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 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 401-406 next last
To: NYer
If Jesus rose again after 3 days, then how is that long enough to make a 2000 yearl old impression in cloth????


41 posted on 04/05/2004 8:12:18 AM PDT by Hammerhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck
Well, that's quite a stretch. I'd like to believe that, but isn't it possible, nay likely, that a given shroud from a given time period was used to bury someone other than Jesus?

I thought of the same thing. I'm not sure there's a "mountain of evidence" that it is Jesus' burial cloth. However, if the time period and location can be validated as 1st century Palestine/Israel area, the fact that the image process is so mysterious and unexplainable makes the theory that it is Jesus' burial cloth a plausible theory. Of course, if one just believes Jesus was just another man crucified (and not the son of God), then this would not be near enough evidence.

42 posted on 04/05/2004 8:12:59 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
I keep an old saying from the Civil War in mind.

"We placed our faith in God, but we kept our powder dry"

As I said, I don't besmirch anyone's belief in this matter, I'm just highly skeptical of all religious institutions raised up by Man.

With reason....
43 posted on 04/05/2004 8:13:23 AM PDT by Badeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
Thanks for the link. I found this point particularly intriguing:

Little-to-no anatomic detail is visible unless you get further than 15 feet away from it. If someone HAD "painted" it, he/she would have had to have used a paintbrush over 15 feet long.

44 posted on 04/05/2004 8:13:52 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Former Fetus
"Ladies and gentlemen", he added, "scientific honesty compels me to say that this man was raised from the dead!"

Hogwash! Your scientist is the hoax. He examines a cloth and proclaims someone rose from the dead? An image on a cloth does not equal arisen in scientific terms. One can not conclude A equals D without determining B and C.

45 posted on 04/05/2004 8:15:12 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"Even those scientists who insist that it was a forgery are at a loss to explain how someone in the 12th century could possibly have created something that human beings cannot even create today."

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

As for how it could be created today ? - perhaps the answer would be to use the paints available at the time, store it in containers made of certain wood and metal which oxidizes, take it out into certain light and humidity conditions, perhaps wash it numerous times with water of different chemical properties in a specific order, hang it up allowing incense to permeate it, subject it to various temperatures from fires .... after hundreds of years of this, it may look exactly like the shroud.
46 posted on 04/05/2004 8:17:15 AM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mfulstone
I Do read my bible and am quite familiar with the passage cited. It actually supports the shroud theory rather than disproves it. Historians have repeatedly stated that a common practice of the age was to initially drape the body with the body lying on a long cloth that was then wrapped over the head and laid down the length of the torso to the feat. This is precisely what the Shroud of Turin shows.
47 posted on 04/05/2004 8:18:46 AM PDT by True-Stu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
If anything were to survive a cremation, it would be teeth.
48 posted on 04/05/2004 8:19:08 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"Point #2: I find it extremely unlikely that a forger in the Middle Ages would have known such minute detail about human anatomy that he would have been able to replicate the results of this reflexive action."

Does this reflex keep those thumbs pinned AFTER the nails have been removed and AFTER the person has died and his body been washed ?
49 posted on 04/05/2004 8:22:44 AM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Former Fetus
Interesting comments, thanks.

While stationed in Germany during the mid 70s, I visited Turin. The Shroud was on public display and I got to walk-by and view it. A very impressive sight. Highly recommended.
50 posted on 04/05/2004 8:24:32 AM PDT by nonomous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mfulstone
John 20:6-7 :: New International Version (NIV)
6Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, 7as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen.

John 20:6-7 :: New American Standard Bible (NASB)
6 And so Simon Peter also came, following him, and entered the tomb; and he saw the linen wrappings lying there,
7 and (1) the face-cloth which had been on His head, not lying with the (2) linen wrappings, but rolled up in a place by itself.


John 20:6-7 :: King James Version (KJV)
6 Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,
7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.


John 20:6-7 :: American Standard Version (ASV)
6 Simon Peter therefore also cometh, following him, and entered into the tomb; and he beholdeth the linen cloths lying,
7 and the napkin, that was upon his head, not lying with the linen cloths, but rolled up in a place by itself.

