Posted on 02/28/2015 3:41:21 PM PST by NYer
All four gospels mention the burial cloth of Jesus Christ. The Shroud of Turin is believed by many to be that burial cloth. It is etched with the image of a man that was scourged, crowned with thorns, crucified, and lanced in the side. If it is real, it provides archeological evidence of the most consequential event in human history—the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Pope Francis plans to venerate the Shroud this summer, just as his predecessors, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict did. The Pope has called for it to be displayed in Turin from April 19 to June 24 and he will view it personally on June 21. My husband Mark and I, and 6 of our 10 kids will make the trip there this spring. Thus, it was with particular interest that I previewed Examining the Shroud of Turin, the first segment of CNN’s 6-part series titled Finding Jesus: Faith, Fact, Forgery which will air this Sunday at 9 PM EST.
The documentary examines artifacts from the life of Jesus through worldwide experts in science, archeology, history and theology. The first episode asks: Is the Shroud of Turin the actual burial cloth of Jesus Christ or is it a fake?
If it is the burial cloth of Jesus, then it was Pontius Pilot who unwittingly began the journey of the Shroud as the most revered and controversial relic in history. It was he who gave Joseph of Arimathea permission to take down the body of Christ from the cross. Joseph donated his own burial cloth and tomb. He, together with Nicodemus–both prominent members of the Jewish ruling body, the Sanhedrin–took Jesus from the cross, wrapped him in linen and laid him in the tomb.
The historical records concerning the Shroud prior to the 14th century are not definite, opening its authenticity to question and leading some to call it a forgery. And so we must rely on scientific, historical, and archeological study to tell the story.
Candida Moss, Ph.D., a theology professor in New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame was one of the consultants and commentators for the documentary. She has degrees from both Oxford and Yale and specializes in the study of relics, martyrdom, and the early Christian Church. Moss noted that evidence for the Shroud as truly the burial cloth of Jesus is very strong, but the Catholic Church has never definitively declared it so.
“When you look at Ecclesiastical statements made by the popes, they have never said the Shroud is authentic, but only that it’s worthy of veneration,” she said. “That is one of the things that the Catholic Church does well—to hold back and do their due diligence.”
The documentary explains that many who have dismissed the Shroud as a fake, point to the carbon dating in 1988. The testing dated the Shroud as coming into existence between 1260 and 1390. Scientists present those results in the film but other experts challenge that conclusion citing possible bacterial contamination of the cloth as has happened with burial shrouds from Egyptian Pharaohs. Carbon dating found them to be centuries younger than their actual known dates.
Another very powerful piece of evidence is presented: the Cloth of Oviedo. It is believed to be the cloth that was placed over the head of Jesus mentioned in the Bible. “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 20:6-7).
The history of this head covering, called the Sudarium, is well documented. It was taken from Palestine in 614 AD to Alexandria, through northern Africa and arrived in Spain in 616 AD where it remains today.
Both burial cloths have the same AB blood type. When compared to one another, the bloodstains match perfectly, showing that it came from the same man. It is noteworthy that the carbon dating on the Sudarium does not agree with that of the Shroud; showing the former as being many centuries older.
Another point against it being a forgery is the discovery that the image of the Shroud is actually a negative. The first photograph of it was taken by Secondo Pia in 1898. While looking at the negative image on the reverse photographic plate, all of a sudden he saw the positive image — he was staring at the face of Jesus! So if it was a fraud, someone would have had to think of creating the image in the negative.
“In looking at the material, I felt there was a lot more on scientific evidence that it could not be a forgery,” Moss said. “For instance, pollens were found on the cloth that came from Palestine and the placement of the nails were in the wrist.” She explained that in medieval times the crucified Christ was portrayed with nail marks in his palms, but historical and scientific research has shown that people were crucified in the wrist—the only possible way it could have held up the body. “If someone was going to make a forgery during that time, it would not have made sense to show the nail marks in the wrist.”
The most compelling evidence, according to Moss, is that despite attempts, no one has been able to recreate it. “When NASA scientists cannot make it, then who can?” she asked.
After the documentary airs, people will have the opportunity write in their questions on the CNN website and scholars will respond online. It premiers Sunday, March 1 at 9 PM EST.
Is this the same male face that is on Veronica's veil??
Grave clothes does not mean a garment in which the body would be dressed like something to wear. That is a modern interpretation of the terms used. Grave clothes mean something to drape over the body.
From archaeological digs, the only shroud that was found was a linen (flax) one-over-one cloth.
