Shroud of Turin

[DRDS]

I know the shroud holds a special place for many who believe in what it represents but I have always found it to be an unrealistic artifact if it was supposed to be from a jewish burial / entombment. At one point in my studies of jewish culture I read about their Burial Practices and it is quite an event. Here is a snip from a site dealing with the practice;

Burial Practices: Ancient Jewish Laws Concerning the Burial of the Dead
...Soon after death, family members of the deceased would mourn and prepare the body for burial. The deceased�s body was washed and anointed with various oils and spices. The body was then wrapped in unique linen clothing that contained spices and placed on a stone shelf that was carved into the bedrock wall of a the tomb... http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/back_to_ ... h_law.html

If one were to consider the practice carefully it is noted that the deceased was first washed.... (keep in mind that blood and how it is handled in jewish tradition was very carefully dealt with) It was washed until clean... thus no dirt or blood left. Then once clean it is oiled or what they called oil;

Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes.
Myrrh is a gum resin...
Aloe was also a resin ... http://voices.yahoo.com/the-history-bur ... 65278.html

Many think they understand what they are and how they are used but, it is always good to gain as much insight as possible here. So let's see another site that digs a bit deeper;

Burial Rituals
In the day of Jesus, Jewish society was incredibly structured. Every aspect of life was precisely defined and controlled by religious beliefs. This organization of life included burial rituals.
The Bible is even very clear on this matter. John 19:38-40 is very precise in indicating that Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus prepared Jesus' body in the manner of the Jews for proper burial. This procedure involves extensive wrapping of the body, while including a LOT of myrrh and aloes that would get placed between the various layers of cloth. Specifically, John 19:40 says that "Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury."

...Merrill Tenney describes the Jewish custom as follows: In preparing a body for burial according to Jewish custom, it was usually washed and straightened, and then bandaged tightly from the armpits to the ankles in strips of linen about a foot wide. Aromatic spices, often of a gummy consistency, were placed between the wrappings or folds. They served partially as a preservative and partially as a cement to glue the cloth wrappings into a solid covering. (from: The Reality of the Resurrection).

...in addition, a semi-liquid unguent such as nard was initially used to anoint the body. The effect of this would be to cause the powdered myrrh and aloes near the body to strongly adhere to the body and to the layers of linen. Outer layers of myrrh and the aloes might have remained as a dry powder.

...The head and hair were anointed with the nard unguent, but the powdered spices do not appear to have been applied to the head or face. A small separate 'face cloth' or 'napkin' was generally placed on the face or around the head. John 20:7 refers to this separate cloth, so this aspect of the custom was definitely used regarding Jesus. Rather than ONE piece of cloth, certainly at least two separate pieces are described here.

...Several points should be noted. A HUNDRED POUNDS of myrrh and aloes were applied during the burial preparation. If a single sheet, such as the Shroud of Turin was used as the burial cloth, how could they have applied such a great amount of spices? Jewish custom did not involve using a single cloth, but rather a number of long strips of linen that were tightly wrapped many times around the body. The presence of the myrrh and the nard would have made the burial clothes become extremely rigid. The burial clothes were never extended to cover the head or face but only wrapped the body.
http://mb-soft.com/public/shroud.html

For me there are many points given from the bible and historic ritual methodology to infer that a single shroud would at most have covered a fully wrapped body which would not have been still bleeding nor would it have soaked through to such outer covering based on the quantities of ingredients used in the process of preparation.

Sounds like you believe Kent Hovind's view of the Shroud, aka the idea that Christ was buried much like a mummy. I'll let Bippy handle this, he knows a lot about this argument.

[Philip]

KBKid wrote: "For me there are many points given from the bible and historic ritual methodology to infer that a single shroud would at most have covered a fully wrapped body which would not have been still bleeding nor would it have soaked through to such outer covering based on the quantities of ingredients used in the process of preparation."

First of all, despite what may have been the typical fashion of caring for a dead body, we have no detailed idea of what was done to that of Jesus. We also have no idea that the large amount of spices were actually used, or whether perhaps their wasn't enough time to use the amount brought. We just don't know. I would say that KB is putting much more emphasis on known historical tradition than what the Bible reveals. And the versions use different verbiage. The ESV uses the terms "bound" and "linen cloths."

