The Shroud of Turin EXTRAORDINARY evidence of Christ's resurrection

The Shroud of Turin EXTRAORDINARY evidence of Christ's resurrection

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-shroud-of-turin

What is the Shroud of Turin? 

The Shroud of Turin is a piece of linen cloth that bears the image of a man who has been crucified. It is a rectangular linen cloth measuring approximately 14.3 feet by 3.7 feet, and is kept in the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, Italy. There is powerful evidence the shroud is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, that bears his actual image. The image on the shroud appears as a negative image ( like a negative of a photograph)  and has most likely been formed by the imprint of the body that had been wrapped in the cloth after death.  The Gospels do describe the burial of Jesus in a linen cloth, which is reference to the shroud. The Gospels describe Joseph of Arimathea taking Jesus' body, wrapping it in a clean linen cloth, and placing it in his own tomb (Matthew 27:57-60, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53). The Gospel of John also mentions the burial cloth, stating that Nicodemus helped Joseph of Arimathea prepare Jesus' body for burial by bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes. They took Jesus' body, wrapped it in linen cloths with the spices, according to Jewish burial customs (John 19:38-40). Scientists have inferred that a burst of 34 thousand billion Watts of vacuum-ultraviolet radiation produced a discoloration on the uppermost surface of the Shroud’s fibrils (without scorching it), which gave rise to a perfect three-dimensional negative image of both the frontal and dorsal parts of the body wrapped in it.

The Shroud of Turin: Empirical Exploration into Jesus' Historical and Scriptural Identity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxb-ffdfV7U

PowerPoint presentation of the video above:
Exposing the last mysteries of the Shroud of Turin, the burial cloth of Jesus.  150 slides
Link for download:
https://mega.nz/file/cqJxxTRR#HycjbRm2IH9uTlmitd937kmS58RHlnKQCGO2sQKRzRg

Shroud of Turin, a forgery? Responding to the critics in regard to the most common objections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGZmIfQf1dM

You can download the video as a Powerpoint presentation with 185 slides:
https://mega.nz/file/9jYg0ArQ#V_WRLsAam7Tai4M7TpQ5f1J2E9C0qDNlJqQyMYgkBrs

You can use the following video in your evangelism. Please share with friends, church, colleagues, family:
The message of salvation through Jesus Christ. Images based on the Shroud of Turin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1PmTmigN24

For more information, check: 
The shroud of Turin EXTRAORDINARY evidence of Christ's resurrection
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-shroud-of-turin





Could the Shroud be a forgery ?
Is the man on the shroud Jesus ?
Images of the Shroud
Videos about the Shroud
Images of the Shroud
How was the image made ?
Age of the shroud of turin
The 1988 Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud
How was the image made ?
Shroud, new study: there is blood of a man tortured and killed
Pre 13th century history of the Shroud
The sudarium from oviedo
How can you explain the existence of other revered shrouds aside from the one in Turin?
THE SHROUD AS AN ANCIENT TEXTILE
Barrie Schwortz testimony
Is it a painting ?
The Shroud is an ancient textile
Was Jesus wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, or, as John reports, tied by strips of linen in company with the spices?
The blood on the Shroud of Turin
Apocryphal  gospels mentioning the Shroud of Turin




Why promote the Shroud of Turin? 

First of all, the aim to make the Shroud of Turin known is not to induce anyone to worship a linen cloth. I, for instance, worship the risen Lord, in truth and spirit. But the Shroud is a tremendous tool to do apologetics. Many today doubt that Jesus Christ is a historical figure. More than ever, skeptics and unbelievers claim that Jesus was invented in the first century, for whatever reasons. Others claim, that the gospel is embellished accounts of a first-century preacher, and the miracles claimed are later additions, traditions, and myths. Others, like Muslims, claim, that God cannot die. That Jesus, therefore, was not God, and that it was not Jesus, that died on the cross, but someone else.
With the Shroud of Turin, we have material, empirical evidence, that confirms the authenticity of the Gospels, and the truthfulness of the eyewitness accounts, which reported what they experienced and saw, in the gospels. And on the other hand, the biblical narratives related to the passion and death of Jesus confirm the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. The Shroud of Turin provides evidence for the historicity of Jesus Christ and refutes the claim that he did not die on the cross. The shroud bears the image of a man who appears to have suffered the same kind of wounds as Jesus did during his crucifixion, including the crown of thorns and the spear wound in his side. The image also shows bloodstains and other physical details that match the biblical accounts of Jesus' crucifixion.

Giulio Fanti, Shroud expert: The Shroud has been called the fifth Gospel. If we compare the Shroud, Gospels, and Bible in general, we find so many correspondences that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to think that this man was not Jesus described in the Gospels. Some people say, 'Yes, but who knew the Bible could have reproduced this image?' Apart from the fact that this image cannot be reproduced, it was even more difficult, if not impossible, to reproduce all these things. This is because we have additional information about the Shroud that complements what is written in the Gospels. This is why Berliner declared it the fifth scientific Gospel. For example, on the Shroud, we see the signs of a small whip, and here I have reproduced the various signs of the whip.

For those who believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Shroud of Turin holds immense significance. It is a tangible link to his physical presence on earth. The Shroud of Turin is a piece of history that has been studied for centuries. It is believed to date back to the first century and therefore, provides a window into the historical context of Jesus' life and death. The Shroud of Turin has been the subject of scientific research for decades, with researchers attempting to determine its age and authenticity. This research has led to new discoveries about the shroud, such as the presence of pollen and the image of a crucified man.

The Shroud being authentic, then man did not make the image—God did. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD [YHVH] thy God am a jealous God . . . (Exod. 20:5‐6 KJV, emphasis added).
Exodus 20:5‐6 explains that the prohibition against graven images applied to making images for the purpose of idolatrous worship. If it were not for this Hebrew doublet clarification, then all images would be prohibited (including all photographs, paintings, statues, etc. of anything in heaven above, the earth beneath, or in the ocean).


If you don’t believe this is Jesus’ Shroud that’s fine by me, BUT the Shroud is the most accurate representation of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ that you will ever see! Note these WORDS:
John 3:16 (KJV)
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

So if you think it’s a fake…. It’s STILL the most accurate representation of the wounds described in the Gospels

If you believe it’s a deception it STILL REVEALS EXACTLY WHAT CHRIST SUFFERED FOR THE SINS OF THE WORLD!!
If you believe it’s an idol….it STILL DEMONSTRATES THE LOVE OF ALMIGHTY GOD BETTER THAN ANY “MAN-MADE IMAGE”

Jesus died so that YOU can live eternally…don’t miss out on GOD’S PROMISE:
2 Corinthians 9:15-15 (KJV) Thanks [be] unto God for his unspeakable gift.



https://shroudphotos.com/

It was stated in the renowned journal Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, “The Shroud of Turin is the single, most studied artifact in human history” (page 200).
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/109/2/j92cur.pdf

If the Shroud of Turinis a forgery, show how it was done, and grasp your $1million dollar prize
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GfYMJT45MY&t=10s

The $1m challenge: ‘If the Turin Shroud is a forgery, show how it was done’:  David Rolfe, a film-maker whose documentary The Silent Witness had brought the shroud into the public eye in modern times, and who had converted to Christianity as a result of his research – wasn’t prepared to give up on it. He was convinced the carbon dating, carried out in 1988 under the direction of the British Museum and Oxford University, had been flawed. And now he claims he has the evidence to prove it. This week sees the release of a new film, Who Can He Be?, in which Rolfe argues that, far from the shroud being a definite dud, new discoveries in the past few years have again opened the question of its authenticity. So convinced is Rolfe that he’s issuing a challenge worth $1m to the British Museum. “If … they believe the shroud is a medieval forgery, I call on them to repeat the exercise, and create something similar today,” he says. “Because from all the evidence I’ve seen, if this is a forgery it’s the most ingenious forgery in history – and of course it dates back almost 2,000 years, to a time of far less sophisticated forgery techniques. “They said it was knocked up by a medieval conman, and I say: well, if he could do it, you must be able to do it as well. And if you can, there’s a $1m donation for your funds.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/17/the-1m-challenge-if-the-turin-shroud-is-a-forgery-show-how-it-was-done

The Most Significant Post-1960s Journal Articles on the Shroud of Turin -- a Bibliography
https://www.academia.edu/81579972/The_Most_Significant_Post_1960s_Journal_Articles_on_the_Shroud_of_Turin_a_Bibliography

A medieval artist or artists, would need to be proficient enough in over a 100 disciplines and also collectively outweigh the intelligence of the people who performed hundreds and hundreds of tests performed on the Shroud and who are not finding any indications of a forgery.

https://www.academia.edu/81353305/The_Plethora_of_Disciplines_Used_to_Study_the_Shroud_of_Turin

Bible References To The Burial Shroud Of Jesus
1. Matthew 27:59
And Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen shroud
2. Mark 15:46
And Joseph bought a linen shroud, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen shroud and laid him in a tomb that had been cut out of the rock. And he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.
3. Luke 23:53
Then he took it down and wrapped it in a linen shroud and laid him in a tomb cut in stone, where no one had ever yet been laid.
4. John 19:40
So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews.
5. John 20:5
And stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in.
6. John 20:6
Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there,
7. John 20:7
and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus' head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself.

The biblical narratives related to the passion and death of Jesus confirm the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. And the Shroud of Turin confirms the authenticity of the Gospels.
So  25 multi-disciplinary tests of the STURP team are simply dismissed, in favor of a highly debated Carbon C14 test for which there are excellent reasons to believe that it was invalid?

A Summary of STURP's Conclusions
We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved.
https://www.shroud.com/78conclu.htm

There is a rich pre-13th century history of the Shroud, which is further evidence that the Radiocarbon dating from 1988 is inaccurate.

Documented References to the Burial Linens of Jesus Prior to the Shroud of Turin's Appearance in France in the Mid-1350s
https://www.academia.edu/75771585/Documented_References_to_the_Burial_Linens_of_Jesus_Prior_to_the_Shroud_of_Turins_Appearance_in_France_in_the_Mid_1350

The Most Notable Figures in Shroud of Turin Research of the 20th and 21st Centuries
https://www.academia.edu/54701856/The_Most_Notable_Figures_in_Shroud_of_Turin_Research_of_the_20th_and_21st_Centuries

SHROUD ILLUSTRATED IN PRAY MANUSCRIPT FROM 1192
In the Budapest National Library is the Hungarian Pray Manuscript, or Pray Codex, the oldest surviving text of the Hungarian language.  It was written between 1192 and 1195 AD (65 years before the earliest Carbon-14 date in the 1988 tests).  One of its illustrations shows preparations for the burial of Christ.  The picture includes a burial cloth with the same herringbone weave as the Shroud, plus 4 holes near one of the edges.  The holes form an "L" shape.  This odd pattern of holes is found on the Shroud of Turin.

Liberato De Caro X-ray Dating of a Turin Shroud’s Linen Sample 11 April 2022
The experimental results are compatible with the hypothesis that the TS is a 2000-year-old relic, as supposed by Christian tradition
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/5/2/47/htm

Was the Shroud’s First-Century Origin Really Debunked?
https://insidethevatican.com/magazine/culture/was-the-shrouds-first-century-origin-really-debunked/?fbclid=IwAR1Wl3zd4-3hQg-1WxAEnNAgx25DTgtDDlybRygZ2n8deiC2C21gAKN642g

https://www.facebook.com/paulbryhanson/videos/408821377878823/

BOUGHT, PURCHASED, RANSOMED & REDEEMED
For you were BOUGHT at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.
1 Corinthians 6:20
Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He PURCHASED with His own blood.
Acts 20:28
"...just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a RANSOM for many."
Matthew 20:28
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a RANSOM for all, to be testified in due time,
1 Timothy 2:5-6
knowing that you were not REDEEMED with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.
1 Peter 1:18-19
These are all terms used to describe a financial transaction.
When you complete a transaction at the store the cashier gives you a piece of paper that describes the details of the price paid
It's called a 'receipt'.

Shroud of Turin DEBATE: Otangelo v. David P. Neff  Jun 9, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GepgplNXQvY&t=694s

Is it Jesus?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyCKit3ALt0

The Shroud of Turin - The Evidence of Authenticity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5NEY0NkPrw

A Grave Injustice
https://vimeo.com/326801807

The Shroud of Turin: Proof of Authenticity Beyond Reasonable Doubt (1 of 2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJymwctqo-A

The Shroud of Turin 1988 Carbon Dating: Triumph or Travesty? (2 of 2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBDuKZSgDSI

The Shroud and the jew: Barrie Schwortz at TEDx ViadellaConciliazione
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G4sj8hUVaY

Is the Shroud of Turin a forgery? With Barrie Schwortz - member of the STURP team
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHHmiFbsxbw&t=3159s


The face of the man, Jesus, has a calmness and peace, and nobility that is incredible when one sees what has been done to Him.

One common claim of atheists is that 'there is NO evidence of the historical Jesus'' Because ALL the Bible and ancient writings of Jesus could be written by anyone and were written by so many people, years after the events, which could easily be made up.

The shroud provides to the lost world the forensic facts and evidence of the horror of Jesus going to the cross. The Shroud bears the ultimate triumph of the Resurrection of Jesus (Yeshua) meaning Salvation. All this is recorded supernaturally on The Shroud of Turin, which proves the Holy Bible to be forensically accurate and perfectly reliable in every possible way.

By virtue of their substance and form, physical objects require no faith whatsoever. They can be observed, examined, touched, and even smelled. -- This is the very opposite of "faith." Thomas was not commended or blessed because he had "seen" Jesus after the resurrection, but those who believe WITHOUT SEEING ARE! (John 20:29)

The Shroud of Turin is NOT A FORGERY FROM THE 14th century, as following amazing evidence will demonstrate. It is a length of linen cloth bearing the negative image of a man,  which based on overwhelming evidence points to be Jesus of Nazareth and the fabric is the burial shroud in which he was wrapped after the crucifixion.

The attributes of the image it's this:

- it's superficial penetrates only the top two microfibers is no directionality such as with brushstrokes
- there's no outline to the image
- is no cementing of fibers as with paint
- it's uniform and intensity top to bottom front to back you think you need a piece of technology to do that
- there are no variations in density as with known artworks every artist gets a little bit more they're a little bit less there
- there's no evidence of that there are no particles between the threads such as some kind of a dust rubbing
- there's no capillary action no evidence that any liquids were applied to the image to bring forth or to the image area
- there's no paint binder present nothing to bind any pigment to the cloth
- it's a negative image with distance information encoded into it
- it's blood from the actual wound it's a AB+ blood with human DNA and
- there's no image under the blood now

1. The blood strains can only be seen with UV light. Why would an artist ever put blood which would not be visible? The presence of a high level of creatinine and ferritin is related to patients suffering from strong polytrauma like torture. Hence, the presence of these nanoparticles points a violent death.
2. There is pollen from Jerusalem, Palestine, and Edessa. Pollen is on the Shroud that is unique to the area around Jerusalem.  In 1973, Swiss criminologist Max Frei, a botanist by training, identified spores from forty-nine plants in samples taken from the Shroud.  Thirty-three of them came from plants that grow only in Palestine, the southern steppes of Turkey, and the area of Istanbul. 
3. Limestone from Jerusalem In 1982, Dr. Joseph Kohlbeck, a Scientist, compared dirt from the Shroud to travertine aragonite limestone found in ancient Jewish tombs in Israel. The particles of dirt on the Shroud matched limestone found in the tombs.’
4. Image on the outermost layer The image resides on the outermost layer of the linen fibers and the image goes just two or three fibers deep into the thread. The superficial image then disappears if a colored thread goes under another thread. The polysaccharide cover is approximately 0.2 thousandths of a millimeter (about 0.000008 inches) the inner side is not.
5. The image is a photonegative Secondo Pia's first photograph in 1898 showed that the image on the cloth is a negative. The front and back (dorsal) images of the crucified man are negative images and contain 3D or topographical information content related to the distance of the cloth from the body. There are no pigments whatsoever on the Shroud. If it were a forgery, with high certainty, it would have been painted. Who of the lay population would have perceived it ?
6. Correct anatomy of the nails The place where the nails are in the hands is anatomically correct. Two nails are through one foot, but only one of the nails is through the other foot.  This allows one foot to rotate, so that the victim can push up and down on the cross in order to breathe during the crucifixion.  If the victim of crucifixion is not pushing up and down, then it is clear that he is dead.  The soldiers had no doubt that Jesus was dead. All paintings of the Middle Ages showed the nails through the center of the palms, but nails through the palms do not support sufficient weight since there is no bone structure above this location. 
7. Age of the shroud 
In 2013, a research team from the University of Padua conducted three tests on tiny fibers extracted from the shroud during earlier carbon-14 dating tests conducted in 1988 The first two tests used infrared light and Raman spectroscopy, respectively, while the third employed a test analyzing different mechanical parameters relating to voltage. The results date the cloth to between 300 B.C. and 400 A.D.. Fanti said that researchers also found trace elements of soil "compatible with the soil of Jerusalem." "For me the [Shroud] comes from God because there are hundreds of clues in favor to the authenticity.
8. Linen is from the first century Stitching used to sew on the 3-inch wide side piece onto the main Shroud is nearly identical to that found at Masada which was destroyed in 73-74 AD. The size of the Shroud being very close to 2 by 8 cubits - the ancient unit of measurement
9. Scourge marks from the Roman flagrum The Shroud shows 100 to 120 scourge marks from two Roman flagrum, one striking from each side, with dumbbell shaped weights on the ends of the straps.  The blood marks from these wounds show blood serum rings (visible only under UV) around the dried blood exudate. There are abrasions on both shoulders evidently caused by the victim carrying a heavy rough object.
10. Side wound from Roman Spear The side of the front image on the Shroud shows a 2 inch wide elliptical wound - the size of a typical Roman spear. The blood running down his arms is at the correct angles for a crucifixion victim.  Two angles for the blood flow can be seen on his arms.  These two angles are consistent with the crucifixion victim shifting between two positions while on the cross in order to breath.


The blood
The blood strains can only be seen with UV light. Why would an artist back then ever put blood there which would not be visible, and providing no advantage at all. But even more remarkable than that, the wide presence of creatinine particles bound to ferrihydrite particles is not a situation typical of the blood serum of a healthy human organism. Indeed, a high level of creatinine and ferritin is related to patients suffering of strong polytrauma like torture. Hence, the presence of these biological nanoparticles found during our experiments points a violent death for the man wrapped in the Turin shroud.” What appears to be blood on the Shroud has passed 13 tests proving that it is real human blood.  The presence of "X" and "Y" chromosomes indicates that the blood is from a male.  The blood type is AB.  

When a person is cruelly tortured, the blood undergoes terrible haemolysis, when the haemaglobin literally ‘breaks up’. In thirty seconds, the reaction reaches the liver, which doesn’t have time to deal with it, and discharges a volume of bilirubin into the veins. Alan Adler has discovered a very high quantity of this substance in the blood on the Shroud. It is this substance that, when mixed with methemoglobin of a certain type, produces that vivid red colour. The colour of the blood belonging to the ‘Man of the Shroud’ is chemical proof that, before dying, he suffered terrible torture.

Pollen from Jerusalem
There is pollen from Jerusalem, Palestine, and Edessa. Pollen is on the Shroud that is unique to the area around Jerusalem.  In 1973, Swiss criminologist Max Frei, a botanist by training, identified spores from forty-nine plants in samples taken from the Shroud.  Thirty-three of them came from plants that grow only in Palestine, the southern steppes of Turkey, and the area of Istanbul: Since the Shroud has never left France since its appearance in Lirey in 1357, this data suggests that the Shroud was exposed to the open air in Palestine and Turkey at some point prior to 1357. Indeed, these findings correlate with the history of the Shroud one would expect if it were genuine (starting in Jerusalem and ending up in Spain) and with the history obtained by its identification with the Edessa Cloth. Moreover: ‘Professor Danin has identified the pollen particles.. of three plants that are found only in Jerusalem. One of them, gondelia turnaforte, was present in extraordinary numbers. It’s the same plant that scholars believe may have been used as the crown of thorns worn on Jesus’ head.’

Limestone from Jerusalem
In 1982, Dr. Joseph Kohlbeck, Scientist, with assistance from Dr. Richard Levi-Setti , compared dirt from the Shroud to travertine aragonite limestone found in ancient Jewish tombs in Israel. The particles of dirt on the Shroud matched limestone found in the tombs.’

Coins in the eyes from the first century
John Jackson and Eric Jumper, the physicists who discovered the ‘threedimensional’ information contained in the Shroud, observed the faint trace of objects placed over the eyes of the Man in the Shroud, which they suggested
might be coins (which would fit with first-century Jewish burial customs). If so, they noted that the coin was the same size as the ‘lepton’ of Pontius Pilate, which was only minted before 37 AD. Francis Filas, a professor at Loyola
University in Chicago, says the images are coins, and that the coins are leptons. According to Filas, computer enhancement and analysis of the images reveals that the objects have a number of coincidences ‘fitting only a
coin issued by Pontius Pilate between 2 and 32 AD.’

Image on the outermost layer
The image resides on the outermost layer of the linen fibers and the image goes just two or three fibers deep into the thread. The superficial image then disappears if a colored thread goes under another thread. The polysaccharide cover is approximately 0.2 thousandths of a millimeter (about 0.000008 inches) the inner side is not.

The image is a photonegative
Secondo Pia's first photograph in 1898 showed that the image on the cloth is a negative. The front and back (dorsal) images of the crucified man are negative images and contain 3D or topographical information content related to the distance of the cloth from the body.

Correct anatomy of the nails
The place where the nails are in the hands is anatomically correct. The image is NOT  there are no pigments whatsoever on the Shroud. If it were a forgery, with high certainty, it would have been painted. Who of the lay population would have perceived it ?

Two nails are through one foot, but only one of the nails is through the other foot.  This allows one foot to rotate, so that the victim can push up and down on the cross in order to breath during crucifixion.  If the victim of crucifixion is not pushing up and down, then it is clear that he is dead.  The soldiers had no doubt that Jesus was dead. All paintings of the Middle Ages showed the nails through the center of the palms, but nails through the palms do not support sufficient weight since there is no bone structure above this location.  Archeology has confirmed that during crucifixion, the nails were driven through the wrists.  The Shroud shows the correct nail locations - through the wrist instead of through the palm. On the Shroud, the thumbs are folded under, contrary to all paintings of the Middle Ages.  Nails through the wrists automatically fold the thumbs under due to contact of the nail with the nerve that goes through the wrist.

Age of the shroud 
In 2013, a research team from the University of Padua conducted three tests on tiny fibers extracted from the shroud during earlier carbon-14 dating tests conducted in 1988 The first two tests used infrared light and Raman spectroscopy, respectively, while the third employed a test analyzing different mechanical parameters relating to voltage. The results date the cloth to between 300 B.C. and 400 A.D.. Fanti said that researchers also found trace elements of soil "compatible with the soil of Jerusalem." "For me the [Shroud] comes from God because there are hundreds of clues in favor to the authenticity," he wrote, adding that there also "no sure proofs. The 1988 carbon C14 results may have been contaminated by fibers used to repair the cloth during the Middle Ages.

The Shroud has four sets of burn holes in an L-shaped pattern.  This same pattern of holes appears on a picture in a document known as the Hungarian Pray Manuscript, which is dated to 1192-1195 AD.  This indicates that the Shroud of Turin ought to be identified as the cloth, sometimes called the Mandylion, that was in Constantinople until the city was sacked during the fourth crusade in 1204 AD.  It is generally believed that this cloth was brought to Constantinople from Edessa, Turkey, in 944 AD.  In Edessa, it was called the Image of Edessa.  Thus, the Shroud of Turin is the same as the Image of Edessa, so it can be historically traced back prior to 944 AD.

Linen is from the first century
Stitching used to sew on the 3-inch wide side piece onto the main Shroud is nearly identical to that found at Masada which was destroyed in 73-74 AD. The size of the Shroud being very close to 2 by 8 cubits - the ancient unit of measurement

Scourge marks from the Roman flagrum
The Shroud shows 100 to 120 scourge marks from two Roman flagrum, one striking from each side, with dumbbell shaped weights on the ends of the straps.  The blood marks from these wounds show blood serum rings (visible only under UV) around the dried blood exudate. There are abrasions on both shoulders evidently caused by the victim carrying a heavy rough object.

Side wound from Roman Spear
The side of the front image on the Shroud shows a 2 inch wide elliptical wound - the size of a typical Roman spear. The blood running down his arms is at the correct angles for a crucifixion victim.  Two angles for the blood flow can be seen on his arms.  These two angles are consistent with the crucifixion victim shifting between two positions while on the cross in order to breath.

Turin Shroud hands reveals a part of the right thumb
A restoration of the TS image in the hands’ region has shown patterns compatible with the right hand’s thumb (the upper extremity of it). The right hand’s thumb appears in a non-relaxed position, adjacent to the palm of the hand, but positioned below it and, therefore, almost completely hidden by the index finger except for its end. The image of this thumb controverts the hypothesis of a medial counterfeiting of the relic. The Barbet’s hypothesis that the absence of the thumbs into the TS image, considered as one of the main indirect proofs of the authenticity of the relic. Indeed, the presence of the upper extremity of the right hand’s thumb, in a non-relaxed position, implying a possible state of stress, fixed by the rigor mortis, can be considered an indirect proof of the crucifixion of the TS man and, consequently, of the authenticity of the relic. 


BOUGHT, PURCHASED, RANSOMED & REDEEMED
For you were BOUGHT at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.
1 Corinthians 6:20
Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He PURCHASED with His own blood.
Acts 20:28
"...just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a RANSOM for many."
Matthew 20:28
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a RANSOM for all, to be testified in due time,
1 Timothy 2:5-6
knowing that you were not REDEEMED with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.
1 Peter 1:18-19
These are all terms used to describe a financial transaction.
When you complete a transaction at the store the cashier gives you a piece of paper that describes the details of the price paid
It's called a 'receipt'.

The Shroud and the jew: Barrie Schwortz at TEDx ViadellaConciliazione
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G4sj8hUVaY

Barrie Schwortz was a member of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (often abbreviated as STURP) a team of scientists which performed a set of experiments and analyses on the Shroud of Turin during the late 1970s and early 1980s. STURP issued its final report in 1981.

After 18 years as a skeptic, in 1995, when confronted with the evidence that the blood on the shroud was of a tortured man, he became convinced of the authenticity of the Shroud. 

"At the beginning of my work, I was very skeptical about its authenticity. I felt no particular emotion toward Jesus because I was raised as an orthodox jew. The only thing I knew about Jesus was that he was a jew, and this was all. Examining the Shroud ".
After 18 years of study, the full conviction came when "the Blood Chemistry Allen Adler, another jew who was part of the study group, I explained why the red blood remained on the Shroud. The old blood would have to be black or brown, while the blood on the Shroud is a red-crimson. It seemed inexplicable, instead it was the last piece of the puzzle. After nearly 20 years of investigation, it was a shock for me to discover that the piece of cloth was the authentic cloth that had been wrapped the body of Jesus. The conclusions I arrived were based exclusively on scientific observation ".
He has no doubt Schwortz: "Once we came to the scientific conclusion that the cloth was authentic, I have come to understand also the meaning. This is the forensic document of the Passion, and for Christians around the world is the most important relic, precisely because it documents everything you read in the Gospels of what was done to Jesus. I think there are enough evidence to prove that this is the cloth that wrapped the body of Jesus ". The truth about Jesus is the task of faith, he states that "from the point of view of science that cloth wrapped the body of man spoken of in the Gospels".
The study of the Shroud has not only convinced of the authenticity, but it has also changed, evidently, also on a personal level.
"At the beginning of the investigation - said Schwortz -, I knew of God, but it was not very important in my life. I had not thought of God, when the avevo 13 years. I was not very religious, it was almost a requirement for my family. Since then I have moved away from the faith, religion and God, until I reached the 50 years. When in 1995 I came to the conclusion that the Shroud was authentic, I built the site www.shroud.com . I started to collect the material and put it to the public. I began to speak publicly about the Shroud around 1996 ".
This dualism, however, could not continue: "When people started asking me if I was a believer, I could not find the answer. At that point I questioned myself and I realized that God was waiting for me. I was really surprised to see that within me there was a belief in God. Fino a 50 years I had pretty much ignored the faith, and suddenly I found myself face to face with God in my heart. Basically I can say that the Shroud was the catalyst that brought me back to God ". He concluded amused: "How many Jews can say that the Shroud of Turin has led them to faith in God"?

Schwortz runs as well the website:
https://www.shroud.com/

The STURP Team
https://www.upra.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Lecture_1.pdf

1) The bloodstains on the Shroud have been forensically matched with the Sudarium of Oviedo which is inarguably centuries older than the Carbon test results.

2) There are pictures of the Shroud in the Hungarian Pray Codex which was written about 200 years before the results on the Carbon dating test.

Additionally, a published study found that the fragments tested in the Shroud were from a section of the Shroud that had been repaired in the middle ages.

The second mystery is related to the dating of the Shroud.  In 1988, samples were taken from the bottom corner opposite the feet and sent to three laboratories in Oxford, Zurich, and Tucson for C14 dating.  The average date from the three laboratories was 1260 ± 31 AD, which produced a two sigma (95% probability) range of 1260 to 1390 AD when corrected for the changing production of C14 in the upper atmosphere.  But the values from these three laboratories did not agree well with each other.  Statistical analysis of the average values from each laboratory indicated only a 5% chance that these average values are consistent with the measurement uncertainties.  When plotted, these average values from the three laboratories produce a slope for the C14 dates of about 40 years/cm as a function of the distance from the bottom edge of the Shroud, so that if the sampling location were moved about an inch closer to the center of the body mass, then the C14 date would increase by about 100 years.  This indicates that something probably caused a spatially dependent shift in the experimental C14 dates.  And the C14 date to the Middle-Ages contradicts other scientific and archeological dating methods noted above.  It contradicts the conclusions of historical investigation which indicates that the Shroud of Turin dates back prior to 944 AD.  It contradicts physical evidence that the Shroud could not have been produced in the Middle Ages due to the bizarre characteristics of the image, and it contradicts other evidence that the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus.  Though multiple hypotheses (contamination, isotopic change, bio-plastic film, invisible reweave, and neutron absorption) have been offered to explain the C14 dating to the Middle Ages, this will remain an area of active research until conclusive evidence is obtained.

The third mystery is related to the blood marks on the Shroud.  Most of the blood would have dried on the body by the time that the body was placed into the Shroud in the tomb.  Dried blood will not soak into a piece of cloth placed over the blood.  In fact, blood that is dried on skin must be scrubbed off of the skin to remove it.  Yet the blood marks on the Shroud are not only on the surface of the linen but often soak through it to the other side, and the dried surface of the blood marks on the cloth are pristine in appearance with no cracking or chipping on the outer edge.  This indicates that the Shroud was not lifted off of a body from which it had soaked up the blood.  So the third mystery is how the dried blood could have transferred from the body to the cloth and produce the blood marks that can be seen on the Shroud.
The conference on the Shroud of Turin in Tri-Cities, Washington, in July of 2017 will present recent research related to these mysteries as well as other issues.  It is also intended to help form a basis for future research.

Photographs Below

The four photographs below show additional views of the Shroud of Turin.  The first photo is a close-up of the face taken by Giuseppe Enrie, who was the official photographer for the exhibition of the Shroud in 1931.  This is a negative based on front lighting of the image of the face.  The next photo down is a positive of the entire front image based on front lighting.  The next photo is a positive of the front image based on rear lighting.  And the last photo is a positive of the back (dorsal) image based on rear lighting.  The value of these last two photographs is that they indicate that no substance was transferred to the Shroud to form the images since no images can be seen in rear lighting, and that horizontal striations of the linen can be seen that are continuous across the width of the Shroud, including the area near the feet.  The horizontal striations are in the Shroud and not in the backing cloth because slight discontinuities in the striations can be seen where the 3-inch wide side strip is sown onto the main piece of the Shroud.  These continuous horizontal striations in the linen argue against the possibility that an invisible reweave or patch was made in the area from which the samples were removed in 1988 for the C-14 dating.

What is on the Shroud?

1.   Rigor mortis in feet shows that the victim was on the cross for a significant amount of time after he had died.

2.  Two nails are through one foot, but only one of the nails is through the other foot.  This allows one foot to rotate, so that the victim can push up and down on the cross in order to breath during crucifixion.  If the victim of crucifixion is not pushing up and down, then it is clear that he is dead.  The soldiers had no doubt that Jesus was dead (Mark 15:43-45, John 19:31-35).

3.  In 1532, the church where the Shroud was located caught fire.  This fire produced two scorch lines on either side of the front and dorsal images.  Water stains can also be seen on the Shroud from water thrown onto the metal box containing the Shroud after it was rescued from the fire.  The heat from the fire did not produce a gradation in the intensity of the image discoloration, indicating that the image is not due to application of an organic compound.

4.  Shortly after the fire in 1532, charred material was removed and replaced by patches.  The repeating pattern of patches and scorch marks that can be seen on the Shroud resulted from the way in which the cloth was folded at the time of the fire.   One corner of the folded Shroud that burned resulted in the many areas that had to be patched.

5.  The Shroud has four sets of burn holes in an L-shaped pattern.  This same pattern of holes appears on a picture in a document known as the Hungarian Pray Manuscript, which is dated to 1192-1195 AD.  This indicates that the Shroud of Turin ought to be identified as the cloth, sometimes called the Mandylion, that was in Constantinople until the city was sacked during the fourth crusade in 1204 AD.  It is generally believed that this cloth was brought to Constantinople from Edessa, Turkey, in 944 AD.  In Edessa, it was called the Image of Edessa.  Thus, the Shroud of Turin is the same as the Image of Edessa, so it can be historically traced back prior to 944 AD.  This indicates that the C-14 date range of 1260 to 1390 AD for the Shroud of Turin is erroneous.  Other dating methods are consistent with a first century date for the Shroud:  1) test results of tensile strength and reflectivity of linen as it ages,  2) stitching used to sew on the 3-inch wide side piece onto the main Shroud is nearly identical to that found at Masada which was destroyed in 73-74 AD,  3) the size of the Shroud being very close to 2 by 8 cubits - the ancient unit of measurement,  4) crucifixion being outlawed after the fourth century, and  5) a possible Roman Lepton over one eye dating to 27 - 30 AD.  Several hypotheses have been made to explain the erroneous C-14 date, including an invisible reweave of the sample area and neutron absorption in the trace amount of nitrogen in the linen shifting the C-14 date by the (N14 + neutron --> C14 + proton) reaction.   Details of this last option are discussed further at RECENT RESEARCH.  Pros and cons of the various options will be considered at the conference.

6.  The back (dorsal) image on the Shroud shows a separation of blood & clear blood serum that flowed from the  wound in the his side that shows on the front image.  This separation indicates that the victim’s heart was not beating for long enough to allow the red blood cells to settle out of the clear blood serum before the side wound was made.  Compare this with the "blood and water" that is said to have exited from Jesus' side wound in John 19:34.

7.  The Shroud shows 100 to 120 scourge marks from two Roman flagrum, one striking from each side, with dumbbell shaped weights on the ends of the straps.  The blood marks from these wounds show blood serum rings (visible only under UV) around the dried blood exudate.

8.  There are abrasions on both shoulders evidently caused by the victim carrying a heavy rough object.  Compare this with Jesus carrying his own cross (John 19:17).  This refers to the horizontal piece (patibulum) but not the vertical piece, which would have been stationary in the ground at the location of the crucifixion.

9.  The front and back of the head show puncture wounds from sharp objects.  Jesus had a cap of thorns beat into his scalp with rods (Matthew 27:30, Mark 15:17-19).

10.  Pollen is on the Shroud that is unique to the area around Jerusalem.  Pollen from a plant with long thorns was found around his head.

11.  The front and back (dorsal) images of the crucified man are negative images and contain 3D or topographical information content related to the distance of the cloth from the body.  Of the 100 to 200 fibers in a thread, the images result from only the top one or two layers of fibers in a thread being discolored.  The thickness of discoloration in a fiber is less than 0.4 microns, which is less than a wavelength of light.  There is no indication of capillarity (soaking up of a liquied) between the fibers or the threads.  The discolored regions of the fibers in the image result from a change in the covalent bonding of the carbon atoms that were originally in the cellulose molecules in the linen.  This change in the covalent bonding of the carbon atoms is equivalent to a dehydration and oxidation of the cellulose molecule.  The conclusion is that an artist or forger could not have produced the bizarre characteristics of the images in any era, either ancient or modern.  How the image of a crucified man could have formed on the cloth with these image characteristics will be considered at the conference.

12.  The image on the Shroud has swollen cheeks and a possible broken nose from a beating (John 18:3) or a fall.  Abrasions on the tip of the nose have a microscopic amount of dirt in the abrasions.  Jesus probably fell while carrying his cross (Matthew 27:32, Mark 15:21).

13.  The side of the front image on the Shroud shows a 2 inch wide elliptical wound - the size of a typical Roman spear (John 19:34).  Post-mortem (after death) blood and watery fluid flowed down from this wound.

14.  The blood running down his arms is at the correct angles for a crucifixion victim.  Two angles for the blood flow can be seen on his arms.  These two angles are consistent with the crucifixion victim shifting between two positions while on the cross in order to breath.  (See #2 above)  What appears to be blood on the Shroud has passed 13 tests proving that it is real human blood.  The presence of "X" and "Y" chromosomes indicates that the blood is from a male.  The blood type is AB.  And most significantly, the blood is high in bilirubin which is a compound produced by the liver when it processes damaged red blood cells,  which occurs when a victim is severely beaten, as Jesus was.  Normal blood turns very dark brown to black as it ages over days and weeks, but the blood marks on the Shroud show a reddish hue.  There are multiple possible causes for this coloration.

15.  All paintings of the Middle Ages showed the nails through the center of the palms, but nails through the palms do not support sufficient weight since there is no bone structure above this location.  Archeology has confirmed that during crucifixion, the nails were driven through the wrists.  The Shroud shows the correct nail locations - through the wrist instead of through the palm.

16.  On the Shroud, the thumbs are folded under, contrary to all paintings of the Middle Ages.  Nails through the wrists automatically fold the thumbs under due to contact of the nail with the nerve that goes through the wrist.

17.  Abrasions on one knee show a microscopic amount of dirt, which is evidence of a fall.

18.  The three-inch wide side strip is sown on with a unique stitch nearly identical to that found only at Masada which was destroyed in 73-74 AD.  This is evidence that the Shroud was made in the first century.  The reason for this three-inch side piece is not certain, but the most likely explanation is that it probably was sown on in the process of originally making the Shroud.

19.  Small chips of travertine aragonite limestone were found in dirt near the feet.  This rare form of limestone is commonly called "Jerusalem limestone" because Jerusalem is the main location in the world where it is found.  This limestone found in dirt on the Shroud had a spectral signature nearly identical to a sample of limestone taken from the Damascus Gate - the closest gate to Golgotha.  No other place on earth is known to have the identical spectral image.  This indicates that the victim whose image is shown on the Shroud almost certainly walked on the streets of Jerusalem before being crucified.

         It is important to note that there is one item that should be on a burial cloth such as this that is not present.  That one item is the products of the body's decay.  There are no body decay products on the Shroud of Turin, in spite of the fact that the pristine nature of the blood marks indicates that this Shroud was not lifted off of the body from which the blood had come.  There is also no evidence on the Shroud of other organic chemicals that might have been used in the burial process, such as myrrh and aloes (John 19:39).

http://www.shroudconference2017.com/
The Shroud of Turin, also commonly called the Turin Shroud, is a burial cloth that has been located in Turin, Italy, since 1578, and has a well-documented history back to about 1355.  The amazing thing about this burial cloth is that it contains full size good resolution images of the front and back of a naked man that was crucified exactly as the New Testament says that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified.  When put on display in Turin, Italy, which usually occurs several times each century, millions of people file past the Shroud and see the images of the crucified man.  Long standing tradition maintains that the Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus.  Ancient documentation and a variety of ancient coins and artistic works are consistent with this view.  The scientific investigation of the Shroud began in 1898 when Secondo Pia took the first photograph of the Shroud which revealed that the image was a good resolution negative image.  It has now been scientifically studied for over 115 years making it the most studied ancient artifact in existence.  This scientific research has shown that the characteristics of the image are so bizarre that it could not be the result of a human agent, either an artist or forger, because the technology to create this image did not exist in a previous era and still does not exist even today.  Based on this scientific research, the general consensus of Shroud researchers is that the Shroud wrapped the body of a real human being that was crucified, and that in some way this body encoded front and back images of itself onto the inside of the Shroud.  


"The presence of traces of whole blood must be considered as firmly established, with the probability that the blood is human. It is possible, of course, that an artist or forger worked with blood to touch up a body image obtained by other means. Attempts to ascertain how the image came to be imprinted on the cloth have not yielded definitive results. An impressive array of optical and microscopic examinations was conducted, including most of those used in testing for blood constituents, infrared thermography and radiography, micro-Raman analysis, and examination by ion microprobe and electron scanning microscope (Jumper and Mottern 1980). There was general agreement among researchers on the nature of the image - degradation and/or dehydration of the cellulose in superficial fibers resulting in a faint reflection of light in the visible range (Pellicori 1980). Only the topmost fibrils of each thread are dehydrated, even in the darkest areas of the image, and no significant traces of pigments, dyes, stains, chemicals, or organic or inorganic substances were found in the image. It was thus determined that the image was not painted, printed, or otherwise artificially imposed on the cloth, nor was it the result of any known reaction of the cloth to spices, oils, or biochemicals produced by the body in life or death. STURP concluded that "there are no chemical or physical methods . . . and no combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances which explain the image adequately" (Joan Janney, quoted in an Associated Press report, October 11, 1981). Two theories currently contend among STURP researchers: a "photolysis effect" (heat or radiation scorch) and a "latent image process" where by the cloth was sensitized by materials absorbed by direct contact with a corpse. Wags were quick to label these "the first Polaroid from Palestine" and "a Christ contact print."

https://www.shroud.com/meacham2.htm
STURP determined that the image was caused by rapid dehydration, oxidation and degradation of the linen by an unidentified process, coloring it a sepia or straw yellow.  Several Physicists, including Dr. John Jackson of the Colorado Shroud Center, suggest that a form of columnated radiation is the best explanation for how the image was formed, leaving a scorch-like appearance (the scorch caused by light versus heat, as the image does not fluoresce).  Dr. Thomas Phillips (nuclear physicist at Duke University and formerly with the High Energy Labs at Harvard) says a potential miliburst of radiation (a neutron flux) could be consistent with the moment of resurrection.  Such a miliburst might cause the purely surface phenomenon of the scorch-like (scorch-by-light) images, and possibly add Carbon-14 to the Cloth.  As Dr. Phillips points out: "We never had a resurrection to study" and more testing should be done to ascertain whether a neutron-flux occurred.
The coloration on the linen fibers of the Shroud is extremely thin.  Sticky tape samples taken from different parts of the image on the Shroud's surface in 1978 were too thin to measure accurately with a standard optical microscope, which means they were thinner than the wavelength of visible light, or less than about 0.6 micrometers.  A more recent measurement of the coloration on one of the fibers was found to be about 0.2 micrometers thick (or one-fifth of a thousandth of a millimeter). Italian scientists working at the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA) conducted experiments on their own time between 2005 and 2010, applying ultraviolet radiation to strips of linen to see if they could match the coloration on the fibers of the Shroud of Turin.  In their ENEA technical report, published in November 2011, they wrote that particular doses of radiation left a thin coating on linen fibers that resemble the colored fibers on the image of the Shroud of Turin.  When questioned, the lead scientist in the study, Paolo Di Lazzaro, said that vacuum ultraviolet radiation (VUV, wavelength 200-100 nanometers) from laser pulses lasting less than 50 nanoseconds produced the best effect.
These findings support the idea that the image on the Shroud was made by a sudden flash of high-energy radiation.  They also refute the possibility of forgery, since lasers were obviously not available in medieval times.
The technical report: P. Di Lazzaro, D. Murra, E. Nichelatti, A. Santoni, G. Baldacchini: "Colorazione similsindonica di tessuti di lino tramite radiazione nel lontano ultravioletto: riassunto dei risultati ottenuti presso il Centro ENEA di Frascati negli anni 2005-2010" RT/2011/14/ENEA (2011).

PASTORAL VISIT
OF HIS HOLINESS JOHN PAUL II
TO VERCELLI AND TURIN (ITALY)
(MAY 23-24, 1998)

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS POPE JOHN PAUL II
Sunday, 24 May 1998
https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1998/may/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19980524_sudario.html

http://www.sindonology.org/shroudScope/shroudScope.shtml

Gianni Barcaccia Uncovering the sources of DNA found on the Turin Shroud 05 October 2015
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14484?fbclid=IwAR17peNapvYavYHxr8xcoGTmirlWj_sdLD5Vw4wIdaFE4zquIV4YOqdkvAI

Wikipedia: Fringe theories about the Shroud of Turin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fringe_theories_about_the_Shroud_of_Turin#Vanillin_loss_theory

Quinn Armstrong All The Evidence For And Against The Shroud Of Turin August 20, 2019
https://www.ranker.com/list/shroud-of-turin-evidence/quinn-armstrong

Knowing the evidence and facing the fact that to my knowledge nobody has been able to come up with a counterexplanation that explains away all of the strange "Shroud-properties" (photo negative, embedded 3D information, nails in the wrist, no paint on it but real human blood, realistic wounds from the flagrum,weaving pattern from antiquity, pollen and dust from the region of Jerusalem, forensic analysis that seems to show that the person on the shroud was tortured and crucified, probably depicted in art of the first centuries AD etc. etc. the list goes on and on)
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/2019/07/a-note-probably-not-my-last-about-the-shroud-of-turin.html

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rqNIdpA3_gnz4eSRmXMMTl3DmwsbirMUohAW7fHbNZA/edit?fbclid=IwAR0HmNicxe3J_mC0uyKU2Am8182fNQaYmh5s6IOTimauX0LGseMDtad_8b8

https://www.sindone.org/it/

Gianni Barcaccia Uncovering the sources of DNA found on the Turin Shroud 05 October 2015
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14484

Why are there no spices on the Shroud?
Barrie Schwortz: As for those spices, they are organic materials and would definitely degrade and dissipate over time. The fact that little was found in recent years does not mean it wasn’t there 2000 years ago. One Italian researcher (Baima-Bollone) claims to have found traces of them in his research, although STURP did not. Of course, STURP was focused on the image, not myrrh and aloes. One other point. Although 75kg was brought to the tomb, there was little time for a proper preparation of the body due to the approaching Sabbath so the women planned to come back on Sunday morning to finish the job. 


Could the Shroud be a forgery?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7128

If the Shroud of Turinis a forgery, show how it was done, and grasp your $1million dollar prize
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GfYMJT45MY

Is the Shroud of Turin a fraud? Refuting the most common objections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGZmIfQf1dM&t=21s

A medieval artist or artists, would need to be proficient enough in over a 100 disciplines and also collectively outweigh the intelligence of the people who performed hundreds and hundreds of tests performed on the Shroud and who are not finding any indications of a forgery.