Families would use what they had, or buy what they could afford. Often it actually would be an old sail because large size cloth was expensive. Josephus reported that often if a family was rich enough to use a table linen, it would be pressed into service, and a new table linen would be purchased at the next opportunity. I believe he may have been referring to the Greek practice in that passage, but 1st Century Jews had picked up some of the cultural practices of their neighbors, such as using coins on the eyes to keep the eyes closed, which comes from the Greek belief that the deceased person would need to pay Charon, the ferryman, for passage across the River Styx, to reach Hades' underworld realm, and the coins on the eyes would serve that purpose. Jerusalem had become a very cosmopolitan center. . . and recall the Gospels were written in Greek.
Any grave clothes had to be ritually "clean", in other words of unmixed materials. It had to have been woven on a loom that was only used with the same materials. You could not mix wool with cotton for example. . . the weaver could not even use the same loom because there was a chance of intermixing threads. Even their clothing could not be mixed. You either wore all cotton, or you wore all wool, or you wore all linen, never a combination. Why? God said so, end of discussion.
Archaeologically, every grave cloth scrap found in Jewish burials has been linen. That may be because linen is a very hardy cloth, resistant to insects, mold, decomposition products, and even bacteria, or it may have been ritually required. We really don't know. However that doesn't mean that others could not have been used. . . because so few have been found since the bones were tossed into the central ossuary pits after a year of decomposition. . . and no cloth has been found in the Ossuaries.
Jewish burial customs required simple burials even for rich people and that no adornment or decoration of the body be done, nor did they allow any worldly goods be buried with the body. The preparations beyond washing the body for burial were mostly practical and specified the arms, ankles, and jaws to be bound to prevent the body from flopping akimbo in death once rigor mortis passed and to keep the mouth from gaping open. So at least three small cloths or bindings were necessary, two for binding legs and arms and one for binding around the face. It appears that either a head covering and modesty cloth for the genitals would be used, or a shroud was used if it could be afforded. It there was a shroud, the head covering and modesty cloth would be unnecessary as the Shroud took the place of both.
In addition, Jews believed that life was in the blood. . . so it went with the body. Therefor, Jewish tradition and Law required, if possible, that everything stained with the blood of the deceased be buried with the body, unless the blood had soaked into the ground. This is another argument that the people preparing the body would have used the cloth that had been covering His face on the Cross after His death, and then also used while being carried to the tomb, would be pressed into service as one of the binding cloths. . . and would now be known as the Sudarium of Oviedo. . . it was already covered with His blood.
For this reason, some have absurdly argued that those who buried Jesus, somehow got their hands on the Roman Lancia, the three nails, and the two flagrums, (as if Pontius Pilate would have agreed to hand them over to these revolutionary cultists) and put them under the Shroud as well, and even claim to see images of them on the Shroud. It is my opinion that this is akin to seeing bunny rabbits in the clouds, a psychological phenomenon called pareidolia.
Does that help?
This whole video just fascinated me. I have worked with graphics in my life .. but this was a whole new ballgame. I was very impressed with their skills.
To see the FACE of my Savior was truly a blessing.
IIRC, the Gospel accounts said that the soldiers broke the legs of the 2 thieves to hasten their deaths, but when they came to Jesus they saw that he had already died.
Immensely. It will be interesting to watch CNN tonight (1st time in years) to present their version and see if they are following the template of the 1980's "Jesus Seminar". Thank you for sharing. This is why I like FR - every now and then someone posts some really riveting information
You are correct. The Romans either flogged and released, or they executed. Seldom both. They did not consider themselves cruel. That was overdoing it. Pontus Pilate was trying to find an out.
The Romans didn't want their crucifixion victims to die rapidly. They were examples they wanted to die slowly. Some lasted for up to a week, hanging from their nails. Some were merely roped to their crosses and lasted longer until they died from exposure and lack of water. After all nails were expensive.
Of course he had also been beaten pretty badly, which would have weakened Him.
The tradition that Jesus only received 39 lashes is not Biblical. 39 is rooted in Jewish Madrash, the body of Jewish marginalia built around the Torah. The Rabbinical exegesis had determined that the Torah required that no man should ever receive more than 40 lashes in punishment and had put that in the Madrash. 39 was traditionally all that the actual practitioners would inflict due to fear they'd lose count and accidentally go over 40 and sin. The Romans who actually administered the flogging to Jesus were under no such stricture.
A study entitled "Scourge bloodstains on the Turin Shroud: an evidence for different instruments used" by Dr. Barbara Faccini, University of Ferrara, Italy, has found that it was not just the Roman flagrum depicted above, but also the dumbbell, and other torture devices in the Roman arsenal used to flog the Man on the Shroud.