What I believe supersedes any concerns about the historical method of burial is that here we have a shroud with an incredibly detailed image of a crucified man with wounds that match those described of Christ, and in such a way that no known technology of the the First Century, medieval times or today can explain how it was created. That the image makes little visual sense, close up, that the image is also partially on inside, that it show's 3D spatiality, all these show something unexplainable, despite tremendous technical efforts at trying to. And now this remarkable textile just happened to have been in the hands of the church, potentially well over 1,000 years, and was always considered the burial shroud of Jesus, is quite remarkable. Almost every other thing about Jesus has been shown to be exceptionally unique, so it should be unsurprising that the methodology and circumstances involving His burial might not match our expectations. Without exhaustive detail in the text that would eliminate the Shroud's authenticity, or proof otherwise, traditional burial customs would appear of little concern to casting doubt upon it.

[KBCid]

Sounds like you believe Kent Hovind's view of the Shroud, aka the idea that Christ was buried much like a mummy. I'll let Bippy handle this, he knows a lot about this argument.

Seriously... You quoted my entire post and did not make a reply to any point in it.

[bippy123]

Burial Practices: Ancient Jewish Laws Concerning the Burial of the Dead
...Soon after death, family members of the deceased would mourn and prepare the body for burial. The deceased�s body was washed and anointed with various oils and spices. The body was then wrapped in unique linen clothing that contained spices and placed on a stone shelf that was carved into the bedrock wall of a the tomb... http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/back_to_ ... h_law.html

If one were to consider the practice carefully it is noted that the deceased was first washed.... (keep in mind that blood and how it is handled in jewish tradition was very carefully dealt with) It was washed until clean... thus no dirt or blood left. Then once clean it is oiled or what they called oil;

KBC, we allready dealt with these issues way back in the past pages of this thread but lets deal with them again for the umpteenth time .

Rebecca Jackson is the expert on jewish burials and it was because she knew the jewish burial customs (formerly being orthodox Jewish herself that she confirmed what happened with Jesus was in perfect accordance to a jewish burial. If you remember your jewish burial customs KBC you also know that anyone who dies in a traumatic fashion with lots of blood on him ISNT WASHED.


http://shroud2000.com/ArticlesPapers/Ar ... urial.html

One of the more interesting avenues of research is the area of burial practices. Could the Shroud have been a genuine Jewish burial shroud? How can we find out? John 19:40 says, “Taking Jesus' body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs.” What were those burial customs?

One of the points of confusion with the Shroud is that it was a custom to wash the body before burial. Yet the Shroud seems to depict a man whose wounds were never cleaned. However there appears to be an exception to this custom for those who have died a violent death. Here is an excerpt from The Jewish Way of Death and Mourning by Maurice Lamm (1969):

“The blood that flows at the time of death may not be washed away. When there is other blood on the body that flowed during lifetime (while alive), from wounds or as a result of an operation, the washing and taharah (purification) are performed in the usual manner.” “Where the deceased died instantaneously through violence or accident, and his body and garments are completely spattered with blood, no washing or taharah is performed. The body is placed in the casket without the clothes being removed. Only a sheet is wrapped around it, over the clothes. The blood is part of the body and may not be separated from it in death.” “Where blood flows continually after death, the source of the flow is covered and not washed. The clothes which contain the blood that flowed after death are placed in the casket at the feet.”

Notice how only a single sheet is used. Also, the man on the Shroud is naked because they cast lots for his garments. The reason for this unusual custom was due to the belief that “life is in the blood”. Leviticus 17:11 says, “For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life.”

Another reason why the blood must be buried with the body is because it was considered unclean. To touch a corpse was to touch something unclean and therefore become unclean yourself. One would then have to go through a ritual process of becoming clean again.

Blood that flowed after the person died is considered “life blood”. This is the blood that makes atonement. It is the trading of that which gives life for that which brings death (sin). It wasn’t just the blood, but the life in the blood that was the acceptable sacrifice.

Blood that flowed after death was often mixed with blood that flowed before death, this was called “mingled blood”. If there was more than a loss of a “quarter log” of mingled blood, it was considered unclean and must be buried with the body. A log is the content of 6 eggs. A quarter log is 1 ½ eggs. The volume of blood lost from the side-wound must have easily exceeded this measure and is why the man on the shroud is unwashed.

The Article "New Pollen Evidence from Israel" discussed the presence of pollen and flower images from plants that grow only in Jerusalem and indicate the Shroud’s existence in the Holy Land and probable use in a burial ceremony. The presence of limestone particles unique to the tombs and foothills around Jerusalem is also telling.

Everything continues to be consistent with the biblical account of the crucifixion and known Jewish burial practices.

This takes care of a large part of KBC's post.

