Burial Cloth Found In Jerusalem Cave Casts Doubt On Authenticity of Turin Shroud [Really?]

Daily Mirror (UK) ^ | December 15th 2009

[Steelfish]

Burial Cloth Found In Jerusalem Cave Casts Doubt On Authenticity of Turin Shroud

By MATTHEW KALMAN 16th December 2009

Archaeologists have discovered the first known burial shroud in Jerusalem from the time of Christ's crucifixion - and say it casts serious doubt on the claimed authenticity of the Turin Shroud.

Ancient shrouds from the period have been found before in the Holy Land, but never in Jerusalem. Researchers say the weave and design of the shroud discovered in a burial cave near Jerusalem's Old City are completely different to the Turin Shroud.

Discovery: The shrouded body of a man was found in this sealed chamber of a cave in the Hinnom Valley, overlooking the Old City of Jerusalem Radiocarbon tests and artefacts found in the cave prove almost beyond doubt that it was from the same time of Christ's death.

It was made with a simple two-way weave - not the twill weave used on the Turin Shroud, which textile experts say was introduced more than 1,000 years after Christ lived. And instead of being a single sheet like the famous item in Turin, the Jerusalem shroud is made up of several sections, with a separate piece for the head.

Professor Shimon Gibson, the archaeologist who discovered the tomb, said ancient writings and contemporary shrouds from other areas had suggested this design, and the Jerusalem shroud finally provided the physical evidence. The debate over the Turin Shroud will not go away. Last month a Vatican researcher said she had found the words 'Jesus Nazarene' on the shroud, proving it was the linen cloth which was wrapped around Christ's body.

[presently no screen name]

DISCOVERY: ....beyond doubt that it was from the same time of Christ's death..

"Same time" means nothing, IMO.

John 19:23,24
When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his clothes and divided them into four shares, a share for each soldier. They also took his tunic, but the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top down.

So they said to one another, "Let's not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it will be," in order that the passage of scripture might be fulfilled (that says): "They divided my garments among them, and for my vesture they cast lots." This is what the soldiers did.

No doubt his robe was 'unique' (for the time period) and costly. Not only the fabric itself but it was ONE PIECE and that one piece would be WIDE - it was a tunic. They may claim what a standard cloth for that day was but there was nothing standard about Jesus's robe. We read they wouldn't tear it and cast lots because of it's value and uniqueness. If it were 'standard' for the day, who would want it and tearing it would be of no consequence.

When I read about the separate piece of linen in the article, I remembered the Scripture because many years ago, a man versed in the tradition back then said - when you are in someone's house for dinner and you plan on COMING BACK, your take your dinner cloth, fold it and placed it aside. Same as He did in the tomb. To me, that's the Good News!

SIDENOTE: As much as I would love for unbelievers to have proof - so, they too, will believe. The Word says otherwise. "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ". That's the way I came to The Lord - through His Word and didn't need proof of anything. Proof only lasts until something else comes along to put doubt on that proof. I believe searching for proof is a smoke screen and harmful for unbelievers - Faith is the key and then they will be open for the supernatural truth.

[Quix]

Good points.

Thanks

[john in springfield]

Hmmm. All interesting.

[presently no screen name]

Basically, their new find proves nothing. What’s ‘standard’ doesn’t apply when it comes to what was available to Jesus at the time. And Scripture shows that.

[Quix]

Good pt.

[grey_whiskers]

You'd have to talk to someone who knows how to spin

I doubt that this is high on James Carville's priority list. /hijack>

Cheers!

[SunkenCiv]

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe ·
	Gods Graves Glyphs	Thanks rdl6989 and Fractal Trader. This is going to be in the Digest under "Oh So Mysteriouso", and ordinarily I don't even add shroud threads (heh, sorry) to the catalog, but this looks much more interesting than the usual stuff. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
·Dogpile · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology · Biblical Archaeology Society · · Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·

[colorado tanker]

The whole thing is shrouded in mystery.