Her Analysis of the image found that just counting the wounds on legs, back, buttocks, chest, etc, but NOT counting any strikes to the sides, which are unknowable because the side images do not show on the Shroud, there are between 40 to 60 from both what the the study refers to as a type 1 two ball and three ball flagrum. In addition, there are more strikes from the dumbbell flagrum included in this count. in addition, the Shroud Man had also been beaten with numerous blows prior to the flagrum with what is referred to as budaedae, or Spanish cord, a multi stranded whip made of Ox-leather that wrapped around the body, similar to a "cat-o-nine-tails", or or more likely with the fasces lictoriae," bundles of flexible birch rods, a device design from which we get today's word fascist. Again, discounting for the sides, there are almost 170 strikes from this torture weapon which breaks the skin, while very painful, is less damaging than the flagrum which is designed to dig in and tear the skin. The total number of marks between both weapons is 220, +/-10.
Many scourging victims did not survive the ministrations of their scourgers according to Josephus. That would be why they would not scourge a person they were going to crucify, It is also the explanation why a robust carpenter, used to carrying large beams of wood, could not make it the short distance to Golgotha carrying the patibulum of His cross.
Here is a mystery to think about. The crowd cried for Pontius Pilate to free Barabbas instead of Jesus. Most people are ignorant of Barabbas. . . Barabbas' name has always been printed that way. . . but that is incorrect Jewish usage. Why?
His first name is a very common name of the era. Yeshua. The name we've been given is not as presented. "Bar" means "Son of", and "abbas" is a Jewish word that means "father".
Yeshua in our modern parlance is Jesus.
So the crowd was yelling for Pontius Pilate to free Yeshua Bar Abbas. . . Jesus, son of the Father.
WHO DID THEY WANT SAVED FROM THAT CROSS???
There is no doubt that Jesus could have saved Himself. The account says He gave up His Spirit. . . not that he died. It was voluntary.
Which Veronica's Veil?
The Veronica's Veil held by the Vatican is a Linen cloth, one-over-one weave, that holds a blobby image that may be human.
Very few inspections are recorded in modern times and there are no detailed photographs. The most detailed recorded inspection of the 20th century occurred in 1907 when Jesuit art historian Joseph Wilpert was allowed to remove two plates of glass to inspect the image. He commented that he saw only "a square piece of light coloured material, somewhat faded through age, which bear two faint rust-brown stains, connected one to the other".Source
The Manoppello Veil, held in the village of Manoppello, Italy, is I think from the in depth research i have done on it, is a self-portrait painting done by Raphael Sanzio Da Urbino, known popularly simply as Raphael.
The fact there is pigment on the threads and the documentation of letters that were sent back and forth between Raphael and Albrecht Dürer referring to painting double-sided, transparent self-portraits, its similarity to the young Raphael, and its appearance just 100 years later, gives proof that this is one of the self-portraits the two artists sent back and forth between them as they experimented with the technique of painting on Byssus and Cambric, a French fine cotton cloth, of which this veil is made. The fact that the Manoppello veil is on Cambric, developed in France in the 13th Century, is pretty much proof it is a painting and not a miraculous image of Jesus Christ.
Then there's The Holy Face of San Sylvestro, also held at the Vatican in the Matilda Chapel:
So which one are you referring to?
The rest of the six known Veronica's Veil candidates are known copies attributed to known artists.
By the way, it is my opinion that the legend of the Veronica's Veil (Veronica is an anagram for vera icon = True Image) is actually a report of the Shroud itself from when it was enclosed in a lattice work frame from the fourth century to the Ninth Century and called variously the Veronica (true image) out of which came the legend of the young woman who pressed her veil to His face on the way to the cross, the image of Edessa, or the Mandylion. At some point it was taken out of its frame and the discovery that it was the Shroud was made. . . and in 944 Gregory Referendarius, the Arch Deacon of the Hagia Sophia gave a Sermon on the arrival of the Image of Edessa, in which he refers to a a full glorious image of Our Lord with a double image with blood flowing from the side. . . and scourge marks. It can only be the Shroud. . . and the Image of Edessa is never mentioned again in history.
A member of the Crusades, Sir Robert du Clary, reports seeing the Image of Our Lord, being pulled up out of a box to "standing up" position every Sunday, while in Constantinople. . . and says it was the Burial cloth of Our Lord in the 12th Century, just before the Crusaders ransacked the city and the Shroud disappeared until surfacing in the possession of a knight whose Great, great Grand Father had been one of the crusaders in Constantinople.
