Shroud of Turin stirs new controversy

[Michie]

A Colorado couple researching the shroud dispute radiocarbon dating of the alleged burial cloth of Jesus, and Oxford has agreed to help them reexamine the findings.

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO. --

The tie that binds John and Rebecca Jackson is about 4 feet by 14 feet, woven of herringbone twill linen. It once led to their romance; years later, it still dominates their thoughts and fills their conversations.

It brought Rebecca, an Orthodox Jew, to the Catholic Church; it led John to suspend himself from an 8-foot-tall cross to study how blood might have stained the cloth. Together, the two have committed to memory every crease, scorch mark and unexplained stain in their years-long pursuit of the mystery

Is the Shroud of Turin -- which allegedly bears the image of a crucifixion victim -- the burial cloth of Jesus

In 1988, science seemed to put that question to rest.

Radiocarbon dating by three separate laboratories showed that the shroud originated in the Middle Ages, leaving the "shroud crowd" reeling. Shroud skeptics responded, "We told you so." The Catholic Church admitted that it could not be authentic. Many scientists backed away.

But John Jackson, one of the shroud's most prominent researchers, was among those who insisted that the results made no sense. Too much else about the shroud, they said, including characteristics of the cloth and details in the image, suggested that it was much older.

Continued- http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-turin17-2008aug17,0,3478153.story

 

[krstlros]

Interesting.

 

[AMDG]

Yes. Very interesting. And now we we probably hear more about this:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/665141/the_sudarium_of_oviedo_proving_the.html?cat=34

 

[Michie]

Colorado Springs, Aug 19, 2008 / 03:00 am (CNA).- The Shroud of Turin Center in Colorado Springs is preparing linen samples similar to the materials used in the Shroud of Turin in an attempt to determine whether or not the carbon dating tests of the shroud could have been skewed by contamination from atmospheric carbon monoxide.

The Shroud of Turin is considered by some to bear an image of the face of Jesus Christ. Made of herring bone linen, the shroud has dimensions of about 4 feet by 14 feet. It bears faint brown discolorations forming the negative image of a man. Its positive image, revealed by modern photography, shows the outline of a bearded man.

Skeptics contend that the shroud is a medieval forgery.

Continued- http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13561

 

[WarriorAngel]

How does someone forge blood stains that carbon tested to about 33 AD?

I think this article lacks alot of information....
like all the studies done but no one comments on....

The image is not paint, it is scorched marks from the same sort you would get from taking a picture...and the negative effect that results.

The 80's test results on the cloth was taken from a piece of the cloth that was sewed on after a fire...in the middle ages.
And the CC never said it was not authentic. They wouldnt be holding onto a forgery and comparing the blood of Lanciano's Eucharistic miracle if they thot it was a fake or forgery.

But LA times isnt exactly a religious paper.

 

[WarriorAngel]

O, and a Jewish scientist found pollen that has been extinct since the time of Jesus - on the Shroud.

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

I dunno--what difference does it make if it's authentic or a fake???

 

[Michie]

History.

Education that comes from studying any artifact.

Thats like saying what difference does it make if the dead sea scrolls are real or any artifact that we use to display in a museum to understand the past. Authenticity promotes understanding. Fakes do not.

Some may use it as edification for faith regardless but there are a great number of people that would like to definitively unravel the mystery of the shroud one way or the other.

*shrug*

 

[JoabAnias]

Wow, wiki has a lot on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin

Science meets religion.

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

History.

Education that comes from studying any artifact.

Thats like saying what difference does it make if the dead sea scrolls are real or any artifact that we use to display in a museum to understand the past. Authenticity promotes understanding. Fakes do not.

Some may use it as edification for faith regardless but there are a great number of people that would like to definitively unravel the mystery of the shroud one way or the other.

*shrug*

The Dead Sea Scrolls have actual historical relevance, you know containing writing and all...the Shroud is just a mere curiosity. Even if the Shroud is authentic, we already know how people of Jesus' time were entombed and enshrouded. It's just like another shard of pottery from a civilisation where entire pots and vessels have been found. And just like those shards- there will never be some full understanding of exactly whom the Shroud belonged to or it's origin or how it fit in with the rest of the time period--whether from Jesus' time or the Middle Ages.

Science is never going to prove who Jesus is/was...it's called faith for a reason. Some people tend towards thinking that if science could just prove that Jesus was/is real that there would be no obstacles to faith. When science is used to see things a certain way, with a particular aim in mind, science can be used to support nearly any theory if it's twisted enough.

