Has Jesus’ Burial Shroud Been Found?

Featured Image

Image result for oviedo sudarium

Yep, I’m referring to the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo.  You’ve probably heard of the former, but not necessarily the latter.  Both are claimed to be Yeshua ha’Mashiach’s (Jesus the Christ’s) burial shrouds.  Well, more specifically, the Turin Shroud is claimed to have been the cloth that wrapped Yeshua’s body, while the Oviedo Sudarium is claimed to have been the separate cloth that wrapped Yeshua’s head (presumably wrapped OVER the regular shroud).  Are these claims true?

(Incidentally, if BOTH cloths are authentic, it would explain the main problem I’ve had with the Turin Shroud over the years: John’s clear description of a separate head cloth.)

First, I will cover the Turin Shroud.

From Wikipedia:

The Shroud of Turin or Turin Shroud (Italian: Sindone di Torino, Sacra Sindone [ˈsaːkra ˈsindone] or Santa Sindone) is a length of linen cloth bearing the negative image of a man who is alleged to be Jesus of Nazareth. It is kept in the Chapel of the Holy Shroud, which is located within a complex of buildings which includes the Turin Cathedral, the Royal Palace of Turin, and the Palazzo Chiablese in Turin, Piedmont, northern Italy. The cloth itself is believed by some to be the burial shroud that Jesus was wrapped in when he was buried after crucifixion. It is first securely attested in 1390, when a local bishop wrote that the shroud was a forgery and that an unnamed artist had confessed. Radiocarbon dating of a sample of the shroud material is consistent with this date.

Let’s address the radiocarbon dating:

Sceptics have claimed that the Shroud of Turin is a medieval forgery, a hoax perpetrated by a clever artist. But Italian researchers have also discredited a 1988 study that dated the Shroud to the Middle Ages.

The findings of another study conducted by Dr. Bollone, together with Grazia Mattutino, a criminologist of the Institute of Forensic Medicine of Turin, who has worked on important cases of judicial reporting, is also forthcoming.

The Turin Institute has kept some of the threads of the Shroud taken during research investigations in 1978. Analysis of these samples identified particles of gold, silver and lead on the linen, that came from its contact with the reliquary that housed the Holy Shroud. A type of algae was also identified, which may have been in the water used to extinguish the Chambéry fire. Mites, pollen, and particles from car pollution were also identified on the linen.

For centuries the Shroud had been kept in a case that was neither watertight nor up to modern standards for preservation.

Given the conditions through which the Shroud has passed, the Italian research team concluded that the carbon-testing conducted in 1988, which dated the Shroud’s origins to between 1260 and 1390, was not valid. They argue that the samples were taken from a very polluted corner which was also restored.

Dr. Alan D. Adler, a biochemist and member of the Shroud Conservation Commission, analyzed 15 fibers extracted from the Shroud sample used for the carbon-dating. After a comparison with 19 fibers from various other areas of the Shroud, Adler found such a high degree of pollution on the sample used for radiocarbon dating that he concluded it is not representative of the entire shroud.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-discoveries-prove-man-on-shroud-of-turin-was-really-crucified

Carbon dating test results conflict with each other and thus are not credible. In 1988, a small snippet of the Shroud was performed, but the “C-14 results of the three labs falls outside the bounds of the Pearson’s chi-square test,” illustrating a flaw in the dating that was likely due to a repair seam that ran diagonally “through the area from which the sample was taken.”[16] A peer-reviewed scientific paper later demonstrated the invalidity of those results, suggesting instead that the Shroud is between 1,300 and 3,000 years old,[17][18] disproving the 1988 results that claimed that the Shroud originated between A.D. 1238 and 1430.