[Mamzelle]

re: Not ALL ancient looms were narrow.)))

Well, no. Of course not, but wide warps are very rare and noteworthy. Weaving wide warps is expensive and requires more skill and time than narrow ones.

Linen is not stretchy. It poses a lot of problems in weaving; warp threads break easily. A wide loom takes up a lot more space, is harder to put a shuttle through.

[dsc]

“2. It is highly likely that a special weave would have ended up as Christ’s cloth.”

Isn’t it true that a well-to-do man provided the tomb?

Why, then, would it be strange if the cloth were up-market?

[ApplegateRanch]

Shoot. It’s quite conceivable that a wealthy person—as was involved in Christ’s burial—MIGH WELL HAVE had a single very rare, for that era, twill fabric from any number of other regions of the world

IF the Celts were using this pattern centuries earlier, then Joseph of Arimathea could have easily come by it during his trips to his Glastonbury tin mines in Britain...and could afford it.

[Quix]

Well, no. Of course not, but wide warps are very rare and noteworthy. Weaving wide warps is expensive and requires more skill and time than narrow ones.

Linen is not stretchy. It poses a lot of problems in weaving; warp threads break easily. A wide loom takes up a lot more space, is harder to put a shuttle through.

#######################

1. Have you seen the huge old Chinese brocade looms—2 person operated . . . about as long as a semi? They toured the USA 20-30 years ago. Certainly the Chinese had a variety of wider looms. I assume other cultures did, too.

2. Wide looms would have indicated a larger investment in the enterprise in terms of space and yarn. The loom itself is not that much more complicated being wider.

3. What does “very rare” mean in what context? 1 out of 5; 1 out of 10? 1 out of 100? within 10 square blocks? within 100 square blocks? Within a city? Within 3 cities?

4. I have 300-400 warp thicker cotton threads on my loom currently . . . each thread a ball of yarn maybe 1,000 or so yards long. Weaving width is 25”. I don’t think a warp 50” wide would be much more trouble if my loom happened to be that wide—particularly with a boat shuttle.

5. Yeah, linen takes some special care. Tightly spun fine thread linen spun very well may not be as likely to break as some not spun so well. And, dampening the linen helps.

6. Looking at ancient Chinese weavings as well as some from other culture . . . I just do not doubt that such a fabric could have been available to the richer folks in the Middle East 2,000 years ago.

7. For all we know, Joseph of Aramathea may have had such a weaver in his own employ or household.

[Quix]

Certainly my feeling & perspective concurs.

[Quix]

Ahhhhh.

LOL.

[Mamzelle]

If you want to know weaving in the time of Christ, you should check out Egyptian art from well before A.D.--you'll see that the common way to weave was to dig a hole, sit on the edge of that hole with the loom's bottom braced at one's feat. The common way to weave is not that different from the frame looms of the modern-era Navajo, with looms standing like a door before the weaver.

Silkworm cultivations and jacquard looms in Israel at the time of Christ? Lol. Why not spinning wheels, too?

Rare means what has survived with mummies, which give a pretty good picture of textile cultivation and production in Israel at Christ's time.

They need to take a sample from the textile that is not part of a repair.

[Betis70]

Sudarium of Oviedo

[Quix]

Seems to me we should be looking for the

UNCOMMON WAYS TO WEAVE of such eras.

[Quix]

I’ve grown up around the Dineh (Navajos) and their weaving.

BTW,

[Poe White Trash]

Yah, that’s about the size of it.

[Mamzelle]

I’ve grown up around the Navajo-style weaving.)))

Well, then, you are well aware why the large ones are so very pricey, and rare.

Why look for the uncommon way to weave, when the Bible is rich in textile lore?

It's possible that a large loom in Christ's time could have woven a textile like the Shroud. It's just unlikely, because a textile of that size and quality, that lasted 2000 years, would attract just as much attention as the image found upon it.