The Plethora of Disciplines Used to Study the Shroud of Turin
https://www.academia.edu/81353305/The_Plethora_of_Disciplines_Used_to_Study_the_Shroud_of_Turin

Key points why the Shroud is not a forgery:

1. We have good evidence that the Shroud existed prior to 1260, the earliest dating of the carbon C14 test from 1988. The Hungarian Pray Manuscript, or Codex, is dated 1192-95. The Codex was compiled at the ancient Benedictine monastery in Hungary. Two pen and ink drawings on one page of the Codex document the existence of the Shroud in 1192. The upper drawing is a depiction of Jesus' body being prepared for burial. Correspondences between the Pray Codex and the Shroud include 1. Jesus is nude; 2. His hands are crossed awkwardly at the wrists, right over left (as it appears on the Shroud), covering His genitals; 3. No thumbs are visible on Jesus' hands; 4. His hands and fingers are unnaturally long; 5. Jesus is about to be wrapped in a double body-length shroud and 6. Red marks on Jesus' scalp and forehead are in the same position as the bloodstains (including the "reversed 3") on the Shroud. In the lower drawing, an angel is showing three women disciples of Jesus' empty tomb symbolised by a sarcophagus with an open lid. Correspondences between this lower drawing and the Shroud include: 7. The sarcophagus lid has a herringbone weave pattern; 8. Red zigzags match the inverted V-shaped blood trickles down the Shroud man's arms and 9. L-shaped patterns of tiny circles in the herringbone weave of the sarcophagus lid match the `poker holes' on the Shroud. It is inconceivable that all these detailed links with the Shroud, several of which are found nowhere else, could have occurred on a single manuscript page by chance.

2. Christ Pantocrator, St Catherine's monastery, Sinai Dated c. 550, is nearly perfectly congruent to the Shroud-face, for example, the high right eyebrow, the hollow right cheek, and the garment neckline. Using his polarized image overlay technique, Dr Alan Whanger found over 200 points of congruence between this icon and the Shroud. Even creases and wrinkles on the Shroud cloth have been rendered by the artist. Flower images in the halo around the head (nimbus) of this icon are found at the same locations on the Shroud. The artist has even rendered the xray images of the Shroud man's teeth as chapped lips! This means that this icon must have been copied directly from the Mandylion/Shroud in the mid-sixth century and so, once again, refutes the radiocarbon dating's 14th-century date of the Shroud.

3. In the Cathedral of Oviedo, Spain, is a linen cloth called the Sudarium Christi, or the Face Cloth of Christ. The Sudarium Christi has a well-documented history.  One source traces the cloth back as far as 570 AD. According to Jewish custom, blood lost while a person was alive was not as important as blood lost after a person dies, when the death was violent. Any blood or bodily fluid which came after death had to be buried with the body, so it had to be recovered. Blood Type: The blood type of the shroud - namely AB blood - matches the blood type of the Sudarium. Dr. Alan Whanger performed Polarized Image Overlay Technology which revealed seventy points of congruence between the blood stains on the Shroud as compared to the Oviedo head cloth on the front of the head, and fifty points of congruence between the blood marks on the back of the head. There is deposit of dirt on the nose area bearing a large excess of calcium and low concentrations of strontium. This discovery matches the previous discovery of dirt on the nose of the Turin Shroud.

4. Bloodstains on the forehead of the man on the shroud, including the "reversed `3'", which perfectly show the distinction between arterial and venous blood, were discovered by Andrea Cesalpino (1519-1603) in 1593. So the unknown medieval or earlier forger of the Shroud would have discovered the circulation of blood, at least ~238 years before Cesalpino!

5. The scientific consensus is that the image was produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils of the linen itself. There are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately.  It's not a painting.  If this were true, it should be possible to identify the pigments used by chemical analysis, just as conservators can do for the paintings of Old Masters. But the Sturp team found no evidence of any pigments or dyes on the cloth in sufficient amounts to explain the image. Nor are there any signs of it being rendered in brush strokes. The entire image is very superficial in nature, Around 0.2 thousandths of a millimeter (about 0.000008 inches) only on the uppermost surface of the fibrils.   A burst of 34 thousand billion Watts of vacuum-ultraviolet radiation produced a discoloration on the uppermost surface of the Shroud’s fibrils (without scorching it), which gave rise to a perfect three-dimensional negative image of both the frontal and dorsal parts of the body wrapped in it.” We currently do not know of any natural cause for a human corpse producing ultraviolet radiation like this. A very short and intense flash of directional VUV radiation can color the linen fabric. The total power of the VUV radiation required for instantly color the surface of a linen corresponding to a human body of medium height, equal to the corporate body surface area = 2000 MW / cm2 x 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion Watts. 

6. Botanist A. Danin of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem determined the origin of the Shroud based on a comprehensive analysis of pollen taken from the Shroud and plant images associated with the Shroud. The most frequent pollen on the Shroud is identical to the most frequent pollen in sediments of the lake of Gennesaret sedimentary layers of two thousand years ago.  Danin's analysis suggests that flowers and other plant materials were placed on the Shroud of Turin, leaving pollen grains and imprints of plants and flowers on the linen cloth. Gundelia tournefortii and Zygophyllum dumosum coexist in a limited area, according to Danin, a leading authority on plants of Israel. The area is bounded by lines linking Jerusalem and Hebron in Israel and Madaba and Karak in Jordan. Frei was able to identify 49 species of plants, the pollen of which is represented in the dust of the Shroud. From the list of these plants it can be deduced that half of them do not grow in Europe, while it is present in the Middle East; in the other half, there are many Mediterranean plants. The first sampling on the Shroud On November 23, 1973, with the consent of the competent authorities, Frei took some dust samples from the Shroud’s margins using adhesive tapes. 

7. The yarn used to weave the Shroud of Turin is of very high quality, evenly spun, and it has been woven into an unusual, fancy weave for the time, called 3 to 1 herringbone twill.  There are no examples of herringbone twill weave from France up to and including the fourteenth century. The yarn was bleached before weaving rather than after the cloth was taken from the loom. This is a significant clue to the age of the cloth because medieval European linen was field bleached, a process that eliminates banding. The measurements of the Shroud are approximately 8 x 2 of the Assyrian standard cubit.  Such conformity to an exact 8 by 2 cubits is yet another piece of knowledge difficult to imagine of any medieval forger. A medieval artist/forger would be most unlikely to know the length of the standard cubit of Jesus' day, as this was only discovered by archaeologists in the 19th century!! Textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, revealed that the stitching of a seam on the Shroud that runs the entire length known as the side strip is typical of Jewish burial shrouds found in Masada, Israel.

IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN A FORGERY?

If you believe the Shroud is a fake, then you must explain how: "Whoever fabricated it before 1353AD must have:

1. know the precise methods of crucifixion in the first century;
2. be proficient enough in over 100 scientific disciplines and also collectively outweigh the intelligence of the people who performed hundreds and hundreds of tests on the Shroud and who are not finding any indications of a forgery.
3. possessed the medical knowledge of a modern expert surgeon;
4. utilized an art process unknown to any great master, never duplicated before or since;
5. be able to foresee and approximate principles of photographic negativity that would not be discovered for centuries;
6. imported a piece of old cloth of Middle Eastern manufacture;
7. used a coloring agent which would be unaffected by intense heat;
8. be able to incorporate in his work details (that have only recently been discovered), that the human eye cannot see and that are visible only with the most advanced computer-scanning devices;
9. be able to reproduce flawlessly, on a nearly flat linen surface, in a single color, undistorted 3-D characteristics of a human body in a 'negative format' on the tops of the threads, while conversely showing the 'blood' as positive and soaking all the way through.
10. Get somewhere the blood of a tortured man, and apply it before creating the image.
11. Create the Sudarium of Oviedo with all the intricacies that match the Shroud of Turin
12. Get limestone from Jerusalem, and pollen particles from the middle east, in special from plants with thorns, that flourish only between March and april

All of this had to have been done prior to 1353, for since that date the Shroud has a clearly documented and uninterrupted history. And even now, with all the scientific and technical skills at our command, our scientists and artists cannot duplicate the Shroud,"


Joe Marino: The Plethora of Disciplines Used to Study the Shroud of Turin Published 2022
https://www.academia.edu/81353305/The_Plethora_of_Disciplines_Used_to_Study_the_Shroud_of_Turin?fbclid=IwAR0XzA0P1zhyBZODDyMFT25_wW8eHjbxXL2VxyUgF81-seMTTOeSQJemF9M




Claim:  "the entire cloth is marked by what appears to be rivulets of blood from wounds in the wrists, feet and side. These marks don't just appear to be blood; they are blood" FALSE
M.Borrini, Ph.D.; and L.Garlaschelli: A BPA Approach to the Shroud of Turin 2018
The inconsistencies identified by the authors seem not only to point against their own reality, but against the authenticity of the Shroud itself, suggesting that the Turin linen was an artistic or “didactic” representation from the XIV century. This new Bloodstain Pattern Analysis supports the historical records (27), the radiocarbon dating, and the chemical analysis.
https://sci-hub.ren/10.1111/1556-4029.13867

"Scientist re-creates Turin Shroud to show it's fake", October 9, 2009:
https://www.cnn.com/.../europe/10/07/italy.turin.shroud/
"Scientists prove Turin Shroud not genuine": https://www.independent.co.uk/.../turin-shroud-latest...
"study suggests Shroud of Turin a fake, supporting study": https://phys.org/.../2018-07-shroud-turin-fake-retracted...
"Study of Shroud of Turin Proves Again: Jesus Relic Is Fake": https://www.haaretz.com/.../MAGAZINE-csi-study-of-shroud...
"research (once again) suggests the Shroud of Turin is fake": https://www.nbcnews.com/.../forensic-research-once-again...
"tests suggest Shroud of Turin is fake": https://www.reuters.com/.../new-forensic-tests-suggest...
"The Bloodstains On The Shroud Of Turin Are Probably Fake, Say Forensic Experts": https://www.buzzfeednews.com/.../shroud-turin-jesus-fake...
"Ancient Shroud of Turin Is Likely Fake, Bloodstain Analysis Finds": https://www.newsweek.com/ancient-shroud-turin-least-half...
"Shroud of Turin Is a Fake, Bloodstains Suggest": https://www.livescience.com/63093-shroud-of-turin-is-fake...

"The Bloodstains On The Shroud Of Turin Are Probably Fake, Say Forensic Experts":  
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/danvergano/shroud-turin-jesus-fake-bloodstain?fbclid=IwAR396GG6MuFxqWjBaNhLOGfyvK6N2EtNvGk5vdt_7WnNz8vsIbyYoqMoasI
"Ancient Shroud of Turin Is Likely Fake, Bloodstain Analysis Finds":
https://www.newsweek.com/ancient-shroud-turin-least-half-fake-bloodstain-analysis-finds-1026279?fbclid=IwAR3pUhM7VPMW8RZud_QJ9faOqFDKhjPmhEp_InyOoAdFHMlbUwXDtzTfFSg
"Shroud of Turin Is a Fake, Bloodstains Suggest":  
https://www.livescience.com/63093-shroud-of-turin-is-fake-bloodstains.html?fbclid=IwAR2Dt60jarXjV12KCSNRyIrXRBrZC47n5vZ-oqxKakhaPFeOKv7SYjfnJ0U
628-year-old fake news: Scientists prove Turin Shroud not genuine (again)
https://www-independent-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/turin-shroud-latest-fake-forgery-scientific-blood-pattern-spatter-study-carbon-dating-debunked-a8450101.html?amp=&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA=&fbclid=IwAR3p53pbmq6cjDKNT0AFHaY96BxrBwsHje9i2-qwy1iWLeTeDVtwsSI6x0c&amp_js_v=0.1#aoh=15868689159723&amp_ct=1586868931077&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fworld%2Feurope%2Fturin-shroud-latest-fake-forgery-scientific-blood-pattern-spatter-study-carbon-dating-debunked-a8450101.html

"My research - continues Garlaschelli - made possible also by the economic contribution of some entities, such as the UAAR (Union of Atheists Rationalist Agnostics), and many private individuals - aimed to verify whether an artist could have obtained it with methods also available in 1300.
https://www.massimopolidoro.com/blog/la-sindone-riprodotta-in-grandezza-naturale-al-convegno-del-cicap.html

Garlaschelli, professor of chemistry at the University of Pavia, told La Repubblica newspaper that his team used linen woven using the same techniques as those used on the shroud, and artificially aged by heating in an oven and washing.
http://www.italiaoggi.com.br/not10_1209/ital_not20091009d.htm

Reply:  Stephen E. Jones: My critique of Borrini, M. & Garlaschelli, L., 2018, "A BPA Approach to the Shroud of Turin," Journal of Forensic Sciences, 10 July
Conclusion after a careful analysis of the claims in the paper: Borrini and Garlaschelli in their paper set up a strawman of the Shroud and refuted only that. And that they are guilty of either scholarly incompetence, in not being aware of the relevant Shroud literature, or scholarly dishonesty, in being aware of that literature but concealing it from their readers. Or both. They are an example of `the blind leading the blind'
http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2018/08/my-critique-of-borrini-m-garlaschelli-l.html

“A BPA APPROACH TO THE SHROUD OF TURIN” by Matteo Borrini and Luigi Garlaschelli 
The article presents numerous formal and conceptual errors that deprive it of scientific credibility. First of all, neither author is a forensic physician, so they lack the experience and knowledge necessary to successfully deal with any kind of investigation of human bloodstains. The “experiments” have been conducted on a living and healthy human being, without traumatic wounds of any kind and with a dummy vaguely reminiscent of a human trunk. But if it is not done with a living human being who has suffered the same wounds and the same chronology as the Man of the Shroud, nor with a corpse that meets the same requirements, then the experiment does NOT reproduce, not even approximately, the circumstances in which the bloodstains originated.

The blood on the Shroud was cadaveric blood, not living blood, or even chemically anticoagulated blood. Considering the above-reported statement, it is likely that the “blood belt” was not produced by the flow of blood between the corpse and the cloth, but while placing the body on the linen, the corpse bled and released a trail of blood that perfectly reproduces the relative path between the corpse and the textile material that absorbed this blood. This fact, too, was not taken into consideration. All these considerations together suggest that the study of Borrini and Garlaschelli presents several limitations and that the conclusions of the authors are not supported by the experimental data.
[url=https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/Hermosilla EN.pdf]https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/Hermosilla%20EN.pdf[/url]

Considerable efforts have been made to demonstrate that the Shroud is a fraud. Many books were written, attempts made to duplicate the image, but what these attempts have achieved is the contrary of the intent. Ini my opinion, the investigations to reproduce the Shroud of Turin only demostrate that the best efforts do not suffice to come even close to the image of the original. The results are far away from the original, very poor and can be easily identified as made by an artist.

All attempts to reproduce the shroud have failed. Copies have been made that look like it but they lack all of the image characteristics that make the shroud image unique. Science cannot explain nor replicate the image..the closest we have come to replicating it (allegedly) is by bombarding linen samples with VUV Excimer Lasers.

https://www.aafs.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/AAFS-2019-E73.pdf


Commentary On: Borrini M, Garlaschelli L. A BPA approach to the Shroud of Turin. J Forensic 
https://sci-hub.ee/10.1111/1556-4029.13997

ANSWER TO THE ARTICLE “A BPA APPROACH TO THE SHROUD OF TURIN” by Matteo Borrini and Luigi Garlaschelli
[url=https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/Hermosilla EN.pdf]https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/Hermosilla%20EN.pdf[/url] 





Physicist Paolo Di Lazzaro, deputy director of the International Centre of Sindonology,  told La Stampa:

We are in the field of pure hypothesis. Every new experiment is welcome, but before drawing any conclusions, a serious scientist must take into account the experimental limits, the unknown parameters and above all the different configuration of skin and blood between the drippings of the dehydrated and wounded and beaten man that we see on the Shroud and the drippings of fluidized blood on the skin of a person in good health. We cannot say that the Shroud‘s blood flows are not congruent with the position of a crucified man if we do not take into account the conditions of the dehydrated sindonic man, with the viscous blood and the swollen, dirty and sweaty skin. For this reason, I believe that the results of this research should be considered as less than preliminary, waiting for an experiment that attempts to reproduce the spots visible on the Shroud using parameters of blood and skin closer to those that they want to reproduce.
https://weirdcatholic.com/2018/08/07/the-latest-bogus-shroud-debunking/

Claim: 
Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin
This is one of the tests that those who claim they have reproduced the Shroud must meet: it must be "reversed like a photographic negative." It is not enough to produce an image that is only superficially like the Shroud. It must be exactly like the Shroud in its uniquely important details - down to the microscopic level. I here predict that if this claimed reproduction of the Shroud is submitted for microscopic analysis, it will be shown to be unlike the Shroud, and therefore itself just a fake copy of the Shroud original. There is a major difference between Garlaschelli's description of how he made his shroud's image (see below) and the image on the Shroud of Turin, that totally disqualifies Garlaschelli's shroud from being a faithful and credible reproduction of the Shroud of Turin.

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

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

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

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

Italian scientists working at the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA) conducted experiments on their own time between 2005 and 2010, applying ultraviolet radiation to strips of linen to see if they could match the coloration on the fibers of the Shroud of Turin.  In their ENEA technical report, published in November 2011, they wrote that particular doses of radiation left a thin coating on linen fibers that resemble the colored fibers on the image of the Shroud of Turin.  When questioned, the lead scientist in the study, Paolo Di Lazzaro, said that vacuum ultraviolet radiation (VUV, wavelength 200-100 nanometers) from laser pulses lasting less than 50 nanoseconds produced the best effect.
These findings support the idea that the image on the Shroud was made by a sudden flash of high-energy radiation.  They also refute the possibility of forgery, since lasers were obviously not available in medieval times.
The technical report: P. Di Lazzaro, D. Murra, E. Nichelatti, A. Santoni, G. Baldacchini: "Colorazione similsindonica di tessuti di lino tramite radiazione nel lontano ultravioletto: riassunto dei risultati ottenuti presso il Centro ENEA di Frascati negli anni 2005-2010" RT/2011/14/ENEA (2011).

What, if the Shroud were a forgery ? 
In the middle ages, during centuries, indulgence was a BIG business for the catholic church. They were granted on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church in exchange for money, which are claimed to allow a remission of  sin, the guilt of which has been forgiven. Typically a writ of indulgence was issued by the Church and given to an individual who had demonstrated some type of penance, or good work. 

Usually priests were travelling from one town to another in middle age Europe, visiting the four corners of the known world with an entire entourage.   One method employed to finance the building of St. Peter's Basilica was the granting of indulgences in return for contributions.  A succession of popes and architects took 120 years to build it, their combined efforts resulting in the completion in 1590. It would cost an estimate of 5,4 billion us$ today to build it. 

One of the tools to collect money was also when priests were travelling to carry  relics of the saints with them, usually consisting of the physical remains of a saint or the personal effects of the saint or venerated person preserved for purposes of veneration as a tangible memorial, and showing to the population.

Of course that was an important tool. To show a peace of wood that was claimed to pertain to the cross of Christ, or a spine of Christs crown, and so on. Now imagine, there would have been a way to produce such an amazing forgery of the linen cloth burial shroud in which  Jesus of Nazareth was wrapped after crucifixion. bearing his negative image. That, of course, would have been a tool of general amazement everywhere, were it would have been carried and shown. After showing it to the crowd, asking for indulgences and funds would have been much easier. 

If there were a method to produce such an inprint, Rome would have build a FACTORY to make the artifact in considerable numbers, and given it to the travelling priests as relic to be shown. There would not be just one shroud known, but hundreds, maybe thousands, and many still existing today. Each a littlebit different, but nonetheless, the technique, and consistency, the same, and as such, comparable one to each other. That would be a GREAT argument to denie the authentiticy ot all of them. 

But there are many  things unique on the shroud. 

The blood strains can only be seen with UV light. Why would an artist back then ever put blood there which would not be visible, and providing no advantage at all. But even more remarkable than that, the wide presence of creatinine particles bound to ferrihydrite particles is not a situation typical of the blood serum of a healthy human organism. Indeed, a high level of creatinine and ferritin is related to patients suffering of strong polytrauma like torture. Hence, the presence of these biological nanoparticles found during our experiments point a violent death for the man wrapped in the Turin shroud.” What appears to be blood on the Shroud has passed 13 tests proving that it is real human blood.  The presence of "X" and "Y" chromosomes indicates that the blood is from a male.  The blood type is AB.  And most significantly, the blood is high in bilirubin which is a compound produced by the liver when it processes damaged red blood cells,  which occurs when a victim is severely beaten, as Jesus was. 

There is pollen from Jerusalem, Palestine, and Edessa. Pollen is on the Shroud that is unique to the area around Jerusalem.  Pollen from a plant with long thorns was found around his head. The place where the nails are in the hands is anatomically correct. The image is NOT  there are no pigments whatsoever on the Shroud. If it were a forgery, with high certainty, it would have been painted. Who of the lay population would have perceived it ? 

The image resides on the outermost layer of the linen fibers and the image goes just two or three fibers deep into the thread. The superficial image then disappears if a colored thread goes under another thread. The polysaccharide cover is approximately 0.2 thousandths of a millimeter (about 0.000008 inches) the inner side is not.

Secondo Pia's first photograph in 1898 showed that the image on the cloth is a negative. The front and back (dorsal) images of the crucified man are negative images and contain 3D or topographical information content related to the distance of the cloth from the body. 

Two nails are through one foot, but only one of the nails is through the other foot.  This allows one foot to rotate, so that the victim can push up and down on the cross in order to breath during crucifixion.  If the victim of crucifixion is not pushing up and down, then it is clear that he is dead.  The soldiers had no doubt that Jesus was dead. All paintings of the Middle Ages showed the nails through the center of the palms, but nails through the palms do not support sufficient weight since there is no bone structure above this location.  Archeology has confirmed that during crucifixion, the nails were driven through the wrists.  The Shroud shows the correct nail locations - through the wrist instead of through the palm. On the Shroud, the thumbs are folded under, contrary to all paintings of the Middle Ages.  Nails through the wrists automatically fold the thumbs under due to contact of the nail with the nerve that goes through the wrist.

In 2013, a research team from the University of Padua conducted three tests on tiny fibers extracted from the shroud during earlier carbon-14 dating tests conducted in 1988 The first two tests used infrared light and Raman spectroscopy, respectively, while the third employed a test analyzing different mechanical parameters relating to voltage. The results date the cloth to between 300 B.C. and 400 A.D.. Fanti said that researchers also found trace elements of soil "compatible with the soil of Jerusalem." "For me the [Shroud] comes from God because there are hundreds of clues in favor to the authenticity," he wrote, adding that there also "no sure proofs. The 1988 carbon C14 results may have been contaminated by fibers used to repair the cloth during the Middle Ages.

The Shroud has four sets of burn holes in an L-shaped pattern.  This same pattern of holes appears on a picture in a document known as the Hungarian Pray Manuscript, which is dated to 1192-1195 AD.  This indicates that the Shroud of Turin ought to be identified as the cloth, sometimes called the Mandylion, that was in Constantinople until the city was sacked during the fourth crusade in 1204 AD.  It is generally believed that this cloth was brought to Constantinople from Edessa, Turkey, in 944 AD.  In Edessa, it was called the Image of Edessa.  Thus, the Shroud of Turin is the same as the Image of Edessa, so it can be historically traced back prior to 944 AD. 

Stitching used to sew on the 3-inch wide side piece onto the main Shroud is nearly identical to that found at Masada which was destroyed in 73-74 AD. The size of the Shroud being very close to 2 by 8 cubits - the ancient unit of measurement 

The Shroud shows 100 to 120 scourge marks from two Roman flagrum, one striking from each side, with dumbbell shaped weights on the ends of the straps.  The blood marks from these wounds show blood serum rings (visible only under UV) around the dried blood exudate. There are abrasions on both shoulders evidently caused by the victim carrying a heavy rough object.

The side of the front image on the Shroud shows a 2 inch wide elliptical wound - the size of a typical Roman spear. The blood running down his arms is at the correct angles for a crucifixion victim.  Two angles for the blood flow can be seen on his arms.  These two angles are consistent with the crucifixion victim shifting between two positions while on the cross in order to breath.

Claim:  It's because of this evidence, that Garlaschelli tried to remake a full-size shroud. Garlaschelli reproduced the shroud using materials and techniques that were available in the middle ages. He placed a linen sheet flat over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid. A bas-relief was used for the face. The linen was then artificially aged by heating the cloth in an oven and washing it, a process which removed the pigment from the surface but left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud. The pigment on the original Shroud faded naturally over the centuries. Garlaschelli then added blood stains, burn holes, scorches and water stains to achieve the final effect.
His replica is amazing, and even the shroudologist Mark Guscin has to admit it. As for those who claim that under the microscope the image cannot be identical to the Turin Shroud, one must consider that even two coins minted in the very same mint aren't identical under the microscope. The goal achieved by Garlaschelli was to show that such a relic could easily be produced in the Middle Ages.

Reply: In the Middle Ages there were the raw materials to build an airplane, but that doesn't mean it was built back then.  As mentioned above Garlaschelli used Shroud photos to make his, and while it's somewhat visually similar to the Shroud, it certainly does not contain all the characteristics.  We know from the Shroud that the blood went on 1st and then the image.  Garlaschelli did his image and then added his blood.  Not a match.


Claim:   There are many inaccuracies and the image is anatomically incorrect.
Reply: Joe Marino: Individual Medical Doctors' Viewpoints on the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin 2021

Starting with French biologist Dr. Paul Vignon in the early 20th-century, most medical doctors who have studied the Shroud believe that the image accurately depicts anatomically and physiologically an actual human body that has undergone the torture of crucifixion. Drs. Robert Bucklin and Dr. Frederick Zugibe, who each studied the Shroud about 50 years each and who performed a combined approximate 50,000 (!) autopsies, both believed that the Shroud image was that of a real, crucified man who died. It seems bizarre that some skeptics will bring up the aforesaid point about a difference of beliefs of where the hand wound was located as if that also practically disauthenticates the Shroud.  It’s fair to say that an overwhelming number of medical doctors believe that it’s not a forgery.

Barbet, Pierre. A Doctor at Calvary. New York: Image Books), 1963, pg. 185
Here, then, is the result of my anatomical and other research on the subject of the Wounds of Christ. I hope I have given the impression that I have conducted them with full independence of mind and with all possible scientific objectivity. I started out with a certain skepticism, more or less with a Cartesian doubt, to examine the images on the shroud; I was quite ready to deny their authenticity if they disagreed with anatomical truth. But, on the
contrary, the facts gradually grouped themselves into a bundle of proofs, which carried increasing conviction. Not only was the explanation of the images so natural and simple that it proclaimed them to be genuine; but, when at first they seemed to be abnormal, the experiment demonstrated that they were as they should be, that they could not be different and as a forger would have portrayed them, following the current iconographic traditions. Anatomy thus bore witness to their authenticity, in full agreement with the Gospel texts. We possess, then, the shroud of Christ, bearing the image of His body and the marks of His blood. It is the noblest relic in the world, a corporal relic of Our Lord. For him who can read and can reflect, it is the most beautiful, the most moving of the meditations on the Passion.

Claim: most damning are the efforts of N.D. Wilson, who produced a replica of the Shroud, that is identical to it in every relevant way, by painting an image on a sheet of glass, placing it over a blank shroud, and leaving it in the sun for 10 days.
Reply: Episode #11: Has The Shroud Been Debunked? John Calvin vs. The Shroud Oct. 15, 2019
N.D. Wilson’s amazing 2005 article in Christianity Today, entitled “Father Brown fakes The Shroud” is a must read for Shroud enthusiasts. Unfortunately, the only possible way to read it is to get your hands on that 2005 magazine in a library somewhere, or pay CT $30 for a digital subscription - which is what I did. 15 years ago N.D. Wilson supposedly figured out how one might fake The Shroud of Turin, and since that time, I have heard several people say or intimate that The Shroud had conclusively been proven a fraud with the 1-2 punch of #1 1988 medieval dating and #2 Wilson’s reproduction.

Wilson’s method of duplicating The Shroud is ingenious. Basically, he and an artist friend painted a reverse image on a large pane of glass, and then had the sun shine through that image onto a Linen cloth over a period of several days. The sun bleached the cloth - lighter in areas of heavy paint and darker in areas of light paint. The resulting image does indeed look fairly authentic and Shroud-like to the naked eye. It does prove that it is possible, with the right equipment,  to put a negative-like image like The Shroud onto a linen cloth. Here are some objections that have been raised:

1. The cloth contains pollen from plants only found in Palestine - that would be difficult for a European forger to get. For one, he would have no idea that such a thing could potentially authenticate The Shroud. Wilson notes that the cloth could have been procured from a first century, Jewish grave, which I suppose is technically possible.

2. The figure in the Turin Shroud is pierced through his wrists, not through his hands. In recent years, it has been discovered that crucified people would have to have been pierced through their wrists (and not their hands) in order to actually be suspended from a cross. This does not at all contradict the Passion accounts in all four Gospels in the Bible, because the Greek word used for ‘hands’ can also include the wrist area, unlike our English, which more clearly delineates between the two. Almost the totality of medieval art depicts the nails used during the crucifixion of Jesus being located in the hands, rather than the wrists. If the Shroud were a forgery, it is remarkable in the extreme that the forger would have known to include nail holes in the wrists, rather than in the hands.

3. I am not an expert on 1300s era glass technology, but some who are have argued that the kind of large and flat pane windows that would have been needed to sun-bleach the painted image of a man onto a large linen cloth would not have been available in the early medieval period. This is a fairly strong objection that I don’t believe Wilson’s article - as thorough as it is - addresses fully.

4. The figure on the Shroud has real wounds and real blood. This, of course, means that it was more than merely a sun-bleached image. Wilson contends that somebody had to have been murdered in order for forgers to make The Shroud using his method. Again, such a thing is technically possible.

5. It appears to some that the figure in The Shroud has coins in its eyes - and the type of coins appear to be first century coins that would have been commonly used in Israel during the time of Christ. That a medieval forger would be able to add such a detail is fairly astonishing. Of course, as with everything surrounding The Shroud, others (and Wilson, I presume) argue that there are no coin impressions in the eyes of the Shroud-figure.

6. Finally, if The Shroud is a forgery, those who painted the image on the glass had a remarkable and accurate knowledge of both the full details of Roman crucifixion and how the body would have responded to such crucifixion. Additionally, the anonymous forgers would have had to have a strong knowledge of anatomy and wound-effects, as the wounds on The Shroud figure are consistent with what modern medical technology would expect. Wilson contends that there were many medieval people with deep and accurate knowledge of anatomy, and the only reason we don’t expect the forgers to have such knowledge is because we have a sort of bias against people from the past and assume they are unsophisticated and unintelligent. Such bias is certainly real, I will readily admit, though it does seem that medical history of the last 500 years demonstrates that medieval medicine and anatomy was indeed quite primitive.

So - did Wilson definitively prove that medieval forgers could have produced The Shroud? Maybe, maybe not. Even Wilson admits, “I have not proved much. Or, I do not think that I have. Men and women who have believed in the Shroud will continue to believe. There is a fireman somewhere in Italy who risked his life to save the Shroud. I have a great deal of respect for that man. Perhaps I've given those who disbelieve more reason for noses lifted in the air, but I have not proved that the Shroud was faked. What I have done is crudely demonstrate that such an image could easily be produced in a matter of weeks by wicked men with no scruples, a little imagination, and a little more skill. The fact that it could have been faked does not mean that it was, though I believe it to have been. ”  

I’ll say this - Wilson’s supposed forgers would have had to be: remarkably intelligent, gifted with art, well supplied with very rare (if existent) glass panes, and have an astonishing - for the time - knowledge of medicine, Roman history and human anatomy. Additionally, they would have had to be in possession of a cloth from Palestine, and possibly even pollen that had come from Palestine as well.

There have been other attempts to recreate the Shroud as well. In 2009 the University of Pavia organic chemistry professor and skeptic society member Luigi Garlaschelli produced a fairly convincing (at first glance) reproduction.

He describes his attempt: "What you have now is a very fuzzy, dusty and weak image, Then for the sake of completeness I have added the bloodstains, the burns, the scorching because there was a fire in 1532."

Garlaschelli says his work disproves the claims of the shroud's strongest supporters.

"Basically the Shroud of Turin has some strange properties and characteristics that they say cannot be reproduced by human hands,"For example, the image is superficial and has no pigment, it looks so lifelike and so on, and therefore they say it cannot have been done by an artist."

"The procedure is very simple. The artist took this sheet and put it over one of his assistants," "His good idea was to wrap the sheet over the person underneath because he didn't want to obtain an image that was too obviously a painting or a drawing, so with this procedure you get a strange image, Time did the rest,"

As you might imagine, there are several people who disagree that Garlaschelli has produced a convincing replica. Dr. Thibault Heimburger has written an extensive and scientific rebuttal of Garlaschelli’s method, essentially arguing that it does not really duplicate all of the elements of the Shroud, but is only a superficial likeness. His paper, linked in the shownotes, concludes:

L.G. concluded: “We have also shown that pigments containing traces of acidic compounds can be artificially aged after the rubbing step (…) in such a way that, when the pigment is washed away, an image is obtained having the expected characteristics as the Shroud of Turin. In particular the image is pseudo negative, is fuzzy with half-tones, resides on the top-most fibers of the cloth, has some 3D embedded properties and does not fluoresce”. I think to the contrary that the image has none of these characteristics (except negativity and nonfluorescence). L.G. used a sophisticated method and a new interesting hypothesis, and he got the best Shroud-like image today. It is interesting to notice that even so, the properties of his image remain in fact very far from the fundamental properties of the Shroud image. 9 For the moment, the Shroud image remains unfakeable.
https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/bible-2021-10/episode-11-has-the-shroud-TLVEey6GpuM/

Claim:  pierre DRC's the catholic bishop in troy's wrote to pope clement the seventh that the shroud was a clever sleight of hand by someone falsely declaring this was the actual Shroud in which Jesus was unfolded in the tomb to attract the multitude so that money might cunningly be wrung from them
Reply: 
Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present FOURTEENTH CENTURY Stephen E. Jones
 D'Arcis provided no evidence in his memorandum to substantiate his claims[45], which he would have if there had been any[46]. D'Arcis did not provide the name of the artist[47], nor a record of his confession[48], nor the source of his allegations[49]. There is also no record of Henri de Poitiers conducting any inquiry into the origin of Shroud[50] and d'Arcis did not even know its date[51]! But there is a record of a letter of 28 May 1356[see "1356a"], from Bishop Henri de Poitiers, praising Geoffroy I, ratifying the Lirey church and approving its "divine cult"[52], which presumably refers to the Shroud[53]! It is also highly unlikely that Geoffrey I de Charny, the owner of the Shroud in the 1350s [see "c.1355"], one of France's most ethical knights, and a devout author of religious poetry, was complicit in forging Jesus' burial shroud[54]. The final refutation of the d'Arcis memorandum is that the image of the man on the Shroud is not painted

Was the “Painted” Cloth Mentioned in the d’Arcis Memorandum of c. 1389 the So-Called Shroud of Besançon? 2022 by Joseph G. Marino 
https://www.academia.edu/73756878/Was_the_Painted_Cloth_Mentioned_in_the_dArcis_Memorandum_of_c_1389_the_So_Called_Shroud_of_Besan%C3%A7on?email_work_card=view-paper

It's not mentioned that d'Arcis was upset that de Charny had gone over his head directly to the Pope.  d'Arcis' own church was in dire need of expensive repair.  It's certainly possible that he was angling to get his own hands on cash offerings.  The d'Arcis memo isn't as black and white as it's made out to be.  See my article "http://The c. 1389 d’Arcis Memorandum and the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin – an English-Language Bibliography" 
https://www.academia.edu/49761930/The_c_1389_dArcis_Memorandum_and_the_Authenticity_of_the_Shroud_of_Turin_an_English_Language_Bibliography

https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/search?q=Pierre+d%27Arcis

http://www.christ-aninventedmyth.eu/approfondimento.asp?ID=44
https://web.archive.org/web/20080905163030/http://www.skeptic.ws/shroud/as/
Large positive image of the shroud
http://www.shroud.com/
http://www.skepdic.com/shroud.html
The Origins of the Shroud of Turin By Charles Freeman | Published in History Today Volume: 64 Issue: 11 2014
The Skeptical Shroud of Turin Website
The Shroud of Turin from the McCrone Research Institute
The Fraud of Turin - by Joe Nickell 6 April 2010
The Holy Shroud (of Turin) from the Catholic Encyclopedia
Italian scientist reproduces Shroud of Turin - Reuters Mon Oct 5, 2009
Shroud of Turin Not Jesus', Tomb Discovery Suggests - National Geographic News Updated December 17, 2009
Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin by Damon et al., Nature, Vol. 337, No. 6208, pp. 611-615, 16th February, 1989
Shroud of Turin articles from CSICOP

Claims of Invalid "Shroud" Radiocarbon Date Cut from Whole Cloth
Shroud of Turin Exhibition Renews False Claims of Authenticity
New "Shroud" Claims Challenged as Spurious
CSICOP on Turin Shroud

Books:
[*]Inquest On The Shroud Of Turin : Latest Scientific Findings by Joe Nickell
[*]Judgment Day for the Shroud of Turin by Walter McCrone
[*]Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud by Harry E Gove



[*]Thats how a fake would look like: How Jesus Was Wrapped In Shroud Of Turin & Sudarium NEW HD VIDEO 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDRCVLOv1-w

Sorry, the Shroud of Turin Is Definitely a Hoax
So, here’s the evidence I have presented for why the Shroud of Turin is clearly a hoax:

We have no reliable documentation of the Shroud of Turin’s existence until the fourteenth century.
The forger who made the Shroud of Turin confessed and the earliest definitive mention of the shroud in any historical source is a record of his confession.
The Shroud of Turin doesn’t match the kinds of funerary wrappings used in Judaea in the time of Jesus or the description of Jesus’s own funerary wrappings given in the Gospel of John.
The linen of the Shroud of Turin has been securely dated using radiocarbon dating to between c. 1260 and c. 1390 AD—well over a millennium after Jesus’s death.
The figure on the Shroud of Turin does not have anatomically correct proportions and much more closely resembles figures in fourteenth-century Gothic art than a real human being.
The bloodstains on the Shroud of Turin are not consistent with how blood actually flows naturally and they instead appear to have been painted on.
The fabric of the Shroud of Turin is made with a kind of weave that is known to have been commonly used during the Late Middle Ages, but does not seem to have been used for burial shrouds in Judaea in the first century AD.
http://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2020/02/24/sorry-the-shroud-of-turin-is-definitely-a-hoax/?fbclid=IwAR2u_d-8vwlFoDa5nRuyC4BwoT5yXiu-KUR1rwYkJaDt7jYtnIoOQPhPIxY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLiY5df0f-
Debunking The Shroud: Made by Human Hands
https://www.shroud.com/bar.htm?fbclid=IwAR0fLwmPd7sk-gBjZtRQPA4aGk1iuZybicfZI38DTFQFsgnAUmJHq3LqC6A

The Shroud of Turin
https://www.physics.smu.edu/~pseudo/Shroud/

L. Garlaschelli: Life-size Reproduction of the Shroud of Turin and its Image 
https://sci-hub.ee/10.2352/J.ImagingSci.Technol.2010.54.4.040301

The opinion of many is that the "second" Shroud is so unsuccessful that it should not appear among the evidence against but among those in favor of the authenticity of the find. However, as could have been foreseen, the new building was soon archived and forgotten and a lot of criticism rained down on the association, especially from many experts, believers and non-believers. Several studies have also certified the total diversity between the Shroud of Turin and the aping of Professor Garlaschelli.
https://www.uccronline.it/2010/04/10/la-sindone-della-uaar-e-del-cicap-e-una-perfetta-bufala/

Problem for the forgery theory.

#34). The agnostic Yves Delage (see above), Professor of Zoology at the Sorbonne, Paris, then and now one of the world's leading universities, gave his reasons why the Shroud image is not a painting:
• The unknown 14th-century artist would have been greater than the Renaissance (14th-17th century) painters:

"At first sight, it would seem that the image on the shroud is ... a painting made for the purpose of a pious fraud. But when this hypothesis is examined with care, we see that it must be rejected for the following reasons: (1) As the shroud is authenticated since the fourteenth century, if the image is a faked painting, there must at this epoch have existed an artist-who has remained unknown-capable of executing a work hardly within the power of the greatest Renaissance painters"[7].
• It would have been impossible for a 14th-century forger to paint the Shroud image in a negative:
"While this is already very difficult to admit for an image painted as a positive, it becomes quite incredible in the case of a negative image, which lacks all aesthetic character in this form and assumes its value only when lights and shades are reversed, while strictly respecting their contours and values. Such an operation would be almost impossible except by photography, an art unknown in the 14th century. The forger, while painting a negative, must have known how to distribute light and shade so that after reversal they would give the figure which he attributed to Christ, and that with a perfect precision: for we know how little is required to change a beautiful head into a caricature, especially when its beauty is due to the expression"[8].
• Why would a 14th-century forger have depicted the Shroud image in a negative, when it could not have been appreciated by his contemporaries?
"I add this argument whose force will be felt on reflection: Why should this forger have taken the trouble to realize a beauty not visible in his work and discernible only after a reversal which only later was made possible? He was working for his contemporaries and not for the twentieth century and the Academy of Sciences" (emphasis Delage's)[9].
• The Shroud's negative image could not have been the result of a color reversal because (amongst other things) it is in monochrome:
"The idea that the image could have been painted in positive and changed to negative, as has happened to certain paintings on cloth and certain frescos, is contradicted inter alia by the fact that the image is in monochrome and consequently could not have undergone two inverse modifications from clear to shadow and from shadow to clear"[10].
• The Shroud's image has no outline [see #14], which is alien to the art of the 14th century:
"(2) The image results from the juxtaposition of graded tints, without definite delineation or sketching, like a badly focussed photograph: a procedure quite alien to the artistic conceptions of the fourteenth century"[11].
• The image is realistic, perfect and has no artisic style [see "#16"]:
"(3) The image is strongly realist, impeccable, without defect or omission: only imperfectly does it take account of tradition. it is neither schematic nor conventional: characteristics not to be found in any of the artistic productions of this epoch nor to such an extent in those of any epoch"[12].
https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2021/07/

Is the man on the shroud Jesus ?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7135

The correlation between the wounds inflicted upon the Jewish man buried in the shroud and the wounds the New Testament reports as having been inflicted upon Jesus is remarkable: ‘comparison of the gospel accounts with the sufferings and burial of the man in the Shroud points to the strong likelihood that the man is Jesus Christ. The evidence is consistent at every point. The man of the Shroud suffered, died, and was buried the way the gospels say Jesus was.’53 These similarities don’t fit any other known victim of crucifixion, except Jesus.

The sufferings, crucifixion and burial of Jesus, as described by the gospels, were different from the ordinary ways the Romans crucified criminals and the Jews buried their dead: ‘Jesus’ case was irregular. He was scourged, crowned with thorns, nailed to his cross [rather than tied], stabbed in the side (instead of his legs being broken), buried well [rather than thrown to the dogs] but incompletely, and his body left the cloth before it decomposed.’54 Because we know quite a lot about Roman and Jewish customs in these matters, we can estimate the probability of two men being treated, crucified and buried in this way, and hence the probability that the Jewish man in the Shroud was Jesus.

Peter S. Williams The Shroud of Turin: A Cumulative Case for Authenticity 
Kenneth E. Stevenson and Gary R. Habermas note just eight irregularities present in both the New Testament and the Turin Shroud (there are others55 ) and make conservative estimates of the probability that these irregularities would occur in other crucifixion victims:

1.Both exhibit a severe beating and scourging (Matthew 27:26-30; Mark 15:15- 19; Luke 22:63-64; John 19:1-3). (1 in 2 probability that a crucified man other than Jesus was beaten in this way) 
2. Both had a crown of thorns (Matthew 27:29; Mark 15:17-20; John 19:2) – ‘Crowning indicates majesty and a crown of thorns would, of course, mock that proclaimed majesty. Jesus was crowned with thorns for this very reason. . . the man buried in the Shroud was also pierced through the scalp. If the man in the Shroud is not Jesus, what are the chances that this man, probably a criminal or slave, would have been crowned with thorns?’56 (1 in 400 probability) 
3. Many crucifixion victims were tied to their crosses with ropes, but both Jesus and the man in the Shroud were nailed there (Luke 24:39; John 20:20, 25- 27).57 (1 in 2 probability) 
4. Neither Jesus nor the man in the Shroud had their legs broken, the normal procedure for ensuring death (John 19:31-32). (1 in 3 probability) 
5. ‘To ensure that Jesus was dead, a soldier stabbed him in the side, and blood and water flowed from the wound (John 19:33-34). The same thing happened to the man in the Shroud.’ (The wound in the side of the Man in the Shroud exactly corresponds to the size of the tip of the lancia, a Roman spear with a long, leaf-shaped head.) (1 in 27 probability) 
6. Few victims of crucifixion were given individual burials in a fine linen Shroud (Matthew 27:57-60; Mark 15:43-46; Luke 23:50-55; John 19:38-42). (1 in 8 probability) 
7. Both Jesus and the man in the Shroud were buried hastily (Mark 16:1; Luke 23:55-24:1). (1 in 8 probability) 
8. Neither man decomposed in their Shroud. (1 in 10 probability) Despite using ‘deliberately conservative’58 estimates of probability that ‘are most likely too low’59 , Stevenson and Habermas observe that: ‘multiplying these probabilities, we have 1 chance in 82,944,000 that the man buried in the Shroud is not Jesus.’

Multiplying these probabilities, we have 1 chance in 82,944,000 that the man buried in the Shroud is not Jesus.
http://docshare04.docshare.tips/files/14267/142675557.pdf

No substances were manually applied to the cloth. No artistic substances such as paint, ink, dye, pigments, or stain were used to constitute the image. No collagen binder as would be used with paint. No fibers cemented to each other as with paint. No capillary action -- meaning no liquids were applied to form the image. No substances were found between threads, as with a dust rubbing. Bloodstains on cloth test positive for heme, bile, serum albumin, and other human blood components. The blood is male type AB. “The blood marks seen on the shroud are consistent with a contact transfer to the cloth of blood clot exudates that would have resulted from major wounds inflicted on a man who died in the position of crucifixion.” Dr. Al Adler—Blood chemist STURP Team . The image is purely superficial. It does not penetrate the cloth – only rests on the top two microfibers. The image is a photographic negative that develops as a positive. The image contains 3D “distance information” similar to a topographical map. No directionality to the image, as found with a brush or any substance application tool. No variation in the depth of the image. (Virtually impossible with human hands.) The yellowing of the image is uniform in intensity. No outline or defined edges to the image.