Indeed, the sample for the 1988 analysis had actually been taken from cloth woven into the Shroud during the Middle Ages, thereby giving a false result. Moreover, “the 12th Century Hungarian ‘Pray Manuscript’ come to depict Jesus being wrapped in the shroud – with authentic herringbone pattern and burn marks – 100 years before carbon-dating says the material originated.”[11]

The defect in the carbon dating was that the samples were “uniquely coated with a yellow–brown plant gum containing dye lakes. 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. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud.”[19] Instead, “[e]stimates of the kinetics constants for the loss of vanillin from lignin indicate a much older age for the cloth than the radiocarbon analyses.”[20]

https://www.conservapedia.com/Shroud_of_Turin#Dating_the_Shroud

3)  Experiments by Russian researchers shows that linen, exposed to similar conditions as the Shroud during the fire 1532, may influence C14 content thus making the linen appear younger than would otherwise be the case (Kouznetsov et al., 1996);

www.shroud.com/mrinobnf.pdf

In 2013, Giulio Fanti performed new dating studies on fragments obtained from the shroud. He performed three different tests including ATRFTIR and Raman spectroscopy (absorption of light of different colors). The date range from these tests date the shroud between 300 BC and 400 AD.[84][85][86] These studies have been publicly disregarded by Cesare Nosiglia, archbishop of Turin and custodian of the shroud. Cardinal Nosiglia stated that “as it is not possible to be certain that the analysed material was taken from the fabric of the shroud no serious value can be recognized to the results of such experiments”.[87][88]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin#Material_chemical_analysis

OK, I think we have at cause to at least question the carbon dating of the shroud.  The data clearly provides conflicting dates, so using a dating method to disprove (or prove) it doesn’t work.  Is this an authentic burial shroud (Jesus’ or not), or a complete fraud, as some claim?

According to textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg of Hamburg, a seam in the cloth corresponds to a fabric found at the fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea, which dated to the 1st century. The weaving pattern, 3:1 twill, is consistent with first-century Syrian design, according to the appraisal of Gilbert Raes of the Ghent Institute of Textile Technology in Belgium. Flury-Lemberg stated: “The linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin does not display any weaving or sewing techniques which would speak against its origin as a high-quality product of the textile workers of the first century.”[95]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin#Material_historical_analysis

In 2002, a team of experts did restoration work, such as removing the patches from 1534 and replacing the backing cloth.  One of the specialists was Swiss textile historian Mechthild Flury-Lemberg.  She was surprised to find a peculiar stitching pattern in the seam of one long side of the Shroud, where a three-inch wide strip of the same original fabric was sewn onto a larger segment.

The stitching pattern, which she says was the work of a professional, is quite similar to the hem of a cloth found in the tombs of the Jewish fortress of Masada.  The Masada cloth dates to between 40 BC and 73 AD.

This kind of stitch has never been found in Medieval Europe.

https://www.newgeology.us/presentation24.html

The Shroud contains real blood stains consisting of human male DNA, and a blood type that is AB – the same rare blood type[2] found on the face covering for Jesus preserved in Spain,[3] and the same rare blood type common in “68 skeletons of Jewish residents from 1,600 to 2,000 years ago in and around Jerusalem.”[4] The height of the man was between 5’9″ and 5’11”; his weight, 168-180 pounds; his age, between 30 and 45 years old.[5] Coins visible only to modern technology had been placed over the man’s eyes, an ancient Roman tradition not known to historians until modern archaeological excavations revealed the practice.[6] The coin over the right eye was minted by Pontius Pilate, and the coin over the left eye was minted only in A.D. 29, merely a few years before the estimated date of the Crucifixion.[7] The angle of the man’s arms during the crucifixion can be inferred from the flow of blood seen on the Shroud: 65° for one arm; 55° for the other. The cloth was a finely woven linen that would have been available to a wealthy man as described in the Gospels, and was cut from the same fabric containing the same pollen as the face covering preserved separately in Spain.[3]

https://www.conservapedia.com/Shroud_of_Turin

And that of course draws the Sudarium into the mix.  Wikipedia’s summary of the research conducted into the Sudarium:

The investigantions of the sudarium have been summarized as follows[3]:

  1. The Sudarium of Oviedo is a relic, which has been venerated in the cathedral of Oviedo for a very long time. It contains stains formed by human blood of the group AB.
  2. The cloth is dirty, creased, torn and burnt in parts, stained and highly contaminated. It does not, however, show signs of fraudulent manipulation.
  3. It seems to be a funeral cloth that was probably placed over the head of the corpse of an adult male of normal constitution.
  4. The man whose face the Sudarium covered had a beard, moustache and long hair, tied up at the nape of his neck into a ponytail.
  5. The man’s mouth was closed, his nose was squashed and forced to the right by the pressure of holding the cloth to his face. Both these anatomical elements have been clearly identified on the sudarium of Oviedo.
  6. The man was dead. The mechanism that formed the stains is incompatible with any kind of breathing movement.
  7. At the bottom of the back of his head, there is a series of wounds produced in life by some sharp objects. These wounds had bled about an hour before the cloth was placed on top of them.
  8. Just about the entire head, shoulders and at least part of the back of the man were covered in blood before being covered by this cloth. This is known because it is impossible to reproduce the stains in the hair, on the forehead and on top of the head with blood from a corpse. It can therefore be stated that the man was wounded before death with something that made his scalp bleed and produced wounds on his neck, shoulders and upper part of the back.
  9. The man suffered a pulmonary oedema as a consequence of the terminal process.
  10. The cloth was placed over the head starting from the back, held to the hair by sharp objects. From there it went round the left side of the head to the right cheek, where, for apparently unknown reasons it was folded over on itself, ending up folded like an accordion at the left cheek. It is possible that the cloth was placed like this because the head formed an obstacle and so it was folded over on itself. On placing the cloth in this position, two stained areas can be anatomically observed – one over the “ponytail” and the other over the top of the back. Once the man had died, the corpse stayed in a vertical position for around one hour, and the right arm was raised with the head bent 70 degrees forwards and 20 degrees to the right. How can this be reasonably thought of as a “vertical position”? If the man of the Oviedo Sudarium was hanging by the right arm only, then the rest of the body, especially the head, would be relatively far from this arm, hanging to the left. This position is incompatible with that of the head that the cloth wrapped. It is therefore easy to deduce that the body was hanging by both arms. But if the body was hanging like this, without support for the feet, the man would have died in 15 or 20 minutes, and there would not have been enough time to generate the amount of liquid necessary to form the stains visible on the cloth. If the body were hanging with both arms above the head, then the head would have been leaning forwards and not to the right. So the only position compatible with the formation of the stains on the Oviedo cloth is both arms outstretched above the head and the feet in such a position as to make breathing very difficult, i.e. a position totally compatible with crucifixion. We can say that the man was wounded first (blood on the head, shoulders and back) 4 and then “crucified”.
  11. The body was then placed on the ground on its right side, with the arms in the same position, and the head still bent 20 degrees to the right, and at 115 degrees from the vertical position. The forehead was placed on a hard surface, and the body was left in this position for approximately one more hour.
  12. The body was then moved, while somebody’s left hand in various positions tried to stem the flow of liquid from the nose and mouth, pressing strongly against them. This movement could have taken about 5 minutes. The cloth was folded over itself all this time. The cloth was then straightened out and wrapped all round the head, like a hood, held on again by sharp objects. This allowed part of the cloth, folded like a cone, to fall over the back. With the head thus covered, the corpse was held up (partly) by a left fist. The cloth was then moved sideways over the face in this position. Thus, once the obstacle (which could have been the hair matted with blood or the head bent towards the right) had been removed, the cloth covered the entire head and the corpse was moved for the last time, face down on a closed left fist. This movement produced the large triangular stain, on whose surface the finger shaped stains can be seen and on the reverse side of the cloth, the curve inscribed on the cheek. Like the previous movement, this one could have taken 5 minutes at most.
  13. Finally, on reaching the destination, the body was placed face up and for unknown reasons, the cloth was taken off the head.
  14. Possibly myrrh and aloes were then sprinkled over the cloth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudarium_of_Oviedo#Research

Sheesh.  The evidence is strongly there – we’ve got a crucified 1st century Jew.

According to a paper by Dr. Petrus Soons scientific research of some of the photographs of the shroud show an oval object under the beard of the image. After much research three cursive letters were identified and translated from the Hebrew. The meaning of the translation was, “The Lamb,” a name in which Jesus was referred to in the New Testament.[30] This finding now makes the person on the shroud exclusively identified with Christ.

https://www.conservapedia.com/Shroud_of_Turin#The_Lamb

Many of the arguments by modern skeptics against the authenticity of the Shroud have been disproven. For example, some claimed that a misspelling on one of the coins over an eye could not be authentic, but in fact several other coins having the same misspelling have since been found.[7]

https://www.conservapedia.com/Shroud_of_Turin#Critics

And then of course there’s the bloodstains and the image on the shroud – specifically the question of HOW the image was made.

