Thursday, January 24, 2013

False malware warning

I just now (9 February 2013) entered theshroudofturin.blogspot.com into Google Chrome and the false malware message no longer appears.

I have just been told that this blog gives the following malware warning (click to enlarge) to visitors using Google Chrome and the old http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com address (i.e. without the ".au" suffix):

As I explained to the person who kindly warned me of the problem:

I have up-to-date virus protection, I am averaging 68 visits a day, including 17 in the last hour, and no one else has told me my page is infected. I can look at the HTML source code and there is nothing that I haven't written. So I assume ... has received a false positive virus message.

But on further checking I found that when I entered the old http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com (without the ".au" suffix) address into Google Chrome only, I too received the above warning. It does not appear in Internet Explorer or Firefox even when I use the old http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com address. And it does not appear in Google Chrome, Internet Explorer or Firefox when I use the new ".au" suffix address: http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com.au.

So I assume it is a false positive malware message. But because it will deter visitors using Google Chrome and the old address accessing this blog, I have sent the following feedback to Blogger Support:


Blogger Support

When my The Shroud of Turin blog http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com.au/ is accessed via Google Chrome using its old address http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com a malware message is displayed that my blog has been infected with malware inserted by www*sanfrancisco*sentinel*com ["."s replaced by "*"s]. The malware message does not appear in Google Chrome, Internet Explore or Mozilla Firefox when the when the new ".au" address http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com.au/ is used. And it doesn't appear in Internet Explore or Mozilla Firefox when the when the old ".com" address is used. So it seems to be a particular problem of accessing my blog's old http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com [address] using Google Chrome. Can you please investigate and fix the problem? Thanks.

Stephen E. Jones


PS: I haven't heard back from Blogger Support. But I have since thought of another reason why Google Chrome's warning message:

Content from www*sanfrancisco*sentinel*com, a known malware distributor, has been inserted into this web page. Visiting this page now is very likely to infect your computer with malware.
must be wrong. I have not edited this blog's template for many years, so a malware virus would have to be able to breach Blogger's security to infect it. This morning I looked at this blog's underlying template, which said it had not been updated since 2004, and a search on "sentinel" in it drew a blank. So again it sounds like a Google Chrome issue, and nothing to do with my blog.

PPS: By chance I found one of my blog posts had a reference to sanfrancisco*sentinel*com ["."s replaced by "*"s]. I have deleted that name in the hope that it was the name of that site that Google Chrome was reacting to.

Stephen E. Jones

Friday, January 11, 2013

The Shroud of Turin: 2.4. The wounds

Here, belatedly, is part 10, "2.4. The wounds" in my series, The Shroud of Turin My previous post in this series was part 9, "2.3. The man on the Shroud ." See the series' part 1, Contents for more information about this series.


THE SHROUD OF TURIN
2. WHAT IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN?
2.4. THE WOUNDS
© Stephen E. Jones

Wounds. The man on the Shroud has numerous wounds [1], to

[Above: The wounds, bloodstains and other marks on the Shroud of Turin[2]]

his head (front and back)[3] and his face[4]; his body (front and back)[5]; his arms[6] and hands[7]; and his legs[8] and feet[9].

As will be seen, both the wounds[10] and the bloodstains[11] have an anatomical[12], scientific[13] and historical [14] accuracy which was unknown in the 14th century[15], and therefore represent yet another major problem of the forgery theory[16, §3].

Head and face. The man's scalp, front and back[17], has numerous puncture wounds[18] which correspond to a crown, or rather cap, of thorns[19] being thrust over the top of the man's head[20]. These puncture wounds match those on the Sudarium of Oviedo[21 ] which has been in Spain since the seventh century[22]. This is evidence that the 13th-14th century radiocarbon date of the Shroud[23] is wrong[24] and is another major problem for the forgery theory[25, §4]. His face has been severely beaten[26] with a broken nose[27, 28], and swelling of both eyebrows, below his right eye, nose, left cheek, and left side of his chin [29].

Body. The man's shoulders have abrasions consistent with having carried a Roman crossbeam[30]. His chest and back have over a hundred small dumbbell shaped

[Left: A Roman flagrum from Herculaneum (modern Ercolano) near Pompeii[31]]

wounds[32] which correspond to the pieces of metal[33] attached to the three thongs of a Roman whip called a flagrum[34]. On his right side[35], just below his heart[36] there is a large wound which corresponds to a thrust of a Roman lance[37].