AS far as the burial being completely, there was almost no time to finish it as the sabbath was rapidly approaching. This is why the ladies (I believe it was the ladies) came back after the sabbath to finish the ritual when they discovered that our lords tomb was empty.

The problem with Kent Hovind is that he didnt bother to check the research of the experts like Rebecca Jackson who was among the first to crack the burial customs of the ancient Jewish people. Remember that large amounts of bleeding werent washed from a victim of trauma. This practice is still performed today even with victims of terrorist bombings in Israel with people actually soaking the victims blood next to them on the groud and placing it back on the victim as this blood was considered the life blood of atonement and in fact they must try to put as much blood back on the victim as they could get.

This post also dealt with why a single cloth was used. Remember again folks, they didnt actually finish the full burial and they were on their way back to finish it, but our LORD had to go as he had more pressing engagements
Shroud.com and other fine shroud sites deal with this. Only Christians like Kent Hovind who have a hidden bias against the shroud give us half the story and hope that most of us Christians dont bother to fully research it like Rebecca Jackson and the rest of the fine shroud researchers have been doing for over 20 years.

I believe this takes care of the Objections on the ancient Jews of that day, I believe we can now put this to rest
These Objections were actually taken care of in the in the early 80's and maybe even earlier.

[bippy123]

Sounds like you believe Kent Hovind's view of the Shroud, aka the idea that Christ was buried much like a mummy. I'll let Bippy handle this, he knows a lot about this argument.

Seriously... You quoted my entire post and did not make a reply to any point in it.

No worries KBC, took care of it
As this was among the very first objections that I found that Kent Hovind made against the shroud, and this is why I keep saying that an on the surface research of the shroud will not get the full facts.

[bippy123]

Kbc I just noticed that your information comes from a site that is about Jesus's bones being found and the site is also making rediculous claims of Jesus having a son called Judah . Dude this stuff has been debunked so many times. Why the heck would u pull information from a pseudo-conspiracy site that no one takes seriously lol. I'm surprised I didn't see information on that site about pink elephants that could fly lol.

[Swimmy]

Bippy,what is your take on the fact that no olive tree pollen was found on the shroud? In what would supposedly should have been covered in it. The line of reasoning I hear to this is it could have came off in its restoration. But if this is the case so should the other pollen as well.

Also the Max guy who found the pollen doesn't seem reliable as in he was caught faking evidence before. Though the other scientists have confirmed it,they were off his samples.

[Byblos]

Bippy,what is your take on the fact that no olive tree pollen was found on the shroud? In what would supposedly should have been covered in it. The line of reasoning I hear to this is it could have came off in its restoration. But if this is the case so should the other pollen as well.

Also the Max guy who found the pollen doesn't seem reliable as in he was caught faking evidence before. Though the other scientists have confirmed it,they were off his samples.

Olive trees pollinate in the spring but exactly when depends on many, many environmental factors (average temperature and wind conditions to name a couple). It is entirely possible that the crucifixion and burial occurred before pollination even started.

Not that this little factoid makes any difference or makes me an expert in any way, but my family used to own a rather large piece of land full of olive trees. We still own a few. I remember a stark difference in timing (sometimes in weeks) from one year to the next when olive trees blossomed.

[bippy123]

Bippy,what is your take on the fact that no olive tree pollen was found on the shroud? In what would supposedly should have been covered in it. The line of reasoning I hear to this is it could have came off in its restoration. But if this is the case so should the other pollen as well.

Also the Max guy who found the pollen doesn't seem reliable as in he was caught faking evidence before. Though the other scientists have confirmed it,they were off his samples.

Swimmy I never heard once that Max frei ever doctored any pollen samples. The guy was world renowned in his field and was used in many criminal cases. He was the expert who was called in to find pollen samples in criminal cases. In fact, it was because of his pressing technique that pollen samples were found. Remember the post I just made about the oils and ointments being responsible for the pollens being buried deep in the shroud?

If frei didn't press hard enough we probably wouldn't have the pollen knowledge of the shroud that we have today.
Yes Rogers was ticked off at the force that Frei used in pressing down his sticky samples against the shroud (physicist John Jackson had to step in between them because Rogers was so angry at frei).

Remember also that frei never knew the full history of the shroud and definitely didn't know about any connection to the image of edessa ( which was found out later when John Jackson found those fold creases through microscopic examinations). Let's give the skeptics the benefit of the doubt and say Frei did plant the pollen there, but how the heck would he know what pollen samples from what countries to plant on the shroud.

Through knowing these little details the skeptics story starts to fall apart.