John 20:6-7 :: Darby Translation (DARBY)
6 Simon Peter therefore comes, following him, and entered into the tomb, and sees the linen cloths lying,
7 and the handkerchief which was upon his head, not lying with the linen cloths, but folded up in a distinct place by itself.


Which one?
51 posted on 04/05/2004 8:26:46 AM PDT by Jaded (My sheeple, my sheeple, what have you done to Me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck
Yes it's possible. However, the wounds seen on the figure in the shroud are consistent with the Gospel accounts of the wounds inflicted on Jesus, such as the spear wound on His side.
52 posted on 04/05/2004 8:29:39 AM PDT by EAGLE7 (They may take our lives, but they'll never take our freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RS
perhaps the answer would be to use the paints available at the time, store it in containers made of certain wood and metal which oxidizes, take it out into certain light and humidity conditions, perhaps wash it numerous times with water of different chemical properties in a specific order, hang it up allowing incense to permeate it, subject it to various temperatures from fires .... after hundreds of years of this, it may look exactly like the shroud.

The Shroud of Turin Conspiracy Theory....

53 posted on 04/05/2004 8:31:07 AM PDT by freebilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: NYer
The Catholic Church takes no official position as to whether or not the Shroud is genuine. I think they have taken the usual position for such apparent miracles, that it's permissible for the faithful to regard it as real but it's not required for them to do so.

The 1988 carbon dating tests were almost certainly a hoax perpetrated by a couple of atheistic scientists who were determined to "prove" that the Shroud was not genuine.

There's no way to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is genuine. But the tests continue to suggest that it comes from the Holy Land and dates to about the time of the Crucifixion.

On top of that, if it's not genuine, it's very, very difficult to suggest how on earth medieval artisans could have faked it. Personally, I think it's real, but it's not a matter of faith.
54 posted on 04/05/2004 8:32:26 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Anatomically correct but the front and back are different sizes. The measurements aren't consistant meaning each side was made separately. As to your #2, I find it hard to believe people before the 20th century were as ignorant as they're made out to be.
55 posted on 04/05/2004 8:33:02 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck
This is my biggest doubt, if you will. I think it's entirely possible the shroud is from the region and time-period of Jesus, but maybe not actually Jesus.

It seems silly to me that every1 - faithful and cynics - seems to base its legitimacy purely on its age. Cynics are desparate to point out it's not that old, while faithful are desparate to find it IS that old. As if that's the only pointer to it being the shroud of Christ.

As it is, I'm open to the possibility.
56 posted on 04/05/2004 8:33:39 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common Sense is an Uncommon Virtue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Flightdeck
Well, that's quite a stretch. I'd like to believe that, but isn't it possible, nay likely, that a given shroud from a given time period was used to bury someone other than Jesus?

The significance of the stitching is placing it at the time of Jesus. But there is an image on the cloth that is seemingly miraculous and that would be the indication it was not used to bury someone else.

Despite the professor's assertion that we could all make our own shrouds of Turin, why hasn't one other example of such an image on a cloth turned up? Why hasn't yon professor done an experiment proving his theory? Until someone demonstrates how the image was transferred and that it is a natural phenomenon they cannot state how it came to be.

Personally I do believe the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Christ. Especially since I learned last year of the head cloth that has been kept in Spain all of these years.

57 posted on 04/05/2004 8:34:17 AM PDT by cyncooper ("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Badeye
What is your theory of how the image came to be on the cloth?
58 posted on 04/05/2004 8:35:37 AM PDT by cyncooper ("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tiamat
Besides the fact that DNA from 100 years apart of indirect relatives is a shot in the dark (to wit: that Jefferson nonsense), Jesus was not actually the biological son of Joseph (and hence David). He may only have been the bio son of Mary, whose lineage is, of course being a woman, ignored. In any case, being the actual Son of God, it's possible there is no real DNA to go on, anyway.
59 posted on 04/05/2004 8:38:33 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common Sense is an Uncommon Virtue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

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

There is also a flesh tone color in stained glass that has been lost. It's like Granny's muffins you remember from your childhood but she took the recipe to her grave and no one has been able to make them since. Things are lost or forgotten every day.

60 posted on 04/05/2004 8:38:53 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 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