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
click here to read article
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.
I noticed that immediately. Nice bit of confirmation, I’d say! LOL.
The ‘critters’ [ET’s] will be demonstrating all manner of purported “proofs” to deny Christ’s deity.
THE GREAT DECEPTION is at work and looming greater.
Folks MUST HAVE A ****RELATIONSHIP**** WITH CHRIST.
Good theories will not suffice.
LOVE IT. EXCELLENT POINTS.
And his responses were?
A weaver doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist to pull a thread over two, or three, other threads instead of one.
Four harneses would do it. Probably 3 would, IIRC.
EXCELLENT. THANKS THANKS.
I’m still skeptical that they can be certain of the “ca 1200” claim.
Having discovered it IN THAT AREA
kind of moots the point of doing such a pollen study.
Not so. Since the "new" burial cloth was found near Jerusalem, a pollen study of it would serve as a sort of ground truth regarding what sort of pollen would be found on burial cloths in that area.
A comparison of its pollen burden to that on the "Turin" shroud would be interesting.
It persistently boggles my mind how adept RC's are at imputing
I realize they are master bashers themselves . . . and I guess when one sees the world through such "bashing glasses" it is easy to fantasize and construe bashing under every word and phrase.
All the more so for those with REACTIVE ATTACHMENT DISORDER.
However, in Jedidah's post above, he rightly merely noted that it's more fitting to worship CHRIST than to get all wound up about artifacts.
!!!OF COURSE!!!, that's anathema, heresy and outrageous to those over fascinated with, obsessed with, addicted to, to idolatrous of artifacts.
Sheesh! Get a life.
Or a RELATIONSHIP WITH CHRIST vs a mere RELIGION.
I was thinking in terms of pollen verifying that it was once in that area.
I think the claim is that the shroud of Turin is woven in a way that was not known until around one thousand AD. If that could be proven it would mean that the shroud MUST be a fake. There may have been varying forms of textiles two thousand years ago but the selection would have been extremely limited compared to today, it wouldn’t have been simply a matter of having money.
“Some people really, REALLY dont want the Shroud to be genuine.”
That is true but does anyone’s wishing make it so or not so?
Read post number fifteen and look up the verse in the bible, either the Shroud of Turin is a fake or the bible is wrong.
It’s funny how often people make assumptions that the ancients did not and could not have had things like....oh....computers for instance.
Until somebody actually finds one.
There’s another artifact, called the “Sudarium”, which is claimed to be the “napkin” referenced in post 15.
Joseph of Arimathea was a rich man who supplied the tomb and probably supplied a superior cloth for Jesus’ burial.
Not necessarily, however.
Can we say FOR CERTAIN how such a head cloth might have been used vis a vis the long shroud type cloth?
Which is why God buried Moses’ body in any unknown place, so that his bones couldn’t be dug up and venerated!
Always. Every Christmas, every Easter, another story/movie runs to try to debunk some aspect of Christianity.
Casting doubt on the Shroud of Turin is pretty weak, though. I think it's real, it'd be pretty cool if it's real, but it's NOT IMPORTANT.
BLESSED BE THE NAME OF THE LORD.
PRAISE GOD FOR HIS GIFT TO YOU.
AND YOU FOR SHARING IT.
Much touched by your narrative.
HE’S COMING SOON.
I get up this morning to find that my heartfelt comment lat night about remembering the central point of Christianity was completely misconstrued.
I didn’t say a thing about Catholics. I didn’t even think about Catholics. Nobody was “bashed” until some thin skins got irritated by their imaginations.
My point was a valid one, and I stand by it. I’ll go out on a limb and contend that anyone who argues with what I said needs to examine their heart and their faith. And by “faith,” I don’t mean the name on the sign at their church building.
Your post is a thread-killer...good observation...magritte
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
[I thought it was obvious—just as you confirmed. Well put!]
Some very good information here on the caucasian (Celtic) Bronze Age mummies found in China.
d00d, take a pill. There was *nothing* about Catholics in that remark - Nothing at all. We should see how charitable YOU are in your apology to Jedidah.
OTOH, if you'd like some bashing, I will be more than happy to oblige.
Do you mean to insinuate that someone worships "souvenirs" (like, presumably, the Shroud)?
If so, who?
Um, hel-LOOOO...... Dockers......!
WOW! Thanks for that witness! "Someday" is soon.
Did you know that some hackers from Carnegie-Mellon actually have that thing running Linux?
I'm betting it originally ran Windows....which is why we found it at the bottom of the Aegean.
Thanks for the excellent fact-based commentary. It’s striking to see how superior your understanding of this topic is to that of the “professional journalist” who cobbled together this article.
Weaving patterns may not be typical of an era, but someone had to do it first, and often advancements are lost. (Damascus steel, for instance, (not pattern welded or simply layered steel) has yet to be reproduced.)
While certain fabrics can be ruled out as being from the era (synthetics, for instance), proving a pre-industrial revolution weaving pattern did not exist (at all, anywhere) at a certain date would be pretty tough, and opens the person making the determination to accusations of circular reasoning. (You can't simply date a pattern because it allegedly did not exist until a certain date, therefore it has to be after a certain date.)
There has to be other supporting evidence which would indicate that the material comes from a certain date, and in the instance of the shroud, exposed to fire, Carbon dating will just not be enough.
In the end, it becomes a matter of belief, not one of proof, at least until someone can demonstrate how medieval persons created the images in such a way that it fits the other evidence.
Yes, that’s my view, too.
Not ALL ancient looms were narrow.