[bippy123]

Bippy,what is your take on the fact that no olive tree pollen was found on the shroud? In what would supposedly should have been covered in it. The line of reasoning I hear to this is it could have came off in its restoration. But if this is the case so should the other pollen as well.

Also the Max guy who found the pollen doesn't seem reliable as in he was caught faking evidence before. Though the other scientists have confirmed it,they were off his samples.

Olive trees pollinate in the spring but exactly when depends on many, many environmental factors (average temperature and wind conditions to name a couple). It is entirely possible that the crucifixion and burial occurred before pollination even started.

Not that this little factoid makes any difference or makes me an expert in any way, but my family used to own a rather large piece of land full of olive trees. We still own a few. I remember a stark difference in timing (sometimes in weeks) from one year to the next when olive trees blossomed.

Byblos great answer. Lebanese olives are tasty, especially mixed in with the mashed potato sandwich .
I believe it's called batata zeytoun sandwich

[KBCid]

Kbc I just noticed that your information comes from a site that is about Jesus's bones being found and the site is also making rediculous claims of Jesus having a son called Judah . Dude this stuff has been debunked so many times. Why the heck would u pull information from a pseudo-conspiracy site that no one takes seriously lol. I'm surprised I didn't see information on that site about pink elephants that could fly lol.

Of course they are not empirical assertions and neither was mine. I posed observations that have been made by many peoples which also include some of the less reputable sources. But, the reference was not intended to be used as a reliable source it was simply to reference the wordings that someone other than I had already put together. This is not a subject that I am in anyway an expert in nor do I assert an expertise in it. A simple bit of seemingly logical rationale was used to see what your response is. You provided your understanding as a response and all is good. If you want to go past a response to attack a source of wording you can certainly go on and on about the sanity of the people on that site but you are overlooking the fact that these are simple rationales posited my many others besides the wacko's at that particular site.

Let me further point out that my knowlege and belief in God and Christ in no way hinges on the authenticity of the shroud and to tell the truth I don't care if it absolutely and empirically can be proven to be Christs. Clothes do not make the man nor in this case the savior of mankind. The shroud at best would be a curiosity to a true christian since it would have no bearing on their belief. On the other hand it could become an idol to some who revere artifacts. God is a bit testy about showing reverence to anything other than himself and his son.

[Pierson5]

Burial Practices: Ancient Jewish Laws Concerning the Burial of the Dead
...Soon after death, family members of the deceased would mourn and prepare the body for burial. The deceased�s body was washed and anointed with various oils and spices. The body was then wrapped in unique linen clothing that contained spices and placed on a stone shelf that was carved into the bedrock wall of a the tomb... http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/back_to_ ... h_law.html

If one were to consider the practice carefully it is noted that the deceased was first washed.... (keep in mind that blood and how it is handled in jewish tradition was very carefully dealt with) It was washed until clean... thus no dirt or blood left. Then once clean it is oiled or what they called oil;

KBC, we allready dealt with these issues way back in the past pages of this thread but lets deal with them again for the umpteenth time .

Rebecca Jackson is the expert on jewish burials and it was because she knew the jewish burial customs (formerly being orthodox Jewish herself that she confirmed what happened with Jesus was in perfect accordance to a jewish burial. If you remember your jewish burial customs KBC you also know that anyone who dies in a traumatic fashion with lots of blood on him ISNT WASHED.


http://shroud2000.com/ArticlesPapers/Ar ... urial.html

Your link addresses the blood issue, which was interesting. But doesn't the Bible specifically says he was bound with spices in John 19:40 and there were multiple pieces of cloth John 20:3-7?
I have read about individuals that have checked the original documents and it's not a mistranslation. Is the Bible wrong in this area?

[Danieltwotwenty]

Your link addresses the blood issue, which was interesting. But doesn't the Bible specifically says he was bound with spices in John 19:40 and there were multiple pieces of cloth John 20:3-7?
I have read about individuals that have checked the original documents and it's not a mistranslation. Is the Bible wrong in this area?

The passage doesn't say exactly where the spices were, it says they bound the body with the spices. Were the spices on the body or where they on the linen? or maybe at the feet of the Body? Maybe this is a translational issue? what was the Jewish custom?....enter Bippy here

Yes it does say multiple cloth, there is the shroud and the sudarium ( the face cloth), there are your multiple cloths.