Arms and hands. The man has a wound at the wrist of his left hand consistent with a large nail having been driven through it[38]. Unlike traditional depictions of Christ with nails in the palms of his hands[39], the Shroud is scientifically[40] and historically[41] accurate because nails through ithe palms cannot support a man's body[42]. The man's left hand is crossed over his right[43] so any nail wound in his right hand cannot be seen[44].

Legs and feet. The man's knees have lacerations[45] consistent with the man having fallen to his knees on hard ground or paving[46]. The back of his calves and front of his thighs also have numerous dumbbell shaped wounds[47] from scourging with a Roman flagrum[48]. The right foot only is visible on the Shroud[49] and then only on the dorsal side[50]. It has a wound consistent with a large nail having been driven through it[51]. The left foot is not visible presumably because it was placed over the right foot[52], and the two feet affixed to the cross by a single nail[53]. Then rigor mortis would prevent the feet being laid out flat on the cloth[54].

Most of these wounds are accompanied with bloodstains[55] which will be considered separately in part 11, "2.4. The bloodstains." The wounds correspond with the Gospel's description the suffering and death of Jesus Christ[56] and will be further considered in "3. The Bible and the Shroud."

NOTES
1. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.21. [return]
2. Brooks, E.H., II., Miller, V.D. & Schwortz, B.M., 1981, "The Turin Shroud: Contemporary Insights to an Ancient Paradox," Worldwide Exhibition: Chicago IL, p.13. [return]
3. Wilson, I. & Miller, V., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, pp.17,20.[return]
4. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.17. [return]
5. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.20. [return]
6. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.22. [return]
7. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.22-23. [return]
8. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.20. [return]
9. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.24. [return]
10. Wilson & Miller, 1986, pp.26,29. [return
11. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.29. [return]
12. Wilson, 1979, p.32. [return]
13. Wilson, 1979, p.36. [return]
14. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, pp.43-48)[return]
15.Wilson, 1998, p.9 [return]
16. Wilson, 1979, p.41. [return]
17. Wilson, 1979, pp.36-37. [return]
18. Wilson, 1979, p.36. [return]
19. Wilson, 1979, p.37. [return]
20. Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," Earl of Wicklow, transl., Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963, pp.93-94. [return]
21 . Guscin, M., 1998, "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, pp.30,32. [return]
22. Guscin, 1998, pp.13-17. [return]
23. Damon, P.E., et al., "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16 February, 1989, pp.611-615. [return]
24. Adler, A.D., 1998, "Concerning the Side Strip on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, 2002, pp.89-90. [return]
25. Guscin, 1998, pp.84-87. [return]
26. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.32. [return]
27. Zugibe, F.T., 1988, "The Cross and the Shroud: A Medical Enquiry into the Crucifixion," Paragon House: New York NY, Revised edition, p.28. [return]
28. That is, the nasal cartilage has separated from the bone (Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, pp.2-3). [return]
29. Wilson, 1979, p.36. [return]
30. Wilson, 1979, pp.38-39. [return]
31. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.56. [return]
32. Wilson, 1979, p.38. [return]
33. Wilson, 1979, p.38. [return]
34. Wilson, 1979, pp.47-48. [return]
35. Wilson, 1979, p.30. [return]
36. Barbet, 1953, pp.137-138. [return]
37. Wilson, 1979, pp.48-49. [return]
38. Wilson, 1979, pp.40-41. [return]
39. Wilson, 1979, p.40. [return]
40. Wilson, 1979, pp.40-41. [return]
41. Wilson, 1998, pp.44-48. [return]
42. Wilson & Miller, 1986, pp.22-23. [return]
43. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.165. [return]
44. Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.165. [return]
45. Wilson, 1979, p.39. [return]
46. Wilson, 1998, p.33. [return]
47. Wilson, 1979, p.38. [return]
48. Wilson, 1986, p.20. [return]
49. Wilson, 1979, p.42. [return]
50. Wilson, 1979, p.22. [return]
51. Wilson, 1986, p.24. [return]
52. Wilson, 1979, pp.41-42. [return]
53. Wilson, 1979, p.42. [return]
54. Antonacci, 2000, p.32. [return]
55. Wilson, 1979, p.36. return]
56. Wilson, 1979, p.36. [return]
§3, §4. To be further examined under "9. Problems of the forgery theory". [return]


To be continued in part 11, "2.5. The bloodstains."

