Posted on 04/03/2010 10:13:43 AM PDT by NYer
April 3, 2010. Turin will play host to the Holy Shroud between April 10th and May 23rd. More than one million people have made reservations to visit. More than 4 thousand volunteers are helping with artistic exhibitions, movies and informative panels.
The face cloth still exists too and the bloodstains on it match those of the Shroud of Turin.
From http://www.shroudofturin4journalists.com/terms/Sudarium-of-Oviedo.htm
The Sudarium’s existence and presence in Oviedo is well attested since the eighth century and in Spain since the seventh century. Before these dates the location of the Sudarium is less certain, but some scholars trace it to Jerusalem in the first century.
Forensic analysis of the bloodstains on the shroud and the Sudarium suggest that both cloths may have covered the same head at nearly the same time. Based on the bloodstain patterns, the Sudarium would have been placed on the man’s head while he was in a vertical position, presumably while still hanging on the cross. This cloth was then presumably removed before the shroud was applied.
A 1999 study by Mark Guscin, member of the multidisciplinary investigation team of the Spanish Center for Sindonology, investigated the relationship between the two cloths. Based on history, forensic pathology, blood chemistry (the Sudarium also is said to have type AB blood stains), and stain patterns, he concluded that the two cloths covered the same head at two distinct, but close moments of time. Avinoam Danin (see above) concurred with this analysis, adding that the pollen grains in the Sudarium match those of the shroud.
I beg to differ. Every time the greek word for linen cloth (othinia) is used in John 20 it is an accusitive plural and verse 7 makes it very clear the head cloth was found separate from the body wrappings.
I think the face cloth was placed on him after he was taken down from the cross. And it was removed before he was wrapped. The face cloth was lying folded by the shroud which was Jewish custom indicating He would be back.
The blood stains on the facial cloth match the shroud.
The shroud was still intact as though it was still wrapped around a body but no body was there.
A scientist I saw on THE CASE FOR THE RESSURECTION said she believed the body actually “hovered” over the shroud because the muscles were not “crushed” against the cloth.
Finally, if Divinci did this he had to have lived in the 700’s because it has been traced back that far. The carbon dating has been proven wrong and this has been accepted by the man who was in charge of the study back in the 70’s.
Now is this THE shroud Jesus was wrapped in? That’s up to each person to decide. I believe it is and God is saying “You people want proof? Okay, use all your technology and prove it to yourselves. And you’d better hurry ‘cause I’m gettin’ ready to head your way one last time.”
Othinia = Othonia (mispelling on my part)
Correction..I meant to say the face cloth was placed on him while on the cross and removed when he was taken down.
“The face of Jesus” program on the History Channel I did watch, but only caught part of it. I will watch it in it’s entirety. Using the shroud, they used 3D modeling programs to render Jesus’ entire body and also bloody areas. Was pretty powerful stuff. The show pretty much compels one to believe the Shroud is real and there’s not much argument against that.
The shroud is one of two things. Either the actual burial cloth of Jesus or the greatest work of art of all time.
But it is in the plural form every time. Not a single cloth but multiple cloths.
I’m a believer. I also seem to remember that there is an imprint of Roman coins over the eyes and the coins dated from the correct time and the practice of putting coins on the eyes was consistent with the entombment methods at the time.
On an unrelated / related note — there was an interesting experiment a few years back that said an xray (negative image) could be made with radiation and scotch tape, especially with radiation shot in a vacuum. I think that those were the same factors at work — a sticky cloth, a sealed tomb, and a risen Lord radiating new life.
The color is from vermillion, a pigment newly available in the 12th Century, and a boom time for creation of religious fakes.
Review Geoffery Chauncer for the common view of religious relics in the middle ages...
Pigs bones!
Wrong.
There may have been multiple cloths, including the shroud, but the others could have been lost or deteriorated. The bottom line is the weight of the scientific evidence contained in the Shroud of Turin points very strongly to authenticity regardless of whether or not He was covered in other cloths in addition to the Shroud.
Absolutely wrong! The Shroud has been scientifically studied intensely for several years using modern instruments, and there is NO evidence the image was inked in. Your citing Chaucer when there is modern scientific evidence available?
How does the science say an image of the face got onto the same multiple cloths wrapping the body when the face was wrapped separately from the cloths wrapping the body?
Okay, I see where it says "cloths" in ESV, and I will do some exegetical research on this point, but even if there were multiple pieces of fabric, that in no way rules out the shroud of Turin being ONE of multiples. Perhaps he was wrapped in strips and then one large shroud placed over him. I don't know. As for the face cloth, there is also a separate cloth, with a different owner, that purports to be the face cloth. The blood stains on it match those on the face of the shroud perfectly.
Discovery Channel had a wonderful program this past week about the efforts of a man who works in digital animation to create a 3-D digital image of Christ by using imagery from the Shroud. When the completed image was shown, I teared up. I am pretty sure I saw him do the same at one point.
The science doesn’t say the image is in multiple cloths, only in the Shroud. The suderium (face cloth) does not have the image, but it does have matching blood stains with respect to blood type (AB) and shape, and it contains other evidence such as pollen that indicates it was in Jerusalem. From a forensics point of view, the Shroud is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of being the burial cloth (or one of them) of Christ.
Just goes to show that you shouldn't read any of Dan Brown's crap.
Multiple means more than one. There was the shroud and the head cloth. Both are preserved.
I think it's a middle age fake.
Fake? How did the "artist" manage to place pollen from Jerusalem in the cloth?
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.