No substances manually applied to the cloth.
No artistic substances such as paint, ink, dye, pigments, or stain were used to constitute the image.
No collagen binder as would be used with paint.
No fibers cemented to each other as with paint.
No capillary action -- meaning no liquids were applied to form the image.
No substances found between threads, as with a dust rubbing.
Bloodstains on cloth test positive for heme, bile, serum albumin, and other human blood components. The blood is male type AB.
“The blood marks seen on the shroud are consistent with a contact transfer to the cloth of blood clot exudates that would have resulted from major wounds inflicted on a man who died in the position of crucifixion.” Dr. Al Adler—Blood chemist STURP Team

The following are image characteristics found on or about the Shroud:
- The image is purely superficial. It does not penetrate the cloth – only rests on the top two micro-fibers. (Analogous to the Shroud image resting on the hairs of your forearm.)
- The image is a photographic negative that develops as a positive.
- The image contains 3D “distance information” similar to a topographical map.
- No directionality to the image, as found with a brush or any substance application tool.
- No variation in the depth of the image. (Virtually impossible with human hands.)
- The yellowing of the image is uniform in intensity.
- No outline or defined edges to the image.

STURP conclusion: “There are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological, or medical circumstances explain the image adequately.”

Medical forensics determined by STURP concluded that the cloth wrapped a human corpse. Blood chemistry indicates human blood from actual wounds. Botanical studies concluded that the cloth originated in Israel. Alternate dating methods (Professor Giulio Fanti, 2013-14) include the First Century within the range. However, can it be proved that the image of “the Man of the Shroud” is Jesus Christ? Only by inference according to the four gospels:

- Bloodstains on the head compatible with a crown of thorns.
- Over 120 scourge (whip) marks compatible with Roman flagrum.
- Nail wound in the wrists (more anatomically correct to hold the weight of the body than the palm of the hand).
- Nail wound in the feet. (The man’s feet were on top of each other.)
- Legs are pulled up due to rigor mortis. (A stiffness of muscles that sets in quickly after death and lasts less than four days.)
- Blood is sourced from actual wounds showing evidence of gravity from a vertical position. (On the cross?)
- No stains of body decomposition. (Resurrection happened on the third day before decomposition had time to occur?)
- Wound in the side compatible in size with a Roman spear tip.
- Post-mortem blood flow from the side wound that also flows across the back.

https://www.christianity.com/wiki/jesus-christ/what-is-the-shroud-of-turin.html?fbclid=IwAR2Uns3ZPVtC1HFoR-jTDQc84a6PbbkkRCDiMFTwNVNaH-7HzTMv1OX22UU

Experts agree that facial features identify the man buried in the Shroud as a Caucasian. Carlton Coon, a leading ethnologist, says he has the physical features of a Jew or Arab. The man’s hairstyle, characterized by a beard and long hair parted in the middle, further identifies him as a Jew. In addition, the hair in back is cut in the form of a pigtail, a hairstyle very common in firstcentury Jewish men. It is thus probable that this crucified person was a Jew.

How can we be sure that the ‘Man of the Shroud’ is Jesus?
The latest and most dramatic discoveries concern a piece of writing on the Shroud itself. For years, people had been asking why below and to the sides of the chin there are three clear and regular lines where no imprint is present. The Paris-based organisation CIERT (Centre International d’Etudes sur le Linceul de Turin, The international centre of studies on the Shroud of Turin), which I represent in Italy, has conducted studies in the most advanced institute in Europe for image analysis via computer, the Institut Optique d’Orsay, whose director is Professor André Marion. All official photographs of the Shroud were divided into tens of thousands of squares which were then given a corresponding optical density and transferred onto a visualisation programme. By means of an extremely advanced programme, some letters gradually began to emerge, in Latin and in Greek: under the chin, we find written ‘Jesus’ and on one side, ‘Nazarene’. What is the explanation for this? The ‘exactor mortis’ the centurion charged with ensuring the execution of the condemned, had drawn strips of ‘glue’ onto the cloth on which he would write the name of the deceased with a red liquid. Where these strips were drawn, the cloth was impermeable and would not, therefore, be subject to the chemical process which subsequently formed the imprint.  I sent a photograph of these inscriptions to André Marion in Paris, and he has already discovered many similarities with the style of the writing only recently discovered on the Shroud.
https://www.messengersaintanthony.com/content/man-shroud-has-name

The Shroud of Turin: Proof of the Resurrection
http://www.british-israel.ca/shroud.htm

The Shroud of Turin: 2.6. The other marks: Writing
http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-shroud-of-turin-26-other-marks-6.html

Certificado do enterro de Jesus Nazareno
https://sites.google.com/site/deciomedeiros/home/teologia/certificado-do-enterro-de-jesus-nazareno

Vatican researcher discovers Jesus death certificate on Holy Shroud
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndGnEGCJuaA&feature=youtu.be

The Writing on the Shroud: A Stephen Jones Update
https://shroudstory.com/2013/06/04/the-writing-on-the-shroud-a-stephen-jones-update/
With the possible exception of the 11th century writing above the right knee (see above), there is no compelling evidence for, and much evidence against, the theory that there is writing on the Shroud of Turin. Even among scholars who believe in the Shroud’s authenticity, most have dismissed as unreliable the computer enhanced images of `letters’ on the Shroud upon which Marastoni’s, Marion and Courage’s, and Frale’s, theories are based[103]. As Dr Bruno Barberis, director of the International Center for Shroud Studies of Turin, commented, "There is no evidence that those letters do exist. Many have seen faint writings on the cloth. Rather than a shroud it looks like an encyclopedia"

Claim: THE MAN OF THE SHROUD HAS LONG HAIR, WHICH IS FORBIDDEN IN THE GOSPELS
Reply: We know from archeological materials such as Middle Eastern carvings and Egyptian tomb paintings that Jews wore what we would consider today as long hair and beards. Hair reached down to the shoulders on men. Women wore hair down to the waist.
https://www.catholic.com/qa/if-st-paul-says-long-hair-is-unnatural-for-men-why-do-our-portraits-of-jesus-show-him-with-it

Leviticus 19:27 “Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.”







"Anatomy of the Shroud"[3], showing wounds and bloodstains on the Shroud man's image which match the Gospels' accounts of the beatings (Mt 26:67-68; 27:30; Lk 22:64; Jn 18:22; 19:3), scourging (Mt 27:26; Mk 15:15; Lk 23:16; Jn 19:1), crowned with thorns (Mt 27:29; Mk 15:17; Jn 19:2,5), crucifixion (Mt 27:35,38,44; Mk 15:24-27,32; Lk 23:33; Jn 19:16-18), death (Mt 27:50; Mk 15:37,39; Lk 23:46; Jn 19:30), legs not broken (Jn 19:32-33), speared in the side (Jn 19:34) of Jesus. See 09Sep20]


Is the man on the Shroud Jesus ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugyztlHlfak

There are three main alternatives regarding the identity of the person depicted on the Shroud of Turin, but the most widely accepted view is that it is a portrait of Jesus of Nazareth. 

While the image on the Shroud is faint, there are 30 features that closely match the Gospel's description of Jesus' death. These features include the blood trails, which indicate the man's position when he bled, the puncture wounds on the forearms corresponding to crucifixion by wrists, the vertical torso indicated by the chest wound, the bloody feet and bent legs consistent with crucifixion on a vertical post, and the overall depiction of a crucified man. The facial abrasions and swollen features match the description of Jesus being beaten, the numerous scourge marks on the body correspond to the scourging Jesus endured, the head wounds align with the crown of thorns, and the scourge wounds on the shoulders and upper back suggest that Jesus carried his own cross. Furthermore, the Shroud portrays a naked man, in line with the Gospel accounts. It also shows no broken bones, which agrees with John's statement that none of Jesus' bones were broken. The wound in the side, resulting from a soldier piercing Jesus, is also evident on the Shroud. Finally, the Shroud depicts a body that shows no signs of decomposition or animal attacks, indicating that it was recently deceased and kept safe, potentially in a sealed tomb. These connections between the Shroud man and Jesus provide strong evidence for their correlation.

1. He was beaten
2. He was whipped and scourged
3. Crown of thorns
4. He carried the cross
5. He was crucified
6. He was pierced on the side
7. Legs were not broken
8. Naked
9. He was buried soon after his death

The mentioned details (such as the injuries, crucifixion, side piercing, and non-breaking of legs) align with the biblical accounts of Jesus' crucifixion and burial. 

1. He was beaten

The New Testament includes several passages that mention Jesus being beaten prior to his crucifixion. Here are a few verses that describe this:

Matthew 27:26:
"Then he [Pilate] released for them Barabbas, and having scourged Jesus, delivered him to be crucified."

Mark 15:15:
"So Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released for them Barabbas, and having scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified."

John 19:1:
"Then Pilate took Jesus and flogged him."

These passages indicate that Jesus was subjected to scourging or flogging before being handed over for crucifixion. The details of the beating are not elaborated upon in the Gospels, but it is clear that Jesus endured physical suffering as part of the events leading up to his crucifixion.


The Shroud does show markings consistent with physical trauma, including facial injuries and wounds on the body, which some interpret as signs of beating. We see a large hematoma on his right cheek, probably a damaged cartilage of the nose, and a part of his beard missing. 

2. He was whipped and scourged

Jesus was subjected to scourging, which involved being whipped or beaten with a scourge—a type of whip or lash typically equipped with sharp pieces of metal or bone. This brutal act of punishment was intended to inflict great pain and humiliation upon the condemned person.

Matthew 27:26:
"Then he [Pilate] released Barabbas for them; but after having Jesus scourged, he handed Him over to be crucified."

Mark 15:15:
"Wishing to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas for them, and after having Jesus scourged, he handed Him over to be crucified."

John 19:1-3:
"Then Pilate took Jesus and had Him scourged. And the soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and put a purple robe on Him; and they began to come up to Him and say, 'Hail, King of the Jews!' and to give Him slaps in the face."

The purpose of scourging was to further humiliate and weaken the condemned person before crucifixion. The scourging itself was a severe form of punishment involving a whip or a lash with multiple leather thongs, often embedded with sharp objects such as metal or bone fragments. The lashes would cause deep cuts, bruises, and excruciating pain.

The Roman authorities used scourging as a means to physically weaken and dehumanize the individuals who were about to be crucified. It served as a public display of power and a deterrent to potential criminals or rebels. The intent was to intensify the suffering and ensure a more prolonged and agonizing death on the cross.

The Shroud displays marks that are consistent with scourge marks. The abrasions on the chest, back, and lower limbs consisting of round, approximately 2cm long figures suggest injuries caused by a flagellum, a Roman torture instrument consisting of a wooden handle with cords at the end to which small metal balls were attached. The punishment was inflicted on a bent back and naked body, causing over a hundred such injuries. The detailed examination of the bloodstains and injuries on the subject's body provides valuable insights into the manner of his death and the torture he endured. 

3. Crown of thorns

The Gospel accounts mention the crown of thorns that was placed on Jesus' head as part of his suffering before the crucifixion. Here are the specific verses that describe this event:

Matthew 27:29:
"And after twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand; and they knelt down before Him and mocked Him, saying, 'Hail, King of the Jews!'"

Mark 15:17:
"They dressed Him up in purple, and after twisting a crown of thorns, they put it on Him."

John 19:2-3:
"And the soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on His head, and put a purple robe on Him; and they began to come up to Him and say, 'Hail, King of the Jews!' and to give Him slaps in the face."

These verses describe how the soldiers, as an act of mockery and humiliation, twisted together a crown of thorns and placed it on Jesus' head. They intended to mock Jesus' claim to kingship, and they also dressed Him in a purple robe, which was a color associated with royalty. The crown of thorns added to Jesus' physical pain and served as a symbol of the suffering and mockery he endured before his crucifixion.

The specific mention of a crown of thorns in relation to crucifixion is unique to the accounts of Jesus' crucifixion in the New Testament. There are no other documented cases in historical records or biblical accounts where the condemned individuals were specifically given a crown of thorns as part of their crucifixion.

The Shroud does show numerous sinuous bloodstains that can be seen on his forehead, the back of his neck, and throughout his hair, emanating from small wounds with pointed diameters. These stains radiate out from his head in a spoke-like pattern, suggesting that a helmet of sharp, pointed thorns was pressed onto his head.  The sinuous bloodstains on his forehead, neck, and hair suggest that the subject had a helmet of thorns pressed onto his head, causing small pointed wounds. The spoke-like pattern of the stains radiating from the head indicates the uniformity of the injury, possibly caused by the same object.

4. He carried the cross

The Gospel accounts describe Jesus carrying the cross or being made to carry the cross before his crucifixion. Here are the specific verses that mention this:

Matthew 27:32:
"As they were going out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross."

Mark 15:21:
"They pressed into service a passer-by coming from the country, Simon of Cyrene (the father of Alexander and Rufus), to bear His cross."

Luke 23:26:
"When they led Him away, they seized a man, Simon of Cyrene, coming in from the country, and placed on him the cross to carry behind Jesus."

John 19:17:
"They took Jesus, therefore, and He went out, bearing His own cross, to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha."

These verses indicate that Jesus initially carried his own cross, but at some point during the journey to the crucifixion site, the soldiers compelled a man named Simon of Cyrene to help carry the cross. The weight and burden of the cross symbolize the suffering and sacrifice that Jesus endured in his crucifixion.

On the Shroud, at the height of the left scapular area and the right suprascapular area, quadrangular bruises can be observed. These marks are believed to have been left by the patibulum, the horizontal beam of the cross that the condemned sometimes carried on himself to the place of execution


5. He was crucified

Here are the verses from the Gospel accounts that describe Jesus being crucified:

Matthew 27:35:
"And when they had crucified him, they divided his garments among them by casting lots."

Mark 15:24:
"And they crucified him and divided his garments among them, casting lots for them, to decide what each should take."

Luke 23:33:
"And when they came to the place that is called The Skull, there they crucified him, and the criminals, one on his right and one on his left."

John 19:18:
"There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them."

These verses explicitly state that Jesus was crucified, along with two other individuals who were criminals. 

The Shroud displays a full-body image that is consistent with the posture of a crucified individual. The long bloodstains on both forearms that appear to run upwards are actually formed when the body was hung on the cross, and therefore the wrists were higher than the elbows. The characteristic bloodstain on the left wrist formed by two divergent streaks is particularly noteworthy as it indicates two different positions assumed by the condemned on the cross. The characteristic bloodstain on the left wrist formed by two diverging streaks is particularly notable, as it indicates two different positions assumed by the condemned man on the cross. The blood flows from an oval-shaped wound caused by a pointed instrument, such as a nail. Particular attention should be paid to the location of this wound, which is not in the palm of the hand as depicted in the traditional iconography of crucifixion, but in the wrist. It is noteworthy that the image of the thumbs is absent from the shroud, which could be due to damage to the median nerve or tetanic contraction.


6. He was pierced on the side

John 19:34:
"But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water."

In John 19:34, it is mentioned that one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear while he was on the cross. This event occurred after Jesus had already died. The purpose of piercing his side was to confirm his death and ensure that he had not merely swooned or fainted.

On the Shroud: On the right side of his chest, there is a large bloodstain that flows from an oval-shaped wound caused by a pointed and sharp object that struck between the fifth and sixth ribs, penetrating deeply. The characteristics of this wound indicate that it was inflicted after the man's death.


7. Legs were not broken

In the historical context of crucifixion during the time of Jesus, it was common for the legs of those who were crucified to be broken. Breaking the legs of the crucified individuals was a method used to hasten their death. When a person was crucified, their body weight was primarily supported by their arms and legs. Breaking the legs of the crucified person would prevent them from pushing up with their legs to relieve pressure on their chest, making it difficult for them to breathe. This would eventually lead to asphyxiation and a quicker death.

John 19:31-33: "Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jewish leaders did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down. The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs."

John 19:36: "These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: 'Not one of his bones will be broken.'"

On the Shroud, the depiction does not show any apparent signs of broken legs on the man. This aligns with the Gospel accounts, specifically in John 19:32-33, which state that the legs of Jesus were not broken during his crucifixion, unlike the legs of the two criminals crucified alongside him.

8. Naked

There are a couple of passages that suggest that Jesus was crucified without clothing.

In the Gospel of Mark (15:24), it is written: "And they crucified him and divided his garments among them, casting lots for them, to decide what each should take." This passage indicates that Jesus' garments were divided among the soldiers, implying that he may have been left unclothed.

Additionally, the Gospel of John (19:23-24) mentions the soldiers dividing Jesus' garments among themselves, but it also states, "But the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom, so they said to one another, 'Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it shall be.'" This verse implies that Jesus was wearing only a seamless tunic, which suggests he may have been without any other clothing.

However, it is important to note that the Gospels do not provide explicit details about Jesus' state of undress during the crucifixion.

9. He was buried soon after death

Matthew 27:57-60:

"When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also was a disciple of Jesus. He went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate ordered it to be given to him. And Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen shroud and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had cut in the rock. And he rolled a great stone to the entrance of the tomb and went away."

Mark 15:42-46:

"And when evening had come, since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also himself looking for the kingdom of God, took courage and went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Pilate was surprised to hear that he should have already died. And summoning the centurion, he asked him whether he was already dead. And when he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the corpse to Joseph. And Joseph bought a linen shroud, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen shroud and laid him in a tomb that had been cut out of the rock. And he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb."

Luke 23:50-53:

"Now there was a man named Joseph, from the Jewish town of Arimathea. He was a member of the council, a good and righteous man, who had not consented to their decision and action; and he was looking for the kingdom of God. This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then he took it down and wrapped it in a linen shroud and laid him in a tomb cut in stone, where no one had ever yet been laid."

John 19:38-42:

"After these things, Joseph of Arimathea, who was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus, and Pilate gave him permission. So he came and took away his body. Nicodemus also, who earlier had come to Jesus by night, came bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds in weight. So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews. Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. So because of the Jewish day of Preparation, since the tomb was close at hand, they laid Jesus there."

These verses describe how Joseph of Arimathea, a disciple of Jesus, obtained permission from Pilate to take Jesus' body down from the cross and bury it. Joseph, with the help of Nicodemus, wrapped Jesus' body in linen cloths with spices and placed it in a new tomb. The burial took place quickly, as it was approaching the Jewish day of Preparation and the Sabbath.



Certain topics demand careful consideration and decision-making due to their global impact and the profound claims they make about eternal bliss or eternal despair. Christianity is one such topic, and the Shroud of Turin serves as a compelling starting point for this process. Now, let's delve into identifying the man depicted in the Shroud based on his portrait.

The first decision we can confidently make is that the man depicted was crucified. The blood trails and posture depicted on the Shroud strongly indicate crucifixion. No other form of violent death matches the nearly vertical torso, outstretched arms, bent knees, and one foot likely resting on top of the other. Supporting evidence, such as the wrist wound and missing thumbs, further reinforces this conclusion. By reaching this decision, our task is simplified, and we are left with three potential options regarding the identity of the man.

Option one suggests that the Shroud portrays Jesus of Nazareth, the central figure of Christianity. Option two proposes that it depicts a typical victim of crucifixion, while option three suggests an anonymous individual. Out of the 30 features of the Shroud and the image it presents, several align closely with the accounts in the Gospels, providing strong support for the portrayal of Jesus. Moreover, additional evidence from Jewish burial customs, as well as biblical references like Matthew 27:32, could be considered to further strengthen this conclusion.

Although the Bible has certain gaps in its narrative, the Shroud fills some of these gaps, such as the indication that Jesus may have fallen while carrying the cross. The torn knee on the Shroud's depiction is consistent with such a scenario, implying the need for assistance. By combining the 30 features with other fields of investigation, we can reinforce our decision. However, let's focus solely on the 30 features for now.

Out of the remaining 16 features, three aspects are worth highlighting. Firstly, these 16 features reinforce the identification of the Shroud man with Jesus, as they align with the Gospel accounts. Secondly, they fill gaps in the Gospel narrative with authenticity, often contradicting long-standing traditions. For example, the Shroud man's wrist injury corresponds with anatomical evidence rather than artistic depictions or translations. Lastly, several of these 16 features are unique to Jesus in the historical record. While acknowledging that historical records are incomplete, it is reasonable to conclude that these distinctive features do not apply to others. Crucifixion victims were typically criminals, traitors, or captured enemies, and they were not likely to be crowned, buried in expensive fabric, or interred soon after death. The Romans intentionally left their crucified victims hanging to serve as deterrents and symbols of subjugation.

Considering the available options, let's examine them in detail. Option A suggests that the Shroud man is a typical or generic crucified individual. However, this contradicts the fact that many of the Shroud's details are unique to Jesus. By definition, something cannot be both unique or rare and typical at the same time, unless substantial evidence emerges indicating that many other victims share these same features. Therefore, the Shroud man cannot be considered a typical victim.

Option B proposes that the Shroud depicts an unknown victim. However, to support this claim, we would need to find another individual who satisfies all 30 features. Until such evidence is presented, this option remains speculative and lacks a strong foundation for decision-making.

Hence, the simplest and most plausible explanation, supported by all 30 observations without baseless assumptions, is Option C—the Shroud portrays Jesus. This conclusion carries significant implications, both simple and profound, regarding the Christian faith and its teachings.



The gospels are not the source of the image, and the image is not the source of the gospels. Instead, both the gospels and the Shroud of Turin portray Jesus, with the historical Jesus serving as the common source for both.

To determine the relationship between the Shroud and the gospels, we can apply Occam's razor, which suggests that the best explanation is the one that accounts for the most evidence with the fewest assumptions. In this video series, we have highlighted 30 features of the Shroud that align with the accounts in the gospels. Out of these, 14 features are self-evident and common to both the Shroud and the gospels, such as Jesus being beaten, crucified, stabbed, and wrapped in linen.

The remaining 16 features are bonus features, not explicitly mentioned in the gospels but compatible with and supplementing the narrative. These include details like the twisted crown of thorns, the three-pronged Roman flag used for scourging, Jesus being struck while vertical and naked, Pilate's surprise at Jesus already being dead, Joseph receiving the body, Jesus being placed on his back with crossed arms, and the piercing of Jesus's side with a spear. These bonus features not only complement the gospel accounts but also ground the Shroud's portrait in historical reality.

It may be tempting to think that the Shroud simply copied the gospels, but this explanation ignores key evidence. While the gospels can explain the 14 common features, the 16 bonus features are observations from the Shroud that are not found in the gospels. Likewise, it is not plausible to suggest that the gospel writers crafted their narratives based on the Shroud since many relevant Shroud details can only be seen through modern scientific techniques that were not available at the time the gospels were written.

So, while both the Shroud and the gospels portray Jesus, neither artifact merely copied the other. Instead, they both draw from the primary source, which is the historical Jesus himself. The Shroud represents Jesus's actual burial cloth, while the gospels recount the true and gruesome story of his death. This explanation also accounts for how the Shroud connects various disciplines, as they all stem from the same historical and physical reality.

In conclusion, the Shroud portrays Jesus, and when considered alongside the gospels, it points to the actual life and death of the historical Jesus. The second video series explores the authenticity of the Shroud, acknowledging the possibility of it being a fake. The third series delves into a profile of the potential faker, but ultimately presents an incoherent portrait. In the final series, the ancient origin of the Shroud and its image is summarized, providing a comprehensive case.



http://docshare04.docshare.tips/files/14267/142675557.pdf

Videos about the Shroud

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-shroud-of-turin#7137


Is the Shroud of Turin a fraud? Refuting the most common objections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGZmIfQf1dM

Time stamps:  

Introduction - 0:00
Sudarium of Oviedo:- 2:46
The patch hypothesis - 32:09
Reliability of Radiocarbon dating - 47:25
The Carbon monoxide hypothesis - 49:30
Addressing the claim of inconsistent blood patterns on the Shroud ( BPA hypothesis by Luigi Garlaschelli ) - 50:25
Successful reproduction of the image on the Shroud?  53:48
The d'Arcis Memorandum from 1389- 58:25
The relics business: - evidence that the Shroud of Turin is a forgery from the Middle Ages? - 1:04:27  
Was Jesus wrapped in a linen cloth, or tied by strips of linen?  - 1:08:52
Is the image on the Shroud anatomically incorrect?  - 1:12:25
Does the Shroud violate the commandment that forbids making graven images?  - 1:15:14
The man on the Shroud has long hair. Does the Bible not forbid men to have long hair? - 1:31:17
The impossible feat for a 14th-century artist to forger the Shroud: - 1:18:54
Why promote, and defend the authenticity of the Shroud? - 1:21:52
Book announcements: - 1:25:07
End notes: - 1:30:00

The Shroud of Turin: Empirical Exploration into Jesus' Historical and Scriptural Identity




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3ZEkEjA4Uw


The Shroud of Turin - The Evidence of Authenticity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5NEY0NkPrw

https://vimeo.com/478203334



Turin Shroud: The New Evidence (Shroud of Turin) | History Documentary | Reel Truth History
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVovTvDjjCg





The make of.... In this video, you can have an idea of how much work it goes to get to the accurate image of the man on the Shroud in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5CY9xbpCM8


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OiKx7La4jU&fbclid=IwAR2C4IHpF5kTnbIa8EeicmcYL1rYv_URfHL_RFPJLX4oeICcCZxFQ03KALM


The attributes of the image it's this:

- it's superficial penetrates only the top two microfibers is no directionality such as with brushstrokes
- there's no outline to the image
- is no cementing of fibers as with paint
- it's uniform and intensity top to bottom front to back you think you need a piece of technology to do that
- there's no variations in density as with known artworks every artist gets a little bit more they're a little bit less there
- there's no evidence of that there's no particles between the threads such as some kind of a dust rubbing
- there's no capillary action no evidence that that any that any liquids were applied to the image to bring forth or to the image area
- there's no paint binder present nothing to bind any pigment to the cloth
- it's a negative image with distance information encoded into it
- it's blood from actual wound it's a AB+ blood with human DNA and
- there's no image under the blood now

that's interesting no image under the blood which tells you this that the order of events is is that is that the
blood was on the cloth first followed by the image when did the image get there we don't know maybe three days later I don't know just later and so so now that makes sense if it's authentic


Scroll down, and there are links to four movies on the Shroud, not on YouTube
https://www.shroudenigma.com/

https://vimeo.com/search?q=shroud+of+turin

How did the shroud of Turin get its 3D image of a crucified and tortured man ?

If the shroud portrays Christ, then he did ressurrect.

And you will meet him. Either as your judge for damnation, or as your savior for eternal life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9K3yw0oKr4


Turin Shroud: The New Evidence (Shroud of Turin) | History Documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVovTvDjjCg&fbclid=IwAR32qrwJJK8z6ITkVzzaSBTZS2FeokrGIpz0A47uhC0v12oo7Z9Hv_xBgVI







Real Face of Jesus Project by Ray Downing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsQ1m_sGFt4&feature=emb_title



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IubZXanfXDc&t=43s&fbclid=IwAR0aJrPrJrg9R5JnNF8HZHcXNisG_mC1MUNhayX8bJ3mjDsqRP4Kg3xM1uU



Proof that the Shroud of Turin is the Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRB16BARvz0



The Shroud of Turin is the authentic burial shroud of Jesus Christ! Here are two comprehensive detailed documentaries in which all the evidence is examined which is irrefutable in scientific and legal terms. I have studied this subject in detail for many years and have come to that conclusion based on all the available evidence.
It is God's miraculous photograph of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah of Israel, taken nearly 2,000 years ago which proves both the crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ. It is also a 3-D hologram with encoded information that would not be revealed until our own time to further prove its authenticity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tmka1l8GAQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2swl6YLLb0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=EQjQ2A1_vOc&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0WB0-M0_16mhH2B-jOruzv90SqFHUPDm1Der8gHnL81TErX4DKsH4yQG0



LATEST: Shroud Of Turin Image was ALIVE & MOVING (Moment of Resurrection?) Jul 3, 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgG9m7cqx68

The international institute for advanced studies of space representation scientists in paloma italy have presented research that the body of the man was in motion when the image was produced yes you heard me right the body appears to have been moving now we know that because the image isn't a single exposure but a combination of multiple exposures sort of the way a strobe light photography can follow the path of a tennis ball or a golf swing the image on the shroud shows various objects in motion like the nails in the man's wrist and feet the teflon on his arms and his belt buckle moving up and down with his breath the italian institute's research shows that multiple exposures of these very easy to track items on the body of the man are present in different positions showing that his hands and feet and his chest when he breathed were moving current theory is that the light that produced the image was oscillating producing light in bursts just like a strobe light would this accounts for the multiple exposures one with each burst of light which in turn accounts for why certain areas of the shroud image are somewhat fuzzy movement would make those areas seem out of focus now how could the body of a dead man be moving in the image this was obviously a burial shroud the eyes of the man are closed and covered with coins or buttons so if this is jesus and he is moving it is the exact moment of the resurrection prior to him opening his eyes can you see why god might want to keep evidence such as that to share with the world but where did the light come from this is something that no one can answer other than jesus himself one theory is that it came from his DNA activating it's an interesting theory studies from as far back as 1984 show that active dna produces laser light but a very low intensity now the dna of god might have quite a different intensity like we said greater than all the electricity on earth it is also thought that the body was levitating at the moment the image was being made and as we know the resurrection body of jesus was able to pass through solid objects like the door of the upper room where the disciples were hiding this could explain why john believed when he saw the burial cloth of jesus had the body of jesus actually passed directly through this cloth without it having even been opened and wasn't lying unopened but empty in the tomb now another theory is that john saw the image of his lord on the cloth the shroud of turin the same image we're talking about today now either theory could accountfor john's reaction but you know what i bet you're thinking hey wait a minute nelson you've been going on and on but what was that you said about nails coins and a belt buckleand what's a teflon are all these things on the image of the shroud the answer is yes they are and a whole lot more if this is the body of our lord which seems the only possible explanation these details tell us a great deal about what he suffered what he wore etc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R4tI30Z5sI


The Shroud of Turin, Secrets of the Resurrection | Documented Miracles Feb 20, 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUES9mMy14g
In the year 944 at the height of the byzantine empire in its capital Constantinople the archdeacon Gregory refendarius gave a sermon on christ's burial cloth today thought to be the first true reference to the shroud of Turin refendarius speaks in detail about the bloodstains from christ's wounds and that you can not only see the figure of a face but also the figure of a whole body. During the fourth crusade when Constantinople burned and citizens were cut down without mercy crusaders ransacked the city's holy archives and stole sacred artifacts it is thought that the shroud of Turin was among those taken in 1353 a devoutly religious member of the knight's templar joffra desharni came into possession of the shroud and had it transported to a monastery in lirey France for safekeeping.



[url=Joe Rogan say's]Joe Rogan say's "Show Me Physical Evidence 4 Christianity"! OK, Challenge Accepted![/url]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHA_Y1jKfo4



SHROUD OF TURIN | CATHOLIC CHALLENGE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3-V3LyVDMU


Shroud of Turin: The Face of Jesus (Gary Habermas & Bob Rucker) Apr 25, 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=m_uQTXYMUqI&fbclid=IwAR1IoYOla5SyVUH5Tm9ZsMs8BTK1XKD5FdY12uUUCqn93X_oobVvUX3j2Zs


Have you ever thought about what happened with Jesus' body at the resurrection?
Christ's body literally DEMATERIALIZED, and matter became energy.  So basically, the Shroud was wrapped around Christ's body, and when he dematerialized, the Shroud fell through his body, got flat, and the energy burst printed the image on the Shroud. Isn't that simply AMAZING?!! Watch after the 46th minute.

The Shroud of Turin w/ Dr. Wayne Phillips - Sacred Heart Church, Tampa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K91jWtBTOFo


Shroud of Turin - Face in the Shroud - The Face of Jesus Christ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2swl6YLLb0

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ Nov 28, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1ycSnHpO9k

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ Dec 4, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-o8UUAPYug

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ Dec 11, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_a2PPW8ONI

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTqNu5WtlhY

In November 2022, I took a colored image of the man on the Shroud of Turin, and run it through Picwish, an AI photo editor, that sharpened the image. I was surprised with the result and encouraged to attempt to improve the image further.  It took me several weeks, several steps of progression, to get to the final results of the image of Jesus, faithful to the image on the Shroud of Turin. Annexed is a picture illustrating the sequence of progression. Below I am also listing the videos I made after each major step ( I thought I had achieved the final result every time). The videos are unlisted ( only the last version is on my channel, The God Talk). The video: " The message of salvation through Jesus Christ" has been translated into ten different languages. You can compare my result with others that have contributed to drawing the image of Jesus based on the Shroud, and annexed is also a picture of how 12 movies in recent times have portrayed Jesus. All, stereotypically, portray Jesus with long hair and a beard, similar to the man on the Shroud.

Shroud of Turin - Face in the Shroud - The Face of Jesus Christ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2swl6YLLb0

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ Nov 28, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1ycSnHpO9k

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ Dec 4, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-o8UUAPYug

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ Dec 11, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_a2PPW8ONI

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTqNu5WtlhY


































https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFGylmGl-KI


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gJfmo7bq0Q

Age of the shroud of turin

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7139

Claim: Unfortunately, we can be virtually certain that the Shroud of Turin is a hoax that was originally created in France in around the 1350s AD
Response:   Carbon dating controversy: The samples used for the testing came from the edge of the Shroud, which was reportedly fixed in the middle age, and therefore, the tests themselves are flawed. The 1988 Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7140

Historical records: There is a rich history of the Shroud that predates 1350. Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the 14th. century

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7144

Maybe the most throughout account of the pre-1350 history of the Shroud was compiled by Joe Marino, and published in the paper: Documented References to the Burial Linens of Jesus Prior to the Shroud of Turin’s Appearance in France in the Mid1350s 2. He cites:

Documented References to the Burial Linens of Jesus Prior to the Shroud of Turin's Appearance in France in the Mid-1350s
https://www.academia.edu/75771585/Documented_References_to_the_Burial_Linens_of_Jesus_Prior_to_the_Shroud_of_Turins_Appearance_in_France_in_the_Mid_1350

2 sources from the 2nd. Century, 1 from the 3rd. Century, 9 from the 4th. Century, 3 from the 5th. Century, 10 from the 6th. Century, 5 from the 7th. Century, 4 from the 8th. Century, 3 from the 9th. Century, 5 from the 10th. Century, 11 from the 11th. Century, 7 from the 12th. Century, and 15 from the 13th century, and 2 from the 14th. Century. In total 77 sources until 1350!! Marino writes in the concluding remarks: Despite conflicting theories of the Shroud’s “pre-history,” there is no doubt there is an abundance of evidence of the purported existence of Jesus’ burial linens.

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the 14th. century
by Stephen E. Jones 4
https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2016/07/chronology-of-turin-shroud-ad-30.html#1


Claim: Radiocarbon dating from 1988 demonstrated that the shroud is a fabrication from the 13th century.
P. E. Damon et al.: Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin 16 February 1989
https://sci-hub.ren/10.1038/337611a0

Reply:  In 1978 a large team of American scientists traveled to Turin, Italy to conduct an in-depth scientific examination of the Shroud. In Turin they were joined by a number of international colleagues. The expedition, under the auspices of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), was the first such extensive scientific examination of the Shroud, and remains to this date the most extensive hands-on study of the Shroud ever undertaken. https://www.shroudofturin.com/sturp.html

A Summary of STURP's Conclusions
We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved.
https://www.shroud.com/78conclu.htm

So  25 multi-disciplinary tests of the STURP team are simply dismissed, in favor of a highly debated Carbon C14 test for which there are excellent reasons to believe that it was invalid?

Was the Shroud’s First-Century Origin Really Debunked?
https://insidethevatican.com/magazine/culture/was-the-shrouds-first-century-origin-really-debunked/?fbclid=IwAR1Wl3zd4-3hQg-1WxAEnNAgx25DTgtDDlybRygZ2n8deiC2C21gAKN642g

Solving the Carbon Dating Problem for the Shroud of Turin Robert A. Rucker, MS (nuclear), July 12, 2022
https://0201.nccdn.net/1_2/000/000/0fe/927/solving-the-carbon-dating-problem-for-the-shroud-of-turin.pdf 

Liberato De Caro X-ray Dating of a Turin Shroud’s Linen Sample 11 April 2022
The experimental results are compatible with the hypothesis that the TS is a 2000-year-old relic, as supposed by Christian tradition
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/5/2/47/htm


Samantha Kamman New technology challenges old scientific conclusions about historic Christian relic APRIL 28, 2022
Using a new X-ray technique called “Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering” to examine a sample of the linen, Liberato De Caro of Italy’s Institute of Crystallography of the National Research Council and his colleagues determined in peer-reviewed research the shroud could be around 2,000 years old. “The new dating method, based on a technique called Wide Angle X-ray Scattering, was first tested on linen samples already dated using other techniques, on samples that had nothing to do with the shroud, and then applied to a sample taken from the Shroud of Turin,” De Caro told The National Catholic Reporter. “It is as if a photographic plate had been imprinted by radiation,” he continued. “By studying the traces left on the plate, one tries to trace the nature of the radiation and its properties. The same could be done for the Shroud’s image.”
https://www.christianpost.com/news/new-technology-challenges-old-conclusions-about-shroud-of-turin.html?fbclid=IwAR2uxMl_Vfy2WvVHBm5A036igor0S1mC9mCWTp_bHbt20FT3pEzzvmgfoiQ

Rainbowlightstudio The Shroud of Turin: Proof of Authenticity Beyond Reasonable Doubt (1 of 2) Aug 11, 2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJymwctqo-A

Rainbowlightstudio The Shroud of Turin 1988 Carbon Dating: Triumph or Travesty? (2 of 2) Aug 9, 2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBDuKZSgDSI

Raymond N. Rogers Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin  12 September 2004
Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud.
https://sci-hub.ren/10.1016/j.tca.2004.09.029

In 2017 French researcher, Tristan Casabianca filed a legal action against the British Museum, which oversaw the C-14 testing labs in 1988. The museum complied and finally released all the raw data. Casabianca’s research team ran new tests and conclude in their 2019 report that there were numerous dates that fell outside the range published in “Nature.” They prove that the Shroud cloth sample is not homogenous, and the 1988 results, famously reported with “95% confidence” are suspect. Casabianca’s team supports the widely-held belief that something went awry with the C-14 tests, which for the ensuing decades discouraged Shroud research and disparaged the Shroud as a medieval fake. Casabianca and his team are advocating that the Vatican authorize a variety of new 21st-century testing methods not available in 1988 or 1978 during STURP’s testing.
https://www.christianity.com/wiki/jesus-christ/what-is-the-shroud-of-turin.html?fbclid=IwAR2Uns3ZPVtC1HFoR-jTDQc84a6PbbkkRCDiMFTwNVNaH-7HzTMv1OX22UU

RADIOCARBON DATING OF THE TURIN SHROUD: NEW EVIDENCE FROM RAW DATA * 15 February 2019
Recently, we obtained the raw data and, for the first time, measured their convergence with the radiocarbon dates published in Nature.
Our results, which are compatible with those previously reported by many other authors (Brunati 1996; Van Haelst 1997, 2002; Riani et al. 2013), strongly suggest that homogeneity is lacking in the data. The measurements made by the three laboratories on the TS sample suffer from a lack of precision which seriously affects the reliability of the 95% AD 1260–1390 interval. The statistical analyses, supported by the foreign material found by the laboratories, show the necessity of a new radiocarbon dating to compute a new reliable interval. This new test requires, in an interdisciplinary research, a robust protocol. Without this re-analysis, it is not possible to affirm that the 1988 radiocarbon dating offers ‘conclusive evidence’ that the calendar age range is accurate and representative of the whole cloth.
http://sci-hub.st/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/arcm.12467

Bryan Walsh An instructive inter-laboratory comparison: The 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin    Accepted 24 September 2019
The Shroud is unique because on one surface it contains clearly visible front and back images of a man, apparently crucified. Quite apart from any religious significance, the Shroud became, and remains, the focus of scientific inquiry because it is not known how the images on it were formed.

Most recently Casabianca et al. (2019), based on information obtained after a legal filing with the British Museum, showed that some of the original Shroud date measurements reported by the three laboratories to the British Museum were modified from their original ‘raw’ laboratory values and transformed into their published form using an unstated methodology.

Our review and analysis of the Shroud radiocarbon data reveal a significant shortcoming in the original report by Damon et al. (1989). The shortcoming begins with the lack of adherence to the protocol that W-W define for combining the inter-laboratory data sets.

Rogers (2005) proposed a method for cross checking the dates of ancient textiles by measuring the loss of vanillin from residual lignin at the growth nodes of linen fibers. The tests he performed on the Shroud threads suggested to him a much greater age than the results Damon et al.

Fanti et al. (2013) developed a series of relationships between characteristics of fiber over time and a method of estimating the age of the fabric. He subsequently applied these techniques to a series of fibers extracted from the Shroud and derived an estimated calendar age of 90 AD +/− 200 yrs (Fanti et al., 2015).

https://sci-hub.st/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X19301865#b0025

Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin 
The major problem in estimating the age of the shroud is the fact that the rate law is exponential; i.e., the maximum diurnal temperature is much more important than is the lowest storage temperature. However, some reasonable storage temperatures can be considered to give a range of predicted ages. If the shroud had been stored at a constant 25 ◦C, it would have taken about 1319 years to lose a conservative 95% of its vanillin. At 23 ◦C, it would have taken about 1845 years. At 20 ◦C, it would take about 3095 years. If the shroud had been produced between a.d. 1260 and 1390, as indicated by the radiocarbon analyses, lignin should be easy to detect. A linen produced in a.d. 1260 would have retained about 37% of its vanillin in 1978. The Raes threads, the Holland cloth, and all other medieval linens gave the test for vanillin wherever lignin could be observed on growth nodes. The disappearance of all traces of vanillin from the lignin in the shroud indicates a much older age than the radiocarbon laboratories reported
http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF

IS THE SHROUD REAL? POSSIBLY.
Christopher Ramsey, the director of the Oxford Radiocarbon Laboratory, thinks more testing is needed. So do many other scientists and archeologists. This is because there are significant scientific and non-religious reasons to doubt the validity of the tests. Chemical analysis, all nicely peer-reviewed in scientific journals and subsequently confirmed by numerous chemists, shows that samples tested are chemically unlike the whole cloth. It was probably a mixture of older threads and newer threads woven into the cloth as part of a medieval repair. Recent robust statistical studies add weight to this theory. Philip Ball, the former physical science editor for Nature when the carbon dating results were published, recently wrote: “It’s fair to say that, despite the seemingly definitive tests in 1988, the status of the Shroud of Turin is murkier than ever.” If we wish to be scientific we must admit we do not know how old the cloth is. But if the newer thread is about half of what was tested – and some evidence suggests that – it is possible that the cloth is from the time of Christ.
https://shroudstory.com/2010/01/22/more-death-certificate-on-the-shroud-of-turin/

New test dates Shroud of Turin to era of Christ March 13. 2013
New scientific tests on the Shroud of Turin, which went on display Saturday in a special TV appearance introduced by the Pope, dates the cloth to ancient times, challenging earlier experiments dating it only to the Middle Ages. The new test, by scientists at the University of Padua in northern Italy, used the same fibers from the 1988 tests but disputes the findings. The new examination dates the shroud to between 300 BC and 400 AD, which would put it in the era of Christ. It determined that the earlier results may have been skewed by contamination from fibers used to repair the cloth when it was damaged by fire in the Middle Ages, the British newspaper reported.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/03/30/shroud-turin-display/2038295/

Shroud Of Turin Real? New Research Dates Relic To 1st Century, Time Of Jesus Christ Mar 29, 2013
 Fanti and a research team from the University of Padua conducted three tests on tiny fibers extracted from the shroud during earlier carbon-14 dating tests conducted in 1988 The first two tests used infrared light and Raman spectroscopy, respectively, while the third employed a test analyzing different mechanical parameters relating to voltage. The results date the cloth to between 300 B.C. and 400 A.D.. Fanti said that researchers also found trace elements of soil "compatible with the soil of Jerusalem." "For me the [Shroud] comes from God because there are hundreds of clues in favor to the authenticity," he wrote, adding that there also "no sure proofs." Much of the controversy about the Shroud centers around carbon-14 dating tests from 1988 that concluded the piece of linen was a medieval forgery. However, those results may have been contaminated by fibers used to repair the cloth during the Middle Ages.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/28/shroud-of-turin-real-jesus_n_2971850.html

Giulio Fanti, Saverio Gaeta, The mystery of the Shroud The surprising scientific discoveries on the enigma of the cloth of Jesus, page 49
A linen fabric from Masada, the radiocarbon date of this Masada sample, assessed at the confidence level of the 95%, was between 59 A.D. and 213 AD: since the Jewish fortress was conquered by the Roman army in 74 AD, fabric fabrication cannot be assumed after this date.

Just in reference to the finding of Masada, it is remarkable the fact that numerous parameters derived from the FT-IR and Raman analyzes were very close to those of the Shroud linen. Even if you can't stating a priori that the two linen fabrics have comparable dates, in any case, is significant that the chemical characteristics of the two fabrics are comparable to each other. The final datum of this spectroscopic analysis, with reference to the linear combination of the ratios considered, has provided for the Shroud sample a value of 300 BC ± 400 years at the 95% confidence level. 

1988 CARBON-14 TEST REFUTED
The 1988 Carbon-14 tests done at Oxford, Zurich and Arizona Labs used pieces of the same sample cut from a corner (lower left of above pictures).
1. A Jan 20, 2005 paper in the professional journal ThermoChimica Acta by Dr. Ray Rogers, retired Fellow with the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory and lead chemist with the original science team STURP (the 1978 Shroud of Turin Research Project, involving approximately 35 scientists directly examining the Shroud for five days), has shown conclusively that the sample cut from The Shroud of Turin in 1988 was taken from an area of the cloth that was re-woven during the middle ages.  Here are some excerpts:
"Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud."
"As part of the Shroud of Turin research project (STURP), I took 32 adhesive-tape samples from all areas of the shroud and associated textiles in 1978."  "It enabled direct chemical testing on recovered linen fibers and particulates".
"If the shroud had been produced between 1260 and 1390 AD, as indicated by the radiocarbon analyses, lignin should be easy to detect.  A linen produced in 1260 AD would have retained about 37% of its vanillin in 1978...  The Holland cloth, and all other medieval linens gave the test [i.e. tested positive] for vanillin wherever lignin could be observed on growth nodes.  The disappearance of all traces of vanillin from the lignin in the shroud indicates a much older age than the radiocarbon laboratories reported."
"The fire of 1532 could not have greatly affected the vanillin content of lignin in all parts of the shroud equally.  The thermal conductivity of linen is very low... therefore, the unscorched parts of the folded cloth could not have become very hot."  "The cloth's center would not have heated at all in the time available.  The rapid change in color from black to white at the margins of the scorches illustrates this fact."  "Different amounts of vanillin would have been lost in different areas.  No samples from any location on the shroud gave the vanillin test [i.e. tested positive]."  "The lignin on shroud samples and on samples from the Dead Sea scrolls does not give the test [i.e. tests negative]."
"Because the shroud and other very old linens do not give the vanillin test [i.e. test negative], the cloth must be quite old."  "A determination of the kinetics of vanillin loss suggests that the shroud is between 1300- and 3000-years old.  Even allowing for errors in the measurements and assumptions about storage conditions, the cloth is unlikely to be as young as 840 years."
"A gum/dye/mordant [(for affixing dye)] coating is easy to observe on... radiocarbon [sample] yarns.  No other part of the shroud shows such a coating."  "The radiocarbon sample had been dyed.  Dyeing was probably done intentionally on pristine replacement material to match the color of the older, sepia-colored cloth."  "The dye found on the radiocarbon sample was not used in Europe before about 1291 AD and was not common until more than 100 years later."  "Specifically, the color and distribution of the coating implies that repairs were made at an unknown time with foreign linen dyed to match the older original material."  "The consequence of this conclusion is that the radiocarbon sample was not representative of the original cloth."
"The combined evidence from chemical kinetics, analytical chemistry, cotton content, and pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry proves that the material from the radiocarbon area of the shroud is significantly different from that of the main cloth.  The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the shroud."
"A significant amount of charred cellulose was removed during a restoration of the shroud in 2002."  "A new radiocarbon analysis should be done on the charred material retained from the 2002 restoration."
Raymond N. Rogers. 20 January 2005. Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin. Thermochimica Acta, Vol. 425, Issue 1-2, Pages 189-194.
2. The Fire-Model Tests of Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov in 1994 and Drs. John Jackson and Propp in 1998, which replicated the famous Fire of 1532, demonstrated that the fire added carbon isotopes to the linen.
Dmitri Kouznetsov, Andrey Ivanov, Pavel Veletsky. 5 January 1996. Effects of fires and biofractionation of carbon isotopes on results of radiocarbon dating of old textiles: the Shroud of Turin. Journal of Archaeological Science, Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 109-121. doi:10.1006/jasc.1996.0009
Jackson, John P. and Propp, Keith. 1997. On the evidence that the radiocarbon date of the Turin Shroud was significantly affected by the 1532 fire. Actes du III Symposium Scientifique International du CIELT, Nice, France.