Last updated: 15 July, 2013.

Thursday, November 22, 2012

The Shroud of Turin: 2.3. The man on the Shroud

The following is part 9, "2.3. The man on the Shroud" in my series, The Shroud of Turin The previous post in this series was part 8, "2.2. The Shroud's location " and the series' first post was part 1, the Contents page. See that page for more information about this series .


THE SHROUD OF TURIN
2. WHAT IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN?
2.3. THE MAN ON THE SHROUD
© Stephen E. Jones

Image of a man. As we saw in part 3, "1.1 Overview of the Shroud of Turin", the Shroud bears the faint[1] double image[2], front and back[3], head to head[4] of a naked[5], bearded[6], muscular[7], tall[8], man [9].

Frontal image. On the frontal image the man's hands are crossed over his pelvis[10], covering his genitals[11].

[Right (click to enlarge): The frontal image on the Shroud[12]. For the full image, see part 3]

Wounds and bloodstains. He has wounds[13] and bloodstains[14] which match the Gospels' description[15] of the beating[16], crowning with thorns[17], flogging[18], carrying a cross[19], crucifixion[20], death[21], legs not broken[22], speared in the side[23], wrapped in a linen shroud[24], burial[25] and resurrection[26] of Jesus Christ[27].

Dorsal image The dorsal or back image of the man on the Shroud shows multiple puncture wounds to the back of the head, evidently caused by a crown, or

[Left (click to enlarge): The dorsal (back) image on the Shroud[28].

rather cap of thorns[29]; over 100 small dumbbell shaped indentation wounds which correspond to those inflicted by a Roman flagrum on the back and legs[30], pooling of blood in the small of the back[31]. Only the image of the sole of the right foot is visible[32] and from it there is a blood flow evidently from a nail wound[33]. There is also dirt adhering to the footprint[34], which as we shall later see is very significant.

This will all be covered in more detail in "2.4. The wounds," "2.5. The bloodstains" and "3. The Bible and the Shroud."

NOTES
1. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.21. [return]
2. Wilson, 1979, p.21. [return]
3. Antonacci, M., 2000, "The Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.1. [return]
4. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B. , 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, 2000, p.18). [return]
5. Drews, R., 1984, "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD, p.11. [return]
6. Guerrera, V., 2000, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.1. [return]
7. Wilson, 1979, p.21. [return]
8. About 181 cms or 5 ft 11 in. (Wilson, 1979, p.35). [return]
9. Wilson, 1979, p.21. [return]
10. Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, p.vii. [return]
11. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.56. [return]
12. Latendresse, M., 2010, ShroudScope: Durante 2002. [return]
13. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, p.4. [return]
14. Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, pp.2-3. [return]
15. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, pp.84-88. [return]
16. Mt 27:30; Mk 15:19; Lk 22:63-64; Jn 19:3. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.86. [return]
17. Mt 27:29; Mk 15:17-20; Jn 19:2. Stevenson & Habermas, 1981, p.122. [return]
18. Mt 27:28-29; Mk 15:17-18; Jn 19:2. Stevenson & Habermas, TN, 1990, pp.84-85. [return]
19. Jn 19:17; Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.86. [return]
20. Lk 24:39-40; Jn 20:20,25-27; Col 2:14. Guerrera, 2000, p.39. [return]
21. Mt 27:50; Mk 15:37; Lk 23:46; Jn 19:30. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.87. [return]
22. Jn 19:30-33. Antonacci, 2000, p.120. [return]
23. Jn 19:34-35. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, p.87. [return]
24. Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53; Jn 19:40. Guerrera, 2000, p.37. [return]
25. Mt 27:59-60; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:52-53; Jn 19:41-42. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, pp.87-88. [return]
26. Mt 28:1-6; Mk 16:1-6; Lk 24:1-7; Jn 20:1-9. Stevenson & Habermas, 1981, p.156. [return]
27. Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, pp.83-99. [return]
28. Latendresse, 2010. [return]
29. Wilson, 1979, pp.36-37. [return]
30. Wilson, 1979, p.38. [return]
31. Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.26. [return]
32. Wilson, 1979, pp.41-42. [return]
34. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.93. [return]


To be continued in part 10, "2.4. The wounds".

