Could the Shroud of Turin verify the supposed remains of Jesus?

TheComte,I have heard this theory somewhere...It may have been from Hiram's Key or somewhere... I don't think that what you suggest is out of the question actually.

Well if the shroud of Turin is bonafide wouldn't Jesus still be buried in it? "IF" those new found tombs are "real" in fact Jesus would still have the wrappings on wouldn't he? So the shroud may be of no importance at all. So one item would disprove the other, correct? I don't see how both can be true unless the grave was robbed and Jesus unwrapped.

Originally posted by favouriteslave
Well if the shroud of Turin is bonafide wouldn't Jesus still be buried in it?

nope, tombs are robbed all the time
they tend to be easy to spot, have minimal guards present, and they aren't normally that hard to break in to

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
TheComte,I have heard this theory somewhere...It may have been from Hiram's Key or somewhere... I don't think that what you suggest is out of the question actually.

Yes, I read the Hiram key also and that was part of their theory about the shroud owner.

if that was a hastely draped over a body burial cloth
it sure came out impeccibly crisp & defined.

by hastily draped, i'm referring to the lateness of the day...
it was upmost important that the Jesus body had to be cleansed anointed & wrapped All Before Sundown...
but early enough in the day for the Jews who carried the corpse
and did the quick funeral rites, to get to their homes before sundown too!
Its Jewish Law....& i'm sure that the 'wrapping' had a ritualized way of being done, according to those same Laws.

All of which collectively bring serious doubt that this was the Jesus burial cloth.

think also that another 2 days had to pass with the corpse beneath the shroud (and evidently un-wrapped) as the image on the shroud attests.
Then, a re-animated Jesus would have wanted an icon or religious relic to survive? so him and the angels casually left the shroud there for the women who came to the tomb the next day (i guess to wail & wrent their garments) to find and secret away? even when the guards who were stationed there to disuade pilgrimages, and had no scraps or evidence of the missing corpse to show their superiors in a desperate defense posturing....just left the shroud laying there for the taking??

dumb guards!!! in the days earlier other soldiers were casting lots for the garments of the "INRI'(king of the jews) as they were keepsakes or might have value to followers or as curosity to others??


oops.........the end

there is a very long thread on this topic from a year or so ago but I can't find it with the search at the moment.

anyway, if you're really interested, there is an amazing book with an incredible amount of detail about the whole shroud carbon-dating fiasco from a guy who was actually present during the process of taking the samples from the shroud:
I've looked - I can't find the thread and I can't find my copy of the book (I may have loaned it out).

Anyway, there is very strong evidence that suggests that the 3 labs that were contracted to do the independent carbon dating of the very small samples were actually given samples that did NOT come from the shroud. It is an intriguing tale because the whole complex business about proving this once and for all was all done with a variety of witnesses present AND it was video-taped....until, it came time to put the sample fibers into the containers and then that was done in a private chamber with no witnesses other than the Vatican's own guys.

Turns out the the fibers actually match almost perfectly with the lining of a medieval priest's vestment that happens to be in a Vatican museum.

So, it's safe to say that all the carbon-dating that was done on the shroud fibers was quite likely a total fraud though I still can't understand their motive. Anyway, the actual shroud itself probably has never been subjected to carbon-dating and the "blood" stains have never been subjected to any scientific testing.

On the whole, we're no better off than we've ever been in terms of the speculation of the authenticity of the shroud. Believe what you want to believe because the Vatican is never going to let anyone actually prove anything about it. It remains, shrouded in mystery!

Wait, youre saying the Vatican covered up the fact that the shroud is real? Yeah that makes sense considering they resisted testing for so long because they didnt want to find out is wasnt real.

Does anyone have any links to how exactly the Jews at the time buried their dead? I remember reading somewhere years ago (can't remember where unfortunately) that they wrapped their dead in rolls of linen, like bandages. This would make the Turin shroud a fake.

Tests on the Shroud have been conflicting. Carbon dating places the age at about 700-400 years old. Pollen grain dating (from pollen found on the Shroud) puts the age at nearly 2000 years. These pollen grains are further said to be from flora found (only?) in Palestine.

