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 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 401-406 next last
To: RS
The technique of making concrete was known to the Romans, then "lost" for hundreds of years.

Your point would be valid on its face, but I don't think it is relevant unless you could show that the technique in question was "lost" and wasn't even able to be replicated by a society that was capable of transplanting human organs, mapping DNA, and landing men on the moon.

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.

And if you sat a monkey down at a typewriter, he could eventually type a random sequence of letters, spaces, and punctuation in such a way that he replicates the Declaration of Independence.

Your "explanation" is typical of the last resort of a scientific process that is at a loss to explain something: Simply offer an explanation that can't possibly be adequately tested, and leave it at that.

61 posted on 04/05/2004 8:39:17 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: RS
Does this reflex keep those thumbs pinned AFTER the nails have been removed and AFTER the person has died and his body been washed?

I would think so. The reflex is the result of a complete severing of the nerve in question, and since there is no indication that any of the twelve apostles was proficient in orthopedic microsurgery I would think there was no way to "fix" the underlying problem before burial.

62 posted on 04/05/2004 8:42:03 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Jaded
HA! And some claim the Word of God has not been changed one iota in all these years.
63 posted on 04/05/2004 8:42:58 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: mfulstone
The shroud devotees should read their bibles. Particularly John 20: 6-7

Obviously, that was NOT Jesus' shroud.

Actually, those passages confirm for me the shroud covered Christ. As I pointed out, see above the reference to the head cloth (napkin in my Bible) in Spain with the same rare blood type found on the shroud.

The Sudarium of Oviedo: Its History and Relationship to the Shroud of Turin

Excerpt:

Such a cloth is known to have existed from the gospel of John, chapter 20, verses 6 and 7. These verses read as follows, "Simon Peter, following him, also came up, went into the tomb, saw the linen cloth lying on the ground, and also the cloth that had been over his head; this was not with the linen cloth but rolled up in a place by itself." John clearly differentiates between this smaller face cloth, the sudarium, and the larger linen that had wrapped the body.

~snip~

64 posted on 04/05/2004 8:44:11 AM PDT by cyncooper ("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Additionally, I have a question about the whole Carbon-14 thing.

Now, I'm not a scientist in any such respecting such archaelogy or historical studies, but I am of scientific background. Just not that branch.

However, I don't recall the half-life of U237/9 (whatever it is) specifically, but I thought it was around 1500 years. In any case, since I went to college I've wondered how this carbon-dating could figure anything *older* than that? W/the Shroud, I've always thought that if it's around 2000 years, how could this method ever possibly prove it to be so?
65 posted on 04/05/2004 8:45:25 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common Sense is an Uncommon Virtue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mfulstone
The shroud devotees should read their bibles. Particularly John 20: 6-7 Obviously, that was NOT Jesus' shroud.
How wide is a strip? I think that is open to interpretation.
66 posted on 04/05/2004 8:47:27 AM PDT by CCCnative (waiting for socialism to fail in Santa Cruz as it did in Soviet Russia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mtbopfuyn
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.

So let me get this straight . . . This image was created by a forger from the Middle Ages who was astute enough to include anatomically correct details about: 1) the placement of nails in the wrists instead of the palms, and 2) the results of reflexive actions in the thumbs caused by severed nerves in the wrists -- but wasn't smart enough to make both sides of the image the same size???

67 posted on 04/05/2004 8:50:04 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude
Ian Wilson wrote "The Blood and The Shroud" which is the most facinating book I've ever read. He used extensive investigative methods and experts to prove the case for the Shroud. If you like Sherlock Holmes mysteries, you would love this book. Follow his clues and the history he pieced together and you will come away a believer.
68 posted on 04/05/2004 8:51:11 AM PDT by WVNan (I'm on a fixed income....BUT I'M A MONTHLY DONOR . Keep FR healthy. Give blood...uh .....generously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: All
Check this out........

http://www.visionsofjesuschrist.com/weeping21.htm

69 posted on 04/05/2004 8:51:32 AM PDT by labowski ("The Dude Abideth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: mtbopfuyn
I would expect the image on the front to be larger than the one on the rear. If this is the case, then I would consider this point to be a strong piece of evidence in support of the Shroud's authenticity.
70 posted on 04/05/2004 8:52:49 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
In any case, if the faithful are wrong, that doesn't make it a "hoax", either. It could simply be a misconception. Even if it was an ancient cloth, it could have been something some1 found and *honestly* thought was an image of Christ, and in his enthusiasm deceived alot of people.

