tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post8523668569247037320..comments2024-03-14T08:08:39.968+08:00Comments on The Shroud of Turin: TSoT: Bibliography "A"Stephen E. Joneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16183223752386599799noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-42375502400224424512007-11-23T10:10:00.000+09:002007-11-23T10:10:00.000+09:00CreationisticThanks for your comment.>How do you w...Creationistic<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your comment.<BR/><BR/>>How do you weigh passages in The Bible with all of this science and carbon dating?<BR/><BR/>The short answer is that the Shroud is compatible with the Bible, it is supported by science, with the sole exception of the carbon dating. <BR/><BR/>However, there were a lot of problems with the latter, including the possibility (if not <I>probability</I>) of outright fraud. See "<A HREF="http://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/STURP.TXT" REL="nofollow">The Great Holy Shroud Dating Fraud of 1988</A>." I certainly don't agree with everything in this paper, but there seems to be at least a <I>prima facie</I> case that the Shroud linen sample may have been switched for a sample from a medieval cloth.<BR/><BR/>If my proposal to radiocarbon date the Shroud's pollen (as set out in my paper "<A HREF="http://creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/2007/05/proposal-to-radiocarbon-date-pollen-of.html " REL="nofollow">A proposal to radiocarbon-date the pollen of the Shroud of Turin</A>," to be published in December's <A HREF="http://www.shroud.com/bstsmain.htm" REL="nofollow">British Society for the Turin Shroud</A>'s Newsletter), if carried out, will provide an independent check, using the same method, on the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud's linen.<BR/><BR/>>It is my understanding from various passages in The Bible that the shroud is unlikely to be the burial shroud of Jesus, especially in looking at Jhn 20:7.<BR/>><BR/>>"And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself."<BR/><BR/>Again, the short answer is that there is no real conflict between the Shroud and the Bible. In my book, "<A HREF="http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2007/08/shroud-of-turin-burial-sheet-of-jesus.html" REL="nofollow">The Shroud of Turin: Burial Sheet of Jesus?</A>," I will have a chapter, "3. THE BIBLE AND THE SHROUD," where I will fully cover this issue.<BR/><BR/>The basic problem is that the various gospel writers, writing from their own perspective, use different Greek words for the various graveclothes, singly and collectively (i.e. <I>sindon</I> = linen sheet, shroud; <I>othonia</I> = linen strips, linen collectively, <I>sudarion</I> = head cloth, jaw-band; and <I>keiriai</I> = bandages, windings); and the problem is compounded by our English translations of those Greek words, and our preexisting ideas that the Jews wrapped their bodies like Egyptian mummies, when they did not.<BR/><BR/>Here are some quotes which explain and answer these problems:<BR/><BR/>"Although the New Testament's description of typical first-century Jewish burial customs is not overly detailed, it does give the general features. The body was washed (Acts 9:37) and the hands and feet were bound (John 11:44). A cloth handkerchief (Greek, <I>sudarion</I>) was placed `around' the face (John 11:44; 20:7). The body was then wrapped in clean linen, often mixed with spices (John 19:39-40), and laid in the tomb or grave. The <I>Code of Jewish Law</I> adds that the Jews usually shaved the head and beard completely and cut the fingernails before burial. However, the gospels tell us that Jesus' burial was incomplete. Because the Sabbath was about to begin, he was removed from the cross and laid in the tomb rather hurriedly. This is why the women returned to the tomb on Sunday morning. They had prepared spices and ointments for Jesus' body, and they went to the tomb to apply them (Luke 23:54-56). It is not often noticed why the women went to the tomb. They certainly did not expect Jesus to rise (Luke 24:3-4; John 20:12-15). Rather they came in order to finish anointing Jesus' body with the prepared spices (Luke 24:1; Mark 16:1). They were worried about who would help them to move the stone from the entrance of the tomb so that they could finish the job begun before the Sabbath (Mark 16:3)." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, pp.46-47).