The bloodstains have been confirmed to be blood -- AB Negative, which, ironically is the same as the blood found on the alleged remnants of the Crown of Thorns -- AB Negative.

How could the image on the Shroud be that of DeMolay when he was burned at the stake? The pierced extremeties and the facial detail, beard, etc. seem too intact if he was burned at the stake.

Originally posted by jimboman
Does anyone have any links to how exactly the Jews at the time buried their dead? I remember reading somewhere years ago (can't remember where unfortunately) that they wrapped their dead in rolls of linen, like bandages. This would make the Turin shroud a fake.

Here are:

Preparing the body -- Taharah
There are three major stages to preparing the body for burial: washing (rechitsah), ritual purification (taharah), and dressing (halbashah). The term taharah is used to refer both to the overall process of burial preparation, and to the specific step of ritual purification. (Interestingly, the term means "purity" in Arabic. See Taharah.)

Here is the general sequence of steps for performing taharah. Blessings, prayers (tefillot) and readings from Torah, Psalms and other Jewish scripture are recited at several points:

The coffin (aron) is prepared by removing any linings or other embellishments. A sheet (sovev) is laid into the coffin. If the person wore a prayer shawl (tallit) during their life, one is laid in the coffin for wrapping the body once it is place there. One corner fringe (tzitzit) is removed from the shawl to signify that it will no longer be used for prayer in life.
The dead person (met if male, or metah if female) is slowly uncovered. (They have been covered with a sheet awaiting taharah.)
The body is carefully washed. As all blood must be buried along with the deceased, any open bleeding is stopped. The body is thoroughly cleaned of dirt, body fluids and solids, and anything else that may be on the skin. All jewelry is removed.
The met/metah is purified with running water, either by immersion in a mikvah or by pouring a continuous stream in a prescribed manner.
The body is dried.
The body is dressed in traditional burial clothing (tachrichim). A sash (avnet) is wrapped around the clothing and tied with a knot that forms the Hebrew letter "shin", representing one of the names of G_d.
The body is then lifted into the coffin and wrapped in the prayer shawl and sheet. Earth from Israel (afar) is placed over various parts of the body and sprinkled in the coffin.
The coffin is closed.
Once the coffin is closed, the chevra then asks for forgiveness from the met/metah for any thing that they may have done to offend them or not show proper respect during the taharah. Guards or watchers (shomrim) sit with the coffin until it is taken for burial. It is traditional to recite Psalms (tehillim) during this time.

Once the body is dressed, the coffin is sealed. Unlike other religions, in Judaism there is traditionally no viewing of the body, and no "open casket" at the funeral, though the immediate family is allowed a visitation right prior to the coffin being sealed to pay their final respects to the deceased. In Israel many do not use caskets at all, but rather wrap the body in thicker white shrouds covered on the outside by a tallit.
en.wikipedia.org...--_Tahar ah

Originally posted by favouriteslave
Well if the shroud of Turin is bonafide wouldn't Jesus still be buried in it? "IF" those new found tombs are "real" in fact Jesus would still have the wrappings on wouldn't he?

Umm, no. The idea is that during the transfiguration, the light and heat were so intense that it left an image of Christ on the shroud. So,no, his body would not still be there.


[edit on 27-2-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Marg mentioned the image from Edessa so here it is. This image is from 560AD. It was painted six years after a shroud was found hidden in the city walls. There is speculation that it is the same as the Shroud of Turin. Here is a brief history of how that may have came to be:

History

That dude looks like a friend of mine! Besides, it's too much a european looking guy to be Jesus. He wasn't aryan. If anything he had more of an arabian appearance.

Why all this adherance to relics anyway? Isn't Christianity all about faith? I don't need to see a pile of bones or a burial shroud to believe in Jesus because I've got his spirit living in me.

[edit on 27/2/07 by jimboman]

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
For me, the image on the shroud looks a bit European. To me, the image is just too modern... In other words, it comes too close to coinciding with paintings and such that we see of Jesus. All of which make him look very Europeanish. I am not convinced that it is necessarily inauthentic,but I don't know if it's authentic either.