Just cuz something is not what it's made out to be, doesn't mean it was a deliberate "hoax".
71 posted on 04/05/2004 8:53:07 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common Sense is an Uncommon Virtue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mfulstone
I have read that Scripture and agree with you.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Tim 3:16 & 17

God has not left us without His Truth!
72 posted on 04/05/2004 8:54:16 AM PDT by LadyPilgrim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
I don't know enough about carbon dating to comment one way or another, but I do know that testing the Shroud using any such method is inherently risky because of the attempts that were made to repair the Shroud after it was damaged in a fire back in the Middle Ages.
73 posted on 04/05/2004 8:55:31 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: nonomous
Since arriving in Turin in 1578, the Shroud has only been displayed a few times each century (see the Shroud History page). Both reasons you stated are probably correct. Security is always a problem with the Shroud. For example, there is strong belief by the authorities in Turin that the April 1997 fire in the Chapel, Cathedral and Royal Palace was intentionally set by an arsonist. In 1978, during a 5 week exhibition, 3.5 million visitors flocked to the city to view the cloth. Organizing such events is always a problem. Most importantly however, exposing the cloth to polluted air and UV light during an exhibition can damage the cloth and the image as well. Even though the Shroud is now stored in a specially designed container to protect and preserve it, too much exhibiting may create serious long term conservation and preservation problems. The next public exhibition is scheduled in the year 2025
74 posted on 04/05/2004 8:57:22 AM PDT by irish guard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves
The Shroud is a proven fake -

No, it has not been *proven* a fake. The efforts to demonstrate it is a fake have been exposed as being flawed so the "mystery" remains.

75 posted on 04/05/2004 8:58:44 AM PDT by cyncooper ("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"Point #1: If someone in the 12th century was intent on making a realistic forgery of Christ's burial shroud, then why would he depict the crucifixion in a manner that did not match the prevailing view of how the crucifixion occurred?"

Another thing I was going to mention. Heck, despite the Shroud and the adulation of it, we continue to depict hand wounds - even "the Passion of the Christ" continues this belief. Talk about unscientific!
76 posted on 04/05/2004 8:59:53 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common Sense is an Uncommon Virtue)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I want to believe, and wish this were the real deal, but here is my dilema:

The first thing we learned in navigation class is that maps are flat, and the earth is round. Take a round ball say, and unpeel it and try and lay it flat. Can't do it?

If the shroud really got it's image by resting on a round head, when laid flat the image on the cloth would be distorted right?
77 posted on 04/05/2004 9:00:36 AM PDT by clyde260 (Public Enemy #1: Network News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: mtbopfuyn
Did you forget that DaVince was playing around with photography way back then?

Since the shroud with its image does in fact pre-date DaVinci and nobody has ever reproduced a like image on a cloth, what is your point?

78 posted on 04/05/2004 9:02:05 AM PDT by cyncooper ("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: tiamat
Are there any Jews living today that can trace their lineage that far back?

I think that the Lubavicher Rebbe could trace his lineage back that far. I don't believe he, of blessed memory, had any children, but perhaps he had nephews or cousins?

79 posted on 04/05/2004 9:04:06 AM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Hammerhead
"If Jesus rose again after 3 days, then how is that long enough to make a 2000 yearl old impression in cloth????"

*smirk*

Okay, let me get this straight... you're willing to stipulate to the possibility of rising from the dead after 3 days... but you're simply -not- willing to go so far as to believe that such an event could leave an image on cloth?

Okaaaaay...

Qwinn
80 posted on 04/05/2004 9:04:47 AM PDT by Qwinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 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