<BR/><BR/>"Another apparent problem crops up in the descriptions of the grave clothes the disciples saw in the tomb on Easter morning. Both Luke and John describe grave clothes in the tomb. Luke says that Peter went inside the tomb and saw the <I>othonia</I>-the generic term for all the grave clothes, including the shroud and the smaller pieces used to bind the jaw, hands, and feet. John, however, gives a more detailed description of what he and Peter saw, and he introduces another term into the grave clothes listing. When they went into the tomb, they saw the <I>othonia</I> lying on the ground, but also the <I>sudarion</I> lying rolled up in a place by itself, apart from these <I>othonia</I>. John adds the detail that the <I>sudarion</I> had been "around the head" of Jesus. <I>Sudarion</I> means `napkin' or `sweat cloth.' It is, at any rate, a rather small piece of cloth. If it had been placed over the face of Jesus in the tomb, no image of Jesus' face would have appeared on the Shroud. Since the Shroud of Turin bears the image of a face, the reference to a <I>sudarion</I> seems to challenge the authenticity of the Shroud. Indeed, some Christians have pointed to this passage as evidence that the Shroud is incompatible with scripture. However, a number of scripture scholars do not think that the <I>sudarion</I> was a napkin or cloth placed over Jesus' face. The Mishnah instructs Jews to tie up the chin of the corpse (Shabbath 23;5). The <I>Code of Jewish Law</I> also commands the practice of binding the chin. 8 Lazarus' napkin was wrapped "around" his face (Greek, <I>perideo</I>), a position that is more consistent with the jaw being tied shut. Additionally, John's observation that Jesus' napkin was found "rolled up" (Greek, <I>entulisso</I>) in the empty tomb corresponds closely to the cloth being used to bind the jaw. John A.T. Robinson, the British New Testament scholar, gives the most plausible explanation for the <I>sudarion</I>. He says it was probably a jaw band, a piece of linen rolled up into a strip, placed under the chin, drawn up around the face, and tied on the top of the head. Its function was to keep the jaw shut before rigor mortis set in. Not only does the New Testament not state that the napkin was placed over the face so as to cover it, but the combination of `wrapped up' and `around the head' (John 20:7; cf. 11:44) fits what is depicted in the Shroud. Jaw bands are used for this purpose today and there is every reason to believe that they were used in first-century Palestine. There is evidence for just such a jaw band on the three-dimensional image of the face of the Shroud. The hair of the man seems to be separated from the cheeks. The hair or the left side of the face hangs out over the edge of an object probably the chin band." (Stevenson & Habermas, 1981, pp.49-50).<BR/><BR/> "As we have already mentioned, it was normal for Jews to be buried in clothing, more specifically the white garments they wore for festivals. In the case of Jesus we would not necessarily expect this, as we know his clothing was taken from him at the time of crucifixion. But many authors have pointed out. that we would certainly not expect the fourteen-foot sheet that we find preserved in Turin. Here again we are in a hornets' nest of controversy over gospel interpretation that exists quite independently of the Shroud. It all stems from apparent conflicts of information between the synoptic writers and St. John. The synoptics speak only of the <I>sindon</I> purchased by Joseph of Arimathea (Mt. 7:59; Mk. 15:46; Lk. 23:53). This is often translated as shroud, although it should be pointed out that it does not have a specifically sepulchral meaning. St. Mark, for instance, used the same word to describe the garment lost by the young man at Gethsemane who fled at the arrest of Jesus (Mk. 14:51, 52). St. John, on the other hand, does not use the word <I>sindon</I>, but instead says the body of Jesus was wrapped in <I>othonia</I>. And in his account of the discovery of the linens in the empty tomb again he uses the word <I>othonia</I> (which he describes as lying at the scene), and refers also cryptically to a mysterious <I>soudarion</I>, rolled up and lying in a place by itself (Jn. 20:7) . The precise meanings of <I>othonia</I> and <I>sindon</I> in their gospel context have been hotly debated. Some have contended that <I>othonia</I> (which is a plural form) means linen bands and that Joseph must have torn up the <I>sindon</I> into strips to wind Jesus mummy-style. Quite neutral exegetes such as Pere Benoit have pointed out that it would surely have been easier for Joseph to purchase ready-made bandages rather than tearing up a large sheet for this purpose. The most balanced modern view is that <I>othonia</I> means cloths in general, which could incorporate shroud and bands." (Wilson, I., "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, 1978, pp.41-42).