1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Shroud Could Date to Time of Jesus

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by dianetavegia, Jan 29, 2005.

Top Posters
Page 1 of 2
  1. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia Guest

    Shroud Could Date to Time of Jesus

    Provided By: The Associated Press
    Last Modified: 1/29/2005 4:57:15 PM


    ROME (AP) — A chemist who worked on testing of the Shroud of Turin says new analysis of the fiber indicates the cloth that some say was the burial linen of Jesus could be up to 3,000 years old.

    The analysis, by a scientist who was on the original 1978 team that was allowed to study tiny pieces of the cloth, indicates the shroud is far older than the initial findings suggesting it was probably from medieval times, and will likely be seized on by those who believe it wrapped the body of Jesus after his crucifixion.

    "I cannot disprove that this cloth was the burial shroud that was used on Jesus," Raymond N. Rogers, a retired chemist from the University of California-operated Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, said in a telephone interview Friday from his home.

    http://www.11alive.com/life/life_article.aspx?storyid=58197
     
    #1 dianetavegia, Jan 29, 2005
  2. Benfranklin403

    Benfranklin403 Guest

    This is only a tiny part of the story of the shroud. For example, three different laboratories, working independently, found an almost identical date for the shroud. I don't remember all the details but I am sure that these three labs dated the cloth as having been made much later than the time of Christ, in around 1200 A.D. That would make it about 1200 years too young. Perhaps all three labs just coincidentally agreed on the date but that is not likely is it?
     
    #2 Benfranklin403, Jan 29, 2005
  3. Ps104_33

    Ps104_33 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    If it actually was the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, what would that mean? Would I get a special blessing for touching it? If it is found to be an age that would put it at the time of Christ, would that prove that it was used in Jesus' burial?
     
    #3 Ps104_33, Jan 29, 2005
  4. Benfranklin403

    Benfranklin403 Guest

    #4 Benfranklin403, Jan 29, 2005
  5. Benfranklin403

    Benfranklin403 Guest

    The results from the C-14 dating of the shroud are as follows. This is from the published paper by P.E. Damon et.al.

    Conclusions: "The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range with at least 95% confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of AD 1260 - 1390 (rounded down/up to nearest 10 yr). These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.

    The results of radiocarbon measurements from the three laboratories on four textile samples, a total of twelve data sets, show that none of the measurements differs from its appropriate mean value by more than two standard deviations. The results for the three control samples agree well with previous radiocarbon measurements and/or historical dates."
     
    #5 Benfranklin403, Jan 29, 2005
  6. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia Guest

     
    #6 dianetavegia, Jan 29, 2005
  7. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,706
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps I have missed something in my reading, and, if so, correct me if I am wrong.
    First, it is true, isn't it, that the image on the shroud is a full-frontal view, from the head down?
    Second, and this is the key to my point here: wasn't the body wrapped (with strips)? Also, was not His head covered with a separate "handkerchief?" (John 20:7)
    There are still two possibilities that could make the shoud authentic, from a scriptual point of view.
    A cloth was laid down before the wrapping, or, it was, supposedly, a covering over the the outside.
    This is what I am having trouble with.
     
    #7 Watchman, Jan 29, 2005
  8. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia Guest

    The Shroud and Other "Cloths" Used in Jesus' Burial

    Students new to the study to the Shroud are sometimes confused by apparent inconsistencies in the description of Jesus' burial cloth or cloths. In truth, the Bible - when read in Greek - uses a variety of terms to describe them.

    The Synoptic Gospels use the word sindon in the singular to designate the Shroud (Matt. 27:59; Mk. 15:46 (twice); Lk. 23:53). Sindon appears only six times in all of the New Testament. In an anecdote unique to Mark, it is used twice in 14: 51-52 to describe the linen cloth left by an unnamed young man when he fled naked from the Garden of Gethsemane.