Last updated: 27 February, 2013.

Monday, November 5, 2012

The Shroud of Turin: 2.2. The Shroud's location

This is part 8, "2.2. The Shroud's location" in my series, The Shroud of Jesus? The previous page was part 7, "2.1. A linen sheet " See part 1, the main Contents page, for more information about this series .


THE SHROUD OF TURIN
2. WHAT IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN?
2.2. THE SHROUD'S LOCATION
© Stephen E. Jones

1578 Turin Cathedral. Since 1578[1], over 400 years, except for comparatively brief periods in times of war[2], and fire (see below), the Shroud has been located in or around St. John the Baptist Cathedral, Turin, Italy.

[Above (click to enlarge): Belltower, Church and Chapel of the Holy Shroud, Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist (Cattedrale di San Giovanni Battista). The Chapel of the Holy Shroud, which was for nearly 300 years (1694-1993), the resting place of the Shroud of Turin, was added to the structure in 1668-1694[3].]

1694 Royal Chapel. In 1694 the Shroud was moved into a purpose-built Chapel of the Holy Shroud (Capella della Santa Sindone), or Royal Chapel, between the Cathedral and the Savoy Royal Palace, designed by the Italian architect Guarino Guarini (1624-1683)[4].

[Above (click to enlarge): Interior of the Chapel of the Holy Shroud before it was closed for repair in 1990[5].

1993 Turin Cathedral. In 1990, the Guarini Chapel had to be closed because of large lumps of stone falling from its dome[6]. A bulletproof laminated

[Right: The Shroud's casket, in its bulletproof glass display case, behind the high altar of Turin Cathedral, between 1993 and the 1997 fire[7].]

glass display case was constructed for the Shroud in the Cathedral, behind the high altar, and in 1993 the Shroud, still in its 17th century silvered wooden casket, was installed into its new home[8].

1997 fire. On the night of 11 April, 1997, a major fire gutted the Royal Chapel, part of the Cathedral and the adjoining Royal Palace[9]. But for the heroic action of a fireman, Mario Trematore, who ignoring the extreme risk to his own life, broke into the Shroud's laminated glass case with his fireman's axe, and dragged the Shroud's container to safety, the Shroud would almost certainly have been destroyed[10].

[Above: Fire engulfs the Royal Chapel and Turin Cathedral on the night of 11 April, 1997.[11]

1997-98 Archbishop of Turin's residence. The Shroud in its container was taken under cover of darkness to the residence of the then Archbishop of Turin, the late Cardinal Giovanni Saldarini (1924-2011), and when opened the Shroud was found to be undamaged.[12] Because there were indications that the fire was deliberately lit[13], the Shroud's location was kept secret until 1998[14].

1998-2005 Turin Cathedral. For the 1998 exhibition, the Shroud was displayed in Turin Cathedral with a steel wall behind it to hide the fire damage to the Chapel behind it, and upon the wall was painted a trompe l'oeil (illusory perspective) scene of how the interior of the Chapel would have looked in the 1820s[15].

[Above: The Shroud (behind the curtains) in Turin Cathedral from 1998. On display is a photograph of the Shroud[16].]

For the 1998 exposition a 4.6 x 1.4 m [17], fire-proof[18], glass-fronted, conservation case was constructed in which the Shroud could be permanently stored flat in a primarily inert argon atmosphere where no microorganisms can live to attack it.[19] The glass is 6 cms thick and bullet-proof and the container is air-conditioned to maintain optimum levels of temperature and humidity.[20] The case can be tilted ninety degrees when the Shroud is on public display.[21]

[Above: The Shroud in its high-technology conservation container is prayed over by the present Archbishop of Turin, Severino Poletto (1933-)[22].]