<BR/><BR/> "What of the <I>soudarion</I>, literally a `sweat cloth'? Some have thought of this as simply the headcloth or chin band-which is clearly what the <I>soudarion</I> mentioned in the story of Lazarus as `round his face' (Jn. 11:44) was. Others have argued that it may have been our Shroud, on the grounds that the description of it as having been `over his head' (Jn. 20:7) could well refer to the manner in which we know the Turin Shroud was used. In support of this argument we may note that in the Lazarus account St. John uses the word <I>peri</I> ('round' or `about'), in contrast to <I>epi</I> ('over'), in the case of Jesus, leaving open the possibility that a different arrangement (and different size of cloth) is being described. St. John makes special mention of Jesus' <I>soudarion</I> being `not with the <I>othonia</I> but rolled up in a place by itself,' which certainly might suggest a cloth larger and more important than a mere chin hand; but as many maintain adamantly that a <I>soudarion</I> could not be anything larger than a handkerchief-sized piece of cloth, it seems unwise to be dogmatic. The conclusion to be drawn is that from exegetical studies alone we can be sure of nothing, that of themselves they can neither prove nor disprove that the Shroud is genuine. It does seem worthwhile at least to consider the various possibilities raised by the gospel accounts for what the Shroud might have been among the linens Peter and John found in the empty tomb on the first Easter Sunday." (Wilson, 1978, pp.42-43).<BR/><BR/> "The precise nature of the burial cloths has been the subject of much debate. The synoptists tell us that Joseph of Arimathea bought (Mark) a clean (Matthew) linen shroud or sheet (Greek - <I>sindon</I>) and wrapped Jesus in it (Matthew, Mark, Luke) [Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:50-56]. John mentions no shroud, but speaks in the plural of linen cloths (<I>othonia</I>) [Jn 19:40; 20:5-6] and also of a <I>soudarion</I> - "the napkin, which had been on his head ... rolled up in a place by itself." [Jn 20:7] The disputed (but probably authentic) passage at Luke 24:12 makes no further reference to the sheet, but mentions <I>othonia</I> lying by themselves. Christian artists have commonly depicted the grave-clothes of Jesus as broad bandages wound round the limbs and the body, together with a turban-like towel around his head. Some writers have visualised the linen sheet being torn into strips and the spices being wound into the folds. It has then been supposed that at the resurrection the<I>soudarion</I> and <I>othonia</I> collapsed in situ to form two separate piles. As will be seen presently this does not in fact tally very well with what the evangelists say, but it illustrates the apparently rather imprecise and confusing picture which they seem to give. John gives us an account of a normal burial in a well-to-do home in his record of the raising of Lazarus: "The dead man came out, his hands and feet bound with bandages (<I>keiriai</I>), and his face wrapped with a cloth (<I>soudarion</I>). Jesus said to them, `Unbind him, and let him go.'' [Jn 11:44] There is nothing in this account to suggest a winding of long bandages around arms and legs and other parts of the body; indeed just the opposite, for the resuscitated corpse was certainly not deprived of wrappings which left him standing there naked. Before burial he had been washed, anointed with perfumed ointments and dressed in his best clean garment. Short strips of cloth had apparently been tied round wrists and ankles to keep his arms and legs in position, and the <I>soudarion</I> kept the mouth from falling open. The hobbled Lazarus was able to shuffle to the entrance of the tomb, where he was set free by the untying of these three cloths. And now he stood there fully clothed." (Wenham, J.W., "Easter Enigma: Are the Resurrection Stories in Conflict?," [1984], Paternoster: Exeter UK, Reprinted, 1987, pp.66-67).<BR/><BR/>"<I>Q. Doesn't the Shroud conflict with Scripture?</I> a) John 20:5-7 mentions linens and at the very least implies there were a minimum of two cloths. Many have suggested that the linens were `strips,' however the Shroud is merely one piece of cloth. ... <I>A.