Then they just wasted almost TEN MINUTES on a South African photographer's absurd Camera obscurer's hypothesis that has been falsified so many times it is absurd to have wasted the time on it. There was an agenda at work here. It was almost as if there were two different people who made this program. One who handled the first 40 minutes, and then one for the next fifteen. If I were to make a guess, given the selective one sided commentary presented, that entirely negative ten to fifteen minute "gotcha segment" would have been under the production and direction of Joe Nickell, publisher of The Skeptical Enquirer.
Let me falsify the camera obscure hypothesis:
Then, they completely sabotaged the Shroud by bringing up the now completely falsified 1988 Carbon 14 test. . . and NOT showing the peer-reviewed science that showed it had been falsified. They used mealy-mouthed description by claiming "samples" were taken from the edge from the edge of the Shroud, wording it in such a to imply that there were three separate samples, when in fact only one sample was taken and then cut in three pieces. At no point did they tell the audience that it had been proved their sample was made of a patched area of the Shroud. Whoever was doing that segment left it as a conclusion that the Shroud was a forgery miraculously created by an unknown photographic process in the 14th Century, and snidely implied the Shroud should be believed as an authentic burial cloth only by deluded true believers who really want it to be, and crackpots in denial. The segment was almost dripping with smugness.
I then think they cut back in the person who made the first portion of the program at the end. The tone of the program changed completely from the previous segment when they tossed in the Sudarium of Oviedo as a bone to the Shroud aficionados. The much older cloth with matching blood stains to add mystery to their story. As far as I know, no one has done a C-14 test on the Sudarium, but its providence is traceable without doubt to the Fifth Century.
In my view, while about 75% of this was excellent, inclusion of the C-14 and Camera Obscura segment with the way it was done, made the whole thing a sabotage hit piece, intended to leave the deliberate impression on the audience that the Shroud of Turin is a 14th Century fake.
A shot of radiation which produced a chemical change in the cloth (not on the cloth) sounds like the most plausible of scientific theories. I still say I suspect art, but not HUMAN art. It would not be fair to compare it to human art.
Strange you should say that. I attended a Shroud symposium where a top radiologist went over the Shroud images and showed that not only does it show surface images but also, in some areas, it shows the bones beneath the surface.
One of the complaints of the skeptic has been that the fingers are too long for a normal human hand. . . but the radiologist pointed out they are normal length, but what we are seeing on the Shroud are the normal phalanges of the fingers, plus the metacarpals under the back of the hand. Also visible on the Shroud are the shadow images of teeth in both the upper and lower jaws and the orbits of the eye sockets and shadows of the nasal openings in the skull behind the nose and cheek bones ridges of the skull.
It was his opinion that some radiation coming from within the body was at least partially responsible for forming the image.
You are correct. It is a practice called crucifragium. It is intended to prevent the victim from raising himself up on his legs to be able to breathe, which will hasten death due to asphyxiation. Basically without being to lift up by pressing down on the nail through the feet, the victim cannot get enough expansion space in the lungs to exchange air, due to the arms pulling the abdomen abnormally upward. CO2 builds up in the lungs and then damage to the lungs start a fluid build-up, further reducing lung capacity. Shock from the pain of broken legs also adds to the rapidity of death as well.
Thank you for sharing your insights, dear Swordmaker!
Sigh.
Read Acts 16:9.
Then keep in mind 1 John 4:1 -- which indicates there *are* obedient spirits whose advice is to be believed; and instructs how to tell the difference.
Follow the link. Read the texts of the prayers.
No idolatry there.
http://www.divinemercy.com/
John 19:33-36.
So glad I didn't waste my time and give them the benefit of the doubt.
Even the Garlascelli (sp?) effort would have made for a better anti-authenticist segment that the ridiculous Allen piece. BTW my friend, my wife and I have a reservation at the Turin Cathedral on the evening of May 18th....
Even the Garlascelli (sp?) effort would have made for a better anti-authenticist segment that the ridiculous Allen piece. BTW my friend, my wife and I have a reservation at the Turin Cathedral on the evening of May 18th....
Even the Garlascelli (sp?) effort would have made for a better anti-authenticist segment that the ridiculous Allen piece. BTW my friend, my wife and I have a reservation at the Turin Cathedral on the evening of May 18th....
The common practice when seeking to diss something is to spend the first half building it up, then when the viewer feels they are watching the work of a professional who is only interested in the truth, they tear it all down and dissmiss it as ‘sadly, a hoax’. It is common to the UFO issue when any alphabet network takes up the subject. The skepticism regarding anything UFOish is proof the manipualtion works.
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.