2005 Turin Cathedral. In 2005[23], the Shroud, inside its case, was installed

[Left: Floor plan of Turin Cathedral showing the Shroud's present location since 2005, in a side chapel in the left transept of the Cathedral[24].]

in its new permanent reliquary (see below), in a side chapel in the north (left) transept of Turin Cathedral[25].

[Above (click to enlarge): The Shroud's reliquary, its current resting place, in a side chapel of Turin Cathedral[26].]

NOTES
1. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, pp.220. [return]
2. In 1706 a French army besieged Turin, but the Shroud had as a precaution been quietly moved to the north coastal Italian city of Genoa for its safety. Then in World War II, the Shroud was secretly moved to a monastery in the southern Italian province of Avellino for seven years from 1939 to 1946. (Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, pp.271,274). [return]
3. "Turin Cathedral," Wikipedia, 5 September 2012). [return]
4. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.112. [return]
5. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.17. [return]
6. Wilson, 2010, p.282. [return]
7. Wilson, 2010, p.282. [return]
8. Wilson, 2010, p.282. [return]
9. "The 1997 Fire," Shroud.com, April, 1997. [return]
10. Wilson, 1998, p.2. [return]
11. Wilson, 2010, p.274H[return]
12. Wilson, 1998, p.2. [return]
13. Wilson, 1998, p.2. [return]
14. Wilson, 2010, p.283. [return]
15. Wilson, 2010, pp.283-284. [return]
16. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.ii. [return]
17. Whiting, B., "The Shroud Story," Harbour Publishing: Strathfield NSW, Australia, p.177. [return]
18. de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.350. [return]
19. Wilson, 2010, p.284. [return]
20. "From Turin: Revealed: The Shroud's New Home," British Society of the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 49, June 1999. [return]
21. Wilson, 2010, p.284. [return]
22. Wilson, 2010, p.82A. [return]
23. Schwortz, B., "2005 Website News," Shroud.com. [return]
24. "News 2000," Collegamento pro Sindone. [return]
25. de Wesselow, 2012, p.350. [return]
26. Schwortz, 2005. [return]


Continued in part 9, "2.3. The man on the Shroud".

Last updated: 10 June, 2015.

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The Shroud of Turin: 2.1. A linen sheet

Here is part 7, "2.1. A linen sheet" in my series, The Shroud of Turin The previous page was part 6, "2. What is the Shroud of Turin?" See part 1, the main Contents page, for more information about this series .


THE SHROUD OF TURIN
2. WHAT IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN?
2.1. A LINEN SHEET
© Stephen E. Jones

Dimensions. As previously mentioned , the Shroud of Turin is a rectangular sheet of fine linen[1], yellowed with age[2], 4.4 long by 1.1 metres wide[3] or 14 feet 3 inches by 3 feet 7 inches[4]. These unusual dimensions correspond very closely to 8 by 2 Assyrian cubits of 21.4 inches[5], which was the standard Jewish cubit in Jesus' day[6]. So even the dimensions of the Shroud are a major problem for the forgery theory[§1] of the Shroud's origin![7]!

[Above (enlarge): The Shroud laid out flat, presumably after the 2002 restoration]

Side strip. The Shroud is a single cloth apart from a strip about 8 cms (3½ inches) wide along its left-hand side (looking at the Shroud with its frontal image in the lower half and upright) and joined by a single seam[8]. The strip is incomplete at its ends, with 14 cms (5½ inches) and 36 cms (14 inches) missing at the bottom and top left hand corners respectively[9]. This side strip is made from the same piece of cloth as the Shroud, since unique irregularities in the weave of the main body of the Shroud extend across the side strip[10]. The outer long edges of the main body of the Shroud and the side strip have a selvedge, a weaver-finished edge[11]. This indicates that the Shroud was originally woven on a wide loom, and the side strip was cut lengthwise and joined to the main body of the Shroud to give it a selvedge on both long edges[12]. Weaving on extra-wide looms is known from antiquity, particularly in ancient Egypt, but it is not known from the Middle Ages[13]. Moreover, the hand-stitching of the seam joining the two inner edges of the side strip and the main Shroud is known only from textiles excavated from the first-century Jewish fortress at Masada, near the Dead Sea[14]. This is more evidence for Shroud's authenticity and further problems for the forgery theory[§2].