ROME, January 11, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) — Italian researchers have made a new discovery about the Shroud of Turin which they say strengthens the hypothesis that “the man of the Shroud was really crucified.”

In a new soon-to-be-released study, researchers have also identified the exact point where the lance pierced his side, and concluded that the bloodstains on what many believe to be the burial cloth of Jesus are “absolutely realistic.”

A new discovery

A preview of the new study was presented in the Italian daily La Stampa on January 2, 2019. Top researchers included Filippo Marchisio, head of Radiology at the Rivoli hospital, and well known Italian sindonologist, Pier Luigi Baima Bollone, a long-time professor of Forensic Medicine at the University of Turin and director of the International Centre of Sindonology.

The investigation started from the observation that the Man of the Shroud’s right arm appears to be six centimeters longer than the left one. The two scholars attribute this apparent anomaly to a fracture in the elbow or a dislocation in the shoulder, which is compatible with a crucifixion. They also took into account that the arms would have had to be forcibly bent to overcome the stiffness of the body at the time of burial.

The upper part of the arms and shoulders are no longer visible on the the Shroud because of damage caused by a fire in 1532, when the linen cloth was kept in Chambéry, in the chapel of the castle of the Dukes of Savoy. The six-centimeter difference between the right and left arm is therefore not immediately apparent to the naked eye.

But today, thanks to science and technology, researchers have reconstructed the entire section. Dr. Marchisio used CAT scanner at the Institute of Radiology in Turin, and a 32-year-old male volunteer with an athletic build similar to the man of the Shroud, to reconstruct the missing parts through an overlapping of images.

Image
Full length negatives of the shroud. Public Domain

“The CT scan allows a perfect reproduction of the body, allowing us to reconstruct the missing parts without the subjectivity inherent in artistic creation,” Marchisio said. “The CT underscores the inconsistency of the position of the shoulders and hands, a further element that supports the hypothesis that the man of the Shroud was really crucified.”

‘Absolutely realistic’

Dr. Marchisio and Dr. Ballone also confirmed that the bloodstains on the Shroud of Turin are “absolutely realistic,” after a study last July questioned their authenticity.

The researchers also identified the exact point at which a lance pierced the victim’s side. They were thus able to identify the organs that were injured, “releasing an accumulation of blood in the pleural cavity,” i.e. the thin fluid-filled space between the two pulmonary pleurae of each lung.

Marchisio explained that “the blood mainly ran down on the right side, along a the channel formed by the arm contiguous to the body up to the elbow, and then it collected to form the belt of blood in the lumbar region.”

“The anatomical relations revealed by the reconstruction of the missing parts confirm it: it is the demonstration of the extraordinary nature and the coherence of the Shroud,” the researcher said. “The more one studies it, the more surprises it holds.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-discoveries-prove-man-on-shroud-of-turin-was-really-crucified

Description

The Shroud full-length, seen in positive (top) and negative (bottom).

The Shroud is about 14 feet 3 inches long by 3 feet 7 inches wide, consisting of a single piece of fine linen cloth made from fibers of the flax plant (Linum usitatisismum), and woven in a 3-over-1 herringbone twill.[11] Centered on the cloth is the front and back images of a man who is pictured as if in a burial repose; the man’s estimated height is somewhere between 5’8″ to 6’1″.[12] He is rather powerfully-built, with classical eastern Mediterranean features. The images of the feet are at both ends of the cloth, indicating that if it was a burial linen the body was placed on one end with the other end bought over the head to cover the body. On either side of the image is a series of triangular patches, covering much of the damage from a fire which took place in 1532.

The image of the body shows a man who had died a violent death. Upon both front and back are dumbbell-shaped markings; approximately 140 such marks were applied upon the back, chest, and legs. Roman soldiers involved in “scourging” as a form of punishment for offenders employed a whip called a “flagrum“,[13] which was studded with either bone or lead knobs, and when used it tore into flesh and muscle.

