Skip to comments.'Jesus-era' burial shroud found
Posted on 12/16/2009 6:53:57 PM PST by JoeProBono
A team of archaeologists and scientists says it has, for the first time, found pieces of a burial shroud from the time of Jesus in a tomb in Jerusalem.
The researchers, from Hebrew University and institutions in Canada and the US, said the shroud was very different from the controversial Turin Shroud. Some people believe the Turin Shroud to have been Christ's burial cloth, but others believe it is a fake.
The newly found cloth has a simpler weave than Turin's, the scientists say. The body of a man wrapped in fragments of the shroud was found in a tomb dating from the time of Jesus near the Old City of Jerusalem.
The tomb is part of a cemetery called the Field of Blood, where Judas Iscariot is said to have killed himself.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
The shroud was found near the Old City of Jerusalem
So: It has a different weave. That doesnt prove anything.
I am sure people with different pocketbooks could afford different weave shrouds.
So let’s see if I understand their reasoning: a person buried in a pine box could not have died around the same time as a person buried in an oak coffin... Is this the best the anti-Shroud people can do?
$64 question: “Does it hold the image of a human?”
Quite the coincidence that this is all of the sudden “found”.
I woudn’t put much credence in anythng the BBC reports on concerning Christianity. For one thing Jesus was buried in a rich man’s tomb (Joseph of Arimethea) as predicted in Isaiah 53...not in the field of blood where Judas committed suicide.
- ‘Jesus-era’ burial shroud found -
And they STILL can’t find Obama’s birth certificate!
Yes, exactly. Shroud experts have always pointed out that the weave of the Turin cloth is very high quality; which is what one would expect from the Gospel accounts that specifically mention that Joseph of Arimathea brought the linen, with the implication that it was high quality.
Why would the Gospels bother to mention that fact as well as the huge amount of space (comparatively speaking) given to the burial cloths left behind in the empty tomb unless the Gospel writers were aware that the burial shroud was known and venerated as a relic at the time they were writing. It’s as if they are acknowledging that the early Christians preserved the shroud. Otherwise, these details in the Gospel accounts would be superfluous.
The skeptics are so eager to debunk the Shroud of Turin that they always, every single time, exaggerate and misrepresent the significance of their new “finds.” Anyone who actually knows about the linen of the Shroud of Turin would have found the fact that this weave is different
But breathless stupid reporters are ignorant and can’t be bothered to do any homework.
Earliest leprosy case found in Jerusalem
December 16, 2009
JERUSALEM (JTA) — The DNA of a shrouded man from the first century found in a Jerusalem tomb revealed the earliest known case of leprosy.
It is also the first time fragments of a burial shroud have been found from the time of Jesus in Jerusalem, according to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
The burial cave, also called the Tomb of the Shroud, is located on the edge of the Old City of Jerusalem in the lower Hinom Valley. The shrouded man’s tomb was placed next to the tomb of the high priest who betrayed Jesus to the Romans, Annas the father-in-law of Caiaphas. This signifies that the man was a member of the aristocracy.
Also unique to this burial is the fact that the man did not receive a secondary burial, in which his bones would have been removed after a year and placed into a stone box. Instead, the man’s tomb, which was carbon dated to 1-50 CE, was sealed shut with plaster, likely because the man had leprosy and died of tuberculosis, according to molecular tests of the man’s bone DNA.
The man’s shroud was woven differently than that of the Turin Shroud, which is said to have wrapped the body of Jesus, according to textiles historian Orit Shamir. Because this is the first burial shroud found from the time of Jesus in Jerusalem, researchers have concluded that the Turin Shroud did not originate from Jesus-era Jerusalem, according to a statement by Hebrew University.
The molecular investigation was conducted by Professors Mark Spigelman and Charles Greenblatt of the Sanford F. Kuvin Center for the Study of Infectious and Tropical Diseases at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Professor Carney Matheson and Kim Vernon of Lakehead University, Canada; Professor Azriel Gorski of New Haven University; and Dr. Helen Donoghue of University College London. The archaeological excavation was led by Professor Shimon Gibson, Dr. Boaz Zissu and Professor James Tabor on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority and the University of North Carolina, Charlotte.
Hinnom Valley? Nice dodge of calling it something more piquant ... Gehenna. This was not a well liked man.
Diseased with two of the primary scourges of the time? Not a wealthy man, or a rather intemperate one, perhaps both.
Sealed burial chamber? Sealed? There was more than disease, that those who buried him didn't want getting out.
Simpler cloth, that is supposed to somehow undermine authenticity of the Shroud of Turin? Given all the above, I'd say he was lucky to have been wrapped in any sort of cloth at all, and not dumped in Gehenna and burned with the rest of the rubbish and animal carcasses.
I have looked into the Shroud of Turin quite a bit. I have several videos etc. I believe it to be the real deal. The carbon dating they did has real problems and does NOT rule it out. There are so MANY things about it that can not be explained any other way. So we already know where the real burial cloth of Jesus is. I don’t know what this one is but it’s not the original.
“I dont know what this one is...”
See post #12
I think it’s interesting this was found, and a shame that some news outlets/people just can’t resist the urge to get a dig in.
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·
Joseph of Arimathea was a very wealthy man and he buried Jesus, so case closed there.
Fragments??? How then do they know it was a shroud???
You don't get wrapped in a shroud...It's one piece...Starts at the foot on the front, goes up over the head and down the back to the back of the feet...
Apparently what they found were fragments of some cloth...And of the weave that was used in those days...
In the Old Testament, the Hinnom Valley or Gehenna was a place of abominable pagan rites, including infant sacrifice. It was there that the apostate kings Ahaz and Manasseh made their children “pass through the fire” to the god Molech. The rites were specifically celebrated in Tophet, the “place of abhorrence,” one of the chief groves in the valley
King Josiah of ancient Judah finally put an end to these abominations. He defiled the valley, rendering it ceremonially unclean (II Kings 23:10). Later the valley became the cesspool and city dump of Jerusalem - a repository for sewage, refuse and animal carcasses. The bodies of despised criminals were also burned there along with the rubbish. Fires burned continuously, feeding on a constant supply of garbage and refuse.
Aceldama, the “field of blood”, purchased with the money Judas received for the betrayal of Christ (Matt. 27:8) was also in part of the valley of Hinnom.
Well, they are enthusiastic.
No one ever claimed they were bright.
That is where Jesus used the illustration of hell and possibility could have been near the area when he was talking to his disciples about hell...
What is the big deal about the Shroud? Are we supposed to worship it or something? I just can’t find any mention of that in my Bible.
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.