Shroud from the time of Jesus

[shunyadragon]

Aren't you aware there was a fire that would have infused the fabric with more recent carbon? And are you not aware of the pollen evidence that the Shroud comes from the Middle East 2000 years ago?
I'm not Roman Catholic any more, so I have no axe to grind, but I was quite impressed with Wilson's book about the earlier incarnation of the Shroud as the Mandylion known in the East and particularly as from Edessa before the 400's.

I believe the pollen evidence just shows the place of origin and cannot be used to date the shroud as you asserted above.

[Adam]

I believe the pollen evidence just shows the place of origin and cannot be used to date the shroud as you asserted above.

I don't have it that clearly in my memory after these many years, but as I recall, the pollen evidence along with the type of linen dated it back far enough.

[shunyadragon]

I don't have it that clearly in my memory after these many years, but as I recall, the pollen evidence along with the type of linen dated it back far enough.

I have reviewed the claims for this, and found them insufficient. The evidence only shows that pollen from plants, like the thistle, may come from the Middle East area were present on the cloth. This only gives the location source of the cloth as Middle Eastern and not date. There are no plant pollens described that could be unique to the time Jesus lived.

The following source gives an assessment of the pollen evidence and the controversy of some of the conclusions.

Note that one authority in the reference stated that based on the pollen evidence the shroud 'could' have originated from the time and place of Jesus. This type of statement is often than taken by the optimist believer as the evidence indicates that the cloth 'did' come from the time and place of Jesus, and as a result some articles later falsely interpreted this as you indicated.

http://www.shroudstory.com/pollen.htm

It was up to Dr. Avinoam Danin, a botany professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Dr. Uri Baruch, a pollen specialist at the Israel Antiquities Authority, to confirm and expand on Frei's work. In a recent conference of the Missouri Botanical Society in St Louis, Missouri, Danin, speaking about the pollen evidence and floral images found on the Shroud, reported that "In the light of our findings, it is highly probable that the shroud did in fact come from this part [the Jerusalem area] of the world."

Professor Avinoam Danin of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem said an examination of pollen traces and floral imprints suggested that they could only have come from plants growing in a restricted area around Jerusalem and could date back to Jesus's time.

© source where applicable

[Adam]

Note that one authority in the reference stated that based on the pollen evidence the shroud 'could' have originated from the time and place of Jesus. This type of statement is often than taken by the optimist believer as the evidence indicates that the cloth 'did' come from the time and place of Jesus, and as a result some articles later falsely interpreted this as you indicated.

http://www.shroudstory.com/pollen.htm

It was up to Dr. Avinoam Danin, a botany professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Dr. Uri Baruch, a pollen specialist at the Israel Antiquities Authority, to confirm and expand on Frei's work. In a recent conference of the Missouri Botanical Society in St Louis, Missouri, Danin, speaking about the pollen evidence and floral images found on the Shroud, reported that "In the light of our findings, it is highly probable that the shroud did in fact come from this part [the Jerusalem area] of the world."

Professor Avinoam Danin of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem said an examination of pollen traces and floral imprints suggested that they could only have come from plants growing in a restricted area around Jerusalem and could date back to Jesus's time.

© source where applicable

Thank you, Shunya,
For that excellent link.
I had not been aware that the Sudarium of Oviedo had likewise been dated to the First Century. In fact I had never heard the Sudarium mentioned by anyone except traditionalist Roman Catholics.

[KBertsche]

There are all kinds of reasons the carbon dating was flawed. I believe in the Shroud as Jesus's.

As Leonhard said, contamination doesn't work as an explanation. Do the math. For a 2000 yr-old sample to come out at 1000 would require about an equal amount of contamination carbon as original material, and would require that this remain after acid and base washes of the sample. This is not credible. The samples that were dated really are Medieval.

[rogue06]

As Leonhard said, contamination doesn't work as an explanation. Do the math. For a 2000 yr-old sample to come out at 1000 would require about an equal amount of contamination carbon as original material, and would require that this remain after acid and base washes of the sample. This is not credible. The samples that were dated really are Medieval.

The late Dr. Walter McCrone (who worked on the shroud as well as many other forensic cases) expressed it this way:

A weight of 20th century carbon equaling nearly two times the weight of the Shroud carbon itself would be required to change a 1st century date to the 14th century.

[yo lunch]

So why did it have an image of His face when the Bible says His face was wrapped separately by a handkerchief?