The wrists and feet bear large bloodstains consistent with historical descriptions of crucifixion. The feet themselves are placed one on top of the other within the image; both front and dorsal images display a single large bloodstain, indicating one nail was driven through both feet upon the cross. The left wrist likewise displays a large bloodstain; however, the left hand covers the right, preventing a view of the wound there. Blood flows are present on both lower arms, displayed to flow in a direction as if the victim was hanging on a cross. A single large bloodstain is also present on the right side of the chest – nearly-obliterated by the 1532 burn damage – and appears to have been mixed with a clear liquid from the body. Blood stains are also present about the scalp, and the marks of a severe beating are evident upon the face.

https://www.conservapedia.com/Shroud_of_Turin#Description

DNA testing of material on the Shroud may prove to be the most reliable measure of its authenticity, and already preliminary results point to a legitimate Middle Eastern, rather than fake European, origin for the Shroud.[14]

https://www.conservapedia.com/Shroud_of_Turin#DNA_Testing

The new research mentioned, contained at the following link, indicates an interesting and diverse history for the object:

https://www.livescience.com/52567-shroud-of-turin-dna.html

IMAGE FORMATION VERSUS WORK OF AN ARTIST

No one knows for sure how the images were created.  The images are scorch-like, yet not created by heat, and are a purely surface phenomenon limited to the crowns of the top fibers.  The Shroud is clearly not a painting; no evidence of pigments or media was found.  The blood was on the Cloth before the image (an unlikely way for an artist to work).  There is no outline, no binders to hold paint, no evidence that paint, dye, ink, or chalk created the images, and there are no brush strokes.  According to world-renowned artist Isabel Piczek, the images have no style that would fit into any period of art history.  The images show perfect photo-negativity and 3-dimensionality.  It is not a Vaporgraph or natural result of vapors.

Note: some microscopic particles of paint exist on the Shroud, but these do not constitute the image.  During the Middle Ages, a practice called the “sanctification of paintings” permitted about 50 artists to paint replicas of the Shroud and then lay their paintings over the Shroud to “sanctify” them.  This permitted contact transfer of particles, which then migrated around the cloth with the folding and rolling of the Shroud when it was opened for exhibit and closed again afterwards.

STURP determined that the image was caused by rapid dehydration, oxidation and degradation of the linen by an unidentified process, coloring it a sepia or straw yellow.  Several Physicists, including Dr. John Jackson of the Colorado Shroud Center, suggest that a form of columnated radiation is the best explanation for how the image was formed, leaving a scorch-like appearance (the scorch caused by light versus heat, as the image does not fluoresce).  Dr. Thomas Phillips (nuclear physicist at Duke University and formerly with the High Energy Labs at Harvard) says a potential miliburst of radiation (a neutron flux) could be consistent with the moment of resurrection.  Such a miliburst might cause the purely surface phenomenon of the scorch-like (scorch-by-light) images, and possibly add Carbon-14 to the Cloth.  As Dr. Phillips points out: “We never had a resurrection to study” and more testing should be done to ascertain whether a neutron-flux occurred.

The coloration on the linen fibers of the Shroud is extremely thin.  Sticky tape samples taken from different parts of the image on the Shroud’s surface in 1978 were too thin to measure accurately with a standard optical microscope, which means they were thinner than the wavelength of visible light, or less than about 0.6 micrometers.  A more recent measurement of the coloration on one of the fibers was found to be about 0.2 micrometers thick (or one-fifth of a thousandth of a millimeter).

Italian scientists working at the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA) conducted experiments on their own time between 2005 and 2010, applying ultraviolet radiation to strips of linen to see if they could match the coloration on the fibers of the Shroud of Turin.  In their ENEA technical report, published in November 2011, they wrote that particular doses of radiation left a thin coating on linen fibers that resemble the colored fibers on the image of the Shroud of Turin.  When questioned, the lead scientist in the study, Paolo Di Lazzaro, said that vacuum ultraviolet radiation (VUV, wavelength 200-100 nanometers) from laser pulses lasting less than 50 nanoseconds produced the best effect.

These findings support the idea that the image on the Shroud was made by a sudden flash of high-energy radiation.  They also refute the possibility of forgery, since lasers were obviously not available in medieval times.

The technical report: P. Di Lazzaro, D. Murra, E. Nichelatti, A. Santoni, G. Baldacchini: “Colorazione similsindonica di tessuti di lino tramite radiazione nel lontano ultravioletto: riassunto dei risultati ottenuti presso il Centro ENEA di Frascati negli anni 2005-2010” RT/2011/14/ENEA (2011).