Dan

[bippy123]

Kbc I just noticed that your information comes from a site that is about Jesus's bones being found and the site is also making rediculous claims of Jesus having a son called Judah . Dude this stuff has been debunked so many times. Why the heck would u pull information from a pseudo-conspiracy site that no one takes seriously lol. I'm surprised I didn't see information on that site about pink elephants that could fly lol.

Of course they are not empirical assertions and neither was mine. I posed observations that have been made by many peoples which also include some of the less reputable sources. But, the reference was not intended to be used as a reliable source it was simply to reference the wordings that someone other than I had already put together. This is not a subject that I am in anyway an expert in nor do I assert an expertise in it. A simple bit of seemingly logical rationale was used to see what your response is. You provided your understanding as a response and all is good. If you want to go past a response to attack a source of wording you can certainly go on and on about the sanity of the people on that site but you are overlooking the fact that these are simple rationales posited my many others besides the wacko's at that particular site.

Let me further point out that my knowlege and belief in God and Christ in no way hinges on the authenticity of the shroud and to tell the truth I don't care if it absolutely and empirically can be proven to be Christs. Clothes do not make the man nor in this case the savior of mankind. The shroud at best would be a curiosity to a true christian since it would have no bearing on their belief. On the other hand it could become an idol to some who revere artifacts. God is a bit testy about showing reverence to anything other than himself and his son.

Kbc no one is claiming their faith hinges on the shroud. That's not what this thread is about, but some have a bias against it's authenticy for god knows what reason and like DRDS said some are actually christians. If you want my response all u had to do was honestly ask me what my opinion is on it, there is no need to try to deceptively illicit a response from me as I have been nothing but transparent about the shroud. As far as fearing that it could become an idol, sure it can for a very small percentage of people that don't understand that Christianity isn't about worshipping images, but heck people like that could also turn the bible into a graven image if they wanted to.

It doesn't mean we bury our heads in the sand and deny the evidence or pretend it doesn't exist . If all Christian historians did this then we wouldn't have the knowledge of our Christian history that we have today and if we didn't have people like sir William Ramsey and other great christians we would still have people thinking that the bible was written 250 years after Christ. The lord taught us to seek and we shall find, but you are right that our faith rests on Jesus and the promises he gave us, but he definitely didn't tell us to be fiedists did he.

Yes you did pose objections that others have posted here ( mostly skeptical atheists I might add) and I have thoroughly answered most of those objections, but it really would help if you pretended to be unbiased and actually researched the information yourself instead of me doing 99% of the legwork answering a bunch of common objections that were answered by most of the experts. How about looking through the many pages in this thread where you will get most of the answers or shroud.com where u will get all of the answers ?
When I study a subject I at least try to first look at all of the objections that critic that side.if your a critic of the shroud shouldn't you at least know a little about it?

What was it that Paul the apostle told the ancient Greeks?
Come let us reason together

And kbci, when you were busy testing my response , your posts also exposed your responses too
God bless

[bippy123]

Your link addresses the blood issue, which was interesting. But doesn't the Bible specifically says he was bound with spices in John 19:40 and there were multiple pieces of cloth John 20:3-7?
I have read about individuals that have checked the original documents and it's not a mistranslation. Is the Bible wrong in this area?

The passage doesn't say exactly where the spices were, it says they bound the body with the spices. Were the spices on the body or where they on the linen? or maybe at the feet of the Body? Maybe this is a translational issue? what was the Jewish custom?....enter Bippy here

Yes it does say multiple cloth, there is the shroud and the sudarium ( the face cloth), there are your multiple cloths.


Dan

Hehe yea Dan, you knew I wouldn't leave pierson's objections unanswered .
It took about 4 hours of digging (whewwww), but to a person with my disorder 4 hours pass by in 15 minutes.
I have found all the answers and the word used for multiple cloths can mean cloth or cloths and there is no consensus on this. Took me going through a few experts to fully get this.

I also learned that a person in that area that is executed by the government MUST be buried in one cloth, so an old dog (me) was taught a new trick hehe.

I am specifically forbidden to use the desktop pc in the late evening, so I'm on my iPod right now so I'll post the full information from multiple sources tomorrow. I feel like my heads gonna explode right now hehe.
God bless folks
And yes Dan most Christian skeptics of the shroud say that because there are 2 cloths found at the tomb that this debunks the shroud, but they keep forgetting that the second piece is the sudarium of Oviedo .
And don't worry kbci, I won't ever be worshipping the shroud because I can tell the difference between an image (even the image of Christ miraculously Imprinted during the resurrection of our lord), and our lord . There is only one savior for me and that's Jesus Christ .