</I> …. The answers to these apparent discrepancies are as follows: First, the Gospels use the following words to describe the Shroud: <I>Sindon</I> burial sheet, winding sheet, shroud; <I>sudarion</I>-sweat cloth, face cloth, handkerchief; <I>othonia</I> linens. One way for the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) to be in harmony with John is if a burial method like the one depicted on the Shroud was used. John mentions a cloth that was described as `around his head' and about the face of Lazarus (John 20:7; 11:44). The word is <I>sudarion</I>, used in burial to bind the jaw against the effects of rigor mortis. There is evidence on the Shroud that a <I>sudarion</I> was used, though the whereabouts of any such cloth has long been unknown. The Shroud is a pure linen garment with some evidence that the head, hands, and feet were bound, most likely with other `linens.' The synoptics describe a linen sheet-a single cloth. Most likely, the sheet was more significant to the synoptic writers than other funerary cloths. Since the Jewish burial custom allowed the use of cloths to bind the hands and feet as well as the jaw, the total picture matches Jewish burial customs exactly and explains clearly why the synoptics only mention a <I>sindon</I> and John mentions <I>othonia</I>. Second, John's use of <I>othonia</I> has led to a widely held belief that Jesus was wrapped like an Egyptian mummy. But such a procedure doesn't conform to what is known of first-century normal Jewish burial ritual. Nor does it match what was previously mentioned in the Word, to wit, that Joseph of Arimathea had purchased a winding sheet and wrapped Jesus in it (Mark 15:46). Even John used the word <I>edesan</I>, which is translated wound in the KJV but literally means `enfolded.' Enfolded would also match the burial custom. Being wrapped with strips of cloth would not. In other words, <I>othonia</I> in John should be understood to mean that Jesus' dead body was enveloped from head to feet in one burial cloth, not wrapped like a mummy with numerous strips of cloth." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, 1990, p.149-150. Emphasis original).<BR/><BR/>"In addition to the Frei sticky tapes taken from the Shroud in 1973 (Table 1) and 1978 for pollen grains, other related materials were also examined. This included three samples from the Sudarium of Oviedo, the traditional face cloth (John 20:7), which would have been wrapped around the head to cover the disfigured face until enshroudment. The Sudarium, which has only bloodstains and no image, has been housed in Oviedo, Spain, continuously since the mid-8th century (Guscin, 1998). In 1979, Frei took 46 sticky tape samples from the Sudarium. All except three of these were removed from his collection shortly after his death and were not available for examination." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.11)<BR/><BR/>See the video "<A HREF="http://www.shroud2000.com/streamingvideos.html#guscin" REL="nofollow">Shroud Report Interview with Mark Guscin</A>" for a demonstration of how the Sudarium of Oviedo (the <I>sudarion</I> of John 20:7) complements the Shroud of Turin.<BR/><BR/>>There are other issues as well that would lead me to believe that this is not the burial shroud of Jesus.<BR/><BR/>OK.<BR/><BR/>>I confess that I am neither a theologian nor an expert and it is clear that you have done much research into this area - but I see some things that appear to be contrary to the belief that the shroud is in fact His.<BR/><BR/>See above.<BR/><BR/>>Thanks!<BR/><BR/>Hope this has helped.<BR/><BR/>Stephen E. JonesStephen E. Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16183223752386599799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-46976801816537898272007-11-23T02:31:00.000+09:002007-11-23T02:31:00.000+09:00Hi Stephen,How do you weigh passages in The Bible ...Hi Stephen,<BR/><BR/>How do you weigh passages in The Bible with all of this science and carbon dating?<BR/><BR/>It is my understanding from various passages in The Bible that the shroud is unlikely to be the burial shroud of Jesus, especially in looking at Jhn 20:7.<BR/><BR/>"And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself."<BR/><BR/>There are other issues as well that would lead me to believe that this is not the burial shroud of Jesus.<BR/><BR/>I confess that I am neither a theologian nor an expert and it is clear that you have done much research into this area - but I see some things that appear to be contrary to the belief that the shroud is in fact His.<BR/><BR/>Thanks!Creationistichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07440186784865408933noreply@blogger.com