From a faith perspective - who cares?? We have the real Jesus each and every day in each and every Catholic Church throughout the entire world. But of course, that doesn't make headlines.

 

[Michie]

The Dead Sea Scrolls have actual historical relevance, you know containing writing and all...the Shroud is just a mere curiosity.

I disagree. It's more than a curiosity. We do not know all there is to know today concerning historical research on this piece & carbon dating. The technology is an ever growing field. There are all sorts of things that have historical relevance that have no writing at all. Bones, fabrics, etc. You can't honestly believe that objects with no writing present no historical relevance???

Even if the Shroud is authentic, we already know how people of Jesus' time were entombed and enshrouded. It's just like another shard of pottery from a civilisation where entire pots and vessels have been found. And just like those shards- there will never be some full understanding of exactly whom the Shroud belonged to or it's origin or how it fit in with the rest of the time period--whether from Jesus' time or the Middle Ages.

We know some of what was the norm back in Jesus' time. There are all sorts of variables. When it comes to archaelogy we never fully know the whole story. What we thought was definite a few years ago can just as quickly change tomorrow. Archaelogical knowledge & facts change constantly as archaelogical history shows over & over again. It's not so much who the shroud belonged to but tracing it back to the furthest possible date. Studying the plants & spices used for burial. It presents a much bigger picture than a pottery shard or a specific person it belonged to.

Science is never going to prove who Jesus is/was...it's called faith for a reason. Some people tend towards thinking that if science could just prove that Jesus was/is real that there would be no obstacles to faith. When science is used to see things a certain way, with a particular aim in mind, science can be used to support nearly any theory if it's twisted enough.

I'm personally not seeing it that way. I don't expect conclusive evidence as to whom it belonged to or if it belonged to Jesus. I look at it as an artifact with a very interesting history. Much of which we do not know. You are right from a faith perspective but from an archaelogical perspective I think you are dead wrong.

From a faith perspective - who cares?? We have the real Jesus each and every day in each and every Catholic Church throughout the entire world. But of course, that doesn't make headlines.

Again, I look at this as more multifaceted than you are presenting it. It does not effect my faith either way. But being an archaelogical junkie & rock hound myself, I see it as much more than proving it was Jesus' shroud. I want to know how the image was made if it was made by human hands. If not, then what? Some sort of radiation? How?

Something yet to be determined. More of the history, etc. Whatever can be learned from the piece.

So you see, it has nothing to do with the arguement you present for me. You're arguing faith as if faith hinges on this object. It doesn't. It has everything to do with learning everything we can about an artifact.

You simply can't assume people's reasoning for finding an object interesting. Its somewhat insulting & arrogant to do so.

There are pro & con arguements on both sides of the fence but both sides have to admit they have not unraveled the mystery. And that is what makes it so fascinating.

So if you do not care, thats your perogative, nobody should fault you for it. Just as you should not fault others & be critical of their interest in the shroud.

 

[kisstheson]

I'm a Shroudie. I live 15 minutes away for the north eastern headquarters for the Shroud of Turin. I hope they find more evidence that its really Jesus' burial Shroud. If not its still a great source for meditating on the Passion.

 

[Globalnomad]

Shannon, I think you are just trying to "arm" yourself - and us - against the possibility that the Shroud should ever be conclusively proved to be a fake. Let's be honest, if that ever happens, we'll have lost something extraordinarily beautiful, this incredible feeling of "maybe". I would personally feel sadly impoverished. But it would not harm our faith - after all, it would jut be a return to the status quo of having to "believe without seeing", which is our daily reality anyway.

But now let me answer your question at face value. Yes, it does matter, because if the Shroud was proved to be from the man who was known as The Christ, it would, first of all, establish the historical reality of the man, which a lot of people still doubt. Secondly, it would confirm the unusual details of his execution, which so far are known only from the Gospels (scourging, crowning with thorns, no bones broken, side pierced with a lance), thus giving tremendous strength to the general historical credibility of the Gospels.

As I said: if it is a fake, we are just back at the status quo of our faith. Good enough. But if the scientific verdict tends to say that it is genuine, then the whole issue of the "historic Christ" takes on a new dimension. From the point of view of secular history, too.