The blood on the Shroud is real, human male blood of the type AB (typed by Dr. Baima Ballone in Turin and confirmed in the U.S.).  This blood type is rare (about 3% of the world population), with the frequency varying from one region to another.  Blood chemist Dr. Alan Adler (University of Western Connecticut) and the late Dr. John Heller (New England Institute of Medicine) found a high concentration of the pigment bilirubin, consistent with someone dying under great stress or trauma and making the color more red than normal ancient blood.  Drs. Victor and Nancy Tryon of the University of Texas Health Science Center found X & Y chromosomes representing male blood and “degraded DNA” (approximately 700 base pairs) “consistent with the supposition of ancient blood.”

The image on the Shroud is of a man 5 feet 10 1/2 inches tall, about 175 pounds, covered with scourge wounds and blood stains.  Numerous surgeons and pathologists (including Dr. Frederick Zugibe (Medical Examiner – Rockland, New York), Dr. Robert Bucklin (Medical Examiner – Las Vegas, Nevada), Dr. Herman Moedder (Germany), the late Dr. Pierre Barbet (France), and Dr. David Willis (England)) have studied the match between the Words, Weapons and Wounds, and agree that the words of the New Testament regarding the Passion clearly match the wounds depicted on the Shroud, and that these wounds are consistent with the weapons used by ancient Roman soldiers in Crucifixion.

Specifically, the scourge marks on the shoulders, back, and legs of the Man of the Shroud match the flagrum (Roman whip) which has three leather thongs, each having two lead or bone pellets (plumbatae) on the end.  The lance wound in the right side matches the Roman Hasta (4cm x 1 cm spear wound).  Iron nails (7″ spikes) were used in the wrist area (versus the palms as commonly depicted in Medieval art).  These marks, combined with the capping of thorns which is not found anywhere else in Crucifixion literature of ancient Roman (Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Elder or Pliny the Younger) or Jewish historians (Flavius Joesphus, Philo of Alexandria) create a unique signature of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.

https://www.newgeology.us/presentation24.html

Unlike the Shroud, there is no “photographic image” of a human head on the cloth, but some believers have stated that the bloodstains on the Sudarium match up to apparent wounds on the head of the image on the Shroud. Using a method called Polarized Image Overlay Technique, scientists have matched more than 100 bloodstain locations on the Sudarium with identical bloodstain sources on the Shroud. It is also purported that the position of the stains on the cloth shows that the person whose head it covered died in an upright position.

An intensive study by the Investigation Team of the Spanish Centre for Sindonology concludes that the staining on the Sudarium was made in several different body positions, and they created artificial heads to attempt to replicate that stains on the cloth. Their study also found small pointed bloodstains on the section that would have been on the back of the head which believers contend are from the crown of thorns. Another scientist examined the pollen attached to the Sudarium and found examples from Palestine, North Africa, and Spain (but no other European countries).

https://www.historicmysteries.com/the-sudarium-of-oviedo/

And then of course there’s the image itself.  When it was first photographed, the photographer afterwards observed that the negative of his film looked like a positive – i.e. the shroud contains a negative photographic image!

And I suppose medieval forgers had access to photography, eh?

There is now a mountain of evidence about the Shroud, but too many dismiss the possibility of the Shroud’s authenticity based on the Carbon-14 dating alone.

However, a good detective does not rely on one piece of evidence. Instead he gathers and weighs all the facts. Here are the pieces of evidence which I find compelling.

1) The image. It is not a stain, nor is it painted on the Shroud. It is not burned on in a conventional heat application method. Instead it is seared on to the cloth with a technology that has yet to be explained. Not only can scientists and historians not reproduce the image using medieval technologies, they can’t reproduce it with modern technology.

Italian scientist Paolo DiLazzaro tried for five years to replicate the image and concluded that it was produced by ultraviolet light, but the ultraviolet light necessary to reproduce the image “exceeds the maximum power released by all ultraviolet light sources available today.” The time for such a burst “would be shorter than one forty-billionth of a second, and the intensity of the ultra violet light would have to be around several billion watts.”

