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 ...
Unfortunately, the Raes samples (taken in 1973) have been conclusively proved to have been a melange of mixed original Shroud linen Flax interwoven with a Medieval Cotton patch invisibly rewoven in the 16th Century to repair a worn area. This Raes area is right next the area where the 1988 Carbon 14 sample was taken and both suffer from the same problem, pollution with the 16th century cotton repair threads. The Cotton that Raes observed in his sample were only observed in his sample and were found in no other locations on the Shroud. His generalizations based on his observations of his samples were erroneously generalized to the Shroud because he assumed the samples were homogenous to the Shroud... just as the scientists who Carbon dated the adjacent samples generalized their results to the Shroud because they also assumed erroneously that their samples were homogenous to the Shroud as well. Both were wrong. Their sample both included material from the 16th Century.
These findings from 2005, have been peer reviewed and duplicated in several scientific journals. Incidentally, the latest studies have found that Raes was wrong about the type of Cotton... it was a European cotton... not Egyptian. However, because it was from a Medieval patch, that would be expected.
Really, they don't talk to those women who understand fabric from the raw textile.
When I first read about the shroud of Turin, I didn't care much for the image, but for the fabric. Because if a length of linen could last 2000 years, that was a miracle itself. That it was a ***wide*** piece of fabric was an indication against the authenticity--ancient looms were narrow. Not that it could not have been supernatural, but everyone focused on the image and I could never get the scientific details about the piece of fabric.
I must admit that I find these archaeological finds that relate to the Bible as interesting. While I would really like to think that someday “proof” as to the origin of the shroud and the supernatural image on it can be confirmed (or at least - “we can't explain the image”) - it doesn't matter one whit with regard to my faith.
Awhile ago they found something with a reference to King David (an inscription on a coin, building, something). Prior to that there was no archaeological evidence regarding a King David - with many saying he was a myth. I'm sure that the finding of the inscription did not change any minds regarding faith issues, but it sure is interesting - to me anyway.
I wonder if prior to this find of another cloth, the “deniers” (those adamantly denying even the possibility - for faith reasons) were saying about the Shroud of Turin “Well, no other shroud has ever been found in Jerusalem - it would be amazing that the one shroud we DID find just happened to be Jesus’ “).
Hmmm. I suppose they have some reasonable answer on the lack of finding shrouds. One of the earlier post said they reburied the bones. Did they recycle the shrouds into something else. That would seem odd - especially with all of the rules they had to follow regarding clean/unclean, etc. Perhaps they were burned in some type of ceremony?
Anyway, as a person interested in the sciences, history, and a Christian - I find the Shroud of Turin an interesting subject. With regards to the separate piece for the head - there is another relic in Europe of that. I think it had something to do with being wrapped under the chin and over the head to keep the jaw closed.
The two statements have the same meaning. He doesn't believe because he's not convinced.
but that such a position was undesirable by atheists because they don't want to entertain even the possibility that God exists
Is it undesirable for you to entertain even the possibility that Zeus exists? How much does the possible existence of Zeus threaten or worry you? Probably not at all, right? Now you may understand.
The weaving argument didn’t make much sense. Now if the Shroud were polyester or had a Gucci logo on it...
Whether real or spurrious, the Shroud of Turin is absolutely fascinating, all the more so because it was Science herself which made it an issue when towards the end of the 19th Century the negative-to-positive image was discovered.
Catholics don’t worship it, they worship the Redeemer, but it is perfectly sane and natural to take interest in the “souvenir” if it is indeed authentic. To ignore it would be foolish pride. It is there before us, it exists, and it has qualities that make it impossible to explain. No one should be accused of idolatry for showing interest in it.
It is one instance in which debunking is not enough. The cloth demands an explanation. In other words, if bogus, that too needs to be figured out. Far from being a test of faith, it is a test of science. Faith remains either way, but what happens to positivistic science?
The cloth would not have survived the effects of putrefaction process of the body... there would not be much left after the microbes and insects had reduced the body to bones. It is theorized that the Shroud of Turin survived because it only covered the body for less than three days, and the body was removed, for whatever reason before much putrefaction set in...
Interesting - makes sense. Thanks!
I was a maid for a very wealthy young Jordanian Muslim. I had given him a copy of a paperback about the Shroud to read to see what he thought about it.
In an ordinary day, an ordinary maid became blessed by God. As I was changing his bedding the book was lying on the bed. I picked it up and looked at the picture of the image of Christ. I was looking at it very carefully to see if I could tell what Christ might look like and said to The LORD in my heart that I wish that I could see what He really looked like not expecting anything to actually happen.
In an instant The LORD transformed me to a place that I could plainly see the face of Jesus. Glorious light was streaming from his face. The light was so beautiful because it was not just light but it was also pure love. This was many years ago and I shall never forget His beautiful face and often think about how someday I shall see it again.
2Cr 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to [give] the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
Because of who Christ was his body did not decompose as others would:
Act 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Act 2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
Psa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
Because the manufacturing process of the day is different. Today we have different material and ways we weave the material through automated methods. Before the Industrial Revolution this was not the case. Variation of material and weaving techniques were extremely limited to standard similar methods. For the most part, weaving did not differ from loom to loom. One would expect the same weaving technique to have been applied for the same type of material in those days.
