Monday, August 6, 2007

The Shroud of Turin: Burial Sheet of Jesus?: Contents

I have decided to largely (but not completely) confine my

[Above: "The Holy Shroud," by Giovanni Battista della Rovere (1561-1630), Galleria Sabauda, Turin]

blogging here to writing an outline of a book, "The Shroud of Turin: Burial Sheet of Jesus?", as per the following chapter headings.


THE SHROUD OF TURIN: BURIAL SHEET OF JESUS?
© Stephen E. Jones

1. INTRODUCTION
2. HISTORY OF THE SHROUD
3. THE BIBLE AND THE SHROUD
4. FOR THE SHROUD BEING JESUS' BURIAL SHEET
5. AGAINST THE SHROUD BEING JESUS' BURIAL SHEET
6. IMAGE FORMATION THEORIES
7. CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY

This will be, as the name suggests, a systematic analysis of the evidence for, and against, the Shroud of Turin being the very burial sheet of Jesus.

This is similar to what I am doing on my CreationEvolutionDesign blog, where most of my posts will be writing notes for a future book, "Problems of Evolution."

As there, this Contents page will contain the hyperlinks to each chapter, and each chapter in turn will contain the hyperlinks to each section in it. Each section will have its own page. The numbering of sections and even of chapters may change as the book outline grows. I will try to post at least one new section a week, not necessarily in chapter or section order. Because of the limitations of Blogger's format (and my time!), each section will have to be brief. If I make changes to an existing section, I won't post it again, although I may indicate it on a current post. While I will still continue to post here on other Shroud-related issues, including continuing here my "Bogus: Shroud of Turin?" series begun on my other blog), writing this book outline will be my main focus on this blog.

Comments are welcome but as per my stated policy, I no longer have the time or inclination for extended debate, so I will generally respond only once to each comment that appears.

Since I intend to use this material eventually as the basis of a published book , I hereby assert copyright over this page and all "The Shroud of Turin: Burial Sheet of Jesus?" pages linked under it.

PS: Note that the lead author of the paper in scientific journal, admitting that "The Turin Shroud ... bears" a "remarkable image" which "depicts all the stigmata of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as described in the Bible" (my emphasis), was Harry E. Grove, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Rochester NY, who was the leading figure in the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud to the 14th century!

Stephen E. Jones, BSc. (Biology).
My other blog: CreationEvolutionDesign


"The Turin Shroud is a linen cloth the color of old ivory measuring 4.4 by 1.1 m. It bears the faint front and back, head to head, imprint of a naked man. This remarkable image depicts all the stigmata of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as described in the Bible. As a result, it is thought by many to be the actual burial cloth of Jesus. The shroud's known history dates back to about the year 1357 when it was displayed in a church in Lirey, France. The shroud, or some version of it, eventually passed into the hands of the House of Savoy. The shroud was stored in a silver chest in a chapel in Chambery, France and in 1532 a fire raged through the chapel. Part of the chest melted and gouts of molten silver burned through the shroud, fortunately outside the image, in a symmetric fashion due to the way it was folded in the chest. The shroud was doused with water before further damage could occur and the burn holes were later patched. In 1578 the seat of the House of Savoy was moved to Turin, Italy and the shroud moved with it. In 1983 the last king of Italy, Umberto II, a member of the House of Savoy, willed the shroud to the Vatican. It is presently stored in a silver reliquary in a glass case behind the main altar of the Cathedral of John the Baptist in Turin, under the custody of the Archbishop of Turin." (Gove, H.E., Mattingly, S.J., David, A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, "A problematic source of organic contamination of linen," Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research -Section B, 1997, pp.504-507, p.504. My emphasis)

2 comments:

Jon said...

Perhaps, the shroud of Turin is like the Tilma of Juan Diego where the image of the Virgin Mary was imprinted. Considering that the tilma still exist to this day and did not rot, it could be said that it is alive. When alive, plants absorbed radio carbon and stop only when it died whence radio carbon decay. This is the basic principle of carbon dating. Now if the shroud is alive up to the date when it was first exposed to public then it was only at that date where the linen (derived from plant) has its radio carbon start to decay. Consequently, the carbon dating will point to the said date, which was the one observed in the radio carbon dating experiment. This can support the belief that the shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Jesus. Please give comment to this idea to JonAce73@yahoo.com

Stephen E. Jones said...

Jon

Thanks for your comment.

>Perhaps, the shroud of Turin is like the Tilma of Juan Diego where the image of the Virgin Mary was imprinted.

From admittedly what little I have read about the Tilma of Juan Diego, aka. the Image of Guadelupe, there is no comparison between it and the Shroud of Turin.

Scientific testing of the Shroud of Turin has shown it not to be a painting, with no paint or pigment, but scientific testing has shown the Image of Guadelupe to be a painting, with layers of paint:

"In 2002, art restoration expert José Sol Rosales said he examined the icon with a stereomicroscope and that he identified calcium sulfate, pine soot, white, blue, and green "tierras" (soil), reds made from carmine and other pigments, as well as gold. Rosales said he found the work consistent with 16th century materials and methods ... Norberto Rivera Carrera, Archbishop of Mexico, commissioned a 1999 study to test the tilma's age. Leoncio Garza-Valdés, a pediatrician and microbiologist who had previously worked with the Shroud of Turin, claimed, upon inspection of photographs of the image, to have found three distinct layers in the painting, at least one of which had initials painted on it." ("Our Lady of Guadalupe," Wikipedia).

Garza-Valdés, whom I know of from my Shroud of Turin studies, is a devout Roman Catholic, who regards the Shroud of Turin as authentic, so if he says the Image of Guadalupe is a painting, that is decisive for me.

>Considering that the tilma still exist to this day and did not rot, it could be said that it is alive.

I gather the Image of Guadelupe is on hemp, which is very durable.

>When alive, plants absorbed radio carbon and stop only when it died whence radio carbon decay. This is the basic principle of carbon dating.

Agreed.

>Now if the shroud is alive up to the date when it was first exposed to public then it was only at that date where the linen (derived from plant) has its radio carbon start to decay.

The Shroud itself is linen, which is woven flax and ceases to be alive when the flax dies, i.e. is harvested.

>Consequently, the carbon dating will point to the said date, which was the one observed in the radio carbon dating experiment. This can support the belief that the shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Jesus

It wouldn't. That the flax the linen of the Shroud is made of was alive just before the Shroud's first undisputed appearance in France c. 1350, is in fact what the 1988 radiocarbon date of 1260-1390 assumed is the case.

Proponents of the authenticity of the Shroud claim the flax was alive only up to or before the early 1st century AD, and that the radiocarbon date is wrong, i.e. it does not yield a true chronological age, due to one or more factors, such as contamination with younger carbon, and/or enrichment of neutrons (i.e. from Jesus' resurrecting body changing its state of matter), that are known to give an apparently younger radiocarbon age than the actual chronological age.

Stephen E. Jones