NEW TESTS DATE THE SHROUD
New experiments date the Shroud of Turin to the 1st century AD.They comprise three tests; two chemical and one mechanical. The chemical tests were done with Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) and Raman spectroscopy, examining the relationship between age and a spectral property of ancient flax textiles.The mechanical test measured several micro-mechanical characteristics of flax fibers, such as tensile strength.The results were compared to similar tests on samples of cloth from between 3250 BC and 2000 AD whose dates are accurately known.
FTIR identifies chemical bonds in a molecule by producing an infrared absorption spectrum. The spectra produce a profile of the sample, a distinctive molecular fingerprint that can be used to identify its components.
Raman Spectroscopy uses the light scattered off of a sample as opposed to the light absorbed by a sample.It is a very sensitive method of identifying specific chemicals.
The tests on fibers from the Shroud of Turin produced the following dates: FTIR = 300 BC + 400 years; Raman spectroscopy = 200 BC + 500 years; and multi-parametric mechanical = 400 AD + 400 years. All the dates have a 95% certainty. The average of all three dates is 33 BC + 250 years (the collective uncertainty is less than the individual test uncertainties).  The average date is compatible with the historic date of Jesus' death on the cross in 30 AD, and is far older than the medieval dates obtained with the flawed Carbon-14 sample in 1988.  The range of uncertainty for each test is high because the number of sample cloths used for comparison was low; 8 for FTIR, 11 for Raman, and 12 for the mechanical test.  The scientists note that "future calibrations based on a greater number of samples and coupled with ad hoc cleaning procedures could significantly improve its accuracy, though it is not easy to find ancient samples adequate for the test."
They used tiny fibers extracted from the Shroud by micro-analyst Giovanni Riggi di Numana, who gave them to Fanti.Riggi passed away in 2008, but he had been involved in the intensive scientific examination of the Shroud of Turin by the STURP group in 1978, and on April 21, 1988 was the man who cut from the Shroud the thin 7 x 1 cm sliver of linen that was used for carbon dating.
These tests were carried out in University of Padua laboratories by professors from various Italian universities, led by Giulio Fanti, Italian professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua's engineering faculty. He co-authored reports of the findings in 1) a paper in the journal Vibrational Spectroscopy, July 2013, "Non-destructive dating of ancient flax textiles by means of vibrational spectroscopy" by Giulio Fanti, Pietro Baraldi, Roberto Basso, and Anna Tinti, Volume 67, pages 61-70; 2) a paper titled "A new cyclic-loads machine for the measurement of micro-mechanical properties of single flax fibers coming from the Turin Shroud" by Giulio Fanti and Pierandrea Malfi for the XXI AIMETA (Italian Association of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics) congress in 2013, and 3) the 2013 book "Il Mistero della Sindone" (The Mystery of the Shroud), written by Giulio Fanti and Saverio Gaeta in Italian.

Italian scientists have conducted a series of advanced experiments which, they claim, show that the marks on the shroud – purportedly left by the imprint of Christ's body – could not possibly have been faked with technology that was available in the medieval period.
The research will be an early Christmas present for shroud believers, but is likely to be greeted with scepticism by those who doubt that the sepia-coloured, 14ft-long cloth dates from Christ's crucifixion 2,000 years ago.
Sceptics have long claimed that the shroud is a medieval forgery, and radiocarbon testing conducted by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Arizona in 1988 appeared to back up the theory, suggesting that it dated from between 1260 and 1390.
But those tests were in turn disputed on the basis that they were skewed by contamination by fibres from cloth that was used to repair the relic when it was damaged by fire in the Middle Ages.
The new study is the latest intriguing piece of a puzzle which has baffled scientists for centuries and spawned an entire industry of research, books and documentaries

"The double image (front and back) of a scourged and crucified man, barely visible on the linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin, has many physical and chemical characteristics that are so particular that the staining ... is impossible to obtain in a laboratory," concluded experts from Italy's National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development.
The scientists set out to "identify the physical and chemical processes capable of generating a colour similar to that of the image on the Shroud." They concluded that the exact shade, texture and depth of the imprints on the cloth could only be produced with the aid of ultraviolet lasers – technology that was clearly not available in medieval times.
The scientists used extremely brief pulses of ultraviolet light to replicate the kind of marks found on the burial cloth.
They concluded that the iconic image of the bearded man must therefore have been created by "some form of electromagnetic energy (such as a flash of light at short wavelength)." Although they stopped short of offering a non-scientific explanation for the phenomenon, their findings will be embraced by those who believe that the marks on the shroud were miraculously created at the moment of Christ's Resurrection.
"We are not at the conclusion, we are composing pieces of a fascinating and complex scientific puzzle," the team wrote in their report.
Prof Paolo Di Lazzaro, the head of the team, said: "When one talks about a flash of light being able to colour a piece of linen in the same way as the shroud, discussion inevitably touches on things like miracles and resurrection." "But as scientists, we were concerned only with verifiable scientific processes. We hope our results can open up a philosophical and theological debate but we will leave the conclusions to the experts, and ultimately to the conscience of individuals."
The research, conducted in laboratories in Frascati, a town outside Rome famous for its white wine, backs up the outcome of tests by a group of 31 American scientists between 1978 and 1981.
The Americans – who called themselves the Shroud of Turin Research Project or STURP – conducted 120 hours of X-rays and ultraviolet light tests on the linen cloth.
They concluded that the marks were not made by paints, pigments or dyes and that the image was not "the product of an artist", but that at the same time it could not be explained by modern science.
"There are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately."
The US team – which included nuclear physicists, thermal chemists, biophysicists and forensic pathologists – concluded: "The image is an ongoing mystery." One of Christianity's greatest objects of veneration, the shroud appears to show the imprint of a man with long hair and a beard whose body bears wounds consistent with having been crucified.
Each year it lures millions of pilgrims to Turin Cathedral, where it is kept in a specially designed, climate-controlled case.
Scientists have never been able to explain how the image of a man's body, complete with nail wounds to his wrists and feet, pinpricks from thorns around his forehead and a spear wound to his chest, could have formed on the cloth.
The Vatican has never said whether it believes the shroud to be authentic or not, although Pope Benedict XVI has said that the enigmatic image imprinted on the cloth "reminds us always" of Christ's suffering.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/9958678/Turin-Shroud-is-not-a-medieval-forgery.html

Shroud Of Turin Real? New Research Dates Relic To 1st Century, Time Of Jesus Christ  Mar 29, 2013
After decades of speculation, new research suggests that the Shroud of Turin, one of the Catholic Church's holiest relics, may be the real deal.
Believed by some to have been Jesus' burial cloth, the Shroud has been the subject of much research. The latest battery of experiments led experts to conclude the cloth may have come from the first century A.D., making it old enough to have been used to bury Jesus Christ Giulio Fanti, a professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua, announced the findings in a book that hit shelves Wednesday in Italy, reports Vatican Insider. Fanti has written several papers about the shroud, including one in 2011 that hypothesized how radiation could have caused the image of a man's bloody face and body to appear on the cloth. In his most recent effort, Fanti and a research team from the University of Padua conducted three tests on tiny fibers extracted from the shroud during earlier carbon-14 dating tests conducted in 1988, according to Vatican Insider. The first two tests used infrared light and Raman spectroscopy, respectively, while the third employed a test analyzing different mechanical parameters relating to voltage.

The results date the cloth to between 300 B.C. and 400 A.D., per The Telegraph. In an email with The Huffington Post, Fanti said that researchers also found trace elements of soil "compatible with the soil of Jerusalem."
"For me the [Shroud] comes from God because there are hundreds of clues in favor to the authenticity," he wrote, adding that there also "no sure proofs." "The tests will revive the debate about the true origins of one of Christianity's most prized but mysterious relics and are likely to be hotly contested by sceptics," The Telegraph's Nick Squires writes about Fanti's experiments. Much of the controversy about the Shroud centers around carbon-14 dating tests from 1988 that concluded the piece of linen was a medieval forgery. However, those results may have been contaminated by fibers used to repair the cloth during the Middle Ages, according to the BBC. Fanti's book, Il Mistero della Sindone (translated to The Mystery of the Shroud) , co-authored by journalist Saverio Gaeta, was released ahead of the Easter holiday, as Christians around the world prepare to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. The Shroud generally resides in a climate-controlled case in a cathedral in Turin, Italy, and is rarely viewed. It will make a rare televised appearance this year, however, on the Saturday before Easter.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/28/shroud-of-turin-real-jesus_n_2971850.html

Problems with the 1988 Carbon Dating
In 1989, the results of 3 independent labs examining a sample of the Shroud taken from the lower left corner caused shockwaves even among agnostic investigators. Their findings indicated a date in the 1300’s.  Since the publication of their findings in 1989, however, several problems have been documented concerning the protocol the researchers used. These include:

The sample of cloth used by the three labs came from the same location on the Shroud, contrary to the protocol set up by STURP which recommended 7 sampling sites with each sample to be sent to 7 different labs.
The sample of cloth used for the carbon dating (known as the Raes sample) is not of the same composition of other areas of the Shroud. In fact, Joseph Marino and Sue Benford show that there are 16th Century fibers woven into the Raes samples and in the sample taken for the 1988 carbon dating (immediately above the Raes samples) – 2000.
Raymond Rogers conducted further research on the contested sample and offered the following conclusion:
“The combined evidence from chemical kinetics, analytical chemistry, cotton content, and pyrolysis/mass spectrometry proves that the material from the radiocarbon area of the Shroud is significantly different from that of the main cloth.The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the Shroud.”  1

The Shroud of Turin FIRST CENTURY AFTER CHRIST!, page 156
Very soon, the statistical calculations of the results related to radiocarbon test published by the review in Nature [44] were double-checked, and serious mistakes had been found. For example, engineer Ernesto Brunati, [29, pp. 51–52], [30, p. 37], [31], observed that the statistical parameter of the significance level, published in reference to the Shroud dating, is not 5% but 4.17%; therefore results had not to be combined each other but carefully reexamined.  Furthermore, making a new count of the average ages on the basis of the data published in Nature, Table 1, he obtained that the value of the sample of Arizona was different from that published, reducing the significance level to 1,04%. To put it simply, this significance level indicates that there are about 99 odds out of 100 that the radiocarbon result is not reliable. According to the scholar Remi Van Haelst , who reanalyzed the statistical calculations on the basis of the data published in Nature, the correct conclusion, which should replace the existing one, should be:

The results of radiocarbon measurements of Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated date of 1280–1300 with only a significance level of 1.2%. These results therefore furnish the conclusive evidence that the samples used by labs are NOT homogeneous in C-14 content.

On a Shroud sample, the existence of a biologic complex composed of fungi and bacteria, which covers as a coating the linen fibers and cannot be removed by the conventional cleaning methods
of most carbon dating labs; this, therefore, would have altered the radiocarbon dating.

The American researcher R. Villarreal, analyzing a thread declared coming from the Shroud, provided by R. Rogers and extracted by Professor Luigi Gonella Gonella from the sample taking in 1988, discovered that one end was made of linen but, instead, the other end was made of cotton. This would confirm the hypothesis, sustained by some scholars, that the majority of the samples taken from the Shroud for radiocarbon dating derived from a so-called invisible medieval patching. The fragment of the linen thread analyzed would belong to the Shroud, whereas the other end would be the result of the hypothesized patching.

There is also another hypothesis that states that the whole sample taken from the 1988 test was part of a repair made in the thirteenth century and not after the 1532 fire. This hypothesis would therefore explain why the Chamb`ery fire holes had not been repaired. Did there perhaps exist a document at the time of the sampling that reported this repair and that was used by someone to select the 1988 sampling area?
https://www.magiscenter.com/5-key-pieces-of-evidence-on-the-shroud-of-turin/?fbclid=IwAR1VwXNUczD8cMWhsRlVuIi51IR0QC9ljKSf1JoLfHV9Qn8BacCrCd9EXJ4


In 1988, three different, highly prestigious laboratories, in Tucson, Oxford and Zurich, dated the Shroud from the late Medieval period using the C14 radio-carbon dating method, which allows one to date an archaeological find by measuring how much radioactivity it loses each year. How can you refute such a precise test?
It was disproved by science itself, specifically by a Russian scientist, Dimitri Kuznetsov, a Lenin prize-winner. He had no idea what the Shroud represented, but he is one of the world’s foremost experts in the dating of cloth. His starting-point was the precept that, at just 300° Centigrade, there is isotopic exchange between materials in close proximity. And in 1532, the Shroud was only just saved from a fire in the chapel in Chambéry, in the Savoy region. There was some damage; the triangular burns which can be seen clearly on the Shroud, caused by the silver casket which contained it. But during the fire, the molecules of the cloth were affected by isotopic discharges from the silver, wood, silk and other materials of the casket. This increased the quantity of radiocarbon in the cloth, thereby ‘rejuvenating’ it.

To reinforce his theory, Kuznetsov took a piece of Jewish cloth, carbon dated to two thousand years ago, and subjected it to the same ‘heat treatment’: in subsequent C14 tests, it appeared to have come from a much more recent period.

So the scientists from the three laboratories mentioned made a mistake in their dating. But the margin of error was even greater because the piece of the Shroud which they examined was from the top left-hand corner, a portion which has been much-mended and heavily worn by the elements over the centuries. The average weight of the Shroud is 25 milligrams per square centimetre, but that of the sample examined was 43 milligrams. Basically, they examined a piece of cloth which had been mended many times. But in any case, even if they had chosen a better sample, the quantity of radiocarbon in the cloth had already been increased because of the fire, and so it would have been impossible to date the cloth correctly using this method. Who knows how much younger the Shroud will appear now, as a result of the third fire last year in Turin Cathedral?
https://www.messengersaintanthony.com/content/man-shroud-has-name


Shroud of Turin: Interview With Expert of New Book Disputing Medieval Date Test Dec 05, 2020
https://townhall.com/columnists/myrakahnadams/2020/12/05/shroud-of-turin-interview-with-expert-of-new-book-disputing-medieval-date-test-n2581008?fbclid=IwAR1vmFz6foE1nhW0CM8-3xAs40yY1EsgShMs2YMqVgxtKNIv_ZcKGyxcNjY

More sources:
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation24.html?fref=gc&dti=1509309685785723

Why Shroud of Turin's Secrets Continue to Elude Science
As the venerated relic goes on public exhibition, its origin remains a mystery wrapped in an enigma.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/04/150417-shroud-turin-relics-jesus-catholic-church-religion-science/

Larry Schwalbe On Cleaning Methods and the Raw Radiocarbon Data from the Shroud of Turin 1, June 2021
The collection of evidence should encourage researchers to begin reconsidering the validity of the assumption that this sample adequately represents the composition of the Shroud as a whole.
http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/paperinfo?journalid=209&doi=10.11648/j.ija.20210901.12





Raymond N. Rogers Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin  12 September 2004
T Casabianca RADIOCARBON DATING OF THE TURIN SHROUD: NEW EVIDENCE FROM RAW DATA  15 February 2019
Bryan Walsh An instructive inter-laboratory comparison: The 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin    Accepted 24 September 2019
Larry Schwalbe On Cleaning Methods and the Raw Radiocarbon Data from the Shroud of Turin 1, June 2021

Paolo Di Lazzaro: Statistical and Proactive Analysis of an Inter-Laboratory Comparison: The Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin 2020 Aug 24
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33286695/

The 1988 Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7140

Shroud of Turin: 1988 Carbon Dating
"Researchers, in large numbers, now believe that in the 16th century, a corner of the Shroud had been expertly repaired... leading to erroneous carbon 14 dating in 1988." -- Dan Porter, 2022
http://bereanarchive.org/articles/history/shroud-of-turin-carbon-dating

Study of data from 1988 Shroud of Turin testing suggests mistakes JULY 24, 2019
After studying the data for two years, the new research team announced that the study from 1988 was flawed because it did not involve study of the entire shroud—just some edge pieces. Edge pieces from the shroud are rumored to have been tampered with by nuns in the Middle Ages seeking to restore the damage done to the shroud over the years. In a recent interview with L"Homme Nouveau, Tristan Casabianca, team lead on the new effort, claimed that the raw data from the 1988 tests showed that the test samples were heterogeneous, invalidating the results.
https://phys.org/news/2019-07-shroud-turin.html?fbclid=IwAR0cGYfOsPP8PktjegE1C7YAiDFFO0zdRmZacaiU2hiJ4bL_IstUBMHb3xY

T. Casabianca et al. Radiocarbon Dating of the Turin Shroud: New Evidence from Raw Data, Archaeometry (2019)
A statistical analysis of the Nature article and the raw data strongly suggests that homogeneity is lacking in the data and that the procedure should be reconsidered. Our results, which are compatible with those previously reported by many other authors (Brunati 1996; Van Haelst 1997, 2002; Riani et al. 2013), strongly suggest that homogeneity is lacking in the data. The measurements made by the three laboratories on the TS sample suffer from a lack of precision which seriously affects the reliability of the 95% AD 1260–1390 interval. The statistical analyses, supported by the foreign material found by the laboratories, show the necessity of a new radiocarbon dating to compute a new reliable interval.
https://sci-hub.ee/10.1111/arcm.12467

S. E. Jones (2015): In 1988 the Shroud of Turin was radiocarbon dated to 1260-1390. Between May and August 1988, three radiocarbon dating laboratories at universities in Arizona, Zurich and Oxford, all using the same new Accelerator Mass spectrometry (AMS) method, radiocarbon dated samples that had been cut from the Shroud on 21 April 1988. At a press conference in the British Museum, on 13 October 1988, following leaks that the Shroud had been dated "1350", Prof. Edward Hall (Oxford), Dr Michael Tite (British Museum) and Dr Robert Hedges (Oxford), announced that the Shroud's radiocarbon date was "1260-1390!". In 1989 Nature reported that the Shroud was "mediaeval ... 1260-1390.". In February 1989 the scientific journal Nature reported:

"Very small samples from the Shroud of Turin have been dated by accelerator mass spectrometry in laboratories at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich ... The results provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval ... AD 1260-1390 ...".

The invisible reweaving repair theory requires that the repair be "approximately 60 percent of the C-14 sample consisting of 16th-century threads while approximately 40 percent were 1st century in origin". Oxford laboratory did find some old cotton threads in their sample, but they were only "two or three fibers". It would require "65 percent of the mass of the shroud ... to give a date of 1350 to a fabric originally dating from the time of Christ" but there was "less than 0.1 percent" of such contamination in the Shroud. Textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg inspected the Shroud as part of its 2002 restoration and she denies there is any evidence of reweaving.

Invisible reweaving repair with 16th-century cotton. 

The Invisible Reweave and Other Challenges to the Turin Shroud's C-14 Medieval Dating: A Review
https://www.academia.edu/40272184/The_Invisible_Reweave_and_Other_Challenges_to_the_Turin_Shrouds_C_14_Medieval_Dating_A_Review?fbclid=IwAR0UeCuJz30oLDZXD2GYzczuKkUurljMmEoq8pr0wbe3N0AMlV7KHIUhg_4

Jim Bertrand wrote an article for the website "Insidethevatican", where he reports: It is well known that the Shroud has undergone several repairs throughout history, including after a fire in 1532. The Shroud was owned in the 1500s by Margaret of Austria, Duchess of Savoy, whose weavers were experts in the technique known as “French invisible reweaving.”

The late STURP chemist Raymond Rogers, who first called Marino and Benford part of the “lunatic fringe,” analyzed their hypothesis, and to his surprise, admitted they were probably right. After being given an actual leftover sample from the 1988 dating, he confirmed the hypothesis. In 2005, he authored a paper in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Thermochimica Acta. He concluded that the C-14 sample was not representative of the main cloth, thus invalidating the results. 2

Raymond N. Rogers (2004): Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud.3

An article in 2010 reported: Christopher Ramsey, the director of the Oxford Radiocarbon Laboratory, thinks more testing is needed. So do many other scientists and archeologists. This is because there are significant scientific and non-religious reasons to doubt the validity of the tests. Chemical analysis, all nicely peer-reviewed in scientific journals and subsequently confirmed by numerous chemists, shows that samples tested are chemically unlike the whole cloth. It was probably a mixture of older threads and newer threads woven into the cloth as part of a medieval repair. Recent robust statistical studies add weight to this theory. Philip Ball, the former physical science editor for Nature when the carbon dating results were published, recently wrote: “It’s fair to say that, despite the seemingly definitive tests in 1988, the status of the Shroud of Turin is murkier than ever.” If we wish to be scientific we must admit we do not know how old the cloth is. But if the newer thread is about half of what was tested – and some evidence suggests that – it is possible that the cloth is from the time of Christ. 8

Further robustness to the reweaving hypothesis comes from Eric Poggel's article in the website Bereanarchive:
http://bereanarchive.org/articles/history/shroud-of-turin-carbon-dating

1. King Umberto II of Italy, whose family used to own the shroud, says that in 1694 they repaired the shroud's heavily frayed and missing edges.

The first three Savoy Lords who possessed it, although they, unlike some of their predecessor Guardians, never purposely removed fragments from their areas with the image of the Corpus Sancti (Holy Body.)  Another fact confirmed by His Majesty was that it was traditionally affirmed, that at one point in the past, the edges of the Lenzuoli (Sheet) had become so tattered as to cause embarrassment or criticism of the Custodians, and those areas were repaired and rewoven using identical techniques, but obviously with similar, yet newer, materials containing dyes and other medieval manufacturing ingredients, in an attempt to better blend the new sections in, as best possible, with the original fabric.  In truth, the presence of medieval dyes was detected in these areas and this fact has been already pointed out by Scientists as additional proof of the inaccuracy of the 1988 Carbon 14 dating test results that placed the samples taken from these areas, as having been fabricated sometime in the middle ages.  In truth, any one of the aforementioned practices alone would also account, for not only the contamination of the fabric resulting in inaccurate Carbon 14 dating results but also, the different types of linen, dyes, resins, and fabric patches discovered to have been present on the outermost edges of the sheet that usually held by Bishops during the exposition of the Sacred Relic to the public for veneration."
From pages 265-267:  "The removal of all patches and of the reinforcement Holland Cloth backing of the Holy Shroud, in the year 2002, confirmed what King Umberto had stated, namely that small sections of the repaired and rewoven edges, had continually been removed from the Sacred Relic and probably as late as the second half of the 17th century. That the practice of removing small fragments and even full length or width threads from the outer edges [of] the Holy Shroud, was a family tradition only finally suppressed by Duke Vittorio Amedeo II of Savoy, was another fact Umberto II of Savoy confirmed to Blue Army Founder and Shroud Devotee John Mathias Haffert, in the mid 1960’s.  It was the same Vittorio Amedeo II, who along with his wife, the Infanta Anna d’Orleans, personally assisted Blessed Sebastiano Valfre on June 6th, 1694, in repairing the Sacred Burial Cloth of the The Christ, shortly before transferring the Sacred Relic to the new Chapel of the Guarini. Later, it became a tradition on June 6th of each year for the Savoy Royal Family to distribute relics of the backing cloth.  It was in 1694, that in accordance to the Savoy Family tradition, some of the removed sections of thread were then woven into full size replicas of the Sindone (Shroud) for private or public veneration in Convents and Cathedrals during popular Holy Week celebrations.  Unlike the meticulous repair work that had been carried out in previous centuries by religious expert weavers following the damage caused to the Shroud by fires and which left little trace of the removed sections, the intervention of the Savoy and the Blessed was aimed primarily at replacing the cloth backing of the Relic giving it added thickness and strength and also a better contrast to the image.  The last intervention by religious sisters had been considered poor by the various members of the House of Savoy since, rather than reweaving the areas nearest the outermost edges that were either missing or had frayed from manipulation and wear, they had camouflaged them with cloth coverings and patches.  The backing of black cloth added by Blessed Sebastiano Valfre was later removed by Princess Maria Clotilde di Savoia, (1843-1911) Consort of Prince Napoleon, who substituted it for a pink silk on April 28th, 1868, on account of the backing having also become deteriorated from manipulation and removal of pieces for relics."

2. Prior to the 1988 carbon dating, archaeologists William Meacham and Paul Maloney, as well as textile expert John Tyrer each independently warned that bottom left corner looked like it had non-original material added from a repair, and wouldn't be a good place to cut a sample for carbon dating.

3.  Chemists Ray Rogers, Robert Villareal, and Alan Adler, as well as microscopist John L. Brown, and Pam Moon each independently examined fibers from the shroud. They found pigments and large amounts of plant gum, likely from tempera paint, coating the fibers from the cloth near and on the carbon dating samples. This yellow coating was similar in color to the linen on the rest of the shroud but undyed white cotton was visible on inner fibers and where the thread passed below another (image below). Brown described this as "obvious evidence of a medieval artisan’s attempt to dye a newly added repair region of fabric to match the aged appearance of the remainder of the Shroud."63a This dye/coating isn't found on the rest of the shroud.



4. Cotton fibers were found in the carbon-dated corner of the shroud by at least 8 different researchers, from 1975 to 2009. Not as a surface contaminant, but woven into the threads, and this cotton wasn't found in the rest of the otherwise linen shroud.

Problems with the 1988 carbon dating procedures

They didn't follow the proper pre-arranged protocol to take multiple samples from multiple areas rather than taking one sample from the location most likely to be contaminated.

Many suspicious and unscientific activities surrounded the 1988 carbon dating of the shroud, including:

The carbon-14 team excluded all previous researchers who had worked with the shroud, causing much protest.
There was a laborious search for a 13th-century linen cloth that had the same color and rare 3-in-1 herringbone weave as the Shroud of Turin. From the same time period when the Shroud was allegedly forged.19a 19b 19b 44
The entire ceremony to cut carbon-14 samples from the shroud was recorded on video, except when two men inexplicably took the cut samples to another room for 30 minutes and returned with them inside opaque containers.
Together this evidence makes a powerful case the 1988 carbon date cannot be considered accurate and therefore should not be used as an argument against the Shroud of Turin's authenticity.  The remainder of this article outlines this evidence in great depth.

Former BSTS (British Society for the Turin Shroud) editor Mark Guscin comments in reviewing Joe Marino's 2020 book on the 1988 carbon dating:

There is a very widespread idea that Shroudies are a group of religious fanatics, while "scientists" are a homogenous group of people (in clean white coats and in nice clean laboratories) who are extremely knowledgeable, calm and never moved by such earthly concerns as money, fame or personal ambition. And they all agree with each other, because science is one and true. No matter what you think about the Shroud, this book should shatter that illusion forever. The scientists involved in the carbon dating were as human as you could imagine; fame-seeking, selfish, money-grabbing and disloyal. They were hopelessly disorganized, seemed to have little idea about what they were dealing with and to care about it even less, they showed an unbelievable lack of respect for anyone who didn't share their own ideas, and that includes other scientists involved in the dating.

"Secret" 1982 carbon dating

A "secret" and poorly documented carbon dating was performed on two ends of an 8cm thread given to STURP chemist John Heller, who was given the thread by STURP chemist Alan Adler, who received the thread from yet another STURP chemist, Ray Rogers, who collected the sample.  John Heller gave the thread to mineralogist George Rossman, who used Fourier-transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (FTMS), a non-typical carbon dating technique, to date each end of the thread separately.  One end of the thread which was covered in starch dated to either 1000 AD or 1200 AD (reports vary), while the other non-starchy end dated to 200 AD.  An 8cm thread can be seen missing from the shroud near the bottom left corner. 12

Recent tests contradict the C14 test from 1988

Robert J. Spitzer (2015): Four contemporary dating tests: The vanillin dating test of Dr. Raymond Rogers, the two spectroscopic analyses (of Dr. Giulio Fanti, et. al), and the compressibility and breaking strength tests (of Dr. Giulio Fanti, et. al) date the Shroud to a time commensurate with the life and crucifixion of Jesus.13

Myra Adams wrote an article for the website Christianity.com in 2019, where she reported: In 2017 French researcher, Tristan Casabianca filed a legal action against the British Museum, which oversaw the C-14 testing labs in 1988. The museum complied and finally released all the raw data. Casabianca’s research team ran new tests and conclude in their 2019 report that there were numerous dates that fell outside the range published in “Nature.” They prove that the Shroud cloth sample is not homogenous, and the 1988 results, famously reported with “95% confidence” are suspect. Casabianca’s team supports the widely-held belief that something went awry with the C-14 tests, which for the ensuing decades discouraged Shroud research and disparaged the Shroud as a medieval fake. Casabianca and his team are advocating that the Vatican authorize a variety of new 21st-century testing methods not available in 1988 or 1978 during STURP’s testing.4

T. CASABIANCA (2019): Recently, we obtained the raw data and, for the first time, measured their convergence with the radiocarbon dates published in Nature.
Our results, which are compatible with those previously reported by many other authors (Brunati 1996; Van Haelst 1997, 2002; Riani et al. 2013), strongly suggest that homogeneity is lacking in the data. The measurements made by the three laboratories on the TS sample suffer from a lack of precision which seriously affects the reliability of the 95% AD 1260–1390 interval. The statistical analyses, supported by the foreign material found by the laboratories, show the necessity of a new radiocarbon dating to compute a new reliable interval. This new test requires, in an interdisciplinary research, a robust protocol. Without this re-analysis, it is not possible to affirm that the 1988 radiocarbon dating offers ‘conclusive evidence’ that the calendar age range is accurate and representative of the whole cloth. 5

Bryan Walsh (2019): The Shroud became, and remains, the focus of scientific inquiry because it is not known how the images on it were formed. Most recently Casabianca et al. (2019), based on information obtained after a legal filing with the British Museum, showed that some of the original Shroud date measurements reported by the three laboratories to the British Museum were modified from their original ‘raw’ laboratory values and transformed into their published form using an unstated methodology. Our review and analysis of the Shroud radiocarbon data reveal a significant shortcoming in the original report by Damon et al. (1989). The shortcoming begins with the lack of adherence to the protocol that W-W define for combining the inter-laboratory data sets.

The overall conclusion is that Damon et al. (1989) did not follow the W-W recommendation to reconsider the data. Rather, they chose to weight equally each of the three means – the scatter-weighted Tucson data and the quoted error-weighted Zurich and Oxford data – to find their arithmetic mean. They then estimated the standard error of that mean by combining the standard errors of those means as if all the data were drawn from the same population. This procedure is inappropriate since it deliberately ignores the heterogeneous nature of the data uncovered by the analysis and introduces error into the statistical analysis.

Our analyses correct this deficiency, and in the process identify a statistically significant heterogeneity in the dates reported for the Shroud sample.  ( heterogeneity: The quality or state of consisting of dissimilar or diverse elements) Technically, this finding would preclude the step of combining the individual data sets and reporting the mean date as was done. Lacking this adherence to protocol, the finding of heterogeneity should, at the very least, have prompted a strong qualification to the reported final result. At this time, the source of the heterogeneity is unknown, but we consider two hypotheses either of which could account for the effect. One is that some inherent variation was present in the carbon isotopic composition of the samples themselves. The other is that some differences in the sample cleaning may have introduced differences in residual contamination. As an example of the latter, we recall that Oxford used petroleum ether as part of its pre-cleaning procedure whereas the other two laboratories apparently did not.

Fanti et al. developed a series of relationships between characteristics of fiber over time and a method of estimating the age of the fabric. He subsequently applied these techniques to a series of fibers extracted from the Shroud and derived an estimated calendar age of 90 AD +/− 200 yrs (Fanti et al., 2015). 6

Quoting from the abstract of the article: Giulio Fanti ( 2015): The present paper discusses the results obtained using innovative dating methods based on the analysis of mechanical parameters (breaking strength, Young modulus and loss factor) and of optochemical ones (FT-IR and Raman). To obtain mechanical results it was necessary to build a particular cycling-loads machine able to measure the mechanical parameters of single flax fibers 1-3 mm long.  two optochemical methods have been applied to test the linen fabric, obtaining a date of 250 BC by a FT-IR ATR analysis and a date of 30 AD by a Raman analysis. These two dates combined with the mechanical result, weighted through their estimated square uncertainty inverses, give a final date of the Turin Shroud of 90 AD ±200 years at 95% confidence level. 7

The study from 2015 was preceded by Fanti et al., by an earlier study from 2013, which made the news in several newspapers. For example, the Huffington Post reported:  Fanti and a research team from the University of Padua conducted three tests on tiny fibers extracted from the shroud during earlier carbon-14 dating tests conducted in 1988 The first two tests used infrared light and Raman spectroscopy, respectively, while the third employed a test analyzing different mechanical parameters relating to voltage. The results date the cloth to between 300 B.C. and 400 A.D.. Fanti said that researchers also found trace elements of soil "compatible with the soil of Jerusalem." "For me the [Shroud] comes from God because there are hundreds of clues in favor to the authenticity," he wrote, adding that there also "no sure proofs." Much of the controversy about the Shroud centers around carbon-14 dating tests from 1988 that concluded the piece of linen was a medieval forgery. However, those results may have been contaminated by fibers used to repair the cloth during the Middle Ages.9

Above results were published in the book:  Il mistero della Sindone 10 



A press release about the book in 2013 reported:

The Shroud shows a not reproducible double image of a man who lived from 280 BC and the year 220 AD (rounded to the nearest tens), period compatible with the documented presence of Jesus in Palestine. The carbon 14 dating performed in 1988 is not statistically reliable. Mineralogical investigations on dusts vacuumed from the Shroud, show the coincidence in dozens of items with those made of dust picked up in Jerusalem and under the Holy Sepulchre. DNA studies on the same samples show an exposition of the Shroud to the middle East region. These are the sensational results reported in an Italian book entitled "IL MISTERO DELLA SINDONE – Le sorprendenti scoperte scientifiche sull’enigma del telo di Gesù (THE MYSTERY OF THE SHROUD – The amazing scientific discoveries on the enigma of the Jesus’ cloth) written by Giulio Fanti and Saverio Gaeta.

The studies led by Professor Giulio Fanti have been performed by the Universities of Padua, Bologna, Modena, Udine, Parma and London. These studies show methodological errors in the radiocarbon data released in 1988 by three laboratories (Tuxon, Oxford and Zurich), who subjected to Carbon 14 test  samples of the Shroud, placing it an age between 1260 and 1390. Giulio Fanti, professor of mechanical and thermic measurements at the Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Padua studies the Shroud from fifteen years and thanks to a multidisciplinary project on the Shroud assigned to him by the University of Padua in 2009 has had the possibility to obtain these results. By means of this project it has also been possible to study and partially reproduce the doubly body image of the Shroud. Dozens of tests have been conducted in 2010-2013 in the Laboratory of High Voltages of Padua University to explain the origin of the mysterious image. If we want today to reproduce a quite similar image on a fabric in 1/2 scale, we require a voltage of about 300,000 V, but according to the american scientist Igor Bensen, a voltage of 50,000,000 would be necessary for the Shroud body image in a 1/1 scale.

Now Fanti focused his studies on the dating of the Shroud. After robust statistical analyses in collaboration with the Universities of London (Anthony Atkinsons), Parma (Marco Riani) and Udine (Fabio Crosilla), he has shown, through robust statistics, the origin of the difference of more than 200 years between the laboratories of Arizona and Oxford in the response of carbon 14 on the Shroud. A statistical model has highlighted the systematic tendency to change: if for a few centimeters of fabric there are differences in 200 years, it’s easy to think that there are thousands years of variations along the nearly 4.5 m of the Shroud, possibly caused by the mysterious energy that produced the image.

To date the Shroud using alternative methods both Raman and FT-IR tests have been used to obtain two different chemical datings with the collaboration of professors Anna Tinti and Pietro Baraldi respectively of the universities of Bologna and Modena. In addition, a multiparametric mechanical method have been used at Padua University after the construction of a new ad-hoc machine capable to acquire the results of loading and unloading cycles of single linen fibers. Using a petrographic microscope Fanti was able to separate Shroud linen fibers from dust particles vacuumed from Shroud; the fibers have been mounted on suitable supports and then, with Dr. Pierandred Malfi performed tests of tension and compression after analyzing about a dozen of antique fabrics (from bandages of mummies Egyptians of 3,000 BC, linens of Masada (Israel, 70 AD) and Medieval tissues up to recent ones.

Five mechanical parameters (tensile strength, Young’s modulus in direct and reverse cycle, loss factor and loss factor in reverse cycle) have been selected to obtain five different age-dependent curves of the samples. After this Fanti has measured the corresponding mechanical properties of the Shroud finding the corresponding point on the scales just determined. Combining the five mechanical results, the following date for the Shroud results: 400 AD with an uncertainty of plus or minus 400 years at a 95% confidence level. With Raman and FT-IR spectra the Italian team measured the concentration of particles of particular atomic groups of flax fibers. At the same confidence level, the first produced the date of 200 BC with an uncertainty of plus or minus 500 years, the latter that of the 300 BC with swings forward and back of 400 years. Combining the two chemical methods with the mechanical one it results a mean date of 33 BC with an uncertainty of plus or minus 250 years at 95% confidence level that is compatible with the period in which Jesus Christ lived in Palestine. In reference to the mineralogical investigations, the dust vacuumed from the Shroud revealed traces of limestone and clay minerals showing high iron content that is consistent with dust present in Palestine. 11

Liberato De Caro (2022): The experimental results are compatible with the hypothesis that the TS is a 2000-year-old relic, as supposed by Christian tradition.14 

In a private email exchange, Barrie Schwortz listed the following peer-reviewed papers as the five most important articles that challenge the c14 date:

ROGERS, Raymond N. - “Studies on the Radiocarbon Sample from the Shroud of Turin” [January 20, 2005] Thermochimica Acta 425 (2005) pp.189-194. (Includes 5 illustrations)
BENFORD, M. Sue and MARINO, Joseph G. - Discrepancies in the radiocarbon dating area of the Turin shroud - Chemistry Today, vol 26 n 4, [July-August 2008]
CASABIANCA, Tristan - MARINELLI, Emanuela - PERNAGALLO, Giuseppe - TORRISI, Benedetto - Radiocarbon Dating of the Turin Shroud: New Evidence From Raw Data - Archaeometry, 22 March 2019
WALSH, Bryan and SCHWALBE, Larry - An instructive inter-laboratory comparison: The 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin - Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, Volume 29, February 2020
SCHWALBE, Larry A. and WALSH, Bryan - On Cleaning Methods and the Raw Radiocarbon Data from the Shroud of Turin - International Journal of Archaeology 2021; 9(1): 10-16 - March 12, 2021.

Modern scientific Shroud Investigations

J.Marino (2022): The age of modern scientific investigation of the Shroud of Turin began in 1898, with Secondo Pia, an Italian amateur photographer, taking the first public photographs of the Shroud. When it was discovered that the Shroud image turned positive on the negative glass plate, science began to show an interest, primarily in finding how the image was imprinted on the cloth. Although the House of Savoy owned cloth until 1985 (the last King died in 1983 and willed it to the living Pope), the Church authorized a group known as the “Turin Commission” to do some limited scientific examination of the cloth in 1969 and 1973. According to archaeologist William Meacham in a 1983 article:

The Turin Commission conducted a series of tests aimed at clarifying the nature of the image. Thread samples were removed from the "blood" and image areas for laboratory investigation. Conventional and electron microscopic examination revealed an absence of heterogeneous coloring material or pigment. The image and "blood" stains were reported to have penetrated only the top fibrils; there had been no capillary action, and no material was caught in the crevices between threads. Both paint and blood seemed to be ruled out, and magnification up to 50,000 times showed the image to consist of fine yellow-red granules seemingly forming part of the fibers themselves and defying identification. Finally, standard forensic tests for haematic residues of blood yielded negative results.

In 1978, a group known as the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), mainly from the United States and most of whom worked in the U.S.’ space and nuclear programs, was given access to the cloth for five straight days (one hundred and twenty hours) to do non-destructive multi-disciplinary studies on the cloth. They published their findings in more than twenty peer-reviewed papers. Their conclusion stated:

No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography. The basic problem from a scientific point of view is that some explanations which might be tenable from a chemical point of view, are precluded by physics. Contrariwise, certain physical explanations which may be attractive are completely precluded by the chemistry. For an adequate explanation for the image of the Shroud, one must have an explanation which is scientifically sound, from a physical, chemical, biological and medical viewpoint. At the present, this type of solution does not appear to be obtainable by the best efforts of the members of the Shroud Team. Furthermore, experiments in physics and chemistry with old linen have failed to reproduce adequately the phenomenon presented by the Shroud of Turin. The scientific consensus is that the image was produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils of the linen itself. Such changes can be duplicated in the laboratory by certain chemical and physical processes. A similar type of change in linen can be obtained by sulfuric acid or heat. However, there are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately. Thus, the answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains, now, as it has in the past, a mystery. We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved.

Since the testing had to be non-destructive, the much-hyped radiocarbon dating test (C-14), which had only been invented in the late 1940s, was believed to date most objects within about a one-hundred-year range accurately, was not done at that time. However after 1978, more scientists and researchers continued to study the cloth. It was stated in the renowned Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology that it’s widely believed: “The Shroud of Turin is the single, most studied artifact in human history” (page 200). 15




A KGB job? 
According to Jones: The 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin as "mediaeval ... AD 1260-1390" was the result of a computer hacking, allegedly by Arizona radiocarbon dating laboratory physicist Timothy W. Linick (1946-89), aided by Karl Koch (1965–89) on behalf of the former Soviet Union, through its agency the KGB. 1

Comment: To me, this hypothesis seems far-fetched, and not plausible. Why would the KGB care about religious affairs? While collecting information about this topic, I asked the opinion of members of the Facebook group: The Holy Shroud of Turin in regard to the KGB hypothesis:

Vincent Thomas Paine responded: " I highly doubt the KGB had the data hacked. It's been firmly established that the samples for testing were taken from a repaired part of the Shroud. But if the KGB story is true...and it's probably not...the reason they would have done this is to try and discredit Christianity. A carbon date of the 1st century would have increased the faith of many... Right or wrong... And if you know anything about the KGB and their ideological subversion campaign, then it makes sense."

What are the main reasons for unreliable radiocarbon test results?

The radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin in 1988 was conducted by three laboratories using accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) and resulted in an age determination of AD 1260-1390, with a 95% confidence interval. However, there are several reasons to question whether the 95% confidence level was warranted.

Sample location and representativeness: The samples used for radiocarbon dating were taken from a corner of the Shroud that is believed to have been repaired in medieval times, leading to concerns that the samples may not have been fully representative of the original cloth. There are good reasons to conclude that this may have resulted in a skewed age determination.

Contamination: The Shroud of Turin has been handled by numerous individuals over the centuries, and there are concerns about potential contamination from modern materials, such as cotton fibers or conservation efforts, which can have affected the radiocarbon dating results.

Chemical composition of the Shroud: The Shroud of Turin may have undergone chemical changes over time, such as contamination with carbon-14-depleted materials or changes in the ratio of carbon-14 to carbon-12 within the cloth, which could have influenced the radiocarbon dating results.

Historical considerations: The Shroud of Turin is a religious relic that has been venerated by many as the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, and some critics have raised concerns about potential biases or motivations that may have influenced the radiocarbon dating process or interpretation of results.

For samples that are younger than about 5,000 years or older than about 50,000 years, the error percentage rate can be larger, reaching several hundred years or more, which corresponds to a higher percentage error. It's also worth noting that the error percentage rate is generally larger for older samples, as the amount of remaining C14 decreases and the measurement becomes more challenging. The percentage of error for radiocarbon (C14) dating of samples that are younger than about 5,000 years can vary depending on several factors, including the laboratory procedures and measurement techniques used, as well as the condition and quality of the sample being tested.

Contamination: Radiocarbon testing requires the sample to be free from contamination by carbon-containing materials that are not part of the original sample. Contamination can occur during sample collection, handling, or storage, and can lead to inaccurate results. For example, modern carbon from the environment, such as humic acids, can contaminate an ancient sample, resulting in a younger radiocarbon date.

Sample size and quality: The size and quality of the sample being tested can also affect the reliability of radiocarbon results. Radiocarbon dating requires a sufficient amount of carbon-14 to be present in the sample for accurate dating. Small sample sizes or samples with low carbon content may yield less precise results or may not produce measurable radiocarbon ages.

Carbon-14 fluctuations: Carbon-14 levels in the atmosphere can fluctuate over time due to various factors, such as changes in solar activity and the Earth's magnetic field. These fluctuations can affect the accuracy of radiocarbon dating, especially for samples with ages close to the present time. Calibration of radiocarbon results using calibration curves and other methods is typically done to account for these fluctuations, but uncertainties in calibration can still impact the reliability of the results.

Post-depositional processes: Organic materials can undergo post-depositional processes, such as contamination, decay, or diagenesis, which can alter the carbon-14 content and affect the accuracy of radiocarbon dating. For example, carbon exchange with groundwater or sediment can result in "old carbon" contamination, where the sample appears to be older than its true age.

Human error: Human error during sample collection, preparation, and analysis can also lead to unreliable radiocarbon results. Errors in sample identification, handling, or processing can introduce inaccuracies and compromise the reliability of the dating.

Sample suitability: Not all samples are suitable for radiocarbon dating. For example, materials with very low carbon content, such as shells or charcoal that has undergone extensive diagenesis, may not produce reliable radiocarbon results.


