Skip to comments.Burial Cloth Found In Jerusalem Cave Casts Doubt On Authenticity of Turin Shroud [Really?]
Posted on 12/15/2009 8:35:30 PM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
B) I'd thought there was one, and only one known archaeologically confirmed case of what we now call leprosy (Hansen's disease) from that time and area and it was a fairly recent find. That was a walled up burial that had never been opened to collect and rebury the bones after a year, which was the normal Jewish practice then. What the bible referred to as "leprosy" is much debated, but probably was several diseases with prominent skin involvement such as psoriasis. HD is known from biblical times in India, but not from the middle east excepting the one recent find. I wonder if this cloth was from that burial or whether they've found a second burial of HD there. HD was often a more severe disease in the middle ages than what is usually seen today and probably was also more severe in the 1st century AD. TB would have been a common disease then; it is more likely this poor soul was given a quick and permanent burial because his HD was both unfamiliar and horrific to them. I doubt this was a 'normal' burial for the time, not that Christ's was normal either...
And it perhaps was so because it was a lifelong job for a weaver, and inventing a new style immediately gave him an economic advantage. A weaver doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to pull a thread over two, or three, other threads instead of one.
It’s like one guy buried in a polyester suit and another in silk. Doesn’t mean they didn’t die in the same timeframe.
But Jesus is risen. The linen was left behind for a reason.
By way of a further example, on p.196 Barber reproduces the remains of a black horsehair sash, found in a bog at Armoy, County Antrim, Northern Ireland, again dating from the early 1st millennium BC, and bearing the closest resemblance to the Shroud's weave. As Barber goes on to point out (p.190), the Hallstatt folk worked with flax (i.e. linen), as well as wool and other fibres. So although this is not to suggest that the Shroud actually derived from the Hallstatt culture, which was broadly Celtic (as in the case of ancient Egypt linens, the Hallstatt fabrics simply survived due to exceptional environmental conditions), it is quite clear that the Shroud's herringbone twill weave represents no obstacle to a first century AD date.
Sinful human nature dictates that IF God had left any actual artifacts that came in direct contact with Jesus, the creation would be worshiped instead of the Creator. Which, IMHO, is why we would never find any of it.
Since there have been studies done on the Turin shroud that reveal things like pollen which are from the Jerusalem area, I wonder if anyone has done the same studies on this new shroud?
We don't have to have artifacts when there are places...but Christians never made the Jordan River into the Ganges and we never made Bethlehem into Mecca. God left us many puzzles from atomic nuclei to the Shroud to Capernaum to the Heavens.
Obligatory Holiday anti-Shroud of Turin story PING!
The Catholic bashers have arrived. Thanks for that pithy comment and the charity in which it was delivered. I'm sure someone is as proud of you as you are of yourself.
Since the woman with an issue of blood was healed by touching the *fringe of Christ’s garment* it is not surprising that such “souvenirs” are venerated in traditional Christianity.
“25And a certain woman, which had an issue of blood twelve years,
26And had suffered many things of many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse,
27When she had heard of Jesus, came in the press behind, and touched his garment.
28For she said, If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole.
29And straightway the fountain of her blood was dried up; and she felt in her body that she was healed of that plague.
30And Jesus, immediately knowing in himself that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in the press, and said, Who touched my clothes?
31And his disciples said unto him, Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
32And he looked round about to see her that had done this thing.
33But the woman fearing and trembling, knowing what was done in her, came and fell down before him, and told him all the truth.
34And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague. (Mark 5:25-34)
That claim is not true. One of many of the claims in this article that is simply not true... including the one that remnants of shrouds have not been found in burials inside Jerusalem. In fact, the weaving of the Shroud, done on a wall loom, with the hand spinning, the soapwort fullering, and hank bleaching technique, when used in combination... something that would not have been likely done deliberately... are all, according to numerous textile experts, uniquely first Century. The thee over one twill in Linen would have been a very expensive cloth that would have represented weeks of work of a skilled weaver. It would have been reserved for avery wealthy buyer, a person such as Joseph of Arimathea was described as having been.
A leper, with two communicable diseases, such as the body covered by this shroud, is probably not a candidate for purchasing a "fine Linen cloth" and his relative used what they could afford. In fact, as you know, as a weaver, the larger the cloth, the more expensive it will be.
What this burial DOES prove, however, is that they DID use a large sheet... and bound his wrists, his jaw, and his ankles, as is reported in Jewish custom and was postulated as the "bindings" or mistranslated "wrappings" in Jesus' burial.
This is the VERY SAME burial... it had the Shroud they are talking about. It was found in 2000. They have just dusted it off and are using it as "new"...