    In Jn. 19:40, the Fourth Gospeller uses the word othonia [Gk.] (plural) to describe the linen cloths used in the Burial. Othonia, a word of uncertain meaning, but probably best translated as a generic plural for grave clothes. The same word is used by Luke or his scribe in Lk.24:12 what had previously been described as the sindon in Lk. 23:53. Note: vs. l2 (But Peter rose and ran to the tomb, stooping and looking in, he saw the linen cloths (plural) by themselves; and he went home wondering what happened.) does not appear in the most ancient manuscripts, but is added by later ancient authorities.

    Next we discover (keirias) [Gk.] translated by the RSV as bandages in Jn. 11:44's description of the raising of Lazarus. In actuality, linen strips used to bind the wrists and ankles and probably also used on the outside at the neck, waist and ankles to secure the Shroud to the body.

    Finally we come to the word sudarion [Gk.] which is found in the canonical texts solely in John (11:44. 20:7) and Luke (l9:20; Acts l9:12). It is translated by the RSV as "the napkin which had been on his head" (Jn. 20:7) and earlier in 11:44 as the cloth with which Lazarus' face was wrapped. Scholars like the late Dr. John A.T Robinson ( "The Shroud of Turin and the Grave Cloths of the Gospels") and J.N. Sanders regard it as a chin band going around the face/head for the purpose of keeping the corpse's jaws closed. Certainly this appears to be the intent of the artist who drew the manuscript illustration for the Hungarian Pray mss, Fol. 27v, Budapest of 1192-95 which clearly illustrates that the Shroud's full length image(s) were known in the 12th century. (See Ian Wilson, 1986, The Mysterious Shroud, Garden City, NY; Doubleday & Company, p.115. See also Bercovits, I. 1969, Dublin: Irish University Press. Illuminated Manuscripts in Hungary, pl. III.) .

    http://www.shroud.com/faq.htm#2
     
    #8 dianetavegia, Jan 29, 2005
  9. Watchman

    Watchman New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,706
    Likes Received:
    0
    Diane,
    Seven minutes? You must have been answering my questions while I was writing, you're good!
    You have provided viable explanations, but still, can we be dogmatic here?
    Still, how DID the image get on there? If it is a forgery someone pulled off one of the best "flim-flams" in the history of the planet!
     
    #9 Watchman, Jan 29, 2005
  10. donnA

    donnA Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    A little off to be the actual burial cloth of Jesus, isn't it.
    People are looking for something to worship, without God.
     
    #10 donnA, Jan 29, 2005
  11. Ben W

    Ben W Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,883
    Likes Received:
    6
    It could very well be genuine, yet is it important if it is? How about if there really is a Holy Grail. There is no veneration in Christianity of objects or dead saints. Why was the burial site of Moses hidden in the book of Jude? (Jude 9) - Maybe it is because we are not to venerate things like that.
     
    #11 Ben W, Jan 30, 2005
  12. Soulman

    Soulman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is it real? I also heard there was a new way of dating the shroud that was much more accurate than carbon dating. Supposedly it comes into the range of possibly being authentic.

    It is in the hands of the Catholic church and is an object of worship.Although we know where Noah's ark is, we can't get to it. The Ark of the Covenant is thought to be in a pagan temple in Ethiopia. Can't get to it.

    I believe God would not want these precious artifacts to become the objects of idolotry. Same with the shroud. Just my opinion.
     
    #12 Soulman, Jan 30, 2005
  13. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Maybe this is why God chose for us not to have any of the original writings of Scripture, at least up to this time...He does NOT want us to make icons outta physical things possibly used by Jesus.

    As for the ark, rev.11:19 tells us it's in the HEAVENLY Temple. This is consistent with Jesus' teaching that the law wasn't to be done away with, but was to be FULFILLED. Just as old laws banning horse racing on 5th Ave. NYC are still "on the books", God's law is still in the ark.
     
    #13 robycop3, Jan 30, 2005
  14. WallyGator

    WallyGator New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    4,180
    Likes Received:
    0
    I view this as an interesting development and will reserve my opinion for now. One way or another, Jesus Christ is still Lord and Savior in my life.
     
    #14 WallyGator, Jan 30, 2005
  15. Mommyperson

    Mommyperson New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    565
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real or not..who cares? It it's nothing more than an object.
    To some it's sadly an object to worship,
    but as for me and my house, we will worship the Lord.
    I have a savior Who's alive..the shroud isn't.