[Above (enlarge): Side strip (left) and seam (centre) near the bottom right hand (i.e. frontal image feet end) corner of the Shroud: ShroudScope]

[Above (enlarge): "How the shroud was originally woven much wider than its present width. Reconstruction of the likely size of the bolt of cloth of which the two lengths of the Shroud (shaded) formed part. This wider cloth was very expertly cut lengthwise, then the raw (i.e. non-selvedge) edges of the shaded segments joined together by a very professional seam to form the Shroud we know today."[15]]

Weave. The cloth's weave is known as "3 to 1 twill" because each transversal weft thread passes alternatively over three and under one of the longitudinal warp threads[16]. This gives the weave the appearance of diagonal lines which reverse direction at regular intervals to create a herringbone pattern[17]. Such complex herringbone three to one twill weaves are known from antiquity, for example, from Egypt and Syria, but they are not known from the Middle Ages.[18]

Yarn. In 1973, textile expert Prof. Gilbert Raes was given four samples from the Shroud's bottom left-hand corner: a 12 mm long weft thread, a 13 mm long warp thread, a 10 x 40 mm piece from the side strip and a 13 x 40 mm piece from the adjacent main Shroud [19] Raes confirmed that the threads and the pieces were linen from common flax plant Linum usitatissium[20]. The flax yarn in the two pieces had what is known as a Z-twist, from the spindle having been rotated clockwise, whereas the yarn in the threads was the more unsual S-twist[21]. Raes also found traces of cotton, of the Middle Eastern species Gossypium herbaceum, in the piece from the main body of the Shroud but not in the piece from the side strip.[22]. This is very significant as we will see when we consider the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud in "6. Science and the Shroud."

NOTES
1. Drews, R., 1984, "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ, p.11; Danin, A., 2010, "Botany of the Shroud: The Story of Floral Images on the Shroud of Turin," Danin Publishing: Jerusalem, Israel, p.7 [return]
2. Antonacci, M., 2000, "The Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.212. [return]
3. The Shroud was precisely measured by textile expert Dr. Flury-Lemberg prior to the 1998 exposition and found to be 437 cm long by 111 cm wide. (British Society for the Turin Shroud Newsletter, No. 51, June 2000 [PDF]). [return]
4. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.69. [return]
5. 8 x 21.4 inches = 171.2 inches and 2 x 21.4 inches = 42.8 inches. The Shroud is 172.0 x 43.7 inches. [return]
6. Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, p.181. [return]
7. Wilson, 1991, p.181. [return]
8. Wilson, 1979, p.21. [return]
9. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.162. [return]
10. Schwalbe, L.A. & Rogers, R.N., 1982, "Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin: Summary of the 1978 Investigation," Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 135, No. 1, p.42. [return]
11. Wilson, I., "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, 2010, p.72 [return]
12. Wilson, 2010, p.72. [return]
13. Wilson, 2010, pp.74-76. [return]
14. Wilson, 2010, p.72. [return]
15. Wilson, 2010, p.73. Upper case heading reduced. [return]
16. Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.161. [return]
17. Wilson, 1979, p.69. [return]
18. Wilson, 2010, pp.74-76. [return]
19. Antonacci, 2000, p.98. [return]
20. Sox, H.D., 1981, "The Image on the Shroud: Is the Turin Shroud a Forgery?," Unwin: London, p.74. [return]
21. Wilson, I. & Miller, V., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.36. [return]
22. Wilson, 1979, pp.70-71. [return]
§1, §2. I have created a section "9. Problems of the Forgery Theory" and I will keep a progressively numbered total of all the problems of the forgery theory encountered along the way, so they can all be brought together and discussed in that section.[return]


Continued in part 8, "2.2. The Shroud's location".

Posted 31 October 2012. Updated 4 August 2024.

Sunday, October 21, 2012

The Shroud of Turin: 2. What is the Shroud of Turin?

This is part 6, "2. What is the Shroud of Turin?" a sub-contents page in my series, "The Shroud of Turin." The series was originally titled, "The Shroud of Jesus?" but I have changed it to "The Shroud of Turin," so that posts in the series are more easily found using a search engine. Each contents topic below will be linked to a page with that heading. The previous page was part 5, "1.3 The central dilemma of the Shroud." For more information about this series see the main Contents page, part 1.