1. Stephen E. Jones: The 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Turin Shroud was the result of a computer hacking #1 JULY 23, 2015
2. Jim Bertrand: Was the Shroud’s First-Century Origin Really Debunked?
3. Raymond N. Rogers: Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin   12 September 2004
4. Myra Adams: What Is the Shroud of Turin? Facts & History Everyone Should Know 2019 8 Nov
5. T. CASABIANCA: RADIOCARBON DATING OF THE TURIN SHROUD: NEW EVIDENCE FROM RAW DATA * 15 February 2019
6. Bryan Walsh: An instructive inter-laboratory comparison: The 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin    Accepted 24 September 2019
7. Giulio Fanti et. al.,: Mechanical ond opto-chemical dating of the Turin Shroud 2015
8. Shroudofturinblog: Death Certificate on the Shroud of Turin? 2010
9. Meredith Bennett-Smith: Shroud Of Turin Real? New Research Dates Relic To 1st Century, Time Of Jesus Christ Mar 29, 2013
10. Gulio Fanti: Il mistero della Sindone. Le sorprendenti scoperte scientifiche sull'enigma del telo di Gesù Mar 20 2013
11. Shroudofturinblog: Giulio Fanti: The Image of a Man Who Lived Between 280 BC and 220 AD March 27, 2013
12. Bereanarchive: Shroud of Turin: 1988 Carbon Dating  June 2022
13. Robert J. Spitzer: Science and the Shroud of Turin  May 2015
14. Liberato De Caro: X-ray Dating of a Turin Shroud’s Linen Sample 11 April 2022
15. Joe Marino: Musings Regarding the Shroud of Turin – Including “How is it that Practically Everyone Thinks They’re an Authority?” 2022

How was the image made ?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7141

The image is not created by any paint stain or die it's not due to oil or bodily composition it's not caused by acid powder or heat interestingly there's no material whether organic or inorganic deposited on the shroud to form the image. The image does not crack at the fold.

1. It's not a painting  If this were true, it should be possible to identify the pigments used by chemical analysis, just as conservators can do for the paintings of Old Masters. But the Sturp team found no evidence of any pigments or dyes on the cloth in sufficient amounts to explain the image. Nor are there any signs of it being rendered in brush strokes.
2. The entire image is very superficial in nature, Around 20 - 30 microns in-depth is approximately 0.2 thousandths of a millimeter (about 0.000008 inches) only on the uppermost surface of the fibrils, the inner side is not, thus it could not have been formed by chemicals, The image resides on the outermost layer of the linen fibers. 
3. It's not a photograph Secondo Pia's photograph showed that the image on the cloth is a negative: dark where it should be bright. 
4. It was not made by a natural chemical process It has been confirmed that the image is the result of oxidation, dehydration, and conjugation of the fibers of the shroud themselves. It is like the imaged areas on the shroud suddenly rapidly aged compared to the rest of the shroud. The image on the shroud is the only one of its kind in this world, and there are no known methods that can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological, or medical circumstances explain the image adequately (S.T.U.R.P's conclusion) 
5. The image was not produced by vapors from chemicals or vapors from the corpse itself. Vapors from chemicals, or from the corpse itself, do not explain how the image is present on parts of the body where the cloth clearly did not touch the body (i.e. areas on either side of Christ’s projected nose).
6.  A burst of 34 thousand billion Watts of vacuum-ultraviolet radiation produced a discoloration on the uppermost surface of the Shroud’s fibrils (without scorching it), which gave rise to a perfect three-dimensional negative image of both the frontal and dorsal parts of the body wrapped in it.” We currently do not know of any natural cause for a human corpse producing ultraviolet radiation like this. A very short and intense flash of directional VUV radiation can color the linen fabric. The total power of the VUV radiation required for instantly color the surface of a linen corresponding to a human body of medium height, equal to the corporate body surface area = 2000 MW / cm2 x 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion Watts

34 thousand billion watts of vacuum-ultraviolet radiation is a very large amount of power.  To give you an idea of the scale of this amount of power, it's equivalent to 34 trillion watts or 34 terawatts. This is approximately 300 times the total amount of electrical power generated in the United States in 2020.

1. The image is only on the uppermost surface of the fibrils, thus it could not have been formed by chemicals. If the image formation came about through chemicals, then it would not explain how the image only appears on the uppermost surface of the fibrils. By their makeup, chemicals penetrate beyond the surface of fabric.
2. The image shows the whole body, however not all areas of the cloth came into contact with the whole body. Chemicals cannot explain how a perfect 3-dimensional image became evenly distributed on the cloth — especially on parts that did not come into contact with the corpse. Thus, something other than chemicals must be the cause of the image on the Shroud.
3. The image was not produced by vapors from chemicals or vapors from the corpse itself. Vapors from chemicals, or from the corpse itself, do not explain how the image is present on parts of the body where the cloth clearly did not touch the body (i.e. areas on either side of Christ’s projected nose).
4. There is a double image on both the front of the cloth and on the back, but no image in the middle of the cloth, implying that the cloth collapsed into a mechanically transparent body (*my note... or the body elevated through and above the cloth, as detailed in the details from the video shared above). The startling discovery of an image on both the front and back of the cloth implies that the cloth collapsed into and through the body.
There is no scientific explanation of how this could have happened unless the body became mechanically transparent, causing the cloth to collapse into it. If the cloth did collapse into the body, then the ultraviolet light would have completely surrounded the body. This would produce a double image on both the front and the back of the cloth, but nothing on the fibers in the middle.
5. You can see inside the body, like an x-ray. The last enigma concerns the bones of the hand which appear visible—as if they were encased in flesh. The process that formed the image recorded both the inside of the hand (the skeleton) and the outside of the hand (the flesh surrounding the skeleton) at the same time.
This again implies that somehow the body covered with the Shroud became mechanically transparent, and that the cloth collapsed into and through this body. If it had not done so, the image would only be of the outside of the body.
“Currently, the known laws of physics cannot explain how a decomposing body can emit an intense burst of vacuum ultraviolet radiation. Furthermore, they cannot explain how such a body could become mechanically transparent and emit light from every three-dimensional point within it.”
How did the image form on the Shroud?
“According to Jackson, an intense burst of vacuum ultraviolet radiation produced a discoloration on the uppermost surface of the Shroud’s fibrils (without scorching it), which gave rise to a perfect three-dimensional negative image of both the frontal and dorsal parts of the body wrapped in it.”
We currently do not know of any natural cause for a human corpse producing ultraviolet radiation like this.

Magis Center  How did the image form on the Shroud? May 27, 2019
Paolo Di Lazzaro Coloring of linen fabrics by ultraviolet radiation 2 Maggio 2015
Paolo Di Lazzaro Deep Ultraviolet Radiation Simulates the Turin Shroud Image July 2010
Conca, Marco The shroud of Turin : first century after Christ! 2016


The shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of JESUS. IT IS ALSO the greatest Kodak moment in history! It is the concrete, tangible, testable proof of the moment of the resurrection. The image is of a body held in a semi-suspended in air posture. The back and buttocks aren't effected by the force of gravity pressing down in the clothe image. So we have a image formed by a energy phenomenon unknown to science. And, a body defying the impact of gravity. It's clearly the person of the crucifixion and evidently of His predicted resurrection.



The image on the Shroud is not a painting. The polysaccharide cover, approximately 0.2 thousandths of a millimeter (about 0.000008 inches), is colored; the cellulose in the inner side is not. 






Each micro-fibril in the linen threads is approximately the diameter of a human hair. A single thread contains around two hundred micro-fibrils, with only the top three micro-fibrils carrying the image. This level of superficiality makes it physically impossible for any artist to paint with such precision.

The image on the Shroud of Turin is formed through a molecular modification of the surface linen fibrils. In this modification, single covalent bonds are transformed into double covalent bonds. As a result, it is the conjugated dehydrated cellulose within the linen that carries the image.

Examining a photomicrograph of the nose region, one of the darkest areas of the image, it becomes apparent that the microfibrils are not held together with any paint or binder. Thus, it is the molecularly modified linen fibrils themselves that comprise the image visible on the shroud today.

The exact cause of this modification remains unknown. However, there are speculations that some form of radiation may have played a role. An Italian scientist demonstrated that ultrashort UV laser impulses can create images on linen fibers with similar microscopic properties to those observed on the shroud.

Despite this understanding, replicating a life-size image like the one on the Shroud of Turin currently exceeds our technological capabilities.


Magis Center  How did the image form on the Shroud? May 27, 2019
“According to Jackson, an intense burst of vacuum ultraviolet radiation produced a discoloration on the uppermost surface of the Shroud’s fibrils (without scorching it), which gave rise to a perfect three-dimensional negative image of both the frontal and dorsal parts of the body wrapped in it.” -Fr. Robert Spitzer
The startling discovery of an image on both the front and back of the cloth implies that the cloth collapsed into and through the body.
There is no scientific explanation of how this could have happened unless the body became mechanically transparent, causing the cloth to collapse into it. If the cloth did collapse into the body, then the ultraviolet light would have completely surrounded the body. This would produce a double image on both the front and the back of the cloth, but nothing on the fibers in the middle.  
“Currently, the known laws of physics cannot explain how a decomposing body can emit an intense burst of vacuum-ultraviolet radiation. Furthermore, they cannot explain how such a body could become mechanically transparent and emit light from every three-dimensional point within it.”
https://blog.magiscenter.com/blog/how-did-shroud-turin-get-image?fbclid=IwAR1RJLWSf7m0agPDmLLoWcpmA_hE-wWJ14xceXPb9HCOQ8bzx9xLkQKyjPk

Robert A. Rucker, How the Image Was Formed on the Shroud July 31, 2020
https://0201.nccdn.net/1_2/000/000/174/1a8/how-the-image-was-formed-on-the-shroud.pdf

The Shroud of Turin, Secrets of the Resurrection | Documented Miracles Feb 20, 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUES9mMy14g

In the year 944 at the height of the byzantine empire in its capital Constantinople the archdeacon Gregory refendarius gave a sermon on christ's burial cloth today thought to be the first true reference to the shroud of Turin refendarius speaks in detail about the bloodstains from christ's wounds and that you can not only see the figure of a face but also the figure of a whole body.  During the fourth crusade when Constantinople burned and citizens were cut down without mercy crusaders ransacked the city's holy archives and stole sacred artifacts it is thought that the shroud of Turin was among those taken in 1353 a devoutly religious member of the knight's templar joffra desharni came into possession of the shroud and had it transported to a monastery in lirey France for safekeeping.


Paolo Di Lazzaro Coloring of linen fabrics by ultraviolet radiation 2 Maggio 2015
From the chemical point of view, the image is due to a molecular modification of the surface of the linen fiber16 constituted of polysaccharides (chains of glucose). These polysaccharides underwent an alteration as a consequence of an acting-at-a-distance phenomenon. In particular, the chemical reaction consists of dehydration with oxidation and conjugation (acid–base reaction). The image is not composed of painting pigments or other substances of that kind.
https://www.academia.edu/12273176/Colorazione_di_tessuti_di_lino_tramite_radiazione_ultravioletta

Paolo Di Lazzaro Deep Ultraviolet Radiation Simulates the Turin Shroud Image July 2010
Our results show that a very short and intense flash of directional VUV radiation can color a linen fabric in order to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image of the Shroud of Turin, including color tone, surface coloring of the outermost fibrils of the linen, and the absence of fluorescence. However, it should be noted that the total power of the VUV radiation required for instantly color the surface of a linen corresponding to a human body of medium height, equal to IT corpor body surface area = 2000 MW / cm2 x 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion Watts

makes it impossible today to reproduce the entire Shroud image using a single excimer laser, since this power cannot be produced by any VUV light source built to date (the most powerful available on the market reach a few billion watts). Rather, the work summarized in this Technical Report has demonstrated that laser radiation is a suitable tool for studying in detail the physical and chemical processes that they could be the basis of the production of the body image of the Shroud, regardless of the source of radiation (or energy) that may have generated this image.

The Shroud image presents some characteristics that we have not yet managed to reproduce, for example the nuance of the image due to a different concentration of yellow-colored fibrils alternating with non-fibrils colored. There are sophisticated diffractive optics that would allow to replicate these characteristics too, but this goes far beyond our intentions: our aim is not to demonstrate that a battery of ten thousand lasers excimer can exactly reproduce the body image of the Shroud. Our main purpose is to carry out accurate, controlled and reproducible experiments, suitable to understand the detail of the physical and chemical mechanisms that they produced the Shroud image, thanks to a powerful and versatile tool such as the excimer laser.

We are composing the pieces of a fascinating and complex scientific puzzle. The enigma of the origin of the image of the Shroud of Turin still remains "a provocation to intelligence"

The American scholar A. Adler, backing the image formation as a cause of the corona discharge, supposed the presence of a ball lightning in the sepulcher, referring to a one-of-a-kind phenomenon. The ENEA Frascati Center carried out coloration tests on the Linen on the basis of excimer lasers (emitting a UV spectrum) that gave satisfactory results. However, even in this case it was not clear which kind of physical phenomenon could have triggered the
laser radiation. According to the authors, who carried out an in-depth examination of the issue both from a theoretical and an experimental point of view, corona discharge is the best hypothesis to explain several peculiar features of the Shroud image. At the Department of Industrial Engineering of University of Padua (Padua, Italy), a group of scientists led by Professor Giancarlo Pesavento carried out some tests generating corona discharge on a 1:2 scale manikin covered with conductive paint and enfolded with a Shroud-like cloth.  In this case almost all the chemical-physics characteristics match to those of the Shroud, but one question remains: what could have developed a 300,000 V discharge in the sepulcher? Summing up, the radiation hypothesis, and among these, that stating corona discharge was triggered by an intense electric field, is the most reliable because, also on the basis of experimental
verifications, it allows one to obtain a result that gets close to the peculiar features of the Shroud.
[url=http://www.frascati.enea.it/fis/lac/excimer/sindone/Di Lazzaro - deep ultraviolet radiation - JIST.pdf[/url]]http://www.frascati.enea.it/fis/lac/excimer/sindone/Di%20Lazzaro%20-%20deep%20ultraviolet%20radiation%20-%20JIST.pdf[/url]

Conca, Marco The shroud of Turin : first century after Christ! 2016
The image resides on the outermost layer of the linen fibers and the image goes just two or three fibers deep into the thread. The superficial image then disappears if a colored thread goes under another thread. A second level of superficiality consists of the fact that the coloration of every fiber constituting the image is only superficial: the polysaccharide cover, approximately 0.2 thousandths of a millimeter (about 0.000008 inches), is colored; the cellulose in the inner side is not. Now that the so-called two-level superficiality of the Shroud image has been described, there is a very interesting and surprising further aspect to be taken into consideration: there are, it seems, actually two imprinted images on the cloth! In fact, from the analysis of the pictures of the dorsal side of the Shroud taken in 2002, it ensued that in correspondence with the face and the hands, there is an image also in the back. Since the Shroud image is superficial, the double image, front and back, implies a double superficiality that is, at least in correspondence with the face, an image on the cloth surface (the main one and most known) and another image, superficial, too, on the opposite side of the Sheet. Between the two sides, there is nothing. Making an analogy, you can imagine a book with the face of the Man of the Shroud on the cover; on the back, another, even fainter, image of the same face; and in the middle, only blanks pages, without any sign of the image.

The double, front and back, body image of the Man of the Shroud reveals such peculiar characteristics that, until now, modern sciences could not reproduce all together at one time on a single cloth. Currently, it is therefore impossible to explain how the Shroud image has been created. The image is not composed of painting pigments or other substances of that kind. the chemical reaction consists of dehydration with oxidation and conjugation (acid–base reaction).
https://3lib.net/book/2572242/382f91

1. It's not a painting 
If this were true, it should be possible to identify the pigments used by chemical analysis, just as conservators can do for the paintings of Old Masters. But the Sturp team found no evidence of any pigments or dyes on the cloth in sufficient amounts to explain the image. Nor are there any signs of it being rendered in brush strokes. In fact the image on the linen is barely visible to the naked eye, and wasn't identified at all until 1898, when it became apparent in the negative image of a photograph taken by Secondo Pia, an amateur Italian photographer. 

2. It's not a photograph
Secondo Pia's photograph showed that the image on the cloth is a negative: dark where it should be bright. This deepens the mystery, and Pia himself casually suggested that the shroud could have been made by some primitive kind of photography. That idea has been inventively pursued by South African art historian Nicholas Allen, who argues that it could in principle have been achieved using materials and knowledge available to medieval scholars many centuries before genuine photography was invented. The key to the idea is the light-sensitive compound silver nitrate, the stuff that darkened the emulsion of the first true photographic plates in the 19th Century, as light transformed the silver salt into tiny black particles of silver metal. 

3. It was not made by a natural chemical process
One of the strange characteristics that the image on the shroud possesses, is that the entire image is very superficial in nature, Around 20 - 30 microns in-depth and both facial images are like this, with nothing in between. It has been confirmed that the image is the result of oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the fibers of the shroud themselves. It is like the imaged areas on the shroud suddenly rapidly aged compared to the rest of the shroud. Professor Giulio Fanti did similar work but he was using a lower resolution image which I believe he scanned from a book. The image on the shroud is the only one of it's kind in this world,and there are no known methods that can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately (S.T.U.R.P's conclusion) I have some of the highest resolution images of the shroud ever taken. Which include G. Enries digitized images,Barrie Schwortz & Vern Millers STURP images, Giancarlo Durantes 1997,2000,2002 & 2010 images, and Haltadefiniziones (HAL9000) images.

If the coloured imprint comes from the darkening of the cellulose fibres of the cloth, what might have caused it? One of the doyens of scientific testing of the shroud, Raymond Rogers of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, argued in 2002 that a simple chemical transformation could do the job. He suggested that even very moderate heat - perhaps 40C (104F) or so, a temperature that post-mortem physicians told him a dead body could briefly attain if the person died from hyperthermia or dehydration - could be enough to discolour the sugary carbohydrate compounds that might be found on the surface of cotton fibres. It doesn't take a miracle, Rogers insisted. This is a reassuringly mundane idea, but there is little evidence for it in this particular circumstance - it's not as if it happens all the time on funeral shrouds. 

On the left, the first superficiality level is shown by the Shroud linen thread model, magnified 300 times, constituted of drinking straws; on the right, the second level of superficiality is highlighted by the fact that,
removed from the colored layer, the straw (fiber) is uncolored.

From a physical point of view, the body image has two levels of superficiality. The first level consists of the fact that the image resides on the outermost layer of the linen fibers and the image goes just two or three fibers deep into the thread (see Figure). The superficial image then disappears if a colored thread goes under another thread. A second level of superficiality consists of the fact that the coloration of every fiber constituting the image is only superficial: the polysaccharide cover, approximately 0.2 thousandth of a millimeter (about 0.000008 inches), is colored; the cellulose in the inner side is not. Now that the so-called two-level superficiality of the Shroud image has been described, there is a very interesting and surprising further aspect to be taken into consideration: there are, it seems, actually two imprinted images on the cloth! In fact, from the analysis of the pictures of the dorsal side of the Shroud taken in 2002, it ensued that in correspondence with the face and the hands, there is an image also in the back. Since the Shroud image is superficial, the double image, front and back, implies a double superficiality that is, at least in correspondence with the face, an image on the cloth surface (the main one and most known) and another image, superficial, too, on the opposite side of the Sheet. Between the two sides, there is nothing. Making an analogy, you can imagine a book with the face of the Man of the Shroud on the cover; on the back, another, even fainter, image of the same face; and in the middle, only blanks pages, without any sign of the image.

The double, front and back, body image of the Man of the Shroud reveals such peculiar characteristics that, until now, modern sciences could not reproduce all together at one time on a single cloth. Currently, it is therefore impossible to explain how the Shroud image has been created. The image is not composed of painting pigments or other substances of that kind. the chemical reaction consists of dehydration with oxidation and conjugation (acid–base reaction).


https://shroudstory.com/



Was this some medieval artistic and scientific genius who knew how to get a dehydration effect WITHOUT burning the shroud he/she was working with??

Paolo Di Lazzaro
The body images on the Shroud looks like an imprint, yet there is no chance to obtain a 200 nm thick coloration depth on linen by using pigments. 200 nm is the depth of color of the body images on the Shroud, indeed. The color of the images on the Shroud is due to dehydration of the primary cell wall of linen fibers which allows formation of chromophores, it is a sort of accelerated aging which may be obtained by e.g., a weak acid, but again, acid acts on the whole linen yarn, not on a so thin depth. As a matter of fact, despite countless attempts, to date nobody was able to obtain a 100% Shroud-like coloration.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why-is-the-Shroud-of-Turin-like-a-photograph-having-a-negative-image

Robert A Rucker: Forensic Science and the Shroud of Turin December 03, 2021 Department of Nuclear Engineering, University of Michigan, USA
2017 to 2021: The 1988 measurement data was finally released for review in 2017. Statistical analysis of the data proved the samples from the lower corner were not homogeneous, i.e., representative of the rest of the Shroud. This non-homogeneity of the samples has been confirmed by four recent papers in peerreviewed journals and is consistent with previous statistical analysis of the measurement data. This indicates the presence of a systematic error in the measured (C14/C12) ratios of the samples evidently because this ratio in the samples was altered by something other than decay of the C14. This means the carbon date of 1260- 1390 AD for the Shroud should be rejected. This leaves us with three main questions: 1) How were the front and back images of the crucified man formed on the cloth? 2) How were the (C14/C12) ratios of the samples altered? 3) Why is the blood that would have dried on the body now on the cloth, since cloth does not absorb dried blood? Multiple answers have been attempted to answer these separate questions, but a recent hypothesis proposes a concept that could explain all three questions.
The images on the Shroud are made by the top one or two layers of fibers in a thread being discolored to a sepia or straw-yellow color. This discoloration of the fibers penetrates to less than 2% of the radius of a fiber. It is the pattern of these discolored fibers that form the images of the crucified man. Three things are needed to produce this pattern of discolored fibers: 1) a mechanism to discolor the fibers, 2) energy to drive the discoloration mechanism, and 3) information to control which fibers are to be discolored. Since the images are that of a crucified man, the information must be that which defines the form of a crucified man and could only have come from the body that was wrapped in the cloth. The only mechanism that could communicate this information from the body to the cloth and produce the good resolution image that can be seen, appears to be radiation. Thus, many if not most Shroud researchers now believe the images were formed by radiation. Research indicates this radiation was evidently low- energy, perhaps charged particles and/or electromagnetic radiation, and released in an extremely brief intense burst of energy from the body. If this burst of radiation included neutrons, a small fraction of the neutrons would have been absorbed in the trace amount of nitrogen in the cloth to form new C-14 atoms in the fibers. This new C-14 could have shifted the carbon date forward by thousands of years, depending on the location on the Shroud. To shift the carbon date forward from the time of Jesus’ death, about 33 AD, to the midpoint of 1260-1390 AD requires the C-14 concentration at the 1988 sample location be increased by only 16.9%. If the radiation burst from the body were sufficiently brief and intense, it would have thrust the dried blood off the body onto the cloth by a natural process called radiation pressure.
https://crimsonpublishers.com/fsar/fulltext/FSAR.000623.php?fbclid=IwAR3vXDB6QQjSpNesU--K1o9HIXjsi30wa8R8_PEklcT-EFhb4JV5iNSHx3o

Stephen Jones (2011):That there is no directionality in the image indicates that the image must have been formed by a release of radiation. Radiation would not cause any any directionality across the width and length of the image. That the Shroud image is consistent with having been caused by some form of radiation through space and was vertically directional is evidence for it having been the result of the resurrection of Jesus:

"The evidence ... clearly indicates that radiation caused the body images on the Shroud. This radiation came from the length and width of a real human corpse, including the internal parts of his body. Radiation does not naturally come from a dead body, and if we were to start a fire under a corpse or make it radiate in some way, we would not only create additional problems with the body, blood, and cloth, we still couldn't come close to making this kind of unique image on a cloth. Moreover, the radiation was vertically directional and encoded through space. Radiation coming from a corpse in such an unprecedented and unique manner is evidence of and consistent with the resurrection. Only a cloth collapsing through a wounded body giving off uniform radiant energy can explain the Shroud's more than twenty body image features, along with the more than one hundred blood marks ... this method not only can encode the mutually inconsistent primary body image features, but also the distracting and misregistered blood marks and body image features caused by the cloth's collapsing motion. Furthermore, this method not only explains how each of the complete and coagulated blood marks that formed naturally on a human got embedded into the cloth, but also how they separated from the body, leaving the original smooth surfaces between the wounds and the skin unbroken and intact on the cloth. Obviously the body has left the cloth. Obviously, each of the numerous wounds once had intimate contact with the cloth. However the cloth could not have been removed from the body by any human means without breaking or smearing many, if not all, these blood marks. Since there are no decomposition stains of any kind on the cloth, this body had to have left it in a unique manner within two to three days. The completely embedded blood marks in Jesus' burial shroud are also consistent with the historical descriptions of Jesus' appearance following his resurrection ... These facts, along with the image-encoding event and the body exiting the cloth within two to three days of death, are all consistent with and indicative of the resurrection.".

Radiation 

STURP leader Prof. John P. Jackson in his "cloth collapse theory" had proposed in 1991 that the image was produced by "shortwave ultraviolet radiation":

"Electromagnetic radiation that is absorbed strongly in air consists of photons in the ultraviolet or soft x-ray region. It happens that these photons are also sufficiently energetic to photochemically modify cellulose. Such photons are strongly absorbed in cellulose over fibril-like distances. Experiments performed by the author have shown that ... shortwave ultraviolet radiation produces a yellow-browned pattern like the Shroud body image composed of chemically altered cellulose. Thus, I posit that radiation from the body initially photosensitized the body image onto the Shroud. This pattern would have appeared, if the radiation was ultraviolet, as a white (bleached) image on a less white cloth. With time, natural aging would have reversed the relative shading of the image to its presently observed state where it appears darker than the surrounding cloth".

"Dr Jackson proposed the hypothesis that, at the time that the image on the Shroud was formed, the cloth collapsed into and through the underlying structure of the body in the Shroud. He did admit that, as a physicist, he had his own difficulties with this concept. Based on his observations of the image he further proposed that, as the body became mechanically transparent to its physical surroundings, it emitted radiation from all points within and on the surface of the body. This radiation interacted with the cloth as it fell into the mechanically transparent body, forming the body image. He also suggested that the radiation would have had to have been strongly absorbed in air. This, he suggested, could have been electromagnetic radiation in the shortwave ultraviolet region of the spectrum, which would have caused a chemical alteration of the cellulose in the cloth fibres."

The normally cautious STURP chemist Ray Rogers (1927–2005) was forced by this and other evidence to conclude that, "the image [on the Shroud] was formed by a burst of radiant energy — light ... such as Christ might have produced at the moment of resurrection":

"I am forced to conclude that the image [on the Shroud] was formed by a burst of radiant energy — light, if you will. I think there is no question about that. What better way, if you were a deity, of regenerating faith in a skeptical age, than to leave evidence 2,000 years ago that could be defined only by the technology available in that skeptical age. The one possible alternative is that the images were created by a burst of radiant light, such as Christ might have produced at the moment of resurrection".

Also Jesus' live body "emitted radiation," namely light, at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-13; Mk 9:2-13; Lk 9:28-36), where His "face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light" (Mt 17:2); "his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them" (Mk 9:3); "the appearance of his face was altered, and his clothing became dazzling white" (Lk 9:29). And the Transfiguration was "a preview of the glorified body of Christ following his Resurrection". It is the view of many (if not most) Shroud scholars, including Ian Wilson, Rex Morgan, John Iannone, Mark Oxley, August Accetta and Giulio Fanti that the image on the Shroud is Jesus' imprinted on the cloth by the light of His resurrection.

It is also supported by the findings of scientists working under the auspices of Italy's ENEA agency, that the closest approximation yet to the colour, extreme superficiality, and other characteristics of the Shroud man's image, was obtained using an excimer laser delivering "a short and intense burst of VUV [vacuum ultraviolet] directional radiation". But the only `problem' with that is, "to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height," would require "a total power of VUV radiation" of "34 thousand billion watts!.

The ENEA study

Significantly the ENEA scientists found in 2011 that only "a short and intense burst of VUV [vacuum ultraviolet] ... radiation can color a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin, including ... the surface [i.e. "the uppermost fibers of the threads of the cloth" color of the fibrils":

"...a short and intense burst of VUV directional radiation can color a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin, including shades of color, the surface color of the fibrils of the outer linen fabric, and the absence of fluorescence"

In 2011, the article: "Italian study claims Turin Shroud is Christ's authentic burial robe," published in The Telegraph reported about a new study that suggested that Christianity's most prized but mysterious relic - the Turin Shroud - is not a medieval forgery but could be the authentic burial robe of Christ. Italian scientists conducted a series of advanced experiments which, they claimed, showed that the marks on the shroud - purportedly left by the imprint of Christ's body - could not possibly have been faked with technology that was available in the medieval period. 

This group of scientists actually considered seriously what it would take to recreate the Shroud's image. And they found that "it could not possibly have been faked with technology that was available in the medieval period." 
 "The double image (front and back)  is impossible to obtain in a laboratory," concluded experts from Italy's National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development. 3

MARCO TOSATTI (2011):  Enea, the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development, has published a report on five years of experiments conducted in the ENEA center of Frascati on the “shroud-like coloring of linen fabrics by far ultraviolet radiation”. “Simply put: we tried to understand how the Shroud of Turin was imprinted by an image so special that it constitutes its charm, and poses a great and very radical challenge, "to identify the physical and chemical processes capable of generating a color similar to that of the image on the Shroud. "

Scientists (Di Lazzaro, Murra, Santoni, Nichelatti and Baldacchini) start from the last (and only) comprehensive interdisciplinary exam of the sheet, completed in 1978 by a team of American scientists from Sturp (Shroud of Turin Research Project). A starting point that all too often those who write about and dissect the Shroud prefer not to take into account, in spite of what is evidenced by available information verified by an accurate control on “peer reviewed” journals, that is, approved by other scientists in objective and independent ways. The Enea report, with a lot of fair play and almost "en passant", very clearly refutes the hypothesis that the Shroud of Turin might be the work of a medieval forger. The hypothesis was supported – against many weighted arguments – by the results of the disputable and probably biased - C14 measurements; a test whose credibility has been rendered ​​very fragile not only by objective difficulties (the possibility that the fabric is contaminated is very high, especially since its historical journey is only partially known), but also from proven factual errors of calculation and the inability to obtain “raw data” from the laboratories for the necessary controls. In spite of repeated requests. An omission that in itself can throw a heavy shadow over the scientific accuracy of the episode.

The report notes: “The double image (front and back) of a scourged and crucified man, barely visible on the linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin has many physical and chemical characteristics that are so particular that the staining which is identical in all its facets, would be impossible to obtain today in a laboratory, as discussed in numerous articles listed in the references. This inability to repeat (and therefore falsify) the image on the Shroud makes it impossible to formulate a reliable hypothesis on how the impression was made.

In fact, today Science is still not able to explain how the body image was formed on the Shroud. As a partial justification, Scientists complain that it is impossible to take direct measurements on the Shroud cloth. In fact, the latest in situ experimental analysis of the physical and chemical properties of the body image of the Shroud was carried out ​​in 1978 by a group of 31 scientists under the aegis of the Shroud of Turin Research Project, Inc. (STURP). The scientists used modern equipment for the time, made ​​available by several manufacturers for a market value of two and a half million dollars, and took ​​a number of non-destructive infrared spectroscopy measurements, visible and ultraviolet, X-ray fluorescence, thermograph, pyrolysis, mass spectrometry, micro-Raman analysis, transmission photograph, microscopy, removal of fibrils and micro-chemical tests”. The analysis carried out on the Shroud did not find significant amounts of pigments (dyes, paints) nor traces of designs. Based on the results of dozens of measurements, the STURP researchers concluded that the body image is not painted nor printed, nor obtained by heating. Furthermore, the color of the image resides on the outer surface of the fibrils that make up the threads of the cloth, and recent measurements of fragments of the Shroud show that the thickness of staining is extremely thin, around 200 nm = 200 billionths of a meter, or one fifth of a thousandth of a millimeter, which corresponds to the thickness of the primary cell wall of the so-called single linen fiber. We recall that a single linen thread is made ​​up of about 200 fibrils.

Other important information derived from the results of the STURP measurements are as follows: The blood is human, and there is no image beneath the bloodstains; the gradient color contains three-dimensional information of the body; colored fibers (image) are more fragile than undyed fibers; surface staining of the fibrils of the image derived from an unknown process that caused oxidation, dehydration, and conjugation in the structure of the cellulose of the linen”. In other words, the color is a result of an accelerated linen aging process”.

As already mentioned, until now all attempts to reproduce an image on linen with the same characteristics have failed. Some researchers have obtained images with a similar appearance to the image of the Shroud, but nobody has been able to simultaneously reproduce all microscopic and macroscopic characteristics. “In this sense, the origin of the Shroud image is still unknown. This seems to be the core of the so-called “mystery of the Shroud”: regardless of the age the Shroud, whether it is medieval (1260 - 1390) as shown by the controversial dating by radiocarbon, or older as indicated by other investigations, and regardless of the actual importance of controversial historical documents on the existence of the Shroud in the years preceding 1260, the most important question, the “question of questions” remains the same: how did that body image appear on the Shroud?”.

“The first method is supported by the fact that there is a precise relationship between the intensity (gradient) of the image and the distance between the body and the cloth. Furthermore, the image is also present in areas of the body not in contact with the cloth, such as immediately above and below the hands, and around the tip of the nose. The second method is less likely because the typical geometric deformations of a three dimension body brought into contact in two dimension sheet are missing. Moreover, there is no imprint of body hips. Consequently, we can deduce that the image was not formed by contact between linen and body”. 2

P. DI LAZZARO (2011): It is this observation, “coupled with the extreme superficiality of the coloring and the lack of pigments” that “makes it extremely unlikely that a shroud-like picture was obtained using a chemical contact method, both in a modern laboratory and even more so by a hypothetical medieval forger”. “There is no image beneath the blood stains. This means that the traces of blood deposited before the image was. Therefore, the image was formed after the corpse was laid down. Furthermore, all the blood stains have well-defined edges, no burrs, so it can be assumed that the corpse was not removed from the sheet. “There are no signs of putrefaction near the orifices, which usually occur around 40 hours after death. Consequently, the image is not the result of putrefaction gases and the corpse was not left in the sheet for more than two days”.

  One of the assumptions related to the formation of the image was that regarding some form of electromagnetic energy (such as a flash of light at short wavelength), which could fit the requirements for reproducing the main features of the Shroud image, such as superficiality of color, color gradient, the image also in areas of the body not in contact with the cloth and the absence of pigment on the sheet. The first attempts made to reproduce the face on the Shroud by radiation, used a CO2 laser which produced an image on a linen fabric that is similar at a macroscopic level. However, microscopic analysis showed a coloring that is too deep and many charred linen threads, features that are incompatible with the Shroud image. Instead, the results of ENEA “show that a short and intense burst of VUV directional radiation can color a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin, including shades of color, the surface color of the fibrils of the outer linen fabric, and the absence of fluorescence”.1

“However, Enea scientists warn, "it should be noted that the total power of VUV radiations required to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height, body surface area equal to = 2000 MW/cm2 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion watts makes it impractical today to reproduce the entire Shroud image using a single laser excimer, since this power cannot be produced by any VUV light source built to date (the most powerful available on the market come to several billion watts )”.

However the Shroud image “has some features that we are not yet able to reproduce – they admit - for example, the gradient of the image caused by a different concentration of yellow colored fibrils that alternate with unstained fibrils”. And they warn: “We are not at the conclusion, we are composing pieces of a fascinating and complex scientific puzzle”. 


The cloth collapse hypothesis

The extreme superficiality of the Shroud man's image (amongst all its other major features) is explained by Prof. John P. Jackson's "cloth collapse theory":

"Superficial Penetration of Image. Once the cloth enters the body region, radiation emitted from within the body volume interacts with each cloth fibril throughout the bulk of the cloth from all directions. However, fibrils on both surfaces of the cloth receive a greater dose than those inside because they are unobstructed by overlying fibril layers. These fibrils would probably be highly absorbing to the radiation because the air, which is less dense by nearly three orders of magnitude than cellulose, is assumed to be highly absorbing to account for image resolution ... The net result is an exaggerated dose accumulation of the surface fibrils over those inside the cloth.".

"According to Jackson, this hypothesis would explain each of the image characteristics of the Shroud. Because radiation effects on the cloth cannot begin until it intersects with the body surface, one-to-one mapping between a given point on the body with a point on the cloth is achieved; in other words, the image is well resolved. As the cloth enters the body region, the fibrils on the surfaces of the cloth receive a greater dose of radiation than those inside, leading to a superficial body image. Also as the cloth collapses, internal stresses cause it to bulge away from the sides of the body and at the top of the head; hence, no image. is visible there. The effect of the radiation thus described would explain the chemical nature of the image. The blood, however, would have been transferred naturally to the Shroud by direct contact, during the initial draping of the body covered with blood. Finally, as the Shroud collapses into the body region, each cloth point falls vertically downwards, explaining why the image features tend to align vertically over their corresponding body part".

In 1990, Jackson proposed his "cloth collapse theory":"... in the case of the Shroud image, the cloth did collapse into and through the underlying body structure ... The concept of a cloth falling into the underlying body region and receiving an image, in essence, requires that two separate assumptions be made. First, we must assume that the body became mechanically `transparent' to its physical surroundings and, second, that a stimulus was generated that recorded the passage of the cloth through the body region onto the cloth as an image. With regard to the latter assumption, it is unclear in an a priori sense what to assume for the physical nature of the stimulus. However, we at least know that it was able to interact physically with cloth; otherwise, image discolorations would not have been formed. I propose that, as the Shroud collapsed through the underlying body, radiation emitted from all points within that body discolored the cloth so as to produce the observed image"

Jackson proposed that the radiation was "in the ultraviolet or soft x-ray region" because it is "sufficiently energetic to photochemically modify cellulose" yet is "absorbed strongly in air".

Resurrection 

While Jackson does not use the word, "resurrection" in his "cloth collapse" theory, Oxley has pointed out the Gospels' evidence for Jesus' body having become "mechanically transparent" at His resurrection:

"The Gospels suggest that the risen Jesus could teleport - in other words, he could move apparently instantaneously from place to place regardless of the physical obstacles in the way ... In John 20:19 and again in John 20:26 it is recorded that Jesus appeared suddenly among his disciples in a locked room. Luke 24:31 records Jesus as vanishing from the sight of the disciples he met on the road to Emmaus. Again, in Luke 24:36 he suddenly appears among the apostles in Jerusalem ... Clearly the body of the risen Jesus, as described in the Gospels, had physical properties beyond the knowledge of modern science ... The Gospel accounts do not, however, preclude the possibility that the body of the risen Jesus became `mechanically transparent'. In fact they seem to suggest it in their descriptions of how Jesus appeared and disappeared without warning. The Gospel accounts give ... credence to Dr Jackson's proposed image-formation mechanism ...".

Ashe is a Christian and a Shroud pro-authenticist, so he  proposed that the resurrection of Jesus "released a brief and violent burst of some other radiation than heat ... which scorched the cloth" and imprinted on it "a quasi-photograph of Christ returning to life"!:

"The Shroud is explicable if it once enwrapped a human body to which something extraordinary happened. It is not explicable otherwise. The Christian Creed has always affirmed that Our Lord underwent an unparalleled transformation in the tomb. His case is exceptional and perhaps here is the key. It is at least intelligible (and has been suggested several times) that the physical change of the body at the Resurrection may have released a brief and violent burst of some other radiation than heat, perhaps scientifically identifiable, perhaps not, which scorched the cloth. In this case the Shroud image is a quasi-photograph of Christ returning to life, produced by a kind of radiance or `incandescence' partially analogous to heat in its effects.".


1. P. DI LAZZARO: COLORAZIONE SIMIL–SINDONICA DI TESSUTI DI LINO TRAMITE RADIAZIONE NEL LONTANO ULTRAVIOLETTO 2011
2. MARCO TOSATTI https://www.lastampa.it/vatican-insider/en/2011/12/14/news/the-shroud-is-not-a-fake-1.36913560 14 Dicembre 2011
3. Stephen Jones: Italian study claims Turin Shroud is Christ's authentic burial robe DECEMBER 22, 2011


Shroud, new study: there is blood of a man tortured and killed 1

Barrie Schwortz was a member of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (often abbreviated as STURP) a team of scientists which performed a set of experiments and analyses on the Shroud of Turin during the late 1970s and early 1980s. STURP issued its final report in 1981.

After 18 years as a skeptic, in 1995, when confronted with the evidence that the blood on the shroud was of a tortured man, he became convinced of the authenticity of the Shroud, and became a Christian.
"At the beginning of my work, I was very skeptical about its authenticity. I felt no particular emotion toward Jesus because I was raised as an orthodox jew. The only thing I knew about Jesus was that he was a jew, and this was all. Examining the Shroud, I quickly realized that it was painted ".
After 18 years of study, the full conviction came when "the Blood Chemistry Allen Adler, another jew who was part of the study group, I explained why the red blood remained on the Shroud. The old blood would have to be black or brown, while the blood on the Shroud is a red-crimson. It seemed inexplicable, instead it was the last piece of the puzzle. After nearly 20 years of investigation, it was a shock for me to discover that the piece of cloth was the authentic cloth that had been wrapped the body of Jesus. The conclusions I arrived were based exclusively on scientific observation ".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G4sj8hUVaY

The blood strains can only be seen with UV light. Why would an artist back then ever put blood there which would not be visible, and providing no advantage at all. But even more remarkable than that, the wide presence of creatinine particles bound to ferrihydrite particles is not a situation typical of the blood serum of a healthy human organism. Indeed, a high level of creatinine and ferritin is related to patients suffering of strong polytrauma like torture. Hence, the presence of these biological nanoparticles found during our experiments point a violent death for the man wrapped in the Turin shroud.” What appears to be blood on the Shroud has passed 13 tests proving that it is real human blood.  The presence of "X" and "Y" chromosomes indicates that the blood is from a male.  The blood type is AB.  

When a person is cruelly tortured, the blood undergoes a terrible haemolysis, when the haemaglobin literally ‘breaks up’. In thirty seconds, the reaction reaches the liver, which doesn’t have time to deal with it, and discharges a volume of bilirubin into the veins. Alan Adler has discovered a very high quantity of this substance in the blood on the Shroud. It is this substance that, when mixed with methemoglobin of a certain type, produces that vivid red colour. The colour of the blood belonging to the ‘Man of the Shroud’ is chemical proof that, before dying, he suffered terrible torture.

According to Professor Giulio Fanti of the University of Padua, the analyses show how “the peculiar structure, size and distribution of the nanoparticles cannot be artifacts made over the centuries on the fabric of the Shroud.” Many fanciful reconstructions of the Turin Shroud being a painted object are once again denied.” Additionally, Fanti says, “the wide presence of creatinine particles bound to ferrihydrite particles is not a situation typical of the blood serum of a healthy human organism. Indeed, a high level of creatinine and ferritin is related to patients suffering of strong polytrauma like torture. Hence, the presence of these biological nanoparticles found during our experiments point a violent death for the man wrapped in the Turin shroud.”

There is no longer any doubt that the Shroud has wrapped the body of a man tortured and killed in the same manner as described in the Gospels for the Crucifixion of Jesus. 

Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud 2
We performed reproducible atomic resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy and Wide Angle X-ray Scanning Microscopy experiments studying for the first time the nanoscale properties of a pristine fiber taken from the Turin Shroud. We found evidence of biologic nanoparticles of creatinine bounded with small nanoparticles of iron oxide. The kind, size and distribution of the iron oxide nanoparticles cannot be dye for painting but are ferrihydrate cores of ferritin. The consistent bound of ferritin iron to creatinine occurs in human organism in case of a severe polytrauma. Our results point out that at the nanoscale a scenario of violence is recorded in the funeral fabric and suggest an explanation for some contradictory results so far published.

Conclusions
On the basis of the experimental evidences of our atomic resolution TEM studies, the man wrapped in the TS suffered a strong polytrauma. We studied a fiber of the TS by atomic resolution TEM experiments and WAXS. This is the first time that the TS is studied at this resolution and this range of view produced a series of experimental results, which thanks to recent studies on ancient dye painting, ferritin, creatinine and human pathology can be connected and understood in relationship with a macroscopic scenario in which the TS was committed [41,42,43]. In fact, the fiber was soaked with a blood serum typical of a human organism that suffered a strong trauma, as HRTEM evidenced that the TS is covered by well-dispersed 30nm-100nm creatinine nanoparticles bounded with internal 2nm-6nm ferrihydrate structures. The bond between the iron cores of ferritin and creatinine on large scale occurs in a body after a strong polytrauma [41,42,43]. This result cannot be impressed on the TS by using ancient dye pigments, as they have bigger sizes and tend to aggregate, and it is highly unlikely that the eventual ancient artist would have painted a fake by using the hematic serum of someone after a heavy polytrauma.

1. http://www.lastampa.it/2017/07/11/vaticaninsider/eng/inquiries-and-interviews/shroud-new-study-there-is-blood-of-a-man-tortured-and-killed-c1jdACNKkTlD9YBPS4kFXM/pagina.html
2. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180487

The Weave of the Shroud of Turin

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7142



RAY DOWNING (2017): The cloth is made of linen thread, and linen thread is made from the stems of the flax plant. In order to transform these stems into workable fiber that can be spun into thread and later woven into cloth, a long process of preparation must be carefully followed. The plants are pulled from the ground and tied into bundles. They are then laid down in the fields until the non-fiber parts rot. The remaining fiber, once dry, is pounded and cleaned. The final step before spinning is combing the long, lustrous fibers into bundles. At this point, the fiber is twisted (spun) into thread. During Jesus' time, all spinning was done by hand with spindles. The spinning wheel wouldn't be invented for at least another 500 years. In the spinning process, the spinner twists the fibers in one of two ways: clockwise (Z) or counterclockwise (S).  Because the structure of the flax fiber has a natural tendency to twist itself in an S twist, spinners over the millennia have spun it in this S direction, as if not wanting to "fight" the fiber. Curiously, the yarn that makes the Shroud has been spun in a Z twist (clockwise).



Stephen E. Jones (2015): The yarn used to weave the Shroud of Turin is of very high quality, evenly spun, and it has been woven into an unusual, fancy weave for the time, called 3 to 1 herringbone twill. The resulting cloth is very fine, with a density of 35 threads per centimeter, or about 89 threads per inch. To give some perspective, the finest surviving Egyptian mummy fabrics are 30 threads per centimeter (75 threads per inch), the thread is spun in an S twist and woven in simple plain weave - one thread over, one thread under.


Close-up of Shroud fabric, with its distinctive three-to-one herringbone twill weave.

The gospel of Mark mentions that Joseph of Arimathea wrapped Jesus' body in a linen cloth for burial:

“Joseph of Arimathea, a highly regarded member of the council, who was himself looking forward to the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Pilate was surprised that he was already dead. He called the centurion and asked him if he had been dead for some time. When Pilate was informed by the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. After Joseph bought a linen cloth and took down the body, he wrapped it in the linen and placed it in a tomb cut out of the rock. ” — Mark 15:43-46

Herringbone. 