It makes perfect human sence that when Mary entered the tomb of Jesus to find his body missing, she would have taken his burial shroud with her as proof. Also since it would have had Jesus’s blood and body fluids on it, which as we know from the bible had the power to heal, she would have taken it simply to protect his precious blood or even possibly use it to continue his healings.
Now, go a step further; let’s say his image was clearly visible on the shroud, of course she would have taken it with her, not only to show the other desciples but as undeniable proof that Jesus had performed another miracle.
Very intersting indeed
A Vatican scholar claims to have deciphered the “death certificate” imprinted on the Shroud of Turin, or Holy Shroud, a linen cloth revered by Christians and held by many to bear the image of the crucified Jesus.
Dr Barbara Frale, a researcher in the Vatican secret archives, said “I think I have managed to read the burial certificate of Jesus the Nazarene, or Jesus of Nazareth.” She said that she had reconstructed it from fragments of Greek, Hebrew and Latin writing imprinted on the cloth together with the image of the crucified man.
The shroud, which is kept in the royal chapel of Turin Cathedral and is to be put in display next spring, is regarded by many scholars as a medieval forgery. A 1988 carbon dating of a fragment of the cloth dated it to the Middle Ages.
However Dr Frale, who is to publish her findings in a new book, La Sindone di Gesu Nazareno (The Shroud of Jesus of Nazareth) said that the inscription provided “historical date consistent with the Gospels account”. The letters, barely visible to the naked eye, were first spotted during an examination of the shroud in 1978, and others have since come to light.
Some scholars have suggested that the writing is from a reliquary attached to the cloth in medieval times. But Dr Frale said that the text could not have been written by a medieval Christian because it did not refer to Jesus as Christ but as “the Nazarene”. This would have been “heretical” in the Middle Ages since it defined Jesus as “only a man” rather than the Son of God.
Like the image of the man himself the letters are in reverse and only make sense in negative photographs. Dr Frale told La Repubblica that under Jewish burial practices current at the time of Christ in a Roman colony such as Palestine, a body buried after a death sentence could only be returned to the family after a year in a common grave.
A death certificate was therefore glued to the burial shroud to identify it for later retrieval, and was usually stuck to the cloth around the face. This had apparently been done in the case of Jesus even though he was buried not in a common grave but in the tomb offered by Joseph of Arimathea.
Dr Frale said that many of the letters were missing, with Jesus for example referred to as “(I)esou(s) Nnazarennos” and only the “iber” of “Tiberiou” surviving. Her reconstruction, however, suggested that the certificate read: “In the year 16 of the reign of the Emperor Tiberius Jesus the Nazarene, taken down in the early evening after having been condemned to death by a Roman judge because he was found guilty by a Hebrew authority, is hereby sent for burial with the obligation of being consigned to his family only after one full year”. It ends “signed by” but the signature has not survived.
Dr Frale said that the use of three languages was consistent with the polyglot nature of a community of Greek-speaking Jews in a Roman colony. Best known for her studies of the Knights Templar, who she claims at one stage preserved the shroud, she said what she had deciphered was “the death sentence on a man called Jesus the Nazarene. If that man was also Christ the Son of God it is beyond my job to establish. I did not set out to demonstrate the truth of faith. I am a Catholic, but all my teachers have been atheists or agnostics, and the only believer among them was a Jew. I forced myself to work on this as I would have done on any other archaeological find.”
The Catholic Church has never either endorsed the Turin Shroud or rejected it as inauthentic. Pope John Paul II arranged for public showings in 1998 and 2000, saying: “The Shroud is an image of God’s love as well as of human sin. The imprint left by the tortured body of the Crucified One, which attests to the tremendous human capacity for causing pain and death to one’s fellow man, stands as an icon of the suffering of the innocent in every age.” Pope Benedict XVI is to pray before the Shroud when it is put on show again next Spring in Turin.
The media continue the assault against Jesus, but when they or their loved ones are seriously ill, guess who they pray to.
When I look at liberal, climate change worshipers, homosexuals, militant atheists, and Democrats, I see a whole group who REALLY don't want God to exist either.
The problem for them, is that He does.
that twill was not used earlier.
Twill is not that complicated. Certainly 4 harnesses would easily do it.
IF we had 99% confidence that we
HAD DISCOVERED 99% of ALL the weavings of that area of the first 1-3 centuries . . .
THEN you might have a point.
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 reserved for his own burial—and given to Christ out of reverence and respect.
The Romans had silks from China, after all.
INDEED. EXACTLY . . . and given that the Romans had silks from China, he may have had a twill linen cloth from any number of distant places.
It would be interesting to know the genetics of the linen/flax plants involved.
The shroud of Turin’s authenticity, or lack thereof, affects my faith not one whit. The shroud is not biblical. If it’s authentic, it’s a wonder. If it’s not, it’s a different kind of wonder.
Thanks. Fascinating. I wasn’t aware of the plaid example from Urumchi. I have just known that the Chinese have been master weavers for at least 5,000 years. Certainly they could do twill.