[Above (enlarge): "Descent from the Cross with the Holy Shroud," by Giovanni Battista della Rovere (c. 1575-c. 1640) or Giulio Clovio (1498–1578): Wikipedia. This aquatint print accurately[1] depicts from the information on the Shroud of Turin how Jesus' body was laid on the bottom half of the Shroud and then the top half was taken over His head and overlapped at His feet. See above the front and back, head to head, image on the Shroud held by angels, with the anachronistic burn marks from a fire in 1532]


THE SHROUD OF TURIN
CONTENTS
2. WHAT IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN?
© Stephen E. Jones

  1. A linen sheet
  2. The Shroud's location
  3. The man on the Shroud
  4. The wounds
  5. The bloodstains
  6. The other marks:

NOTES
1. Except that it wrongly shows Jesus' right hand on top of His left. (Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.137).


Continued in part 7, "2.1 A linen sheet."

Posted 21 October 2012. Updated: 28 August 2023.

Friday, October 19, 2012

The Shroud of Turin: 1.3 The central dilemma of the Shroud

Here is part 5, "1.3 The central dilemma of the Shroud." The previous post in this series, "The Shroud of Turin" was part 4, "1.2 The Shroud and me."


THE SHROUD OF TURIN
1. INTRODUCTION
1.3 THE CENTRAL DILEMMA OF THE SHROUD
© Stephen E. Jones

The central dilemma of the Shroud is this: either the Shroud is a work of human art, deliberately designed to depict Jesus' burial Shroud with the imprint of His flogged, crowned with thorns, crucified by nails, dead, speared in the side, legs not broken,

[Left: Walsh, J.E., 1963, "The Shroud," Random House: New York NY.]

buried in a tomb, and resurrected body on it; or it is authentic, the very burial sheet of Jesus! There is no third alternative, because no other person would have had the same set of injuries (particularly having been crowned with thorns) which the Gospels record that Jesus had, nor would their burial shroud have survived intact to this day. Therefore, if the Shroud is not a work of human art, then it must be the burial sheet of Jesus!

Perhaps the most well-known statement of this dilemma was by writer John Evangelist Walsh, who stated it in the preface of his 1963 book, "Shroud" (my emphasis on each quote below):

"Only this much is certain: The Shroud of Turin is either the most awesome and instructive relic of Jesus Christ in existence-showing us in its dark simplicity how He appeared to men-or it is one of the most ingenious, most unbelievably clever, products of the human mind and hand on record. It is one or the other; there is no middle ground."[1]

One of the earliest statements of this dilemma was by Jesuit historian Fr. Herbert Thurston (1856-1939), an implacable opponent of the Shroud's authenticity, who admitted in 1903:

"As to the identity of the body whose image is seen on the Shroud, no question is possible. The five wounds, the cruel flagellation, the punctures encircling the head, can still be clearly distinguished in spite of the darkening of the whole fabric. If this is not the impression of the Body of Christ, it was designed as the counterfeit of that impression. In no other personage since the world began could these details be verified."[2]

Pro-authenticists Ken Stevenson and Gary Habermas in 1981 stated one arm of the dilemma quantitatively by conservatively estimating the probability that the image on the Shroud was "someone other than Jesus" was "nearly 83 million to 1":

"The gospels say that these eight irregularities were present in Jesus' death and burial. The Shroud evidence says they were also present in the death and burial of the man of the Shroud. We have estimated the probability that they happened to someone other than Jesus, deliberately using skeptical and conservative estimates. Yet, multiplying these probabilities, we have 1 chance in 82,944,000 that the man buried in the Shroud is not Jesus. This ratio of nearly 83 million to 1 is almost meaningless to many of us. Yet consider this practical illustration. 82,944,000 dollar bills laid end-to-end would stretch from New York to San Francisco more than three times. Suppose one of these bills is marked, and a blindfolded person is given one chance to find it. The odds that he will succeed are 1 in 82,944,000. These are the odds that the man buried in the Shroud is someone other than Jesus Christ. There is a chance that the man of the Shroud is someone else, just as there is a chance that the blindfolded person would find the marked bill. But the odds are practically infinitesimal. There is no practical probability that someone other than Jesus Christ was buried in the Shroud of Turin."[3]