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

D/p

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

I think it an impossibility to ever prove that it was Jesus' burial shroud. It might be proven to be from the time of Jesus (though the evidence so far, precludes that possibility-despite the conspiracy theories surrounding that evidence)- but it will never conclusively be proven to have bee used by Christ. Never.

I dunno- I guess I just think there's much more interesting and compelling new science out there than that surrounding this historical object--unless of course, one has an obssesion with the Shroud and it's authenticity. There's much more compelling historical discovery out there than this possible burial cloth. It's akin to me to people obsessed with UFOs and cryptozoology--that they have the missed potential to pursue real science; rather than using their energies and intellect to pursue real science, they got caught up in pseudo-science which seems really imprtant, but in fact, is completely unimportant.

Why would it be good to use to meditate on the Passion- it's only the stirrings of one's imagination, and conjuring up of images...but I guess most here are Western in their approach to faith and their prayer is totally dependent upon such conjurings.

I dunno, I just don't get it. To each their own, I suppose. And If it's edifying to people's faith, then there is no harm in that.<shrugs shoulders>

 

[Globalnomad]

It can never be PROVED that it was Christ's, but if it is proved to be from that period, the link to a historical Christ will be strong enough for a court of law. Think of it: it is known that it was brought from the East during the Crusades as a precious trophy, which proves that it had been preserved somewhere all those centuries as an object of great value, that a Western knight would be tempted to grab as a spoils of war. Why had it been preserved for a thousand years? It must have been believed to be connected with something important since the very beginning, to have been so carefully preserved. And the tale that the Shroud tells is not that of a normal crucifixion (aside from the fact that your average crucified victim would not have been buried in an expensive linen shroud): crucified people were not crowned with thorns, and did not have their sides pierced with spears. They were not always scourged either. If the cloth is really from that period, and it was really used to bury someone who had been crucified, then the fact that it came to light as a Christian relic after having been carefully preserved for a thousand years, makes it a very strong piece of evidence of a historical Jesus.

Which is the reason for all this controversy.

 

[kisstheson]

"Why would it be good to use to meditate on the Passion- it's only the stirrings of one's imagination, and conjuring up of images...but I guess most here are Western in their approach to faith and their prayer is totally dependent upon such conjurings."

I don't know shannon. why in every catholic church I've been in are there pictures or depictions of the stations of the cross? An artist's imagination?
The Eastern Orthodox have tons of icons. When you read the gospel are you picturing the stories? The Passion story does stir my thoughts as I try to imagine what Jesus suffered.

 

[Michie]

Personally, I'm more into the technicalities. Everything else is a bonus as far as theological perspective. The shroud in no way is comparable with UFO & Bigfoot hunters nor is it an obession for me. I'm sure everyone is carrying on just fine.

There was faith before the shroud & there will be faith after. I don't think it's going to shatter anyone's faith.

Inspection on the shroud is not junk science. Inspecting it does not exclude all other science. That is why they are those in the field with specialties & interests within the broad spectrum of science.

Just because there are a few people that seem to think its the end all of getting to the bottom of it while throwing in assumptions of their own is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

This overly critical attitude with know-it-all airs including what is & is not science seems to be attitude here. It's just as ridiculous as the original arguement of historical relevance & comparisons of pottery shards, (which some have proven to be very valuable & an important piece to historical puzzles). To compare those interested in the subject with the comparisons given here.

Science & the interests within is a very big arena. I'm sure nothing else is being neglected & put on hold as the shroud is yet again being investigated as new developments become available.

So if its not your thing then its not your thing. But it does not give anyone the right to come in criticize those that are interested while defining what is or is not worthwhile in the field of science. Or worse, what is & is not science.

Thats seeing things with a very narrow view.

 

[Michie]

"I don't know shannon. why in every catholic church I've been in are there pictures or depictions of the stations of the cross? An artist's imagination?
The Eastern Orthodox have tons of icons. When you read the gospel are you picturing the stories? The Passion story does stir my thoughts as I try to imagine what Jesus suffered.

Good point. Thats the Churches view also. But I guess it could be there for those of us less spiritually evolved.

Wait... we might hear of a better way soon.

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

Eastern Rites do not have icons to stir up mental images while in prayer. I'm sure our Orthodox brethren in TAW would be happy to explain the ideas behind not conjuring up mental images during prayer. Since obviously if I write it I am just being glib.

Sorry for chiming in with something other than a cheerleading squad opinion--carry on.