A herringbone weave has a v-shaped or chevron pattern formed by regularly reversing with offset the width-wise woof (or weft) thread as it is drawn through the lengthwise warp. The result is a broken zigzag pattern which resembles the skeleton of a herring fish.



Image side of the undated and presumably not pre-treated Shroud sample, "split from one used in the radiocarbon dating study of 1988 at Arizona" retained by Arizona radiocarbon dating laboratory.] 



Non-image side of the above Arizona radiocarbon dating laboratory piece of its Shroud sample.

The Shroud's herringbone 3:1 twill weave was formed by passing each weft thread alternately under three warp threads and over one.


The Shroud's complex herringbone three-to-one twill weave (a) compared to a plain weave (b)

Each successive weft thread begins at an ascending point in the warp one thread earlier, the direction being reversed at regular intervals by repeating the process at a descending point, thus producing the diagonal "herringbone" pattern.

The Shroud is an ancient textile

https://www.academia.edu/102459586/Key_Statements_about_the_Turin_Shroud_as_a_Textile

Flury-Lemberg, Mechthild. “A cloth of inestimable worth,” in The two faces of the Shroud: Pilgrims and Scientists Searching for a Face. Gian Maria Zaccone, ed. (Turin: Editrice ODPF), 2001, pp. 137-142.
STATEMENT: [Re: the stitching on the one long side of the Shroud, linking the large piece with an 8-cm.-wide strip of the same fabric:] We can now prove that this dates back to when the original cloth was made. The sheet was prepared professionally and its stitching can be compared with that of fabric found in tombs at Masada (the Jewish fortress close to the Dead Sea, which was destroyed in 73 AD). [Pp. 140-141]

Fulbright, Diana. “Akeldama repudiation of Turin Shroud omits evidence from Judean Desert,” in Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Scientific approach to the Acheiropoietos Images, ENEA Frascati, Italy 4-6 May 2010, pp. 79-85.
We learn that the New Testament accounts of the burial of Jesus provide the “most valuable evidence” for context of the burial of their “man of the shroud” from Akeldama. Objections disputing the first-century date of the Turin Shroud – in this case, its herringbone weave and its large size – in fact may corroborate the antiquity of the cloth.

D. Fulbright (2010):  At Murabba’at, the site of numerous manuscripts and artifacts in line with the finds from Qumran, archaeologists and textile experts Grace M. Crowfoot and her daughter Elizabeth Crowfoot recorded seven twillweave fabrics, including a dark blue cloth of fine and regular herringbone twill weave (2:2) with Z spun warp threads and mixed S and Z spun weft threads, probably imported.  Numerous textile fragments were discovered at Masada by the Yadin excavations in 1963-65. Avigail Sheffer and Hero Granger-Taylor, archaeologists with the Israel Antiquities Authority, recorded in their preliminary report fourteen twill weave textiles. These include several textiles in diamond twill weave, which is actually a more complex variation of the herringbone pattern, as the direction of the diagonal is reversed periodically, ultimately forming diamond patterns in the cloth . Most of the textiles found at Masada were imported from Anatolia and farther north, from Germany, according to expert textile analysts. The worn and patched condition of these imported textiles of intricate weave indicates well-to-do people fallen on hard times.

A few other ancient textiles made on four-harness looms and found in the Near East, namely in Palmyra, Antinoë, Möns Claudianus and Masada, can also be regarded as analogues of the burial garment from Turin . They are all woolen fabrics made with 2/2 twill or 2/2 diamond twill weaves and high-quality products, as evidenced by, among other things, a high density of threads (up to 160 threads per 1cm).





Legging discovered in permafrost, South Tyrol. Wool, 2:2 herringbone weave, ca. 800 – 500 B.C.E.

Dr. Mechthild Flury-Lemberg has shown that the herringbone pattern existed not only during the first century of our era, but long before. She has published a study of woolen leggings (54.6 cm. x 15.7 cm,) found on the frozen remains of a man discovered in the permafrost of South Tyrol in 1994. They are made of coarse goat hair, and woven in a 2:2 herringbone pattern. The leggings have been dated to ca. 800 to 500 B.C.E

Archaeologists who have asserted that the weave of the Turin Shroud was unknown until it was introduced in Europe a thousand years after Christ possibly have been misinformed, despite evidence which should be very well known to textile experts working with them. We may also ask if the herringbone pattern was so unusual in ancient times as to have been an anomaly. Gilbert Raes, renowned expert on ancient textiles, wrote: “At the beginning of our age both cotton and linen were known in the Middle East. The type of weave [the herringbone pattern of the Turin Shroud] is not particularly distinctive and does not enable us to determine the period in which it was produced”. Objections disputing the first-century date of the Turin Shroud – in this case, its herringbone weave and its large size – in fact may corroborate the antiquity of the cloth.  5

G. Vial (1988): The only herringbone in linen so far analysed and published is that cited in note 10. It is very late — second half of the XVIth century — and much simpler than that of Turin. The number of threads per centimeter in its main warp is practically half of the Turin count (19.5 instead of 38) and the proportion of warp/weft reductions is less: 19.5/16 = 1.22 instead of 38/26 = 1.46 for Turin. The important main warp of the latter thus offered a much smoother surface to the reproduction of the image. If one takes into account the three constitutive elements of a textile — the structure, the primary material, and the reductions of warp and weft — one must acknowledge that the Shroud of Turin is truly "incomparable".... 6


The Shroud's weave was expensive and rare. 

Because of its complexity, the Shroud would have been an expensive, and therefore rare, fabric. Especially so in the first century when fine linen ranked in value with gold and silver. No example of herringbone twill weave in linen from first or early centuries has been found, although examples of that weave have been found in silk and wool. There are no examples of herringbone twill weave from France up to and including fourteenth century. There is in fact only one known example of a medieval herringbone twill linen weave fabric, a fourteenth century, a block-painted linen fragment with a 3:1 chevron twill weave, in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

Further evidence of the extreme rarity of medieval linen cloths with a Shroud-like herringbone twill weave, was the fact that the then British Museum's Dr. Michael Tite was unable to find any medieval linen with a weave that resembled the Shroud's, to use as a blind control sample for the 1988 radiocarbon dating.

The Shroud's expensive weave is consistent with it being the linen shroud bought by the "rich man" Joseph of Arimathea in which to bury Jesus' body. The Gospels record that Joseph of Arimathea, a "rich man," bought a linen shroud and wrapped Jesus' body in it (Mt 27:57-60; Mk 15:43-46; Lk 23:50-53; Jn 19:38-42). The Shroud's expensive herringbone three-to-one twill weave is consistent with it having been that linen shroud bought by the rich man Joseph of Arimathea in which to wrap and bury Jesus' body.  That the Shroud's weave is expensive and rare is another problem for the forgery theory. The primary motive of art and archaeological (including relic) forgery is financial gain.  If the Shroud were a medieval forgery, then the forger, to maximize his profit, would have "just got a bit of linen." That is, he would have used the least expensive "bit of linen" he could find that would still deceive his prospective buyers. But the Shroud is not just any "bit of linen." As we have seen above the Shroud would have been expensive and rare in the first century. And it would have been even more expensive and rare in the 14th century, of which there is only one known other example, but in fragments as opposed to the ~4.4 x 1.1 metre Shroud. So the medieval forger would have been most unlikely to have obtained a fine linen herringbone twill sheet the size of the Shroud in the first place. And if the forger did have the opportunity to obtain the 8 x 2 cubit ancient Syrian or Palestinian fine linen sheet that the Shroud is, he would not have bought it for the very high price it would have been, as that would have severely reduced the profit margin on his planned forgery of the Shroud image upon it. This is yet another of the many problems of the forgery claim.3 

C. Mader: The shroud of Turin is a single length of linen cloth. The weave is a three hop (3 over 1) herringbone twill. The weft thread passes over three warp threads, under one, over three, and so forth for each run of the weft thread across the loom. The next weft is offset by one, and the next forming a twill. After a few threads, the offset is reversed forming a herringbone. Linen is a cloth made from yarn of twisted flax fibers. Flax is a plant grown from seed from which linseed oil is pressed for fiber for making linen yarn. Linen cloth is woven from the yarn produced by spinning flax fibers together. Flax is among the oldest fiber crops in the world. The use of flax for the production of linen goes back at least 5000 years. The best grades of flax fibers are used for linen fabrics such as the fine-quality cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The thickness of the fibers from flax plants varies significantly. The average thickness of the Shroud fibers is about 13 micrometers The Shroud of Turin linen is approximately 350 (315-390) micrometers thick. The yarn consists of approximately 70 to 120 flax fibers twisted together in a clockwise Z-twist. The various lengths (hanks) of yarn are not spliced together but laid in side-by-side during the weaving. The variegated patterns, known as banding, in both the warp and weft yarn, suggest that the yarn was bleached before weaving rather than after the cloth was taken from the loom. This is a significant clue to the age of the cloth because medieval European linen was field bleached, a process that eliminates banding. Warp threads are the threads that are strung onto the loom before weaving begins. They run along the length of the cloth. Weft threads are the threads that run across, being passed over and under to create the cloth. Twill means the cloth’s pattern has a diagonal wale or texture. Denim, as used in ordinary blue jeans is an example of twill. Herringbone means the offset is periodically reversed, hence the diagonal wale is reversed. The resulting appearance is that of a herring fish bone.

The weave is important because it is evident in one of the illustrations in the Hungarian Pray manuscript which dates to 1180-1195 which is earlier than the 1988 carbon dating of 1260- 1390. The manuscript shows the burial of Jesus naked with hands over his pubic area and no  visible thumbs. It shows the identical pattern of burn holes found on the shroud. The herringbone weave of the shroud is depicted. The Pray Codex or Hungarian Pray Manuscript is one of the most important historical documents showing that the Shroud of Turin existed prior to the 1200s within the Byzantine Empire.1

Shroud 1st draft: Rodney Hoare holds an MA in Natural Sciences from Cambridge, and in his book “The Turin Shroud is Genuine” he notes “The specific cotton found within the Shroud, Gossypium herbaceum, is found only in the Middle East. Even more important is the absence of any wool fibers, which certainly would have been present on any European loom. Therefore the Shroud is not of European origin.5

The size of the Shroud

Stephen E. Jones (2015): In 1989, an expert in early Syriac, Ian Dickinson, of Canterbury, England, realized that the measurements of the Shroud were approximately 8 x 2 of the Assyrian standard cubit of between 21.4 and 21.6 inches, which was the common unit of lineal measurement in Jesus' day:

"Along these same lines has been a study of the shroud's dimensions as recently made by an expert in early Syriac, Ian Dickinson, from Canterbury, England. Curious at the shroud's, by British units of measurement, anomalous 14 foot 3 inch by 3 foot 7 inch overall size, Dickinson wondered if these dimensions might make more sense if converted to the cubit measure as prevailing in Jesus's time. Establishing that the first-century Jewish cubit was most likely to the Assyrian standard, reliably calculated at between 21.4 and 21.6 inches, Dickinson found that if he chose the lower of these measures there was an astonishing correlation, accurate to the nearest half-inch:



Such conformity to an exact 8 by 2 Jewish cubits is yet another piece of knowledge difficult to imagine of any medieval forger. It also correlates perfectly with the `doubled in four' arrangement by which we hypothesized the shroud to have been once folded and mounted as the `holy face' of Edessa, for the exposed facial area of this latter would have been an exact 1 by 2 Jewish cubits".


Above: Page 67 of "Inductive Metrology: Or, The Recovery of Ancient Measures from the Monuments," by William Matthew Flinders Petrie (1877).]

The Standard Assyrian cubit was 21.6 inches. During the 19th century the archaeological pioneer, Sir Flinders Petrie (1853–1942) and Assyriologist Julius Oppert (1825–1905), from many measurements of ancient buildings in Babylon, found the length of the Assyrian cubit to be almost 21.5 inches, since refined by other archaeologists to be 21.6 ±0.2 inches. According to page 67 of Petrie's book above, he himself accepted 21.60 inches as the mean length of the Assyrian cubit.



Mechthild Flury-Lemberg: 437 x 111 cms. In 1998, ancient textiles conservator, Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, determined the true dimensions of the Shroud to be 437 x 111 cms, i.e. 172 x 44 in. or 14 ft 4 in. x 3 ft 8 in.:

"The first speaker was Dr. Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, a former curator of the Abegg Foundation textile museum, Switzerland, whose theme was 'The Shroud fabric, its technical and archaeological characteristics. It was Dr. Flury-Lemberg who, immediately prior to the 1998 exposition, had the task of preparing the Shroud for its display and housing in the new three-ton Italgas container constructed for it. Because the plate for the new container had been made slightly too small, Dr. Flury-Lemberg gained permission to remove the blue surround that had been sewed on in the 19th century. The intention behind this surround had been to save the Shroud from the repeated handling at the edges to which they had been subjected throughout the long centuries when it was the custom to hold it up before the populace. However, the surround had ever since prevented examination of the same edges, thereby hindering totally accurate calculation of its dimensions. Now the dimensions have been authoritatively determined by Dr. Flury-Lemberg as 437 cm long by 111 cm wide."

The Shroud's 437 x 111 cm dimensions are exactly 8 x 2 cubits! The Shroud's 437 x 111 cm dimensions are, to the nearest centimeter, exactly 8 x 2 Assyrian standard cubits of 21.6 inches!


Above: Table showing that the 1998 437 x 111 cms true dimensions of the Shroud are even more exactly 8 x 2 Assyrian standard cubits of 21.6 inches than the 14 ft 3 in. x 3 ft 7 in. pre-1998 measurements were. 

And again, the Assyrian standard cubit was the international measure of commerce prevailing in Jesus's time, including among the Jews: 

"So there were cubits for Temple use and various other applications, but it is a particular cubit of the marketplace that is connected with the Shroud, the cubit that is known as the Assyrian cubit: the widely used, indeed, international standard of that time for merchants of the Near East, and had been so for centuries. This cubit of commerce was carried with the lingua communis, the language of trade and diplomacy that stretched from the Euphrates to the Mediterranean, the tongue that had become the common language of the Jew. Aramaic: the same language which Jesus spoke. Aramaic had been the communication medium of the Assyrian Empire and Israel had been a subject of Assyria."

This is another major problem for the medieval (or earlier) forgery claim since a medieval artist/forger would be most unlikely to know the length of the standard cubit of Jesus' day, as this was only discovered by archaeologists in the 19th century!! 3

Sidestrip.

Stephen E. Jones (2015): The sidestrip is a strip of linen about 8 cms (3½ inches) wide along its left-hand side of the Shroud (looking at it with its frontal image in the lower half and the man upright), and joined by a single seam. The strip is incomplete at each end, with 14 cms (5½ inches) and 36 cms (14 inches) missing at the bottom and top left hand corners respectively. The sidestrip 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. The sidestrip is joined to the main body of the Shroud by a single seam which is 4-5 mm wide. The sewing thread of the seam is also linen. In preparing the Shroud for its 1998 exposition, ancient textiles conservator, Dr. Mechthild Flury-Lemberg (1929-), removed the blue satin surround that had been sewed on by Princess Clotilde of Savoy (1843–1911) in 1868. Flury-Lemberg was the first person since the 16th century to see between the underside of the Shroud and its linen backing cloth sewed on in 1534 by Chambéry's Poor Clare nuns  after the 1532 fire. In 2000 Flury-Lemberg reported that she had discovered, "a very special, almost invisible stitching with which the edges were finished" which is visible only on the Shroud's under-side. In her forty years of working on historic textiles Flury-Lemberg had only once before found an "essentially identical" type of stitching: that found in first-century textiles at Masada, the Jewish fortress overrun by the Romans in AD 73 and never occupied again.4


Drawing of `invisible seam' found on cloth fragments at the first-century Jewish fortress of Masada, which is "identical to that found on the Shroud and nowhere else".

Since a medieval forger would be most unlikely (to put it mildly) to even know about almost invisible first century Jewish stitching; and even if he did know about it, he would be even more unlikely to go to the trouble of adding it to his forgery (what use would almost invisible stitching be to a forger?); and even if he wanted to use it, he would be most unlikely to have the high degree of skill needed to do such stitching. 




THE SHROUD AS AN ANCIENT TEXTILE

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-shroud-of-turin#7142

Below is a summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin as the ancient burial cloth of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.
by J. Michael Fischer, adapted from the original article by John C. Iannone[

Stitching used to sew on the 3-inch wide side piece onto the main Shroud is nearly identical to that found at Masada which was destroyed in 73-74 AD. The size of the Shroud being very close to 2 by 8 cubits - the ancient unit of measurement

The Shroud is a linen cloth woven in a 3-over-1 herringbone pattern, and measures 14'3" x 3'7".  These dimensions correlate with ancient measurements of 2 cubits x 8 cubits - consistent with loom technology of the period.  The finer weave of 3-over-1 herringbone is consistent with the New Testament statement that the "sindon" (or shroud) was purchased by Joseph of Arimathea, who was a wealthy man.

In 1532, there was a fire in the church in Chambery, France, where the Shroud was being kept.  Part of the metal storage case melted and fell on the cloth, leaving burns, and efforts to extinguish the fire left water stains.  Yet the image of the man was hardly touched.
In 1534, nuns sewed patches over the fire-damaged areas and attached a full-size support cloth to the back of the Shroud.  This became known as the "Holland" backing cloth.
The Shroud was moved to Turin in 1578, where it remains to this day.

In 2002, a team of experts did restoration work, such as removing the patches from 1534 and replacing the backing cloth.  One of the specialists was Swiss textile historian Mechthild Flury-Lemberg.  She was surprised to find a peculiar stitching pattern in the seam of one long side of the Shroud, where a three-inch wide strip of the same original fabric was sewn onto a larger segment.
The stitching pattern, which she says was the work of a professional, is quite similar to the hem of a cloth found in the tombs of the Jewish fortress of Masada.  The Masada cloth dates to between 40 BC and 73 AD.
This kind of stitch has never been found in Medieval Europe.

Stephen E. Jones The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!
The Shroud has almost invisible stitching in its seam that is identical to stitching found elsewhere only at the Jewish fortress of Masada, which was last occupied in AD 73. Since a medieval forger would be most unlikely (to put it mildly) to even know about almost invisible first century Jewish stitching; and even if he did know about it, he would be even more unlikely to go to the trouble of adding it to his forgery (what use would almost invisible stitching be to a forger?); and even if he wanted to use it, he would be most unlikely to have the high degree of skill needed to do such stitching.
https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-evidence-is-overwhelming-that-turin.html#para07

Orit Shamira A burial textile from the first century CE in Jerusalem compared to roman textiles in the land of Israel and the Turin Shroud 2015
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d4d5/a1faca9e2ab2177edf92094c4abf4824a022.pdf

Observation: The wool textile from the Ben Hinnom Valley could, therefore, have been imported from Greece or Italy in which Z-spinning was the norm.
Reply: Relevant is the fact that textiles with Z-spinning were available in Palestine, in the 1st. Century, and as such, have been bought in Jerusalem, and used to bury Jesus.




It is Syrian Weave Cloth of fine linen because Joseph of Arimathea bought it from a Sryian merchant selling his goods for the Passover outside the Damascus Gate. That is why the Shroud is Syrian weave cloth in Syrian cubits. 8 X 2 Cubits. That is also the reason the cloth has pollens on it from Syria, because it is from Syria. Jesus was buried with the rich at death, Shroud is proof of that.
https://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2020/02/24/sorry-the-shroud-of-turin-is-definitely-a-hoax/

The linen fabric was that of flax and cotton and was produced in the Judaic environment: it does not bear traces of fibers of animal origin (the Mosaic law prescribed to keep separate the wool from the linen). A forger would have had to have known this as well.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rqNIdpA3_gnz4eSRmXMMTl3DmwsbirMUohAW7fHbNZA/edit?fbclid=IwAR0HmNicxe3J_mC0uyKU2Am8182fNQaYmh5s6IOTimauX0LGseMDtad_8b8

http://www.acheiropoietos.info/proceedings/FulbrightAkeldamaWeb.pdf
This article totally blows Professor Gibsons false assertions of the shroud out of the water.
The claim by Gibson that akadelma tombs site in jerusalem disprove the authenticity of the shroud is completely refuted on the basis of ancient textile evidence from the judean desert and elsewhere.
Pietro Savio published a cloth woven in a herringbone pattern dated to 130C.E. Discovered in the excavations of the necropolis at Antinoe. Plus there pre-dynasty burials described by Petrie and Mackay involving large textiles with the characteristic selvedge fringe. In one example a long cloth lay below the body and was folded over it in the same manner as the shroud of turin.
Twill-weave textiles of shroud fragments and nearly intact shrouds have been found at various excavation sites in the judean desert and all around in egypt to europe from even before the era of Jesus that have shown this type of weave.

Claim: The 3-to-1 herringbone weave used in the shroud did not exist in Jesus's time
Reply: There are no examples of herringbone twill weave from France up to and including fourteenth century. There is in fact only one known example of a medieval herringbone twill linen weave fabric, a fourteenth century, a block-painted linen fragment with a 3:1 chevron twill weave, in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London. The variegated patterns, known as banding, in both the warp and weft yarn, suggest that the yarn was bleached before weaving rather than after the cloth was taken from the loom. This is a significant clue to the age of the cloth because medieval European linen was field bleached, a process that eliminates banding.  Rodney Hoare holds an MA in Natural Sciences from Cambridge, and in his book “The Turin Shroud is Genuine” he notes “The specific cotton found within the Shroud, Gossypium herbaceum, is found only in the Middle East. Even more important is the absence of any wool fibers, which certainly would have been present on any European loom. Therefore the Shroud is not of European origin.  That the Shroud's weave is expensive and rare is another problem for the forgery theory. The primary motive of art and archaeological (including relic) forgery is financial gain.  If the Shroud were a medieval forgery, then the forger, to maximize his profit, would have "just got a bit of linen." That is, he would have used the least expensive "bit of linen" he could find that would still deceive his prospective buyers. But the Shroud is not just any "bit of linen." The Shroud would have been expensive and rare in the first century. And it would have been even more expensive and rare in the 14th century, of which there is only one known other example, but in fragments as opposed to the ~4.4 x 1.1 meter Shroud. 

Claim:  Then Shimon Gibson is interviewed on the Akeldama shroud fragments found in Jerusalem in 1999. A very curious aspect of the whole controversy is why Shroud fans have never mentioned the Second Temple burial cloth remains that were found. The answer is quite simple because they completely contradict the Shroud as a first century Jewish artifact: fabric, patteakeldama shamirrn, twist of the fibers and a four meter long cloth have nothing to share with the archaeological findings. Gibson refers to his amazing discovery of the first Jerusalem shroud ever found: it is made of wool (not linen), it has a simple 1:1 twill weave with 'S' spinning twist (3:1 complex herringbone twill weave with 'Z' spun). Moreover, despite the fact that the Akeldama shroud remained in the dirt and bacterial contamination for 2,000 years, it was carbon dated to 50 AD. So, archaeological evidence from controlled excavations of Second Temple Jewish tombs clearly prove that the Turin Shroud is not an artifact from that period.

Reply: So all shrouds in the 1st century had to be a 1:1 twill with "S" spinning twist?  This simply ignores the fact that rich people of the time could have afforded to buy more expensive linen.  It's absurd to think that a scholar would discount the Shroud simply because it was more complex than an archaeological find in the same period.



The fabric of the Shroud aligns with the descriptions of Jesus's burial cloth in the Gospels. According to Jewish burial customs, Jesus's body was wrapped in linen and placed in a rock tomb. The cloth was purchased by Joseph of Arimathea, a wealthy and influential Jewish man who believed in Jesus.

The Shroud is physically consistent with this description. It is made of linen, which corresponds to the material used for burial cloths. Moreover, it is large enough to wrap an adult man, fulfilling the requirement for Jesus's burial.

Some interpretations suggest that the gospels refer to strips of linen rather than a shroud-like cloth. However, a closer examination of the biblical text allows for multiple legitimate readings. The words used in the Gospels, such as "wrapped," "rolled up," "enveloped," "bound," "tied," and "fastened," can be understood to describe the wrapping of Jesus's body in a fine linen cloth. The use of plural terms like "linen cloths," "bandages," "wrappings," and "clothes" in John's Gospel may refer to both the large Shroud and the smaller strips of linen used to bind the jaw, hands, and feet. Scholars who have conducted detailed word studies, reviewed Jewish burial practices, and examined early Christian traditions agree that the plural form likely encompasses all the grave clothes associated with Jesus's burial.

Additionally, Joseph of Arimathea, as a Jewish leader, would have adhered to Jewish burial customs. Jewish law prohibits weaving wool and linen together, and the Shroud's linen composition aligns with this requirement. Chemical analysis of the fabric has found no traces of wool, further supporting its conformity to Jewish laws.

Considering Joseph's reverence for Jesus and his status as a wealthy man, it is reasonable to expect that the cloth purchased to wrap the Son of God would be of top quality. The Shroud's fabric is made of handmade linen, which was a labor-intensive and expensive material to produce. The process of creating linen involves planting, harvesting, bundling, curing, deseeding, separating, beating, and combing the flax fibers before spinning or twisting them into thread. The Shroud's thread has a uniform size, a counterclockwise twist, and is woven in a complex pattern. Its thread count compares favorably to burial cloths of Egyptian royalty, demonstrating high quality and expense.

In conclusion, the fabric of the Shroud aligns with the descriptions of Jesus's burial cloth in the Gospels. It is a large linen cloth that meets Jewish laws of composition, and its materials and craftsmanship befit its association with a reverential and wealthy man like Joseph of Arimathea.



The dimensions of the Shroud of Turin appear to be deliberate and hold significance. Non-partisan sources indicate that the units of measurement used in the ancient Near East closely align with the Shroud's dimensions. The fabric is made of two lengthwise strips, one wide and one narrow, and the weaving pattern at the seam matches, suggesting that both strips were produced simultaneously on the same loom. Additionally, both strips have selvages, which are edges produced during manufacturing to prevent unraveling.

Despite being over 650 years old and having endured various treatments and handling, the Shroud remains surprisingly uniform in its shape, considering its handmade nature. Measurements of the Shroud, obtained from different sources, consistently indicate a ratio of four units long by one unit wide. The average measurement of 438 by 112 centimeters supports the notion that the cloth's size was deliberately chosen. If a narrower cloth had sufficed, there would have been a selvage instead of a seam. Similarly, if a wider sheet had been the goal, wider strips could have been joined.

When considering the Shroud's age, there are generally two positions: it existed in first-century Palestine or 14th-century Europe. To determine a unit of measurement that divides evenly into both 438 and 112 centimeters, medieval weights and measures were examined. Two closely matching units were the Spanish foot and the English ell. For ancient units, a book by Flinders Petrie from 1877 called "Inductive Metrology" was consulted. Petrie analyzed dimensions of buildings and monuments from around the world and calculated the units of measurement they were built to. His findings coincided with the work of Julius Oppert, who identified measurements from inscriptions and literary remains. Four nearly identical results derived from two independent methods were found, with these units being referred to as the Assyrian cubit.

The combined evidence suggests that the Shroud's dimensions align closely with the measurements of the Assyrian cubit and other ancient units used in Persia, Assyria, and Egypt. This supports the conclusion that the Shroud existed in ancient Palestine during Jesus's era.

In summary, the Shroud's deliberate dimensions, consistent with ancient measurement units, further support its compatibility with the Gospel descriptions of Jesus's burial cloth. The fabric and its measurements align with Jewish burial customs and the practices of the time. While it is possible to argue that the image on the Shroud was added at a later date, it would require ascribing significant foresight to a medieval forger or artist, as they would have needed to locate and use an expensive, ancient cloth that matched the necessary dimensions.



1. Charles Mader: The Weave of the Shroud of Turin 
2. RAY DOWNING: The Fabric of the Shroud of Turin March 30, 2017
3. Stephen E. Jones: Dimensions #3: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic! JULY 10, 2015
4. Stephen E. Jones: Sidestrip #5: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic! AUGUST 24, 2015
5. Shroud 1st draft

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

The wound on the wrist appears on the Shroud as a simple blood-stain. But if you pass an optical fibre between the cloth and the protective lining which was stitched to the Shroud in Chambéry in 1532, and photograph it from behind, the wound appears to be square. Due to dehydration, Jesus’ blood was very dense. Only in the place where the nail was removed was the blood sufficiently liquid to leave a trace, on the back of the cloth. There is a church in Rome, the Holy Cross of Jerusalem, where some objects of the Passion were donated by Saint Helen, the mother of Emperor Constantine. She had found them at Golgotha, where her son had conducted the first archaeological dig in history, thereby discovering Jesus’ tomb, over which the emperor Hadrian had built a huge pagan temple. Only centuries later was doubt first cast upon these relics which, up to then, had always been considered authentic. One of these relics was a nail said to have held Jesus to the cross.

I was overcome with emotion on discovering that the wound inflicted upon the ‘Man of the Shroud’ by the nail planted in his wrist, exactly one centimetre square, corresponds to the size of the nail found by Saint Helen. What is more, one of the other relics kept in the Church of the Holy Cross is a length of wood said to have been placed over the Cross with the name of the condemned man. On it, in Hebrew (written from right to left), Greek and Latin, is ‘Jesus the Nazarene’.
https://www.messengersaintanthony.com/content/man-shroud-has-name

https://shroudstory.com/

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the 14th. century

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7144

Maybe the most throughout account of the pre-1350 history of the Shroud was compiled by Joe Marino, and published in the paper: Documented References to the Burial Linens of Jesus Prior to the Shroud of Turin’s Appearance in France in the Mid1350s 2. He cites:

Documented References to the Burial Linens of Jesus Prior to the Shroud of Turin's Appearance in France in the Mid-1350s
https://www.academia.edu/75771585/Documented_References_to_the_Burial_Linens_of_Jesus_Prior_to_the_Shroud_of_Turins_Appearance_in_France_in_the_Mid_1350

2 sources from the 2nd. Century, 1 from the 3rd. Century, 9 from the 4th. Century, 3 from the 5th. Century, 10 from the 6th. Century, 5 from the 7th. Century, 4 from the 8th. Century, 3 from the 9th. Century, 5 from the 10th. Century, 11 from the 11th. Century, 7 from the 12th. Century, and 15 from the 13th century, and 2 from the 14th. Century. In total 77 sources until 1350!! Marino writes in the concluding remarks: Despite conflicting theories of the Shroud’s “pre-history,” there is no doubt there is an abundance of evidence of the purported existence of Jesus’ burial linens.

Shroud history

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the 14th. century

by Stephen E. Jones 4
https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2016/07/chronology-of-turin-shroud-ad-30.html#1


30 Friday, April 7. Jesus was crucified and died. Joseph of Arimathea bought a linen Shroud [Gk. sindon], took Jesus' body down from the cross, bound His hands and feet with linen strips [othonia], wrapped Jesus' body in the shroud and laid Him in a cave tomb. 

30 Sunday, April 9. The Apostles Peter and John enter Jesus' tomb. They find the linen strips [othonia] lying where they had been around Jesus' hands and feet, and the facecloth [soudarion = the Sudarium of Oviedo] which had been on [epi] the top of Jesus' head, where there is a gap between the front and back images on the Shroud, but they find no shroud [sindon]. John was immediately convinced from the pattern of the graveclothes that Jesus had risen from the dead, as He had predicted. John would have realised that graverobbers would have either taken Jesus' graveclothes and left His body, or they would have taken Jesus' body still wrapped in His graveclothes, but they would not have taken Jesus' body and left the linen strips [othonia] which had been tied around Jesus' hands and feet. Especially if those linen strips were still "looped together and knotted exactly as they had bound the hands and the feet," of Jesus' body, which having been resurrected had passed through them. Or rather they had passed through Jesus' "mechanically transparent" resurrected body! One of the earliest Christian writings, the Gospel of the Hebrews, recorded that Jesus took His shroud with Him out of the tomb and gave it to the "Servant of the Priest" presumably the Apostle John.

50 Death of Edessa's King Abgar V. According to the early church historian Eusebius (c. 260-340), King Abgar V (BC 4–AD 50) of Edessa had written to Jesus asking Him to come and heal him and Jesus had replied to Abgar by letter promising that after His resurrection He would send one of His disciples to Edessa to heal Abgar and preach the Gospel. According to Eusebius, Thaddeus, one of the Seventy, did go to Edessa, healed Abgar V from Thaddeus, and commenced Christianity there. While historian J.B. Segal (1912–2003), considered that this account "may well have a substratum of fact," he regarded the part of it about the exchange of letters between Abgar V and Jesus, which Eusebius had personally read in Edessa's archives, was a "pious fraud," which unknown to Eusebius had been inserted into Edessa's archives in the time of Abgar VIII (177 to 212), who was the first Christian king of Edessa. But as will be seen, Eusebius' account says nothing about Abgar V being healed by an image of Jesus on a cloth, which later versions of the Abgar V story do say. The pilgrim Spanish nun Egeria in c.384 recorded that she had seen the text of Jesus' letter to Abgar V affixed to Edessa' city gate.

57 Death of Ma'nu V (r. 50–57), son of Abgar V, who had succeeded him as king of Osroene, the capital city of which was Edessa. Ma'nu V is succeeded by Ma'nu VI (r. 57–71).

60 According to the 945 "Official History of the Image of Edessa", King Ma'nu VI reverted to paganism and persecuted Edessa's Christians. To ensure the safety of "the likeness of our Lord Jesus Christ not made by hand" which had been fastened to a board and embellished with gold, i.e. the Mandylion (the Shroud "four-doubled" = tetradiplon), was supposedly bricked up above the public gate of Edessa, where it had previously laid, and then was completely forgotten for almost five centuries until its discovery after another major flood in 525. However, this story is most implausible (did Ma'nu VI, or none of his officials, not notice, nor suspect, that the Mandylion they were seeking to destroy, was where it had previously been but only behind fresh brickwork?), and is more likely a "pious fraud" to give the Mandylion/Shroud, which is known in Edessa only from 544, a false back-history to the time of Jesus.

2nd century (101-200)

c. 150 Several second century Christian writings record that the Shroud had been saved from Jesus' tomb: the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Acts of Pilate / Acts of Nicodemus, the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Gamaliel. This shows that second century writers knew the Shroud existed in their day. They disagree about who saved it from the tomb, but they agree that it had been saved.

177 Accession of Edessa's king Abgar VIII, the Great. Abgar VIII (r. 177-212), also counted as Abgar IX. His full name was Lucius Aelius Septimius Megas Abgarus. He was a ruler of Osroene, a Syriac-speaking kingdom in Upper Mesopotamia, whose capital city was Edessa. Abgar VIII was Edessa's (and presumably the world's) first Christian king, as is evident from some of his coins which were the first to feature a Christian symbol: a prominent Christian cross on his crown (see below).



Second century Edessan coin, one side with Abgar VIII wearing a crown bearing a Christian cross (right), and on the other side the head of the Roman emperor Commodus (r. 180-192) (left).]

c. 180 Abgar VIII has inserted into Edessa's archives fictitious correspondence between Abgar V and Jesus. This "pious fraud" became the basis of the "Legend of Abgar" which was added to and modified over subsequent centuries as more information about the Shroud became known. But the Abgar-Jesus letters were more likely a verbal request by Abgar and a reply by Jesus which were later transcribed into writing, with embellishments.

c. 183 During the tolerant reign of Roman Emperor Commodus (r. 180-192) Abgar VIII asked Pope Eleutherus (175-189) to send missionaries to Edessa. In Abgar VIII's reign Edessa became the world's first Christian city, as evidenced by this stone Christian cross over a lion's head in a former fountain in modern Sanliurfa (ancient Edessa, which has survived the almost complete eradication of Edessa's Christian history since the Muslim conquest in 1144. The lion was the symbol of the Abgar dynasty, which ceased ruling over Edessa after Abgar VIII's death in 212.

190 Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215) in his Outlines, listed the burial places of Jesus's disciples, including that Thaddaeus/Addai was with that of Thomas "in the Britio of the Edessans," that is Edessa's birtha, or citadel.

194 Abgar VIII supported Parthia in its war against Rome, leading Roman Emperor Septimius Severus (r. 193-211) to take Edessa's rule from him and give it to a procurator, until 197-198 when Abgar VIII assisted Rome in its defeat of Parthia.

3rd century (201-300)

201 A major flood of its river devastates Edessa, thousands die, and the "church of the Christians" is damaged. This is the first mention anywhere of a Christian church building and is further evidence that Edessa had become a Christian city.

202 As a reward for assisting Rome in its war with Parthia, Abgar VIII was invited to Rome in 202, which he visited after 204.

205 Following the flood of 201, in 205 Abgar VIII built on higher ground within the walls of the old Edessa, a new walled Citadel, called "Birtha" in Syriac.

4th century (301-400)

c. 315 Roman Empress Constantia (c.293-330), the half-sister of Emperor Constantine the Great (c.272–337), wrote to the church historian, Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea (260-339), asking him to send her an "image of Christ." Constantia's letter is lost but from Eusebius' reply, she seems to be asking for a specific image of Christ, presumably the Mandylion/Shroud. This is supported by Eusebius' reply in which, instead of simply answering Constantia along the lines of, "Sorry, but I don't have an image of Christ to send to you," he gave a long-winded refusal which indicated that Eusebius knew which image Constantia meant, but he needed to find a way to refuse Constantine's half-sister's request without actually saying "no". This is further evidence that the Mandylion/Shroud existed in the fourth century, known in Christian circles, but hidden from those who would seize it.

c. 330 Athanasius (c. 296–373), who was bishop of Alexandria from 328 to 373, affirmed in the times of Constantine the Great (c.272–337), who was Roman Emperor from 306-337, that a sacred Christ-icon, traceable to Jerusalem in the year 68, was then present in Syria, when Syria did not include Edessa.

337 Constantine, the first Christian Roman Emperor, abolished crucifixion throughout the Roman Empire in 337 out of veneration for Jesus, crucifixion's most famous victim. Crucifixion continued to be banned in the remnants of the Roman Empire which included Europe. Neither the Bible, nor writers in the Roman era, described crucifixion in detail, presumably because everyone then knew those details, and crucifixion was so abhorrent. Therefore a medieval European forger, ~1000 years later, would not know enough about Roman crucifixion to depict it accurately as it is on the Shroud.

c. 338 St. Nino (c. 296–340), spent her youth in Jerusalem from c. 308. In 338 she wrote in her memoirs that she had been told that the linen strips (othonia - Lk 24:12; Jn 11:44) had been taken by Pilate's wife, who took them to Pontus, but later they were brought back to Jerusalem. The soudarion - Jn 20:7, Nino had heard, had been taken by Peter, but it was not by then known where it was.

6th century (501-600)

525 Edessa suffered a major flood of its river, the Daisan ("the Leaper"), killing one-third of the city's population (about 30,000) and destroying buildings, including the cathedral, and much of the city's wall[6]. The city, its wall, and a new Hagia Sophia ("Holy Wisdom") cathedral, were then rebuilt by the Byzantine Emperor Justin I (r.518 to 527), although the actual work was carried out by his nephew and future Emperor, Justinian I (r.527-565)[7]. According to the 945 `Official History of the Image of Edessa' [see "945c"] the Mandylion/Shroud, had been hidden in the city wall above Edessa's public gate, early in the reign of Abgar V's pagan grandson [Ma'nu VI (r.57–71)], then been completely forgotten, and was not rediscovered until the 544 siege of Edessa by the Persian King Khosrow I (r. 531-579), aka. Chosroes I, which was in 544.  However this story of the Mandylion/Shroud having been hidden in Edessa's wall, completely forgotten, for almost 500 years, contains multiple implausibilities. Likewise Ian Wilson's theory, based on that `Official History' story, that the Mandylion/Shroud was discovered in, or soon after 525, during the rebuilding of Edessa's flood-damaged wall, suffers from the same multiple implausibilities and it does not even have the support of the `Official History' that the Mandylion/ Shroud was discovered during the Persian siege of Edessa.

544 Persian king Khosrow I lays siege to Edessa. It is a fact of history that in 544 Persian King Khosrow I (aka Chosroes I) besieged Edessa but the city resisted the siege and the Persians were "forced to retreat from Edessa":

"Khosrow turned south towards Edessa and besieged the city. Edessa was now a much more important city than Antioch was, but the garrison which occupied the city was able to resist the siege. The Persians were forced to retreat from Edessa ..."

Historian Evagrius Scholasticus (c.536-594), recorded in c.593 [see below "c. 593"] in his Ecclesiastical History that the Persians built a huge mound of timber higher than Edessa's wall, that was to be moved next to the wall from which his army could attack the city. The Edessans countered by tunneling under the wall with the aim of setting the mound on fire from below before it could be moved forward to the wall. Evagrius described the crucial role of "the divinely made image not made by the hands of man" (the Mandylion/Shroud) in the defense of the city:

"The mine was completed; but they [the Edessans] failed in attempting to fire the wood, because the fire, having no exit whence it could obtain a supply of air, was unable to take hold of it. In this state of utter perplexity they brought out the divinely made image not made by the hands of man, which Christ our God sent to King Abgar when he desired to see him. Accordingly, having introduced this sacred likeness into the mine and washed it over with water, they sprinkled some upon the timber ... the timber immediately caught the flame, and being in an instant reduced to cinders, communicated with that above, and the fire spread in all directions".

Evagrius' "not made by the hands of man" is the Greek word acheiropoietos, lit. a = "not" + cheiro = "hands" + poietos = "made" (Mk 14:58; 2Cor 5:1; Col 2:11)[33], which is the first known application of that word to the Mandylion/Shroud and is the first historical evidence that the Mandylion/Shroud was in Edessa by 544. Evagrius' account says that the "divinely made image not made by the hands of man," had been "sent to King Abgar" by Christ, but this is false (although Evagrius may have believed it to be true), since not only is the original Abgar V story a "pious fraud," it said nothing about an image of Jesus on a cloth[see ". According to the 945 `Official History,' it was during the Persian siege of 544 that Edessa's bishop Eulalius was led in a vision to find where "the divinely created image of Christ ... lay hidden in the place above the city gates". However that is part of the Abgar V pious fraud and is self-evidently highly implausible. Moreover, there is no bishop Eulalius known in the actual history of Edessa. And if a bishop of Edessa had discovered "the divinely made image not made by the hands of man" hidden above Edessa's gate during the Persian siege of 544, Evagrius would surely have mentioned it. A Syriac "Edessan Chronicle," written after 540 and just before the 544 siege mentions the 525 Edessa flood in detail, but says nothing about the rediscovery of an Image, which is strong evidence against Wilson's theory that the Mandylion/Shroud was rediscovered in the aftermath of the flood of 525. So since Evagrius introduces the Image as already known to be at Edessa in 544, but with no viable explanation how it came to be there, the most likely (if not the only) explanation is that it had arrived in Edessa from elsewhere, shortly before 544, as my theory proposes. Secular historian Procopius of Caesarea (c.500–c.554) also wrote about Edessa's repulse of the 544 Persian siege, by digging a tunnel underneath the Persian siege tower, filling the tunnel with inflammable material and setting fire to it, which in turn consumed the tower, but Procopius did not mention anything about an Image. However, there are a number of important events in Edessa's history which Procopius does not mention, so he may simply have not known of the role of the Image in the siege. Also, Procopius was writing secular history, and he himself was a skeptic who was not interested in recording such things.

c. 550 Christ Pantocrator, St Catherine's monastery, Sinai. This encaustic (hot coloured wax) on wood (a technique which died out and became lost in the eight century) icon of Christ Pantocrator ("ruler of all") at the isolated Saint Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai, and so escaped the iconoclasm (Gk. eikon = "image" + klastes = "breaker") of of the eighth through ninth centuries. Dated c. 550, this icon was a gift from the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I (c.482–565), who built the monastery between 548 and 565. This is the earliest surviving painted icon of Christ. It is nearly perfectly congruent to the Shroud-face, for example the high right eyebrow, the hollow right cheek, and the garment neckline. So marked are these oddities, that the late Princeton University art historian, Professor Kurt Weitzmann (1904-1993), while making no connection with the Shroud, remarked of this icon that:

"... the pupils of the eyes are not at the same level; the eyebrow over Christ's left eye is arched higher than over his right ... one side of the mustache droops at a slightly different angle from the other, while the beard is combed in the opposite direction ... Many of these subtleties remain attached to this particular type of Christ image and can be seen in later copies ..."



Using his polarized image overlay technique, Dr Alan Whanger found over 200 points of congruence between this icon and the Shroud. Even creases and wrinkles on the Shroud cloth have been rendered by the artist. Flower images in the halo around the head (nimbus) of this icon are found at the same locations on the Shroud. The artist has even rendered the xray images of the Shroud man's teeth as chapped lips! This means that this icon must have been copied directly from the Mandylion/Shroud in the mid-sixth century and so, once again, refutes the radiocarbon dating's 14th-century date of the Shroud.


7th century (601-700)




614 The Sudarium of Oviedo, the "face cloth" or "napkin" in John. The Holy Chest (or Arca Santa) in which the Sudarium was transported from Jerusalem in 614, via Alexandria, to Cartagena and Seville in Spain in 616; taken to the Monastery of San Vicente near Oviedo in 761, deposited in the Holy Chamber (Camara Santa), which is within today's Oviedo Cathedral, by King Alfonso II (r. 783, 791-842) in c.812, opened by Bishop Ponce (1025–1028) in 1030 and again opened by King Alfonso IV (1040–1109) in 1075. Sudarium of Oviedo was kept was officially opened in the presence of [url=http:]King Alfonso VI (r. 1077-1109)[/url], his sister Doña Urraca (c.1033–1101), Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar (c. 1040–1099) (aka El Cid) and a number of bishops. This official act was recorded in a document which is now kept in the archives of the cathedral in Oviedo. The bloodstains on the face and back of the head of the Sudarium of Oviedo are so similar in appearance to those on the corresponding parts of the Shroud, that the two cloths must have been in contact with the same wounded body within the same short time period. And since the Sudarium has been in Spain since the early seventh century, and certainly since 1075, this is further evidence that the "mediaeval ... AD 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud was wrong!

633 The Mozarabic Rite of Roman Catholics living under Muslim rule in Iberian Spain, which may have originated in the sixth century under Saint Leandro, Bishop of Seville (c.534–601), was given its final form in 633 at the Fourth Council of Toledo, Spain. The Illatio or preface of the rite states, "Peter ran to the tomb with John and saw the recent imprints of the dead and risen one on the cloths".

639 Edessa was conquered by the Muslim army under the Rashidun Caliphate. The Image of Edessa/Shroud which was in Edessa fell under Muslim control and remained so for over 300 years until 943. The conquest was peaceable and indeed Edessa's Syriac-speaking population were happy to be liberated from the Greek-speaking Byzantine rule from Constantinople. In return, Edessan Christians were allowed by their Muslim overlords to continue their religious observances, including veneration of the Image of Edessa/Shroud, and Edessa's Hagia Sophia cathedral was preserved.

