Shroud Of Turin Real? New Research Dates Relic To 1st Century, Time Of Jesus Christ

reply to post by adjensen


All elaborate scientific theories of earthquakes and radiation aside - I have one niggling question that I just cannot let go....When the tomb was opened after Jesus' ressurection, it was said to be empty. Empty would mean that there was no shroud of Turin present. How did this dubious piece of cloth earn its reputation? Who brought it into the public's attention and why has this simpe and logical approach not been addressed before? Anyone?

reply to post by taketheredpill


"Empty" didn't mean that the tomb was empty, and scripture says that the burial cloths were present.

So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. Then Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen. (John 20:3-7 NIV)

charles1952
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

Dear boymonkey74,

I've just had a unique experience. I'll make one response to your question about the Shroud's weave, then stop.

ANYONE WHO CARES ABOUT THE SHROUD QUESTION, GO TO THIS LINK:
www.historian.net...
DON'T EVEN TALK ABOUT IT UNTIL YOU DO.

This article was published in 3 parts in The Glyph, the journal of The Archaeological Institute of America, San Diego, Vol 1, No. 10 (Sept 1997); No. 11 (Dec 1977); No. 12 (March 1998). This is great stuff.

Now, about your weave question. From the article:

The shroud is a herringbone twill with a 3:1 weave, of probably 1st century Syrian design. The flax fibrils contain entwisted cotton fibrils from a previous work of the loom. The cotton is Gossypium herbaceum, a Middle Eastern species not found in Europe.

First Century?

Please, seriously, if you care about science and the Shroud go here. It's not a religious site and it doesn't make a religious argument. Just go there, everybody.

With respect,
Charles1952

Your link is very deceiving.

For one thing, there is no dicussion over carbon dating calibration. Because Carbon 14 has never remained in consistent quantities in the atmosphere, any dates that are initially given to an object have a plus/minus 1950 years to it. So something claiming to be from the 1st century could also come from any of the previous or following 19 centuries because of uncalibrated carbon dating. Unless there is some dendrochronology of that time period to go along with it, it is impossible to determine through carbon dating the exact date the shroud was used.

reply to post by adjensen


fair enough. I stand corrected. However, empty should mean empty.

reply to post by taketheredpill


I suspect that the term "empty" was used to simply indicate that the person who had been buried in there, three days prior, was no longer in the tomb.