2) The 3D capabilities of the image. The image of the man on the Shroud can be read by 3D imaging technology. Paintings fail this test.

3) The evidence of crucifixion. The wounds of the crucified man are all consistent not only with Roman crucifixion, but the details of Jesus’ particular crucifixion – the scourging, the crown of thorns, no broken bones, and the wound in the side. In addition, medieval paintings show the nails in the palm of Christ’s hands, the Shroud shows the nail wounds in his wrists which is anatomically correct. The flesh of the palms would not have supported the weight of the man’s body.

4) Geography. Pollen from the Shroud is not only from the Jerusalem area, but from Turkey and the other places the Shroud is supposed to have resided. Dust from the area of the image by the knees and feet is from the area around Jerusalem.

5) The evidence of Jewish burial customs. The Shroud details are perfectly consistent with first-century Jewish burial customs. There are even microscopic traces of the flowers that would have been used in the burial-flowers that grew locally and were known to be used for burial. In addition, traces of the spices used for Jewish burial have been discovered.

6) The blood and the image. The bloodstains on the Shroud are real human blood, not paint. The flow of the blood accurately reflects crucifixion and subsequent burial. The image was seared on the linen after the bloodstains. The fact that the bloodstains retain their reddish colour is evidence that the blood came from a person under extreme duress. The most recent finding again suggests that the crucified man was tortured.

7) The type of cloth. The cloth is consistent with fabrics from first-century Israel, but not with medieval Europe. A forger would have had to not only forge the image, but would have had to have detailed knowledge of linen weaves of the first century and then not only reproduce it, but age it convincingly.

https://catholicherald.co.uk/issues/august-4th-2017/turin-shroud-the-latest-evidence-will-challenge-the-sceptics/

In 1976 Pete Schumacher, John Jackson and Eric Jumper analysed a photograph of the shroud image using a VP8 Image Analyzer, which was developed for NASA to create brightness maps of the moon. A brightness map (isometric display) interprets differences of brightness within an image as differences of elevation – brighter patches are seen as being closer to the camera, and darker patches further away. Our minds interpret these gradients as a “pseudo-three-dimensional image”.[127][128][full citation needed] They found that, unlike any photograph they had analyzed, the shroud image has the property of decoding into a 3-dimensional image, when the darker parts of the image are interpreted to be those features of the man that were closest to the shroud and the lighter areas of the image those features that were farthest. The researchers could not replicate the effect when they attempted to transfer similar images using techniques of block print, engravings, a hot statue, and bas-relief.[129]

However optical physicist and former STURP member John Dee German has since noted that it is not difficult to make a photograph which has 3D qualities. If the object being photographed is lighted from the front, and a non-reflective “fog” of some sort exists between the camera and the object, then less light will reach and reflect back from the portions of the object that are farther from the lens, thus creating a contrast which is dependent on distance.[130]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin#Image_and_text_analysis

Again, we’re expected to believe that medieval forgers knew about and had access to photo technology?

Since 1930[172] several researchers (J. Jackson, G. Fanti, T. Trenn, T. Phillips, J.-B. Rinaudo and others) endorsed the flash-like irradiation hypothesis. It was suggested that the relatively high definition of the image details can be obtained through the energy source (specifically, protonic) acting from inside.[173] The Russian researcher Alexander Belyakov proposed an intense, but short flashlight source, which lasted some hundredths of a second.[174] Some other authors suggest the X-radiation[175] or a burst of directional ultraviolet radiation may have played a role in the formation of the Shroud image.[176][177] From the image characteristics, several researchers have theorized that the radiant source was prevalently vertical. These theories do not include the scientific discussion of a method by which the energy could have been produced.[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin#Hypotheses_on_image_origin

Of course, Yeshua’s resurrection – with a brief, bright, intense flash of light emanating from His body – could well explain it.

And, back to the issue of the dating: the Sudarium of Oviedo was dated to the about 700 AD, BUT historical records date it to at least the 500s (with records that it was much older).  Again, nullifying the dating methods.

IN CONCLUSION

We have extremely strong scientific evidence that the Turin and Oviedo cloths are none other than Yeshua’s burial shrouds, and that He was crucified, and that He was raised from the dead.

2 thoughts on “Has Jesus’ Burial Shroud Been Found?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s