680 A Bishop Arculf of Perigueux, France, returning from a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in about 680, was shipwrecked on the island of Iona in the Scottish Hebrides. Arculf recounted his pilgrimage to the Abbot of Iona Abbey, Irish scholar and saint Adamnan (c. 624–704), who recorded it in his De Locis Sanctis ("On Holy Places"), completed in 698. In particular, Adamnan recorded in Latin that in Jerusalem Arculf had seen, "the sudarium of our Lord which was placed over his head in the tomb". However, Arculf described this cloth as "eight foot long", which is much shorter than the Shroud's fourteen feet. It cannot have been the Shroud folded in two because that would have been 7 feet long, and besides Arculf stated that he had kissed this "sudarium" and that close up he would have noticed that it was folded. It also cannot have been the "face cloth" or "napkin" [Greek soudarion] of John 20:7 (see on the Sudarium of Oviedo above), because that would have been a much smaller cloth. Finally, Arculf did not mention that this "sudarium" had an image of Jesus imprinted on it, which he surely would have, had there been one. Since Latin had no word of its own for the Greek sindon used of the Shroud in the gospels (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53), it was a common confusion in Latin writers that the word "sudarium" was used to mean the much larger Shroud. Some have speculated that what Arculf saw was a single sided copy of the Shroud, such as the Besançon or the Compiegne shroud, but they both had images. So it seems that what Arculf saw was a piece of cloth that had acquired the false reputation of being either the Shroud or the Sudarium. Either way, it is a further testimony to the common knowledge among early Christians that Jesus' burial cloths had been recovered from His tomb and existed in their day!


Gold solidus coin, minted 692-95 by Byzantine Emperor Justinian II (668–711). The face of Jesus on the coin has many "Vignon markings" features found on the face of the man on Shroud, including wrinkles in the Shroud cloth, proving beyond reasonable doubt that the 7th century designer of this coin had the Shroud as his model!

692 Between 692 and 695 Byzantine Emperor Justinian II (668–711) minted tremissis and solidus coins bearing an image of Jesus' face. The coins are inscribed "Jesu Christu, Rex Regnantium" ("Jesus Christ, King of Kings"). They are therefore in the category of Christ Pantocrator [Greek pan "all" and kratos "rule," hence "all-ruling one," "Almighty" (2Cor 6:18; Rev 1:8; 4:8;11:17; 15:3; 16:7,14; 19:6,15; 21:22)] icons. These were the first coins to bear Jesus' image.

Note that the c.692 solidus coin above depicts as tassels on Jesus' garment what are wrinkles around the neck of the Shroud man! Also note that above the tassels on the coin it depicts three protuber- ances which are also on the Shroud, the middle one on both being Jesus' and the man's Adam's apple (see Enrie negative)!] These resemblances include long hair that falls behind the shoulders, a long forked beard, a moustache, and a small tuft on the forehead where there is a `reversed 3' bloodstain on the Shroud using his polarized image overlay technique, Dr Alan Whanger found at least 65 points of congruence between this coin and the Shroud face. Yet in a court of law, only 14 points of congruence are sufficient to determine the identity of fingerprints, tire tracks, etc. Even wrinkles in the Shroud fabric were reproduced on the coin!

8th century (701-800)



787 The iconoclasm of Leo III was continued by his son Constantine V Coproymos (741–775), and grandson Leo IV the Khazar (r. 775–780). It was only after the death of Leo IV that the first period of iconoclasm was brought to an end in 787 by the Second Council of Nicaea, the last of the first seven ecumenical councils of the whole Christian church, both East and West. The Council debated the veneration of holy images and in particular about the Image of Edessa not having been produced by the hand of man. Leo, Lector of Constantinople's Hagia Sophia Cathedral, reported to the Council that he had visited Edessa and seen there "the holy image made without hands and adored by the faithful". The Council endorsed the veneration of images, and in particular the Image of Edessa, the "one `not made by human hands' [acheiropoieton] that was sent to Abgar". It was the main argument used by the bishops to defend the legitimacy of the use of sacred images and to which the iconoclast bishops had no reply.

9th century (801-900)

812 King Alfonso II of Asturias (c. 760–842), built a chapel in his capital Oviedo, which was later incorporated into Oviedo Cathedral. In The 9th century chapel built by King Alfonso II, within which was the Holy Chamber (Cámara Santa) that held the Holy Chest (Arca Santa), which in turn contained the "face cloth [Gk soudarion], which had been on Jesus' head" (Jn 20:7), later known as the "Sudarium of Oviedo," and other relics.  That chapel was a Cámara Santa (Holy Chamber), to hold the Arca relics, that had been in the nearby Monastery of San Vicente since 761.



c. 820 Stuttgart Psalter On 20 October 2013, a Max Patrick Hamon (presumably this cryptologist) guest-posted on Dan Porter's now closed Shroud of Turin blog a post titled, "An Intriguing 9th Century Image Suggestive of the Shroud – A Guest Posting by Max Patrick Hamon". Hamon asked the question: "Does the Turin Shroud predate more than half-a-millennium at least the radiocarbon date (1325±65 CE)?" and then he answered his own question (my summary with minor changes): 

"A Shroud-like dorsal image of Christ? In 1998-2000, Pr. Heinrich Pfeiffer was the first to draw attention to the ca 800-814 CE Stuttgart Psalter miniature-Turin Shroud dorsal image connection. In a passing comment he just wrote: "... The numerous small wounds resulting from the flogging [on the Shroud] are already to be found ... in a representation of the flogging of Jesus in the Stuttgart Psalter of the early 9th century. The ... miniature clearly shows the whole dorsal image of the Shroud ..."

Could the ca. 800-814 CE Stuttgart Psalter stark naked flogged Christ back view really predate the carbon 14 dating result of 1325 ± 65 calendar years by no less than 510-515 years; more than half a millennium?
... Re the Stuttgart Psalter miniature of the Flogging of Christ-Turin Shroud (TS hereafter) man's dorsal image connection, to the astute observer:

● Both men are stark naked with long flow of hair in the back ...
● Both have arm(s) bound/crossed in front ...
● Both have bloodied furrows/scourged marks in conjunction with two whips with lashes each
fitted with doubled (metal) pellets implying two executioners.
● Both have almost feminine curved left hip & thigh (to be called later “the Byzantine curve”)
● Both are/were tied at tibiofibular level with left leg in front of right leg (TS man accurate
Forensic description: left leg in front of right leg with rope-mark in the tibiofibular fleshes).
● Both show a most unnatural/awkward feet position.
● "Christ is depicted naked from the back, with realistic, bleeding scourge marks, something that is very rare, if not non-existent, in the Middle Ages ..."
● "... the artist accurately depicted a Roman flagrum, of the three-thonged, lead ball tipped, type which made the marks on the Shroud." 
● "... the artist depicted two scourgers, which is not mentioned in the Gospels, but which can be deduced from the pattern of scourge marks on the Shroud"
● "Jesus' feet are at an angle (as the man on the Shroud's appear to be)"
● "Jesus' hands would have been crossed in front of him (his right arm is not visible) at about his groin area as on the Shroud"
● "Jesus has long hair (as has the man on the Shroud)"
All these pieces of evidence piled up into crucial evidence: the bloodied body burial cloth now kept in Turin was already in existence early in the 9th CE. The Stuttgart Psalter miniature Shroudlike Christ does predate the radiocarbon date by no less than half-a-millennium."




Close-up of the left scourger's, three-thonged, metal ball tipped, Roman flagrum. Compare its historical accuracy with the flagrum above which is a copy of one excavated from the 18th century the Roman city of Herculaneum which had been buried in the AD 79 eruption of Mt Vesuvius.


10th century (901-1000)


King Abgar V (c.25 BC-AD 50) of Edessa is depicted in this 10th century icon at Saint Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai, receiving the Image of Edessa (the Shroud "four-doubled" - tetradiplon) from Jesus' disciple Thaddeus. Abgar's face is that of Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (r. 913-959), to commemorate the arrival of the Image of Edessa/Shroud in Constantinople on 15 August 944

943 In the Spring of 943, Byzantine usurper Emperor Romanos I Lekapenos (r. 920–944) sends an army led by his best general, John Curcuas (fl. 915–946), to Edessa to negotiate with its Muslim emir ruler for possession of the Edessa cloth, to add to his collection of Christian relics. In exchange for the Cloth, Curcuas offered on behalf of the Emperor, a guarantee of perpetual immunity of Edessa from Byzantine attack, 12,000 pieces of silver and the release of 200 Muslim prisoners.

944a After lengthy consultations with his superiors in Baghdad, in the Summer of 944, Edessa's emir accepts Curcuas' terms and Bishop Abraham of nearby Samosata, enters Edessa to receive the cloth, and despite the resistance of Edessa's Christians, he is satisfied that he has the original, as well as two copies of the Image and Abgar V's letter from Jesus. After a short stay in Samosata, the bishop travels with the Image, escorted by Curcuas' army across Anatolia back to Constantinople.



"The surrender of the Holy Mandylion" (the Image of Edessa), one of 574 miniatures, which may be copies of earlier Byzantine images, in the 12th Century "Madrid Skylitzes," which was based on the Synopsis of Histories by John Skylitzes (c. 1040s – aft. 1101). The persons on the left are wearing turbans and the buildings on their side have no Christian crosses, hence they are Muslims. The buildings on the right have Christian crosses, which means that the artist depicted both the Image being handed over by muslims in Edessa and its arrival in Christian Constantinople. Note that behind the face-only Image of Edessa is depicted the full-length Shroud! So by at least the 12th century the Image of Edessa/Mandylion was known to be the full-length Shroud!

944b On Thursday 15 August 944 the Image of Edessa arrives in Constantinople. It is carried in its framed portrait, fastened to a board and embellished with gold, through the streets of the city amidst great celebration. The Image is then taken to the church of St Mary at Blachernae, where it is viewed by members of the imperial family. Romanos I's two sons Stephen and Constantine find the face blurred and cannot distinguish its features (further evidence that this was the Shroud: its image is faint and difficult to see close-up). But the legitimate Emperor, Constantine VII, son of the late Emperor Leo VI (r. 886–912), was artistic and readily discerns them. The Image of Edessa/Shroud is then taken to the Imperial (Boucoleon) Palace where it is placed overnight in the Pharos chapel.

944c The next day, 16 August 944, the Image is carried around the walls of Constantinople, thereby establishing it as the city's new palladium (guarantee of a city's Divine protection). The Image is then taken to Constantinople's Hagia Sophia cathedral, where it is placed on the "throne of mercy". During that enthronement of the Image ceremony, Gregory Referendarius (overseer of relationships between the Patriarch and the Emperor), Archdeacon of Hagia Sophia, an eyewitness of these events, delivers a sermon in which he says that the Cloth bears not only "the sweat from the face of the ruler of life, falling like drops of blood" but also "drops from his own side ... [of] blood and water":

"This reflection, however - may everyone be inspired with the explanation - has been imprinted only by the sweat from the face of the ruler of life, falling like drops of blood, and by the finger of God. For these are indeed the beauties that have coloured the true imprint of Christ, because that from which they dripped was also embellished by drops from his own side. Both are highly instructive - blood and water there, here sweat and image. O equality of happenings, since both have their origin in the same person. The source of living water can be seen and it gives us water, showing us that the origin of the image made by sweat is in fact of the same nature as the origin of that which makes the liquid flow from the side".

By "the sweat from the face of [Christ] ... falling like drops of blood" Gregory refers to Lk 22:44:

"And being in agony he [Jesus] prayed more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground."

which occurred in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36; Mk 14:32). But the "drops from his own side ... [of] blood and water" refers to Jn 19:33-34 which was after Jesus' death on the cross:

"But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water."

Clearly, the face-only Image of Edessa does not show the blood and fluid-stained spear wound on Jesus' side that is on the Shroud. But Gregory could not have made that reference unless he had been aware of the wound in the side of the image and of bloodstains in the area of that wound, and hence knew that the Cloth was full-length rather than merely a face-cloth. And to know that, Gregory must have seen that under the Image of Edessa face was a full-length, bloodstained, body image of Jesus. This is a further corroboration of Ian Wilson's insight that the Image of Edessa was the Shroud ("four-doubled" - tetradiplon)!

944d In December 944, the co-Emperor sons of Romanos I, Stephen and Constantine, fearing their ~74 year-old father was going to confirm Constantine VII as his successor, forced him to abdicate.


 "Coin ... [a gold solidus] minted in 945 under the reign of the Byzantine emperor Constantine VII. On the obverse, a bust of Christ similar to the Shroud face image; on the reverse, Constantine VII ... Notice ... the overall similarity of the facial representation with the face on the Shroud ... the left cheek of Christ, that is, the cheek that appears on our right, shows a clear protuberance, which is also on the Shroud. The beard and hair are also similar to the Shroud. Note the very peculiar lock of hair on the forehead. This is similar to the inverted '3' shape as seen on the forehead on the Shroud".

945a On 27 January 945, with the help of his wife, Romanos I's daughter Helena Lekapene (c. 910–961), Constantine VII exiled Stephen and Constantine (Helena's brothers!) and became sole emperor at the age of 39. Within weeks of his accession, Constantine VII had a new gold solidus coin struck, bearing a very Shroud-like Christ 'Rex Regnantium' (King of Kings) portrait, inspired by the recently arrived cloth of Edessa  

945b On 16 August 945, the anniversary of the solemn exposition of the cloth in Hagia Sophia cathedral, Constantine VII proclaimed 16 August as the Feast of the Holy Mandylion in the Eastern Orthodox church calendar, which it continues to celebrate to this very day, even though the Image has been lost to them since 1204!

945c Soon after becoming sole Emperor, Constantine VII commissioned an official history of the Image of Edessa, the "Narratio de imagine Edessena", or "Story of the Image of Edessa". Indeed it may have been written by Constantine himself! The Story is actually a sermon to be read to Eastern Orthodox congregations on each 16 August Feast of the Holy Mandylion, starting in 946, hence it is also known as the "Festival Sermon". Fastened to a board The Official History states that the Image of Edessa "now to be seen" in Constantinople in 944, had in Edessa been fastened to a board and embellished with gold by Abgar V:

"Abgar ... set up this likeness of our Lord Jesus Christ not made by hand, fastening it to a board and embellishing it with the gold which is now to be seen, inscribing these words on the gold: `Christ the God, he who hopes in thee is never disappointed'".

This fits the hypothesis that the Shroud was folded and mounted in such a way ("four-doubled" - tetradiplon) that only the facial area was visible and accessible, so "every description of the Image of Edessa during the period in question is compatible with a viewing of the Shroud". Two alternative versions of the origin of the image The Official History gives two mutually exclusive versions of the origin of Jesus' image on the cloth. The first version is the traditional explanation since the sixth century, that Jesus washed his face in water, wiped it on a towel, and his likeness was impressed on the towel, which he then gave to Abgar V's servant Ananias, who in turn gave it to Abgar V. The second version is that: 

"... when Christ was about to go voluntarily to death ... he ... pray[ed] ... sweat dropped from him like drops of blood ... he took this piece of cloth which we see now from one of the disciples and wiped off the drops of sweat on it ... the still-visible impression of that divine face was produced. Jesus gave the cloth to Thomas, and instructed him that after Jesus had ascended into heaven, he should send Thaddaeus with it to Abgar ... Thomas gave the divine portrait of Christ's face to Thaddaeus and sent him to Abgar".

That is, the image was formed during Jesus' agony in the Garden of Gethsemane when His "sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground" (Lk 22:44) This second version would be inexplicable unless dripping blood could be seen on the face of the Image of Edessa, as it is on the Shroud face, but which could not be explained by the first version. This second version may be the parent of the tradition of Veronica's veil - or it may be the other way around. Moist secretion The Official History described the Image as "a moist secretion without coloring or painter's art", "it did not consist of earthly colors ... and ... was due to sweat, not pigments". This fits the Shroud image which is extremely faint. It also explains why some thought the Image had been made in the Garden of Gethsemane when Christ's face was covered in sweat "like great drops of blood". These "water/sweat details" sound "uncannily like the characteristics of the Shroud's image". 

945d Soon after he became sole Emperor in January 945, Constantine VII commissioned a painting, now at Saint Catherine's Monastery, Mt Sinai, depicting Abgar V holding the Edessa cloth, which had been handed to him by Thaddeus. That icon survives as the top right-hand quarter of a diptych. It originally was a triptych with an icon of the Image of Edessa in the centre panel but only the two wings have survived. 


The Abgar V icon in its surviving diptych context.

958 In a letter of encouragement to his troops campaigning around Tarsus in 958, Constantine VII told them that he was sending them holy water consecrated by relics of the Passion, including, "the sindon [shroud] which God wore". This can only mean that by 958 Constantine VII had seen unfolded the full-length Shroud behind the face of the Image of Edessa. Moreover Constantine made no mention of the Image of Edessa, despite his previous close identification with it. This is the first of several subsequent mentions of a burial sindon or shroud being among the imperial relic collection in Constantinople, with no explanation how it came to be there. The arrival of the Edessa cloth in Constantinople in 944 had been accompanied by a great celebration, so the arrival of the sindon, acknowledged as Jesus' burial shroud, ought to have merited at least the same level of celebration and ceremony, but there is no record of the sindon's arrival in Constantinople! This is inexplicable unless the Edessa cloth and the Shroud are one and the same, more than three centuries before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud!

c. 990 The first known reference to the Edessa Cloth as the "Mandylion" appeared in about the year 990 in a biography of the Greek ascetic, Paul of Latros (c. 880-956), who without ever leaving Mt. Latros (aka Mt Latmus), was granted a vision of "the icon of Christ not made by hands, which is commonly called 'the holy Mandylion'". "Mandylion" originally derived from the Latin word mantile which meant "hand-cloth", and by the tenth century it had been borrowed by several languages including Arabic, Turkish, and Greek as mandil, "handkerchief". The Byzantine Greeks attached to mandil the diminutive suffix -ion as a colloquial name for the Image of Edessa. It was clearly not a descriptive name because the Image of Edessa definitely was not a "little handkerchief "! The existing word "mandylion" was evidently applied by the Byzantines to the Cloth since it was no longer of Edessa but Constantinople. However "mandylion" was not used of the Image by the cloth's official custodians, and in fact the word only appears three times (including the Paul of Latros reference) in the Greek texts of that period.

11th century (1001-1100).


"Scenes from the Passion of Christ". During the period 900-1200, ivories were produced all over Europe, often in monasteries and ecclesiastical or royal courts. Ivory carvings appeared on book covers, reliquary caskets, antependia (the panel in front of an altar) and religious icons. The plaque is the biggest ivory panel of the Middle Byzantine period recorded, and is comparable in size to conuslar diptychs.

Part of a larger carved ivory panel in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London. Note that Jesus' arms are crossed awkwardly at the wrists, right over left, over His loins, exactly as they are on the Shroud. And Jesus is lying on a double-length cloth which has a repeating pattern of Xs similar to those in icons of the Image of Edessa (i.e. the Shroud "doubled in four" = tetradiplon) and hinting at the Shroud's herringbone weave. Yet this is a late 11th/early 12th century Byzantine icon, an early example of the genre which the Byzantine Greeks called Threnos, or Lamentation, the main feature of which is Jesus wrapped in a large cloth compatible with today's Turin Shroud. This alone is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the Shroud already existed more than a century before the earliest 1260 radiocarbon date of the Shroud!

1. Holger Kersten:  Jesus Lived in India: His Unknown Life Before and After the Crucifixion 2001
2. Joe Marino: Documented References to the Burial Linens of Jesus Prior to the Shroud of Turin’s Appearance in France in the Mid1350s 2022
3. Whocanhebe: The history of the Shroud
4. Stephen E. Jones: Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present: 1st century JULY 24, 2016

Late eleventh/early twelfth century Byzantine ivory of the threnos (Greek for lamentation)  scenes of Jesus. This is an example of a dramatic change in depictions of Jesus' burial which began about the beginning of the eleventh century. Before the eleventh century Jesus had been traditionally depicted as being buried wrapped in linen strips like an Egyptian mummy. But from the early eleventh century, in threnos (lamentation) burial scenes, Jesus' began to be be depicted lying full-length in front of the Cross as the central figure and His body about to be enveloped in a double full-length white shroud. In these depictions Jesus' right hand is crossed over the left at the wrists as it is on the Shroud. This sudden new artistic development coincides with the discovery after the Image of Edessa arrived in Constantinople in 944 that behind its face panel was the full-length Shroud "doubled in four" (tetradiplon)[99].

1092 A letter dated 1092 purporting to be from the Byzantine Emperor I Komnenos (r. 1081 to 1118) (aka Alexius I Comnenus) to Robert II of Flanders (c.1065- 1111)[100]. In the letter the Emperor appealed for help to prevent Constantinople falling into the hands of the pagans. The letter listed the relics "of the Lord" in Constantinople including, "the linen cloths [linteamina] found in the sepulchre after his Resurrection". Although historians regard the letter as a forgery, it may not be, since Robert had made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in 1086 and had spent some time with Alexius I in Constantinople, and there is no reason why the two had not remained in touch. Besides, even if Alexius I did not write the letter, this need not invalidate its description of the relics which were then in the imperial collection. 

12th century (1) (1101-1150).

Jacques de Molay (c.1243–1314) and Geoffroi de Charney (c.1240–1314), were burned at the stake for recanting their confessions extracted under torture and proclaiming their, and the Templar Order's, innocence of the false charges brought by King Philip IV.  Geoffroi de Charney was the great-uncle of Geoffroy I de Charny (c. 1300–1356), the first undisputed owner of the Shroud. Pro-authenticist historian Ian Wilson theorised that the Templars acquired the Shroud after it was looted from Constantinople in 1204 by soldiers of the Fourth Crusade, and took it to their fortress at Acre. Then after the Fall of Acre in 1291 the Templars took the Shroud to France and hid it in their network of fortresses and castles. 

1140a "The Song of the Voyage of Charlemagne to Jerusalem" (known by es in French, including "Chanson du Voyage de Charlemagne à Jerusalem", or "Le Pèlerinage de Charlemagne"), is an Old French epic poem about a fictional expedition by Emperor Charlemagne the Great (c.742-814) and his knights, composed around 1140. Although imaginary it bears historical testimony to the existence of the Shroud at the time, in that it reflects the accounts then given by pilgrims. In it the Emperor asks the Patriarch of Jerusalem if he has any relics to show him, and the Patriarch replies:

"I shall show you such relics that there are not better under the sky: of the Shroud of Jesus which He had on His head, when He was laid and stretched in the tomb ...".

While this contains an inaccuracy in that the Shroud was not in Jerusalem in Charlemagne's time (c.742-814) but continuously in Edessa from 544 to 944 and.  So The Voyage of Charlemagne evidently reflects genuine but mistaken pilgrims' reports of a shroud in Jerusalem in the Early Middle Ages. The word for "Shroud" in The Voyage of Charlemagne is the Old French equivalent of "sindon", the Greek word, used in the Gospels for Jesus' burial shroud (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53). Moreover this Old French word (presumably sydoines) is the same word used by crusader Robert de Clari (1170-1216) of the shroud with "the figure of Our Lord on it" that he saw ~63 years later in Constantinople in 1203. So this is evidence that in 1140, over a century before the earliest, 1260, radiocarbon date of the Shroud, it was common knowledge that the burial shroud of Jesus existed, upon which He had been laid stretched out in the tomb, and which had then covered His head!

1192-5 The Hungarian Pray Manuscript, or Codex, is dated 1192-95. The Codex was compiled at the ancient Benedictine monastery at Boldva, Hungary. Hungary was then ruled by King Bela III (r.1172–1196), who had spent six years (1163–1169) as a young man in the imperial court at Constantinople. Two pen and ink drawings on one page of the Codex, one above the other (see above), document the existence of the Shroud in the late twelfth century. The upper drawing is a depiction of Jesus' body being prepared for burial. Correspondences between the Pray Codex and the Shroud include: 1. Jesus is nude; 2. His hands are crossed awkwardly at the wrists, right over left (as it appears on the Shroud), covering His genitals; 3. No thumbs are visible on Jesus' hands; 4. His hands and fingers are unnaturally long; 5. Jesus is about to be wrapped in a double body length shroud and 6. Red marks on Jesus' scalp and forehead are in the same position as the bloodstains (including the "reversed 3") on the Shroud. In the lower drawing an angel is showing three women disciples Jesus' empty tomb symbolised by a sarcophagus with an open lid. Correspondences between this lower drawing and the Shroud include: 7. The sarcophagus lid has a herringbone weave pattern; 8. Red zigzags match the inverted V-shaped blood trickles down the Shroud man's arms and 9. L-shaped patterns of tiny circles in the herringbone weave of the sarcophagus lid match the `poker holes' on the Shroud. Thomas de Wesselow, an agnostic art historian concludes:

 "We have now identified eight [there are at least nine - see above] telling correspondences between the Shroud and the drawings on a single page of the Pray Codex ... It is inconceivable that all these detailed links with the Shroud, several of which are found nowhere else, could have occurred on a single manuscript page by chance. The only reasonable conclusion is that the artist of the Pray Codex was aware of the Shroud. The Shroud existed and was already damaged, then, by 1192-5, when the illustrations in the Pray Codex were drawn. Given the close links at the time between Hungary and Byzantium, it can hardly be doubted that the artist saw the relic in Constantinople. The Shroud was the Byzantine Sindon."!

"The Codex Pray, Pray Codex or The Hungarian Pray Manuscript is a collection of medieval manuscripts. In 1813 it was named after György Pray, who discovered it in 1770. It is the first known example of continuous prose text in Hungarian. The Codex is kept in the National Széchényi Library of Budapest. One of the most prominent documents within the Codex (f. 154a) is the Funeral Sermon and Prayer ... It is an old handwritten Hungarian text dating to 1192-95. Its importance of the Funeral Sermon comes from that it is the oldest surviving Hungarian, and Uralic, text ... One of the five illustrations within the Codex shows the burial of Jesus. It is sometimes claimed that the display shows remarkable similarities with the Shroud of Turin: that Jesus is shown entirely naked with the arms on the pelvis, just like in the body image of the Shroud of Turin; that the thumbs on this image appear to be retracted, with only four fingers visible on each hand, thus matching detail on the Turin Shroud; that the supposed fabric shows a herringbone pattern, identical to the weaving pattern of the Shroud of Turin; and that the four tiny circles on the lower image, which appear to form a letter L, `perfectly reproduce four apparent "poker holes" on the Turin Shroud', which likewise appear to form a letter L. The Codex Pray illustration may serve as evidence for the existence of the Shroud of Turin prior to 1260–1390 AD, the alleged fabrication date established in the radiocarbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin in 1988".














Pre 13th century history of the Shroud

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7144

In the beginning of the history of the Church, the Jesus burial sheet was probably kept hidden for several reasons: first of all, it was a very precious “memory,” having enveloped He who sacrificed Himself on the Cross. Furthermore, Christians feared that someone could seize and destroy it: the Hebrews, in compliance with Mosaic Law, considered everything that had touched a corpse as impure; and not Hebrews judged the punishment of crucifixion as ignominious. The reasons why the protectors of the Shroud wanted to keep it hidden are then clear. Nino, who evangelized Georgia under the Constantine empire (306–337), inquired after the Shroud to Niafori, his master, and to other Christian scholars of Jerusalem. He learned that the burial cloths had been for some time in possession of Pilate’s wife, and after, they were handed by Luke the evangelist, who stored them in a safe place known only to himself. 

In the fourth century, in Edessa there was the certainty that the city owned an image of Christ, created by God and not produced by the hands of man. It is said that when the image was shown it was folded in eight layers: the result of creasing the Shroud in this way gives a long rectangle with the head in its center, without a neck. This is exactly the same image shown in the copies of the Image of Edessa. A tenth-century codex, named Codex Vossianus Latinus Q69, found by Gino Zaninotto  and preserved in the library of the Rijksuniversiteit of Leiden (the Netherlands), sheds some light over the obscure centuries of the Shroud in Turkey: it contains an eighthcentury account, coming from the Syriac area and translated by Smira archiater, saying that an imprint of Christ’s whole body was left on a canvas kept in the cathedral of Saint Sophie at Edessa. Also in the Second Council of Nicaea (787), debating the veneration of holy images, there were been various talks about the Image of Edessa, not produced by the hands of man.

The great fame of the face of Jesus imprinted on a canvas spread both in the East and the West. In 944, the Byzantine army, during an offensive against the Arab Sultanate of Edessa, came into possession of the Mandylion and took it solemnly to its capital. Another confirmation of the arrival of the Shroud in Constantinople is given by the image painted by John Skylitzes13 in his homonymous codex in which is depicted the arrival of the relic in Constantinople in 944

The arrival of the Shroud to Constantinople in A.D. 944 (Madrid Skylitzes, Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid).

The Blessed Sebastian Valfre, who restored the Shroud in 1694, wrote, “The Cross received Jesus alive and returned Him dead; the Shroud received Jesus dead and returned Him alive.” The first author, leaving a scientific perspective and after long years dedicated to studying the Shroud, reaches the following conclusions on the subject. The Shroud is a particular “photograph” of Jesus Christ in His Resurrection, displaying the signs of the tortures He freely suffered for us all to be redeemed. It is the only “photograph” of Himself He allowed us to admire. It is addressed to the many doubtful persons and to those whose Christian faith is weak, reminding them that Jesus Christ has lived, and is living now, among us, and will be waiting for us at the end of our earthly life. In fact the Shroud has been especially given for persons with the hope that many others, pushed by the scientific interest aroused by this “impossible image,” come closer to Him and love Him better.

The Shroud shows a man crucified with nails, as reported by Christianity, but notably, that man was crowned by thorns. Nailing was not uncommon in Roman times, but crowning with thorns was a unique or extremely rare procedure reserved for alleged kings. The fact that the Shroud Man was crowned with thorns supports therefore the idea that the Man of the Shroud is Jesus Himself.

The Shroud of Turin FIRST CENTURY AFTER CHRIST!, page 23


Byzantine era coin dating from AD 692 shows Jesus on a cross bearing a remarkable resemblance to Shroud face.


Early Second Century - Christian persecutions in the Second century were supposedly the reason why the cloth was hidden inside the fortified wall surrounding the city of Edessa.

525 A.D. - After a severe flood destroyed most of Edessa, the cloth was rediscovered when the walls —where the cloth had been hidden for over 400 years —were being rebuilt. The cloth became known as "The Image of Edessa" and later was called “The True Likeness of Christ not made by human hands.” All Orthodox icons of Jesus and Byzantine coins dramatically change to conform to the True Likeness featuring long hair, full beard, large eyes, and flattened nose—all stylistically similar to the Shroud image.

944 A.D. - The Byzantine Imperial Army invaded Edessa for the express reason of retrieving the cloth from the city which had fallen to Islam. It was taken to Constantinople (now Istanbul) and presented to the Emperor.



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

Yet how to respond to the objection that the first documented mention of the Shroud is from the French village of Lirey in 1357 - which suggests a medieval origin? 
For starters, as I have previously pointed out [see 24May20 with references, 21Jun20 & 03Mar21], that the first undisputed appearance of the Shroud was at Lirey, France in c.1355, meaning that anti-authenticists don't dispute it, is not the same as being "the first documented mention of the Shroud." Because in 1207 [see "1207"] there is a historical record of what can only be the Shroud in Constantinople in 1201:

"In 1207, after the sack of Constantinople in 1204, Nicholas Mesarites, keeper of the Emperor's relics in the Pharos Chapel, Constantinople, recalled that in 1201, in that chapel, was `the sindon [which] wrapped the mysterious, naked dead body [of Christ] after the Passion' (my emphasis). The Greek word variously translated `mysterious', `indefinable' and `uncircumscribed', is aperilepton, which literally means `un-outlined' or `outlineless'. The Shroud-image uniquely has no outline [see 11Jun16], so there could be no stronger proof that the Shroud in Constantinople is that of Lirey, Chambéry and Turin!"
This is objective, historical evidence that the Shroud existed in Constantinople in 1201, over a century and a half (154 years) before it was exhibited at Lirey in c. 1355! And 59 years before the earliest possible radiocarbon date of 1260! Irrespective of whether anti-authenticists accept it!


The full-length Shroud of Turin (1), is doubled four times (2 through 5), resulting in Jesus' face within a rectangle, in landscape aspect (5), exactly as depicted in the earliest copies of the Image of Edessa, the 11th century Sakli church, Turkey (6) and the 10th century icon of King Abgar V of Edessa holding the Image of Edessa, St. Catherine's monastery, Sinai (7). word comprised of tetra "four" and diplon "doubled," hence "four doubled" or "doubled in four"[36]. In all of early Greek literature it is only found twice and both times it refers to the Image of Edessa aka Mandylion[37]. In 1966 Shroud historian Ian Wilson experimentally proved, by taking a full-length photograph of the Shroud and doubling it four times, so that the face one-eighth was uppermost in landscape aspect, that the Image of Edessa/Mandylion was the Shroud "four doubled"[38] (see above).
https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2021/07/

BURIAL CONSISTENT WITH ANCIENT JEWISH BURIAL CUSTOM
The burial is consistent with ancient Jewish burial customs in all respects, including the use of cave-tombs, attitude of the body (hands folded over loins), and types of burial cloths.  The Sindon (Shroud) enveloped the body.  The Sudarium was a face-cloth used to cover the face out of respect during removal from the cross through entombment.  It was then removed and placed to one side.  There was also a chin-band holding the mouth closed.  The Othonia were bandages used to bind the wrists and legs.  All are mentioned in the New Testament and evidenced on the Cloth.  Such cloths are spoken of in the Misnah - oral traditions of the Rabbis written down in the second and third century.
The Cave-Tombs were carved out of sides of limestone hills. The presence of Calcium Carbonate (limestone dust) on the Cloth was noted by Dr. Eugenia Nitowski (Utah archaeologist) in her studies of the cave tombs of Jerusalem.  Optical Engineer Sam Pellicori noted in 1978 the presence of dirt particles on the nose as well as on the left knee and heel.  Prof. Giovanni Riggi noted burial mites.  Dr. Garza-Valdes discovered oak tubules (microscopic splinters) in the blood of the occipital area (back of the head) as well as natron salts.  Traces of aloe and myrrh have also been identified on the Cloth.  These are consistent with Jewish burial customs of antiquity.

HISTORICAL REFERENCES
Persian King Chosroes I attacked the Byzantine city of Edessa in 544 AD but was repulsed.  Evagrius Scholasticus (born 536 AD), in his 590 AD book Ecclesiastical History, wrote that the people of Edessa believed an image of Christ of "divine origin" allowed them to destroy the siege mound.  This is the first reference to the Image of Edessa being a divinely created image (acheiropoieta, meaning "not made by human hands").
The legend of King Abgar V, ruler of the city of Edessa (400 miles north of Jerusalem in Turkey) from 13 to 50 AD, locates a cloth with the image of Jesus in Edessa, though it is not called a burial shroud.  It says that Jesus was given a towel, and when He had washed Himself, He wiped His face with it.  His image having been imprinted upon the linen, He sent it to Abgar with a message.  The Acts of Holy Apostle Thaddaeus (6th Century) calls the cloth a tetradiplon (cloth doubled-in-four).  This Greek term only appears twice in historical texts, and both times refers to the Image of Edessa.  Dr. John Jackson's raking light test in 1978 confirmed tetradiplon fold marks in the Shroud.  If it is folded in half three times, the Shroud of Turin displays only the face of the man.  There is a famous icon from the 10th century that depicts the image of Edessa being held by Abgar:

In 943 AD the Byzantine Emperor Romanus I sent an army of 80,000 men to besiege the Muslim-held city of Edessa in order to take the Image of Edessa.  The cloth was given up, and on August 15, 944 AD it arrived in the Byzantine capitol Constantinople.  TheNarration De Imagine Edessena, written one year later gives a history of the Image including the legend of Abgar, and tells of a private viewing of the Image by the future emperor Constantine VII and his two brothers-in-law, the sons of Emperor Romanus.  One of the most famous Medieval Greek writers, monk Symeon Magister Metaphrastes, wrote the Chronicle around 944, which describes the same event.  These documents report that Constantine could see only a faint image, like a "moist secretion, without pigment or the painter's art".  The other two men were said to be barely able to make out an image at all because it was so faint.
The next day, August 16, the population welcomed the Image to the city.  Archdeacon Gregory Referendarius gave a public sermon in which he spoke of the legend of Abgar, and then said "...this reflection... has been imprinted only by the sweat from the face of the originator of life... For these are the beauties that have made up the true imprint of Christ, since after the drops fell, it was embellished by drops from his own side.  Both are highly instructive - blood and water there, here sweat and image."  Till then the cloth had only been reported to have a facial image.
In 958 AD, Emperor Constantine VII sent a letter to his army which was engaged near Tarsus.  To inspire them, he mentioned "...the sacred linens, the sindon which God wore, and other symbols of the immaculate passion."  "Passion" refers to the suffering and death of Christ.  Thus he states clearly that the burial cloth (sindon) was in the possession of the Byzantine Empire.
In 1201 AD, Nicholas Mesarites, overseer of the Imperial Relic Collection in Constantinople, published an inventory.  It includes "...burial sindones of Christ" that "wrapped the... naked body after the Passion... In this place He rises again..."
The French Crusader knight Robert de Clari wrote in his memoirs that the "sindoines in which our Lord had been wrapped" was kept in a church and displayed every Friday, until it disappeared in 1204 with the attack and looting of Constantinople by French Crusaders during the Fourth Crusade.
The Shroud was displayed in 1355 in the French town of Lirey.  It was in the possession of a famous Templar Knight, Geoffrey de Charny, who claimed it was the cloth that "wrapped the Lord Jesus Christ after his death".

SHROUD ILLUSTRATED IN PRAY MANUSCRIPT
In the Budapest National Library is the Hungarian Pray Manuscript, or Pray Codex, the oldest surviving text of the Hungarian language.  It was written between 1192 and 1195 AD (65 years before the earliest Carbon-14 date in the 1988 tests).  One of its illustrations shows preparations for the burial of Christ.  The picture includes a burial cloth with the same herringbone weave as the Shroud, plus 4 holes near one of the edges.  The holes form an "L" shape.  This odd pattern of holes is found on the Shroud of Turin.  They are burn holes, perhaps from a hot poker or incense embers that predate the 1532 fire.  There are four sets of the holes, showing how the Shroud must have been folded in four layers when the holes were made.  The holes in the top layer are large, and they get progressively smaller in the next three.
















The Christ Pantocrator of St. Catherine’s Monastery at Sinai is one of the oldest Eastern Roman religious icons, dating from the sixth century AD.[1] It is the earliest known version of the pantocrator style that still survives today, and is regarded by historians and scholars to be one of the most important and recognizable works in the study of Byzantine art as well as Eastern Orthodox Christianity

Positive image (above) and negative image (below) of the Pantocrator Icon in the St. Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai (on the left) and the face of the Man of the Shroud (on the right). It is clear how the icon image loses any relevance in the negative version, whereas for the human eye the negative image of the Shroud face is easier to capture. To enhance the comparison with the related positive image, in this illustration, the Shroud face has not been reproduced overturned from left to right as it is done traditionally.

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

Byzantine Coins, the Shroud of Turin and the Holy Grail
https://coinsandhistoryfoundation.org/2021/04/08/byzantine-coins-the-shroud-of-turin-and-the-holy-grail/?fbclid=IwAR2lwXiyB7cXwJ5hyQnUVANiMb3TwQdwd1HAjSmcflgCrhoViFYaasY2cB0

Documented References to the Burial Linens of Jesus Prior to the Shroud of Turin's Appearance in France in the Mid-1350s
https://www.academia.edu/75771585/Documented_References_to_the_Burial_Linens_of_Jesus_Prior_to_the_Shroud_of_Turins_Appearance_in_France_in_the_Mid_1350


Claim:  But shroudologists are hard to convince, and they speak of the Shroud as the "snapshot of the resurrection," thus avoiding any scientific explanation for the image formation. Richard Kaeuper is right when he says that the first historical document on this relic dates from the middle of the XIV century. Many Shroud experts agree on that, even if they quote meaningless legends and apocryphal texts to support the presumed existence of the Shroud in the first millennium. When the Pontifical Academy of Sciences chose the three university labs to perform the carbon dating, leaving aside all the church and diocese amateurs who dealt with the Shroud for years -- it confirmed its medieval origin. Thus, historical and scientific data do match.

Reply: While the 1st historical document mentioning the Shroud is from the mid-1350s, there are plenty of documented references to the burial linens of Jesus before that and they are more than just "meaningless legends and apocryphal texts."  See my recent 45-page+ article Documented References to the Burial Linens of Jesus Prior to the Shroud of Turin’s Appearance in France in the Mid1350s (https://www.academia.edu/75771585/Documented_References_to_the_Burial_Linens_of_Jesus_Prior_to_the_Shroud_of_Turins_Appearance_in_France_in_the_Mid_1350s).
     Small point but it wasn't the Pontifical Academy of Sciences who chose the 3 labs.  The Academy had been involved in the preparation but was one of the many victims of the politics involved in the dating, as covered in my 800-page book on the C-14 dating.  The only thing the labs knew about the Shroud was that it historically surfaced in the mid-1350s.  You can be sure that the dates were going to be "massaged" so that the range included 1357 and that's what the 2019 article in Archaeometry by Casabianca et al. showed-- the labs had thrown out many of the bad dates, making the 1260-1390 with a 95% confidence rate a sham.

