Mary didn't just pop up out of nowhere, she was also of the House of David. It was tradition that she would marry within her tribe, Judah, which was part of the House of David. There's bound to be decedants of Judah that could be tested.

151 posted on 04/05/2004 10:16:44 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke
I'm not saying it's not compelling. I happen to think an awful lot of circumstantial evidence is as good as 1 solid piece of evidence.

But I still question the idea that only Jesus got some of these punishments. Out of how many millions killed? They can't tell me no1 else got at least some of those extra punishments. Also, I cannot reason why Romans - rather disinterested - would specifically mandate "extra special treatment" for this Jew, nor why they would listen much to Jewish counsel to do so beyond already putting him to death as their wish.
152 posted on 04/05/2004 10:19:02 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common Sense is an Uncommon Virtue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
"The image was created by a 1/10th second burst of intense energy, and it's a nearly perfect x-ray image."

Love these "explanations"... not a quarter second, not 2 seconds, but 1/10 ( without explaining what type of energy ) ... and I thought it was a negative image, not an x-ray
153 posted on 04/05/2004 10:22:10 AM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I had never heard of the Shroud of Turin before that moment.

Oh, puleese!

154 posted on 04/05/2004 10:23:38 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
True. Tom spoke of this. Now, combine that.......with the idiotic choice of material to test.........combined with the inherent weakness in carbon-14 dating methodologies (see link in my original replay; it is discussed in there a bit), and any hullabaloo about the so-called "carbon dating" of the Shroud should have been put to bed a LONG time ago. Of course, there are far too many who refuse to be distracted by little things like "science" or "facts".
155 posted on 04/05/2004 10:25:57 AM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: NYer
The things found on the shroud also firmly date it around the time of Christ, as well as from the middle east.
156 posted on 04/05/2004 10:28:02 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?" -- Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
They can't tell me no1 else got at least some of those extra punishments.

I'm sure some did. However, we have multiple historical accounts of a man who received all of these tortures. These are shown in the shroud.

Proof? No. Compelling? Absolutely.

BTW, the Romans weren't "disinterested" in punishing Jews. Don't forget that Jesus wasn't a condemned murderer or other criminal. Pilate himself had found no fault to condemn Him. As an observer of human nature, I can believe that could lead to higher scorn and ridicule than the man justly condemned.

157 posted on 04/05/2004 10:28:13 AM PDT by pgyanke ("The Son of God became a man to enable men to become sons of God" - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Very interesting, yes I intend to check the links.

I don't mean to be so skeptical
158 posted on 04/05/2004 10:29:41 AM PDT by clyde260 (Public Enemy #1: Network News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: mtbopfuyn
G-d will not permit us to have enough evidence to "prove" it is the real death shrod of Christ. If he did so--we would lose "free will." We must chose by faith alone. This is why G-d will not show himself in a way that will prove he exists. He will always give us the choice to not believe. If the Shroud was proved for a fact to be an item proving the resurection--Free Will would vanish.
159 posted on 04/05/2004 10:29:47 AM PDT by Hollywoodghost (Let he who would be free strike the first blow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
"But the real point is that this image was not visible in any detail until seen as a photographic negative. Thus, no one could have painted it since they couldn't see what they were doing."

Another quick thought - could this originally have been used as a backing for another cloth that a positive image had been paintd on ?
Over the centuries chemicals and sunlight leached through the positive image to stain the backing material ?
160 posted on 04/05/2004 10:30:06 AM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 401-406 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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