    But this is certainly an interesting topic to read.
     
    #15 Mommyperson, Jan 30, 2005
  16. Benfranklin403

    Benfranklin403 Guest

    "The American chemist said he decided to analyze the amount of vanillin, a chemical compound that is present in linen from the flax fibers used to weave it. Vanillin slowly disappears from the fiber over time at a calculated rate, he said."

    The above is not an accepted or recognized dating method.
     
    #16 Benfranklin403, Jan 30, 2005
  17. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia Guest

    What is amazing to me is that this image, if it is from Jesus, could prove the resurrection. I think of the mighty power, amazing event that pulled the body of our Savior right through his own grave clothes.

    Of course, like Jesus said to Thomas,
     
    #17 dianetavegia, Jan 30, 2005
  18. don 3426

    don 3426 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jesus' resurection has already been proven in the Bible. How does the fact that a peice of cloth from jesus' time prove that it was ever in contact with him. There is no real proof of were he was buried or exicuted. This cloth can be a thing to distract us from saving others and make us dwell on what a piece of cloth will do.
     
    #18 don 3426, Jan 30, 2005
  19. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    I seriously doubt that this is a burial shroud somehow impressed with a "photograph" of Christ. Over and over it has been declared a fake and over and over again someone comes up with a reason why it "might" be real".

    I have 100% absolute proof of the resurrection - "He is risen, he is not here." My Bible is MUCH more trustworthy than a scrap of cloth.
     
    #19 NaasPreacher (C4K), Jan 31, 2005
  20. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    from http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/package.jsp?name=fte/shroudofturin/shroudofturin

    Shroud of Turin Enigma Solved

    In 1988, scientists tested faith. Specifically, they conducted three tests on the Shroud of Turin, believed by the faithful to be the burial cloth of the crucified Jesus of Nazareth, to determine its age.

    The Carbon-14 tests, performed independently at three different radiocarbon labs, dated the cloth between 1260 and 1390 AD. The conclusion: The Shroud couldn't be Jesus' burial cloth. In fact, the British Museum, which coordinated the testing, branded it "a hoax."

    Or were those three tests wrong?

    Scientists with The American Shroud of Turin Association for Research have now shown that the 1988 Carbon-14 tests on the Shroud of Turin were not performed on the original burial cloth, but rather on a rewoven shroud patch. That means the tests created an erroneous date for the actual age of the Shroud.

    What is the Shroud of Turin? It is a large piece of linen cloth that shows the faint full-body image of a blood-covered man on its surface. Many believe it was the burial cloth in which Jesus was wrapped after he was crucified.

    "Now conclusive evidence, gathered over the past two years, proves that the sample used to date the Shroud was actually taken from an expertly-done rewoven patch," AMSTAR President, Tom D'Muhala, said in a news release announcing the findings. "Chemical testing indicates that the linen Shroud is actually very old--much older than the published 1988 radiocarbon date."

    Chemist Raymond Rogers, a fellow of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico who conducted the latest testing, said, "As unlikely as it seems, the sample used to test the age of the Shroud of Turin in 1988 was taken from a rewoven area of the Shroud. Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin which is currently housed at The Turin Cathedral in Italy. The radiocarbon sample has completely different chemical properties than the main part of the shroud relic," explains Rogers. "The sample tested was dyed using technology that began to appear in Italy about the time the Crusaders' last bastion fell to the Mameluke Turks in AD 1291. The radiocarbon sample cannot be older than about AD 1290, agreeing with the age determined in 1988. However, the Shroud itself is actually much older."

    Rogers insists the radiocarbon sample was cut from a medieval patch and is totally different in composition from the main part of the Shroud of Turin. Based on his findings, which have been published in Thermochimica Acta, a chemistry peer reviewed scientific journal, the American Shroud of Turin Association for Research declares that the 1988 tests have been refuted.

    The age of the Shroud of Turin is still to be determined.
     
    #20 gb93433, Jan 31, 2005
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 2
Loading...