May I have the book, chapter and verse for the handkerchief thing?

Thanks,

Yo Lunch

[rogue06]

May I have the book, chapter and verse for the handkerchief thing?

Thanks,

Yo Lunch

John 20:7

And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

Will that do?

[yo lunch]

John 20:7

And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

Will that do?

Thanks, I thought it was a handkerchief though. However, one wonders just how they knew where it adorned, if it ever did, the body of Jesus? After all, it was found near and not on Jesus.

[technomage]

Thanks, I thought it was a handkerchief though. However, one wonders just how they knew where it adorned, if it ever did, the body of Jesus?

Jewish burial customs at that time were consistent enough that anyone familiar with the customs would know how the body was cared for after death.

[rogue06]

Thanks, I thought it was a handkerchief though. However, one wonders just how they knew where it adorned, if it ever did, the body of Jesus?

Well, the text clearly states that he was wrapped and buried in the "manner of the Jews is to bury" (John 19:40), and if that was the manner they used...

[yo lunch]

Well, the text clearly states that he was wrapped and buried in the "manner of the Jews is to bury" (John 19:40), and if that was the manner they used...

I must plead complete ignorance on the topic. thanks.

[yo lunch]

Well, the text clearly states that he was wrapped and buried in the "manner of the Jews is to bury" (John 19:40), and if that was the manner they used...

Care to elucidate? Just what was the manner and custom of burial garb?

[Rapalyea]

Hi,

I have been interested in these subjects a long time and became tired of all the basic missinformation. Specifically:

1) Carbon dating has conclusively proven the shroud is midieval in origin.
2) The image has been conclusively proven to be Red Ochre in composition.

I especially like the second claim. The one and only source I have ever found for this claim is McCrone. Even his own lab assistants demure. http://www.shroudofturin4journalists.com/ The guy blew off numerous STURP confrences, failed to return sample slides until someone actual went to Chicago and got them. For details on paint, blood, McCrone etc [See Report On The Shroud Of Turin - Heller 1983 pages 167-192.]

From the official STURP REPORT: "No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image... We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin." http://www.shroud.com/78conclu.htm

The C14 results were a scandal, IMHO. I have been convinced not to attribute venality to those who cut the sample. That leaves incompetance of a monumental and incomprehesible scale. Apparently they did not even consult with the STURP team. A basic reference to this and many other controversies see http://www.shroudofturin4journalists.com/

I have spent the last many days researching a couple of other salient controversies. First, the coin on the eyes. I don't know what to make of this however. Larger images seem to show 'bug' eyes. Whanger http://www.youtube.com/user/shrouden.../0/8Jyd7kwzO08 claims to have identified a misspelled inscription of a Pilate Lepton over the right eye, and another lepton on the left. Fontinelle claims Leptons, but differently from Whanger. http://holyshroudguild.org/media/SHROUD$20COINS$20DATING$20BY$20IMAGE$20EXTRACTION.pdf

My own examination of the enhanced images seems to show a Lituus clearly visible in Fontinelles image. The lituus looks like a shepherd hook and is distinctive to Pilate Leptons of LIZ and LIS and LIH vintage [AD 30,31,and 32 respectively]. I am still skeptical, however, because I do not have access to the high resolution imaging and polarization techniques mentioned. However, ANY lituus, in and of itself, would be strong evidence....

The recent 'Death Cirtificate" is what led me, through google, to this site. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndGnEGCJuaA Apparently it has been discussed elsewhere in the forums. The cirtificate claim is especially interesting because letter images have been deduced for decades. In addition, the purported images, unlike the tiny lepton coins, are very large. In fact, the image purporting NAZAREAN, is probably nearly a foot long and two inches wide.

This word is important for several reasons, not just the obvious. Jesus is reported to be a Nazarean in the New Testament, I believe, not because he was from Nazareth, a town that may not have actually existed as such at the time, but because he was of the Nazarean 'philosophy'. I have not researched this last item yet, but it would be an interesting development. http://shroudofturin.wordpress.com/2.../#comment-1244

This is a link to a large presentation of the Certificate. It only includes the the shroud image with the words over written. The YouTube video, by contrast, includes an enhanced image and the overlay presented separately, one above the other. That section of the film clip is only on screen a few seconds. I paused the presentation and copied the two images to my own files.

Cheers!
David

[Rapalyea]

FROM RAPALYEA - I did not find an edit button to include the last URL referenced: It includes a large photo presentation and numbered interpretation.