[edit on 26-2-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Various cultures throughout the world depict Jesus in a manner which they could readily identify with -- Ethiopian Christians traditionally depict Him as being African; Far-Eastern Asian Christians depict Him as being Asian (Japanese, Chinese, etc.).

Perhaps the most well-known examples in America are from Mormon literature and art where Jesus is depicted as being lily-white, with bright blue eyes and shimmering blonde hair.

I'm not necessarily saying any of these depictions are particularly bad, and I understand the reasons for doing so, but just that they are not accurate -- Jesus was of Semitic stock, and his hair and complexion was likely similar to the modern day Jews and Arabs.

Originally posted by Zhenyghi
How could the image on the Shroud be that of DeMolay when he was burned at the stake? The pierced extremeties and the facial detail, beard, etc. seem too intact if he was burned at the stake.

He was tortured first. The authors speculate that after being tortured he was covered in a shroud, not quite dead. Lactic acid that had built up in his muscles came out in sweat and formed the images on the shroud. He was only burned later after he recovered from his torture injuries.

Originally posted by Zhenyghi
I'm not necessarily saying any of these depictions are particularly bad, and I understand the reasons for doing so, but just that they are not accurate -- Jesus was of Semitic stock, and his hair and complexion was likely similar to the modern day Jews and Arabs.

Well, I don't know so much about Jesus looking like a modern Jew because of the European influence, but I suspect he'd look a lot like a modern arab. I hate to say it, but Jesus probably looked something similar to Osama Bin Laden, not as tall though. Bin Laden stands about 6'4"

Originally posted by Zhenyghi

The bloodstains have been confirmed to be blood -- AB Negative, which, ironically is the same as the blood found on the alleged remnants of the Crown of Thorns -- AB Negative.

do you have any sources on this blood test? My best information is that no one has ever been allowed access to the areas reputed to be blood stains. I'd love to read about this further testing.

Geesh, I thought my days of giving resources were over with my college days...

I don't make it a habit of taking notes on every tidbit of information I read, or hear in lecture; its mostly locked away somewhere in the deep recesses of my brain....but, to satisfy your request, I did a simple Google search and came up with this from Wikipedia:

Shroud of Turn
Blood Stains
"...Alan Adler, a chemist specializing in analysis of porphyrins, identified the reddish stains as type AB blood."

The Wikipedia article also mentions the pollen grain dating which I noted here and elsewhere.

I trust this will satisfy you. If not, feel free to search on your own.

Thanks! I was not familiar with Adler's work. Of course, the entry in Wikipedia is not fully supported by the other sites that I found in other searches using the "clues" you gave. I have read quite a bit about the shroud and the continuing controveries but it has been many years since I delved into all of this. Still, I leaned more than I knew so, thanks!

Of course, I already knew about the pollen stuff.

This is indeed a curious piece of folklore!

I cannot yet accept the authenticity of the relic stories because there are still far too many unanswered questions but this is truly something very old that we cannot yet fully explain so I will not make any statement that the relic stories are impossible.

[edit on 1-3-2007 by Al Davison]

Originally posted by Myrtales Instinct
Personally, I don't think the Shroud is a relic from Christ. It looks like Leonardo to me. His likeness and his work.

I am very surprised that they might have found actual blood on the shroud. I believe in the theory that this is Leonardo, an early experiment in art or even photography.

It never made sense to me that this might be a real burial shroud belonging to anyone. If a cloth were wrapped around a body, the resulting image would not be in such neat proportion once the cloth was laid out flat. The image should be skewed somewhat.

Just try to wrap a cloth around a somewhat circular object without wrinkling it anywhere. You end up with folds in the fabric and any image that resulted would have these folds in evidence.

Also, why would only the front of the person be reflected on the shroud? If a cloth were wrapped all the way around someone, why wouldn't there be an image of the person's back on the cloth?

If on the other hand, the cloth was not wrapped around a body, but just layed over it, how would the resulting image show (in such perfect proportion) the sides of the head?