Microanalyist Dr Walter McCrone (1916-2002), also a leading opponent of the Shroud's authenticity, stated the dilemma in 1982:

"Finally, I can see no possible mechanism by which the shroud image could have been produced except as the work of an artist. The faithful representation of all of the anatomical and pathological markings, so well described in the New Testament, would be difficult to produce except by an artist. They are totally without distortion and, indeed, look exactly the way we would like to have them look."[4]

Two other leading anti-authenticists, Steven Schafersman, and Joe Nickell quoting him approvingly, actually agree with Stevenson and Habermas' estimate of "the odds as 1 in 83 million that the man on the shroud is not Jesus Christ" and state the dilemma clearly, "there are only two choices: If the shroud is authentic [i.e. not "a product of human artifice"], the image is that of Jesus" and there is "[no possible third hypothesis":

"As the (red ochre) dust settles briefly over Sindondom, it becomes clear there are only two choices: Either the shroud is authentic (naturally or supernaturally produced by the body of Jesus) or it is a product of human artifice. Asks Steven Schafersman: `Is there a possible third hypothesis? No, and here's why. Both Wilson[5] and Stevenson and Habermas[3] go to great lengths to demonstrate that the man imaged on the shroud must be Jesus Christ and not someone else. After all, the man on this shroud was flogged, crucified, wore a crown of thorns, did not have his legs broken, was nailed to the cross, had his side pierced, and so on. Stevenson and Habermas even calculate the odds as 1 in 83 million that the man on the shroud is not Jesus Christ (and they consider this a very conservative estimate). I agree with them on all of this. If the shroud is authentic, the image is that of Jesus.'[6]"[7]

In a follow-up 1990 book, Stevenson & Habermas pointed out that if "human artifice" has been "virtually ruled out" as an explanation of the Shroud's image, then it is not "crazy or unscholarly or unscientific to suggest the image is likely that of Jesus":

"Oddly enough, the Shroud opponents have actually helped to make our case. Certainly the need to resort to a denigration of the scientists on the basis of their religious preferences shows a decided bias on their part. In addition, if critics feel the need to declare Jesus a myth, are they not actually suggesting that the Shroud evidence indeed matches the Gospel narratives of Christ's passion and death? At least a few of them are willing to admit this in print. For example, Schafersman states, `Stevenson and Habermas even calculate the odds as 1 in 83 million that the man of the shroud is not Jesus Christ ... a very conservative estimate'[3]. I agree with them on all of this. If the shroud is authentic, the image is that of Jesus. Otherwise, it's an artist's representation..."[6] The bottom line then is that either the image is that of Jesus of Nazareth or it was intended by its creator to portray Jesus. Since we've virtually ruled out human artifice, are we crazy or unscholarly or unscientific to suggest the image is likely that of Jesus?"[8]

Since both Shroud anti- and pro-authenticists agree that there are only two realistic alternatives: 1. either the image on the Shroud is that of Jesus; or 2. it the work of a human artist intending to depict the image of Jesus; then the less likely the image on the Shroud is the work of a human artist, the more likely the image on the Shroud is that of Jesus!

NOTES
1. Walsh, J.E., 1963, "The Shroud: The Authoritative, Comprehensive and Concise Report on the Single Most Fascinating Artifact in the Christian World," Random House: New York NY, pp.xi-xii. [return]
2. Thurston, H., 1903, "The Holy Shroud and the Verdict of History," The Month, CI, p.19, in Wuenschel, E.A., 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961, p.40. [return]
3. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, pp.127-128. [return]
4. McCrone W.C., "Shroud image is the work of an artist," The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 6, No. 3, Spring 1982, pp. 35-36, p.36.[return]
5. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, pp.51-53. [return]
6. Schafersman, S.D., 1982, "Science, the public, and the Shroud of Turin," The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 6, No. 3, Spring, pp.37-56, p.42. [return]
7. Nickell, J., 1987, "Inquest on the Shroud of Turin," Prometheus Books: Buffalo NY, Revised, Reprinted, 2000, p.141. [return]
8. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R. , 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, p.196. [return]


Continued in part 6, "2.What is the Shroud of Turin?"

Last updated: 27 February, 2013.