What happened to the Shroud of Turin in the Early Church Era? 
"Larry Stalley is a prolific author on the Shroud of Turin, mainly focusing on topics such as the hidden references to the Shroud during the era of the early Church. Many of his papers can be found on Shroud.com and Academia.edu, a few notable ones being "The Shroud of Turin Served as a Tabernacle During the High- Priestly Ministry of Jesus" and "Are There Veiled References to the Shroud of Turin in the New Testament? An Exegetical Summary of Select Texts". Larry even has a paper translated into Arabic by the Coptic Church in Egypt. In addition to his articles, his research and findings can be found at incredibleshroud.com on the Authenticity page."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgYYRuWBepU

Recent History of the Shroud

The Shroud of Turin Part 9 - History of the Shroud between 1999-2022
When looking at this part of the timeline, you'll notice there's a lot of deaths. Many of the experts regarding the Shroud have passed on by now. Let us pray for the repose of their souls, and thank them for all their work.
November 10th, 1999: Roger A. Morris, original member of the STURP team that examined the Shroud in 1978, dies at his home in White Rock, New Mexico, after a short illness.
March 2nd-5th, 2000: An invitation-only International Symposium on the Shroud called "The Turin Shroud: Past, Present and Future," is held at the Villa Gualino in Turin, Italy. The attendees include noted sindonologists from around the world like Dr. Alan Adler, Dr. John Jackson, Dr. Alan Whanger and Ian Wilson, along with other experts who have only been peripherally involved with the Shroud in the past. Ian Wilson calls it "probably the best-ever Shroud Symposium."
May 6th, 2000: A one-day Shroud Imaging Symposium called "La Sindone, dalla fotografia alla tridimensionalita" (The Shroud, photography and three-dimensionality) is held at the Sanctuary of the Holy Shroud in San Felice Circeo, Italy. Hosted by Don Augusto Bonelli, participants include Emanuela Marinelli, Aldo Guerreschi, Nello Balosino, Jose Umberto Cardoso Resende and Barrie Schwortz.
June 10th, 2000: Dr. Alan Adler, world-renowned chemist, original STURP team member and one of the most important scientists in international sindonology, dies unexpectedly in his sleep. His death rocks the world of Shroud research to its foundation. Adler was the only American scientist on Archbishop of Turin Saldarini's Scientific Advisory Commission. His loss is mourned worldwide and is considered by many a serious blow to American Shroud research. Shortly after his death, the Adler family gathers all the samples of Shroud materials that were in Adler's possession (including the most important of the tape samples taken during the STURP examination in 1978 and loaned to him by Raymond N. Rogers) and returns them to the Archdiocese of Turin. Over the next year or two, Rogers makes five different written requests to the Turin authorities to have his samples returned to him, but he never receives any response.
August 12th to October 22nd, 2000: A ten-week public exhibition of the Shroud is held in Turin. It marks the fifth such exposition of the Shroud since it was first photographed in 1898 and modern science took an interest in the cloth. It also has the distinction of being the longest ever public exhibition in recorded Shroud history.
August 27th-29th, 2000: A major International Shroud Symposium, called "Sindone 2000," is held in Orvieto, Italy. Organized by Emanuela Marinelli and other members of the Collegamento pro Sindone, researchers attend from around the world. Just a few of those presenting papers at the conference included Paul Maloney, Prof. Giulio Fanti, Dr. Alan and Mary Whanger, Rev. Albert "Kim" Dreisbach, Maurizio Marinelli, Aldo Guerreschi, Joseph Marino and Sue Benford, Isabel Piczek, Fr. Frederick Brinkmann, Kevin Moran, Prof. Daniel Scavone, Jack Markwardt, and Barrie Schwortz.
October 14th, 2000: Don Lynn, imaging expert from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and original STURP team member, dies unexpectedly in his sleep. Again the world of sindonology mourns the loss of one of its most well respected researchers.
October 22nd, 2000: Archbishop of Turin Severino Poletto officially closes the longest Shroud Exhibition in history and announces the next planned public exhibition will occur during the next Holy Year, in 2025.
January 21st, 2001: The Shroud of Turin Website celebrates its 5th Anniversary. With visitors from 160 countries, the site continues to be the definitive Internet resource for Shroud information.
September 12th, 2001: Fr. Maurus Green, O.S.B., British Shroud scholar and author, dies at age 81.
September 19th, 2001: Dr. Robert Bucklin, world-renowned forensic pathologist, original STURP team member and sindonologist with more than 50 years of Shroud research to his credit, dies in Ft. Myers Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
October 25th-28th, 2001: The Holy Shroud Guild and the American Shroud of Turin Association for Research (AM*STAR) co-sponsor the 2nd International Dallas Shroud Conference in Dallas, Texas. The conference is attended by many well known Sindonologists from around the world.
January 21st, 2002: The Shroud of Turin Website celebrates its 6th Anniversary. With well over 30,000 visitors per month, the site continues to be the definitive Internet resource for Shroud information.
April 25th-26th, 2002: The International Center for the Study of the Shroud of Turin (CIELT), the largest Shroud study organization in France, sponsors their fourth major symposium, the IV Symposium Scientifique International du CIELT, in Paris, France. Many researchers from around the world attend the event and present papers and abstracts regarding current and future Shroud studies.
June 20th - July 22nd, 2002: A small group of textile experts, headed by Mechtild Fleury-Lemberg of Switzerland, perform a dramatic and radical "restoration" of the Shroud under the auspices of the Archbishop of Turin and his advisors at the Turin Center for Shroud Studies, and with the full permission of the Vatican. They remove the thirty patches sewn into the cloth by Poor Clare Nuns in 1534 to repair burn holes from the 1532 fire. They remove the backing cloth (frequently referred to as the "Holland Cloth") that was sewn onto the back of the Shroud in 1534 to strengthen the fire damaged relic. They photograph the hidden back side of the cloth and then re-attach a new, whiter linen backing cloth. They use lead weights suspended from the edges of the Shroud to "flatten" many of the creases in the cloth and apply steam to certain areas to help accomplish this. They handle the cloth without gloves or special clothing. They scrape away the charred edges of all the burned areas and collect the scrapings into small containers. During a continuous period of thirty-two days, they expose the cloth to significant amounts of potentially damaging light and the polluted air of Turin. They perform this restoration in secret, without consulting any of the world's Shroud experts (including most of their own advisors) that could have contributed important scientific guidance to ensure that no valuable scientific or historical data was lost or damaged during the restoration. They set off a firestorm of controversy, criticism, debate and recrimination that ultimately engulfs, polarizes and divides the Shroud research community.
July 10th, 2002: Death of Walter McCrone, probably the world's most well known Shroud skeptic; he was the first modern scientific researcher to publicly proclaim the Shroud of Turin a "beautiful painting." Although he was a proponent of the painting theory since 1979 and published many articles supporting this theory, he ironically made a significant contribution to sindonological research, since his work spawned countless studies worldwide, in art, chemistry, haematology and history, all aimed at challenging his conclusions. Interestingly, at the time of his death, the Shroud was undergoing a major "restoration" in Turin (see below).
Late 2002: After the announcement of the Shroud's "restoration" earlier in the year, a group of scientists and Shroud scholars joins together in an internet group, 'Yahoo ShroudScience', to discuss the scientific issues surrounding the Shroud. In 2005, the group publishes a jointly authored compilation of known scientific facts about the Shroud's image, titled, “Evidences for Testing Hypotheses About the Body Image Formation of the Turin Shroud."
January 20th, 2005: A peer reviewed scientific paper by Raymond N. Rogers, retired Fellow of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, is published in the journal Thermochimica Acta, Volume 425, Issues 1-2, Pages 189-194. Titled "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the Shroud of Turin," the paper concludes: "As unlikely as it seems, the sample used to test the age of the Shroud of Turin in 1988 was taken from a rewoven area of the Shroud. Pyrolysis-mass spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the Shroud." Rogers' paper is extremely important as it provides a credible scientific argument for redating the cloth to determine its actual age, and is widely reported in the media, but to a far lesser extent than the coverage given to the 1988 c-14 dating that declared the cloth a "medieval fake." Almost immediately, Shroud scholars and skeptics alike begin debating, agreeing and disagreeing with Rogers and each other.
March 8th, 2005: Raymond N. Rogers, internationally renowned chemist from Los Alamos National Laboratory and member of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) team, dies in Los Alamos, New Mexico, after a long illness.
April 12th, 2005: Paul E. Damon, professor emeritus of geosciences at the University of Arizona, and head of one of the three laboratories that performed the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud in 1988, suffers a stroke while working in his office and dies two days later on April 14th.
April 21st, 2005: Robert Dinegar, retired physicist from Los Alamos National Laboratory and member of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) team, dies in Los Alamos, New Mexico.
September 8th-11th, 2005: The 3rd International Dallas Conference on the Shroud of Turin, jointly sponsored by The Holy Shroud Guild and the American Shroud of Turin Association for Research (AM*STAR) in collaboration with the Centro Internationale de Sindonologia, of Turin, Italy, is held in Dallas, Texas. This was the first Shroud conference to have international co-sponsors.
September 11th, 2005: Professor Silvano Scannerini, member of the Turin Conservation Commission on the Holy Shroud and a respected Shroud researcher, dies this date in Italy.
December 14th, 2005: Jean Lorre, imaging expert from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and member of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) team, dies in Pasadena, California after a brief illness.
January 21st, 2006: The Shroud of Turin Website celebrates its 10th Anniversary. With millions of visitors since it first went online, the site continues to be the definitive Internet resource for in depth Shroud information.
April 29th, 2006: The Reverend Albert R. "Kim" Dreisbach, Jr., Episcopal priest, founder of the Atlanta International Center for the Continuing Study of the Shroud of Turin (AICCSST), world renowned Sindonologist, Biblical scholar and civil rights activist, dies at the Atlanta Hartsfield Airport on his way to Italy to speak at two Shroud conferences.
April 11th, 2007: After 60 years of priesthood, Don Luigi Fossati, a keen scholar of the Shroud, dies at the age of 87. Interested in the Shroud since the 1940's, he went on to author many books, essays and articles on the Shroud and created the first filmstrips of the Shroud in 1950.
May 11th, 2007: Orazio Petrosillo, noted Italian journalist, dies after a brief illness. One of Orazio's most notable contributions was made in 2002, when he was the first person to break the story of the secret "restoration" of the Shroud, thus compelling the Turin authorities to publicly acknowledge the intervention for the first time.
June 14th, 2007: Dr. Eugenia Nitowski, noted archaeologist, Shroud scholar and founder of the Ariel Museum of Biblical Archaeology, is found dead in her apartment.
June 24th, 2007: Marcia Mascia, one of the great "behind the scenes" persons of Holy Shroud Ministry, dies after a long illness. She was best known as Fr. Peter Rinaldi's secretary, but she was one of the great organizers of the Holy Shroud Guild during the 1960's, 70's, and 80's.
August 8th, 2007: Professor Luigi Gonella, Scientific Advisor to the Archbishop of Turin, Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero, from 1978 to 1989, including throughout the infamous carbon dating of the Shroud in 1988, dies after a short illness.
January 5th, 2008: Professor Giovanni Riggi di Numana, long-time Shroud researcher and participant in the 1978 scientific examination of the Shroud, dies unexpectedly of a heart attack. After 1978 he continued his research on the Shroud and in 1988, was responsible for cutting the samples used for the C14 dating of the Shroud.
August 14th-17th, 2008: Joe Marino, Sue Benford and the Shroud Science Group, organize and sponsor "The Shroud of Turin: Perspectives On A Multifaceted Enigma," an International Shroud Conference at Ohio State University, Blackwell Hotel.
November 9th, 2008: Fr. Aram J. Berard, founder of the Holy Shroud Task Force, dies in Weston, Massachusetts, after a long illness.
December 23rd, 2008: Michael Minor, co-founder, Vice-president and General Council of AM*STAR, dies at his home in Kaufman, Texas, after a brief illness.
January 16th, 2009: Brendan Whiting, author of the 2006 book "The Shroud Story," dies in Sydney, Australia.
February 18th, 2009: Dr. Harry E. Gove, noted nuclear physicist credited with developing the AMS radiocarbon dating method used in 1988 to test samples from the Shroud of Turin, dies peacefully at the age of 86.
March 25th, 2009: Don Augusto Bonelli, Parish Priest and Rector of the Sanctuary of the Shroud in San Felice Circeo, Italy, at his home in Terracina. Although not as well known as others might be in the world of the Shroud, Don Augusto Bonelli was an amazing man and a devoted promoter of the Shroud throughout Italy. In addition to the beautiful church and sanctuary dedicated to the Shroud that he created in San Felice Circeo, he was also responsible for organizing two important Shroud conferences (the first in May 2000 in Circeo and the second in May 2006 in Terracina and Perugia).
April 6th, 2009: Sue Benford, a dedicated Shroud researcher who helped bring to light the data regarding the anomalous nature of the 1988 C14 sample, dies unexpectedly after a brief illness.
April 10th, 2009: Vernon D. Miller, Chief Scientific Photographer for the 1978 STURP team, dies on Good Friday, April 10, 2009, in Santa Barbara, California. Karl Schulz, noted Canadian Shroud scholar also dies, in Montreal, Canada. Although his name is not familiar to everyone, Karl was a well known and respected sindonologist and promoter of the Shroud throughout Canada.
July 10th, 2009: Don Devan, imaging scientist and member of the 1978 STURP team, dies peacefully at his home in Santa Barbara, California.
September 23th, 2009: John Brown, noted materials scientist who provided the first independent corroboration of Ray Rogers observations, dies at his home in Marietta, Georgia, after a long battle with prostate cancer.
April 10th to May 23rd, 2010: The Shroud is displayed publicly for the first time since 2000, giving the public their first opportunity to see the relic since the controversial "restoration" of 2002.
May 4th to May 6th, 2010: The International Workshop on the Scientific Approach to the Acheiropoietos Images is organized by Paolo Di Lazzaro and sponsored by and held at the ENEA Research Center, in Frascati, Italy.
August 31st to September 2nd, 2010: The 11th International Congress on the Holy Shroud, organized by the Lima Catholic Studies Center (CEC-Lima) and “Accion Universitaria” is held at the University of Lima (Peru).
November 20th, 2010: The Second National Shroud Encounter in Fátima, Portugal, organized by the Centro Português de Sindonologia (Portuguese Sindonology Center), founded in the 1980's by Dr. Lagrifa Fernandes, was held at Allamano's Missionaire Center inside the Museum of Consolata Missionaires near the Fatima Sanctuary.
November 25th, 2010: Dr. Leoncio Antonio Garza-Valdes, author of "The DNA of God," dies at the age of 71.
April 18th, 2011: Retired Cardinal Giovanni Saldarini, Archbishop of Turin from 1989 to 1999, dies after a prolonged illness at the age of 86.
September 29th, 2011: Archbishop Philip M. Hannan, who served for 23 years as the Archbishop of New Orleans and who was an ardent student and supporter of the Shroud, dies peacefully in his sleep at the age of 98.
April 28th-30th, 2012: 1st International Congress on the Holy Shroud in Spain is held in Valencia, Spain. The event is sponsored by the Centro Español de Sindonologia (CES).
June 30th - July 1st, 2012: 1st International Scientific Congress on the Holy Shroud in Panama is held in Panama City, Panama. The event is sponsored by the Arquidiócesis de Panamá.
March 3rd, 2013: Inauguration of a permanent exhibition of the Shroud of Turin in Panama City, Panama, produced by Peter and Dalys Soons.
March 30th, 2013: Pope Benedict XVI, in one of his last acts as Pontiff, authorizes a television-only exhibition of the Shroud of Turin directly from the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin. This is the first such exhibition in 40 years, since the first-ever TV exposition of the Shroud on November 23rd, 1973. Newly-elected Pope Francis makes the first comments of his papacy on the Turin Shroud just hours before it airs on television.
April 17th, 2013: "Shroud and Faith, A Possible Dialogue?" is the theme of a Shroud Congress held this date in Rome at the Pontificia Università Lateranense. The conference was designed to create a deeper interest in the Shroud in light of the TV exposition held on March 30th, 2013.
April 19th, 2013: TEDx ViaDellaConciliazione conference is held in Vatican City. The topic of this independently organized TED event was Religious Freedom Today and marks the first TED event ever held in the Vatican.
May 4th, 2013: Feast of the Holy Shroud is celebrated in a solemn ceremony in Fátima, Portugal.
May 4th, 2013: Msgr. Nosiglia, Papal Custodian in Turin, opens a month long celebration dedicated to the Shroud on the Feast Day of the Holy Shroud with a concert and a mass. The month features concerts, celebrations and reflections in memory of the Holy Shroud.
May 23rd, 2013: Death of Maurizio d'Assia (Moritz Friedrich Karl Emmanuel Humbert von Hessen), Prince of Langravio di Assia-Kassel. First born of Prince Filippo d'Assia, Langravio d'Assia and of Princess Mafalda di Savoia. He was one of the persons King Umberto II of Savoy designated Executor of his Will regarding the Holy Shroud of Turin.
May 24th-25th, 2013: Experts from around the world gather in Mexico City, Mexico for a conference on the Holy Shroud of Turin. The conference, titled “The Holy Shroud and the Year of Faith,” also marks the 30th anniversary of the Mexican Center for the Study of the Shroud.
June 21st, 2013: Ilona Farkas, founder of the Collegamento pro Sindone journal in Italy and who worked tirelessly on behalf of the Shroud, dies peacefully in her sleep at the age of 90.
September 6th, 2013: Dr. Frederick Zugibe, world renown medical examiner, Shroud scholar and expert on crucifixion, dies after a long illness.
October 30th, 2013: "TV" Oommen, founder of the Bible Discoveries Museum and Teaching Center in Raleigh, North Carolina, dies after a long illness.
November 3rd, 2013: Death of Thaddeus J. Trenn, noted Canadian theologian, historian, philosopher and prolific author
December 4th, 2013: It is announced on this date that Pope Francis has authorized another public exhibition of the Shroud in 2015.
December 25th, 2013: Fr. Jorge Loring Miró, S.J., noted Spanish author, essayist and lecturer, dies in Malaga, Spain at the age of 92.
January 1st, 2014: Bartolome M. Saucelo, Shroud scholar, lecturer and author, dies peacefully in his home in South Bend, Indiana.
March 1st, 2014: Prof. Willy Wölfli, director of the Zurich Polytechnic at the time of the 1988 Shroud of Turin radiocarbon dating, dies.
August 16th, 2014: Dorothy Crispino, Shroud scholar, author and publisher of Shroud Spectrum International, dies at her home in Cavour, Italy, at the age of 98.
September 4th-5th, 2014: An international Shroud conference titled, “Workshop on Advances in the Turin Shroud Investigation," is sponsored by the Technical University of Bari, Italy and the University of Bari "Aldo Moro," Italy with the technical co-sponsorship of the CIS (International Center for Turin Shroud Studies), Turin. The event was organized by the Department of Electrical and Information Engineering of the Technical University of Bari, Italy.
October 9th-12th, 2014: An international Shroud conference titled, "Shroud of Turin: The Controversial Intersection of Faith and Science," is organized by Joe Marino in St. Louis, Missouri and co-sponsored by the Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation and the Salt River Production Group. More than 160 people attend the four day event.
April 19th - June 24th, 2015: The Shroud goes on public display for the first time since 2010.
July 18th, 2015: Ian Dickinson, outspoken and sometimes controversial Shroud scholar and researcher, dies after a brief illness in Canterbury, England.
July 31st, 2015: Robert William (Bill) Mottern, an x-radiographic expert from Sandia Laboratory and an original member of the STURP team, dies at age 91 at his home in Shannondale, in Maryville, Tennessee. Bill secured an important place in Shroud history when he provided John Jackson, Eric Jumper, Don Devan and Ken Stevenson access to his VP-8 Image Analyzer in 1977 to view an image of the Shroud. That event, which permitted the so-called 3D properties of the Shroud to be visualized for the first time using an analog scientific instrument, became the catalyst for the founding of STURP and its examination of the Shroud in 1978. Mottern was using the VP-8 to analyze the x-rays he produced for his work at the lab and ultimately became a member of the team and participated in the direct examination of the cloth. Before his passing he donated his Shroud materials to STERA, Inc., including one of the two complete sets of the x-rays he made of the Shroud in 1978.
December 11th, 2015: Fr. Hector Guerra, L.C., passed away in Madrid, Spain after a long and courageous battle with cancer. Fr. Guerra was not well known to most of the Shroud world, but worked tirelessly behind the scenes to promote the Shroud internationally. He was at least in part responsible for the 2011 Encounter of the Two Linens in Mexico City, the 2012 CES Conference in Valencia, the 2013 TEDx ViadellaConciliazione Conference in the Vatican, the 2013 Third Encounter of the Two Linens Conference in Jerusalem and many others. He was also responsible for opening Shroud exhibits around the world and was planning more in the future when his health failed.
December 12th, 2015: Avinoam Danin, noted Israeli botanist and Shroud researcher, dies after a brief illness in Jerusalem. Avinoam was well known in the Shroud world for his analysis of the pollens found on the cloth and his somewhat controversial claims of finding many flower images on the Shroud.
January 21st, 2016: The Shroud of Turin Website celebrates its 20th anniversary on the internet.
February 14th, 2016: Dr. Michael Clift, who served as General Secretary of the British Society for the Turin Shroud (BSTS) for more than two decades, dies after a long illness.
March 22nd, 2016: Barbara Sullivan, author of a Shroud article in National Review in 1973, one of the earliest Shroud articles in a popular American magazine, dies peacefully at her home in Needham, Massachusetts.
April 6th, 2016: Dr. Marie-Claire van Oosterwyck-Gastuche, noted French Shroud scholar, dies at her home on this date. She held a PhD in Physical Chemistry, was the author of the book, "Le radiocarbone face au Linceul de Turin" ("Radiocarbon facing the Shroud of Turin"), and Superintendent of the Royal Museum of Central Africa, in Belgium. Marie-Claire was an outspoken critic of the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud and spent many years writing and lecturing on that topic.
August 28th, 2016: Rev. Harold David Sox dies at his home in Palm Springs, California after a brief struggle with colon cancer.
September 8, 2016: Dr. Sebastiano Rodante, noted Italian pediatrician, Shroud scholar, delegate of the International Centre of Sindonology of Turin and a frequent presenter at international conferences, dies at age 92 in Syracuse, Italy.
September 18, 2016: Prof. Gino Zaninotto, historian and Latin and Greek scholar, dies at 80 years of age. In his extensive research on the Shroud, he had carried out in-depth studies on Roman scourging and crucifixion.
September 29th, 2016: Dame Isabel Piczek, world renowned monumental sacred artist, physicist and Shroud scholar, dies in Los Angeles, California. She was best known for providing a professional artist's expert opinion on why the Shroud image is not a painting. Her artworks included murals, frescos and stained glass windows for cathedrals, monasteries, schools and convents around the world.
February 14th, 2017: Lennox Manton, dedicated Shroud scholar, long-time member of the British Society for the Turin Shroud (BSTS), avid researcher and prolific author of Shroud-related works, dies in England.
February 23rd, 2017: Gina Phillips Moran Glick, M.D., noted anesthesiologist with a strong interest in the medical and forensic science aspects of the Shroud and sister of optical engineer and Shroud researcher Kevin Moran, dies in Coppell, Texas, after a long illness.
April 2nd, 2017: Mario Moroni, highly respected Italian Shroud scholar and author, passes away at the age of 84 in Italy.
June 27, 2017: David Wayne Balsiger, award-winning film producer and director responsible for several television documentaries about the Shroud, dies at age 71.
July 19th-22nd, 2017: An International Conference on the Shroud of Turin is held in Pasco, Washington, U.S.A. The event is titled, "Seeking Solutions to the Mysteries of the Shroud," sponsored by Mark Antonacci and his Test The Shroud Foundation and organized and managed by Robert Rucker (and family).
October 21st, 2017: Dr. Alan D. Whanger, long time Shroud scholar and researcher, dies after a brief illness at age 87.
November 24th, 2017: Diana Andry Fulbright, long time Shroud scholar, researcher and founding Board member of STERA, Inc., dies peacefully in her sleep at her home near Richmond, Virginia, after a brief illness at age 75.
December 14th, 2017: Remi G. Dubuque, noted educator, lecturer and Shroud scholar, dies this date at age 87.
January 14th, 2018: Prof. Franco A. Testore of the Polytechnic University of Turin and Director of that university's Textile Department dies this date. Testore and Gabriel Vial were the two textile experts invited to observe the cutting of the Shroud sample for radiocarbon dating on 21st April 1988, although Testore had little knowledge of the Shroud at that time.
March 8th, 2018: Robert Villarreal of Los Alamos, New Mexico, passes away after a long battle with Parkinson's disease. He is best known in Shroud circles for heading a team of eight colleagues at Los Alamos National Laboratory in 2008 that verified and confirmed the observations of Ray Rogers regarding the anomalous nature of the 1988 radiocarbon dating sample.
May 5th-6th, 2018: Turin's International Center of Sindonology (CIS) holds its Annual Meeting in Chambéry, France. The primary topic of discussion is a re-evalution of radiocarbon dating.
May 24th, 2018: Ed Desloge of St. Louis, Missouri, passes away suddenly on this date. Over the years he was an ardent supporter and patron of Shroud researchers and organizations (including STERA, Inc.) and co-sponsored a number of Shroud events including the very successful 2014 St. Louis Conference.
August 27th, 2018: Paul Maloney, archaeologist and internationally respected Shroud scholar, dies unexpectedly while taking a nap at his home in Quakertown, Pennsylvania.
October 26th, 2018: Dr. Phillip Wiebe, noted Canadian Shroud scholar, dies peacefully in Langley, BC, Canada, after a courageous battle with cancer.
October 30th, 2018: Yannick Clément, ardent Shroud scholar, 45, of Louiseville, Quebec, Canada, dies unexpectedly. He was best known to those who followed his numerous postings on Dan Porter's Shroud of Turin blog page.
November 9th, 2018: John Klotz, long time Shroud researcher and author of "The Coming of the Quantum Christ," dies after a brave struggle with pancreatic cancer.
January 28th, 2019: Raymond J. Schneider, respected Shroud scholar, educator and member of the STERA, Inc. Board of Directors, dies at his home in Woodstock, Virginia after battling cancer.
March 27th, 2019: Kevin Moran, optical engineer, imaging expert and devoted Shroud scholar for more than 40 years, dies at his home in Belmont, North Carolina after a brief illness.
June 28th, 2019: Oswald Scheuermann, noted German scholar and imaging researcher who made significant contributions to the study of the Shroud image, dies on this date. No other details available.
February 4th, 2020: Fr. Manuel Carreira, Spanish astrophysicist, highly regarded Shroud scholar, theologian, philosopher and Jesuit priest dies this date.
March 28th, 2020: Piero Vercelli, highly respected Italian textile expert and Shroud scholar passes away on this date.
September 21st, 2020: Prof. Luigi Fabrizio Rodella, noted Italian Shroud scholar and medical/legal expert, dies unexpectedly at age 57 in Brescia, Italy, after a brief illness.
September 23rd, 2020: Dr. Douglas J. Donahue, who served as the Chairman of the Department of Physics at the University of Arizona in Tucson, dies on this date. He also served as Director of the Arizona Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory, one of the three labs that dated the Shroud in 1988.
November 17th, 2020: Ernest 'Ernie' H. Brooks II, President of Brooks Institute of Photography and a member of the STURP team that examined the Shroud in 1978, dies at age 85 on this date in Lacey, Washington.
August 31st, 2021: Mary W. Whanger, the wife of the late Dr. Alan D. Whanger, who died in 2017, dies in Raleigh, North Carolina.
November 17th, 2021: Peter Soons dies this date from a massive heart attack. Peter created the holographic images of the Shroud that are on display in exhibits around the world and that helped people better see and understand the so-called 3-D properties of the Shroud's image.
November 26th, 2021: Father Heinrich Pfeiffer, SJ, Professor of Art History and Christian Iconography, dies this date at age 85 at the Peter Faber House in Berlin. He was best known in the Shroud world as the primary promoter of the controversial Veil of Manoppello image as the true Veronica's Veil.
February 26th, 2022: Grand Opening of the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C.'s exhibit, "Mystery & Faith: The Shroud of Turin." The exhibit is scheduled to run until July 31st, 2022.


1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_Pantocrator_(Sinai)

Within the tradition of linear perspective, the Shroud image stands as an orphan with no known ancestry in terms of its style, technique, materials, time, place, and esteem. In the previous video, we explored how forensic pathologists interpret the legs on the Shroud. Now, let's delve into art history.

Art historians examine the stylistic and formal development of artistic traditions and place them in their historical context. When analyzing a handcrafted artifact like the Shroud, we expect to find evidence that aligns with the time and place of its creation. The Shroud first appeared in Lirey, France, around 1350, and therefore, that is the relevant time and place for our investigation.

Foreshortening is a technique within linear perspective where parts of a body or object are visually shortened while maintaining the illusion of proper proportion. Historians credit Brunelleschi and Donatello with rediscovering linear perspective in the early 1400s from ancient Roman and Greek art. In the case of the Shroud, it exhibits foreshortening in the lower legs, which is not present in the copies of the Shroud.

By comparing the development of foreshortening in art history, we find that the Shroud remains the sole example of this technique in 1350, 1400, and even later. Only by 1450 do we see several examples of foreshortening appearing in Northern Italy, and by 1500 and 1550, it becomes an established tradition. Therefore, the Shroud is geographically and chronologically distinct, not fitting into the progression of foreshortening as observed in other artworks.

Let's consider a specific example, Andrea Mantegna, who is renowned for his skill in foreshortening. His painting "The Lamentation over the Dead Christ" (circa 1470-1480) demonstrates this technique. Unlike the Shroud, Mantegna deliberately reduced the size of Jesus's feet in order not to obstruct the view of the body. This artistic foreshortening allows the viewer to see the entire figure. The Shroud image, on the other hand, exhibits photographic foreshortening, which is not a deliberate artistic choice.

Artistic foreshortening is not a matter of capability but intention. While many talented artists existed before the 15th century, any of them could have portrayed Jesus with foreshortened legs using canvas and paint. However, the question is whether they would have done so. To illustrate this point, consider the analogy of jazz music. Beethoven, for instance, composed the Ninth Symphony, which does not feature jazz elements. This is not due to a lack of capability, but because jazz as a musical style had not yet been invented or demanded by the patrons. Similarly, foreshortening in art has its own historical context and development.

Returning to the copies of the Shroud, these paintings were created directly from the Shroud itself. The earliest known copy dates back to 1516, while others fall within the range of 1400-1550. Artists frequently copied works of art as part of their training, as seen in Raphael's drawing of Michelangelo's David. However, the copies of the Shroud are distinct from routine copies. They were often commissioned by popes or royalty, used as gifts, publicly venerated, and even touched to the original Shroud to sanctify them. Yet, there is no evidence to suggest that later generation copies were sanctified by earlier ones. It seems that the earliest copyists and patrons recognized the Shroud as different from standard works of art.

Visual differences between the copies and the Shroud are evident. None of the legs in the copies are foreshortened, and they are fully visible




THE SUDARIUM CHRISTI - THE FACE CLOTH OF CHRIST

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-the-shroud-of-turin-extraordinary-evidence-of-christ-s-resurrection#7146

https://www.historicmysteries.com/the-sudarium-of-oviedo/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W99__WEncPE&t=208s


Description:

The Sudarium of Oviedo is a small piece of cloth measuring approximately 84 x 53 cm (33 x 21 inches) and is made of a fine, transparent linen fabric. It has several distinct features:

Bloodstains: The Sudarium bears numerous bloodstains, which are believed to have come from Jesus' face. The stains are brownish-red in color and are distributed irregularly across the cloth, forming a pattern consistent with the wounds inflicted during crucifixion, including a large stain over the nose and mouth area.

The bloodstains are a prominent feature of the relic and have been the subject of much analysis. Here are some details about the bloodstains:

Distribution: The bloodstains on the Sudarium are distributed in a pattern that corresponds to the anatomy of a face. There is a large stain over the nose and mouth area, with smaller stains around the eyes and cheeks, as well as near the hairline. This pattern is consistent with the placement of wounds inflicted during crucifixion, such as those caused by a crown of thorns or from blood flowing from the nose and mouth.

Color and texture: The bloodstains on the Sudarium are brownish-red in color, indicating that the blood had oxidized and aged over time. The stains have a mottled appearance, with some areas darker and others lighter, which is consistent with the characteristics of bloodstains that have dried and spread on a porous linen fabric.

Size and shape: The bloodstains on the Sudarium vary in size and shape. Some stains are small and round, while others are larger and irregular in shape, suggesting that they were created by contact with wounds that had different sizes and shapes.

Penetration: The bloodstains on the Sudarium are not superficial, but appear to have penetrated the fabric. This suggests that the blood came into direct contact with the cloth and was absorbed by the fibers, rather than being applied on the surface.

Absence of smear marks: One notable feature of the bloodstains on the Sudarium is the absence of smear marks. Smear marks, which would typically be present if blood had been wiped or smeared on the cloth, are not found on the Sudarium, suggesting that the blood was applied in a different manner, such as by contact with a passive, motionless object like a face.

Here are some of the different kinds of blood stains found on the Sudarium of Oviedo:

Whole Blood Stains: These stains are dark red or brown in color and are the result of fresh blood coming into contact with the cloth. Whole blood stains typically exhibit a consistent color throughout the stain, and they may appear as small or large patches on the Sudarium.

Serum Stains: Serum is the clear, yellowish fluid that separates from blood when it clots. Serum stains on the Sudarium appear as lighter areas that may have a yellow or yellow-brown color. These stains are typically smaller in size and may be found within or around whole blood stains.

Transfer Stains: Transfer stains occur when blood from a wound is transferred to another surface, such as when a cloth is pressed against the wound. On the Sudarium, transfer stains may appear as distinct imprints of a wound, showing the shape and size of the injury. These stains can provide valuable information about the type of wound that caused the blood stains.

Clotted Blood Stains: Clotted blood stains on the Sudarium appear as dark, irregularly shaped areas that result from blood coagulating and forming clots. These stains can provide insights into the coagulation properties of the blood, which can be useful for forensic analysis.

Smudged Blood Stains: Smudged blood stains on the Sudarium may occur when blood is smeared or wiped across the cloth. These stains may appear as irregular or blurred patches of blood, and they can provide clues about how the cloth was handled or manipulated after coming into contact with blood.

The Sudarium of Oviedo has various blood stains. Three of these stains are particularly noteworthy: the butterfly stain, faded stain, and crown of thorns.

Symmetric Stains: The symmetric stains on the Sudarium of Oviedo are blood stains that exhibit a high degree of symmetry, with a pattern that is almost perfectly mirrored on both sides of the cloth. These stains are typically located near the center of the Sudarium and are characterized by their consistent and symmetrical appearance. The symmetric stains may be oval, circular, or elongated in shape, and they may vary in size.

The origin and significance of the symmetric stains on the Sudarium of Oviedo are subjects of ongoing research and investigation. Some researchers believe that these stains may be the result of blood flow from a wound on the head, given their central location on the cloth and their symmetrical appearance. Others propose that the symmetric stains may have been formed through a process of capillary action, where blood was drawn into the cloth by the fibers, resulting in a symmetrical pattern.

The symmetric stains on the Sudarium of Oviedo are of particular interest to those studying the cloth, as they provide valuable clues about the bloodstain patterns and the possible events that may have taken place during the burial of Jesus Christ. Further research and analysis of these stains may help shed more light on their formation and significance in relation to the Sudarium's history and religious beliefs.

Butterfly Stain: The butterfly stain on the Sudarium of Oviedo is a distinctive pattern that resembles the shape of a butterfly. It consists of two large, symmetrical, and elongated blood stains that are connected at one end, with the opposite ends fanning out. The butterfly stain is located near one edge of the cloth and is characterized by its unique shape and symmetry. The origin and significance of the butterfly stain are subjects of debate among researchers and scholars, and various theories have been proposed to explain its formation.

Faded Stain: The faded stain on the Sudarium of Oviedo is a blood stain that appears to be lighter in color compared to the surrounding stains on the cloth. It may have a more brownish or yellowish hue, indicating that the blood may have undergone some changes or degradation over time. The faded stain is typically smaller in size and may be found in various locations on the Sudarium. The cause of the faded stain, whether it is a result of natural degradation or other factors, is a topic of investigation among experts.

Crown of Thorns: The crown of thorns stain on the Sudarium of Oviedo is a cluster of blood stains that resemble the pattern of a crown, with multiple small stains arranged in a circular or semi-circular shape. This stain is associated with the crown of thorns that is said to have been placed on Jesus' head during the crucifixion, according to Christian tradition. The crown of thorns stain is often located near the top of the Sudarium and is characterized by its unique pattern resembling a crown, which is of significant religious significance to Christians.


Holes: The Sudarium has several holes, which are believed to be from puncture wounds caused by thorns or other sharp objects. The holes are located near the edges of the cloth and are irregular in shape, further supporting the theory that the Sudarium was used to cover a face that had been beaten and pierced.

Folds: The Sudarium shows evidence of having been folded in a particular manner, with a distinctive pattern of creases and folds. The folds form a "zig-zag" pattern that is consistent with the Jewish burial customs of the 1st century AD, where a body would be wrapped in a shroud and the face covered with a separate cloth.

Water stains: The Sudarium also bears faint water stains, which are believed to have been caused by the cloth being used to wipe Jesus' face after he was taken down from the cross and before it was folded and placed in the tomb.

Age and wear: The Sudarium shows signs of age and wear, including discoloration, fraying edges, and patches where the original fabric has been reinforced with newer fabric. These signs of wear are consistent with its long history as a revered relic.

Here are some points that have been put forward as evidence for the connection to the Shroud of Turin:

Blood type and DNA analysis: Studies conducted on both the Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin have found that they both contain bloodstains with the same blood type, known as AB. In addition, DNA analysis of the bloodstains on both relics has shown similar characteristics, with shared genetic markers. However, it's important to note that these findings do not conclusively prove that the Sudarium and the Shroud were in contact with the same individual, as blood type and DNA alone cannot definitively identify a specific person.

Consistency of bloodstains: The bloodstains on both the Sudarium and the Shroud are consistent in their location, distribution, and patterns. For example, both relics have bloodstains over the nose and mouth area, which is consistent with wounds caused by a crown of thorns, and both have bloodstains around the eyes and cheeks, which could correspond to blood flow from facial injuries. This similarity in the bloodstain patterns has been considered as evidence that the Sudarium and the Shroud were used in a similar manner, possibly to cover the face of the same individual.

Historical and geographical proximity: The Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin have both been associated with the region of Palestine and are believed to have been in possession of the same religious communities at different points in history. According to historical records, the Sudarium was brought to Spain from Jerusalem in the 7th century, while the Shroud is believed to have been brought to France from Constantinople (present-day Istanbul) in the 14th century. Some proponents of the connection between the two relics argue that their close proximity in time and geography supports the idea that they were associated with the same individual, namely Jesus Christ.

Complementary nature: Proponents of the connection between the Sudarium and the Shroud argue that the two relics are complementary to each other. The Sudarium, being a smaller cloth specifically used to cover the face, could have been used in addition to the larger Shroud, which is believed to have covered the entire body of Jesus. Some researchers suggest that the Sudarium was used as an initial covering for the face immediately after the crucifixion, and then the body was wrapped in the Shroud, which explains the similarities in bloodstain patterns between the two relics.



In the Cathedral of Oviedo in northern Spain is a linen cloth called the Sudarium Christi, or the Face Cloth of Christ.  It is often referred to as the Cloth of Oviedo.  The Sudarium Christi is a poor-quality linen cloth, like a handkerchief, measuring 33 by 21 inches.  Unlike the Shroud of Turin, it does not have an image.  However, it does have bloodstains and serum stains from pulmonary edema fluid which match the blood and serum patterns and blood type (AB) of the Shroud of Turin.



The Sudarium Christi has a well-documented history.  One source traces the cloth back as far as 570 AD.  Pelayo, Bishop of Oviedo in the 1100's, noted in his Chronicles that the Oviedo Cloth left Jerusalem in 614 AD in response to an attack led by Persian King Chosroes II, and made its way across North Africa to Spain.  It was transported to Oviedo in a silver ark (large box) along with many other sacred relics.  The Sudarium was never in contact with the Shroud since its arrival in Spain around 711 AD.
The Oviedo Cloth was placed around the head at the time of death on the Cross and remained there until the body was to be covered by the Shroud in the Garden Tomb.  Then it was removed and placed to one side (John 20:7).  Oviedo scholar Mark Guscin notes that the practice of covering the face is referenced in the Talmud (Moed Katan 27a).  He adds that Rabbi Alfred Kolatch of New York talks of the Kevod Ha-Met or "respect for the dead" as the reason for covering the head.  Rabbi Michael Tuktzinsky of Jerusalem in his Sefer Gesher Cha'yim (Volume 1, Chapter 3, 1911) offers as a reason that it is a hardship for onlookers to gaze on the face of a dead person.
According to Guscin, studies by members of the Spanish Centre for Sindonology (Dr. Jose Villalain, Jaime Izquierdo and Guillermo Heras of the University of Valencia) using infrared and ultraviolet photography and electron microscopy have demonstrated that this Cloth and the Shroud of Turin touched the same face, although at different points in the burial process.  They note that the length of the nose on both cloths is 8 centimeters (3 Inches).  Tradition and historical information support the idea that the face touched by both cloths was that of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.
Those interested in the work of Oviedo scholar Mark Guscin can read about it in his book The Oviedo Cloth, 1998, The Luttenworth Press, Cambridge, CT. ISBN 07188-2985-9.
Original text by John C. Iannone 1999-2001.  Adapted by J.M. Fischer from 2004 to 2016.
Shroud photos courtesy of Barrie M. Schwortz. 1978


For an in-depth scientific analysis of the Shroud, see Dr. Rogers' FAQ
THE HISTORICAL CASE FOR JESUS


http://www.newgeology.us/THE%20HISTORICAL%20CASE%20FOR%20JESUS.pdf

In his 2007 book THE CASE FOR THE REAL JESUS, Lee Strobel, former legal editor of the Chicago Tribune, interviewed some of the most accomplished historians specializing in ancient texts.The case was made without a single mention of the Shroud of Turin or the Sudarium.


"In recent years, six major challenges to the traditional view of Jesus have emerged... They are among the most powerful and prevalent objections to creedal Christianity that are currently circulating in popular culture." (Page 14)
After grilling the experts, he summarized his findings on pages 266 and 267:
     "Are scholars discovering a radically different Jesus in ancient documents just as credible as the four gospels?No, the alternative texts that are touted in liberal circles are too late to be historically credible - for instance, the Gospel of Thomas was written after AD 175 and probably closer to 200.According to eminent New Testament scholar I. Howard Marshall of the University of Aberdeen in Scotland, the Thomas gospel has 'no significant new light to shed on the historical Jesus.'The Secret Gospel of Mark, with its homoerotic undercurrents, turned out to be an embarrassing hoax that fooled many liberal scholars too eager to buy into bizarre theories about Jesus, while no serious historians give credence to the so-called Jesus Papers.The Gnostic depiction of Jesus as a revealer of hidden knowledge - including the teaching that we all possess the divine light that he embodied - lacks any connection to the historical Jesus.

Is the Bible's portrait of Jesus unreliable because of mistakes or deliberate changes by scribes through the centuries?[/i]No, there are no new disclosures that have cast any doubt on the essential reliability of the New Testament.Only about one percent of the manuscript variants affect the meaning of the text to any degree, and not a single cardinal doctrine is at stake.Actually, the unrivaled wealth of New Testament manuscripts greatly enhances the credibility of the Bible's portrayal of Jesus.

Have new explanations refuted Jesus' resurrection?No, the truth is that a persuasive case for Jesus rising from the dead can be made by using five facts that are well-evidenced and which the vast majority of today's scholars on the subject - including skeptical ones - accept as true: Jesus' death by crucifixion; his disciples' belief that he rose and appeared to them; the conversion of the church persecutor Paul; the conversion of the skeptic James, who was Jesus' half-brother; and Jesus' empty tomb.All the attempts by skeptics and Muslims to put Jesus back into his tomb utterly fail when subjected to serious analysis, while the overblown and ill-supported claims of the Jesus Tomb documentary and book have been decimated by knowledgeable scholars.

Were Christian beliefs about Jesus stolen from pagan religions?No, they clearly were not.Allegations that the virgin birth, the resurrection, communion, and baptism came from earlier mythology simply evaporated when the shoddy scholarship of 'copycat' theorists was exposed.There are simply no examples of dying and rising gods that preceded Christianity and which have meaningful parallels to Jesus' resurrection.In short, this is a theory that careful scholars discredited decades ago.

Was Jesus an imposter who failed to fulfill the messianic prophecies? On the contrary, a compelling case can be made that Jesus - and Jesus alone - matches the 'fingerprint' of the Messiah.Only Jesus managed to fulfill the prophecies that needed to come to fruition prior to the fall of the Jewish temple in AD 70.Consequently, if Jesus isn't the predicted Messiah, then there will never be one.What's more, Jesus' fulfillment of these prophecies against all odds makes it rational to conclude that he will fulfill the final ones when the time is right.

Should people be free to pick and choose what they want to believe about Jesus? Obviously, we have the freedom to believe anything we want.But just because the U.S. Constitution provides equal protection for all religions doesn't mean that all beliefs are equally true.Whatever we believe about Jesus cannot change the reality of who he clearly established himself to be: the unique Son of God.So why cobble together our own make-believe Jesus to try to fulfill our personal prejudices when we can meet and experience the actual Jesus of history and faith?"

Anyone with doubts about these issues would do well to read all of this excellent book.

There are a total of seventy points of coincidence with the stains on the front of the Shroud and fifty on the back.
https://catholicleader.com.au/features/question-time-analysis/was-the-sudarium-of-oviedo-really-wrapped-around-jesus-head-after-his-death/

New coincidence between Shroud of Turin and Sudarium of Oviedo
Conclusion The Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin are two relics attributed to Jesus Christ that show a series of amazing coincidences previously described. These similarities suggest that both cloths were used by the same personality. In this contribution, we describe the X-ray fluorescence analysis performed on the Sudarium and we highlight a new fascinating coincidence with the Shroud and with the place of the Passion. Among the chemical elements detected, the concentration of Ca is the most reliable one. It is associated to soil dust and it shows a significantly higher presence in the areas with bloody stains. This fact allows us to conclude that the main part of the Ca located in the stained areas was fixed to the cloth when the physiological fluids were still fresh or soon after. As the stains have been correlated with the anatomical part of the deceased man, the amount of Ca can also be related with his anatomical features. The highest content of Ca is observed close to the tip of the nose, indicating unexpected soil dirt in this part of the anatomy. A particular presence of dust was also found in the same place in the Shroud providing a new and astonishing coincidence between both cloths. The low concentration of Sr traces in the Sudarium, even lower in the stained areas, matches also well with the type of limestone characteristic from the Calvary in Jerusalem. This new finding complements two other recently publicized: The ponytail shape of the Man of the Shroud hair, whose origin is justified by the use of the Sudarium of Oviedo and the alleged presence of a scourge mark in this cloth. Such a gathering of evidences strengthens the tradition that both cloths have wrapped the same body, that of Jesus of Nazareth.
https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/pdf/2015/02/shsconf_atsi2014_00008.pdf


Claim: Jews didn’t bury people with napkins.
Response: The Tachrichim—The Simple White Shroud Used for Burial in the Jewish Faith

The traditional clothing used to cover the body for burial in the Jewish tradition is the tachrichim. It’s an inexpensive white garment, typically entirely hand-stitched without buttons, fasteners, zippers or tied knots. The tachrichim is customarily fashioned out of linen or muslin (an homage to the ancient Hebrew priesthood), and includes pants, a tunic, a hood and a belt, irrespective of gender. The pants may be long enough to cover the feet, or the tachrichim may include cloth “booties.” The face is typically covered with a linen square or handkerchief/veil called a “sudarium.” The deceased is dressed in the burial garments by members of a Chevra Kadisha, or burial group, often associated with the decedent’s synagogue.
https://guttermansinc.com/jewish-burial-garments/

The Sudarium of Oveido

Let us now turn to the Sudarium of Oveido. It is a small, blood-stained cloth kept at the cathedral of Oveido in Spain, the stains of which match up with those on the Shroud of Turin and are of the same blood type. It has no image upon it, but has its own ancient history of preservation which shows it was held in high esteem by the faithful.
Mark Guscin wrote a very insightful article on the Shroud.com website, “The Sudarium of Oviedo: Its History and Relationship to the Shroud of Turin.” Though it is less well known, Guscin documents that the Sudarium has a clear historical association with the Shroud, its blood stains are of the same type AB, the stains display remarkable congruency with those on the larger cloth, and it bears pollens tying it to the environs of Jerusalem. It was apparently folded into a “napkin” and used primarily to blot up blood and fluid issuing from the nose and mouth of the Lord when His body was removed from the Cross and transferred to the tomb.
Studies of the stains on the Oveido cloth demonstrate it was folded over and used as a blotting cloth while the head was slumped forward and almost resting on the right shoulder. This indicates the victim was crucified and the cloth was put in place before the body was taken down from the cross. Guscin writes:

The stains on the sudarium show that when the cloth was placed on the dead man’s face, it was folded over, although not in the middle. Counting both sides of the cloth, there is therefore a fourfold stain in a logical order of decreasing intensity. From the composition of the main stains, it is evident that the man whose face the sudarium covered died in an upright position. The stains consist of one part blood and six parts fluid from a pleural oedema. This liquid collects in the lungs when a crucified person dies of asphyxiation, and if the body subsequently suffers jolting movements, can come out through the nostrils. These are in fact the main stains visible on the sudarium. These stains in the nasal area are also superimposed on each other, with the different outlines clearly visible. This means that the first stain had already dried when the second stain was formed, and so on.

Guscin further adds, citing the research of Dr. José Villalaín,


The cloth was not wrapped entirely round the head because the right cheek was almost touching the right shoulder. This suggests that the sudarium was put into place while the body was still on the cross. The second stain was made about an hour later, when the body was taken down. The third stain was made when the body was lifted from the ground about forty five minutes later. The body was lying at the foot of the cross for about forty-five minutes before being buried. The marks (not fingerprints) of the fingers that held the cloth to the nose are also visible.

What Prompted John to Believe?

In John 20:8 we read: “So the other disciple who had first come to the tomb then also entered, and he saw and believed.” This immediately follows verses 20:5–7, so they are the cause that resulted in this effect. What exactly did John see that made him believe the Lord had been raised from the dead?

Research done by Rebecca Jackson, cited by Joseph Marino in “Is the Turin Shroud Compatible with a First Century Jerusalem Burial?—Some Jewish Perspectives,” documents that Jewish burial customs of the first century mandated that one who died a violent death had to have all bloodstained items buried with the body. This was due to the belief that a bodily resurrection required the whole body to be buried together, with all blood, bones, etc. included. This meant the face-cloth would have been buried with the body, but not necessarily that it remained on the face while it was within the shroud.

Marino cites Jewish lawyer Victor Tunkel, who made the following points in an oral presentation titled “A Jewish View of the Shroud of Turin” to the British Society for the Turin Shroud on May 12, 1983:

it has a chance to be genuine because Jesus did not undergo a normal, natural death. He suffered a violent, blood-stained death, and rules for burial in such cases are quite different. In a normal death, the body has to be washed and then dressed in conventional shrouds. That does not apply to the body that has died in violent circumstances.

In Jesus’ case, it was a case of capital punishment, but would include someone whose throat had been cut or was stabbed many times and left for dead, and so on. Because of the belief in the 1st century in the bodily resurrection, the Jews, or at least the Pharisees, took the view that the blood is as much part of the body as the limbs, the hair and every other body part and must be buried so as to be available for that resurrection. So if one found a bloodstained body, absolutely drenched in blood, one can’t take the clothes off, wash the body, put it in shrouds because one would be taking away some of the body, which of course then wouldn’t be available for the resurrection. This was a key point in debates between Pharisees and Sadducees.

We can therefore be confident that those who prepared the Lord’s body planned to include the sudarion somewhere within His shroud during the final preparations. In my opinion, though, it strains one’s sense of propriety to imagine that, after being used to blot bodily fluids in the above manner, the cloth would afterwards have been re-wrapped around His head. Included within the shroud, yes, but not laid again upon that beloved face.

We must realize that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus had to undertake very incomplete, hasty preparations so as to get the body of the Lord into the tomb before the Sabbath began. They would have been fully aware that the women were going to finish the work once the Sabbath ended (Lk. 23:55, “Now the women who had come with Him out of Galilee followed, and saw the tomb and how His body was laid”), so they only needed to do a bare minimum of preparation that would have also eased the women’s later task. The men only needed to convey the Lord’s body to the tomb, place it on the shroud, put some 75 pounds of sweet-smelling myrrh and aloes around the body (Jn. 19:39–40), cover the body, and loosely bind the shroud closed with ties. That way, the women would have no difficulty uncovering the Lord’s body later to properly finish the task. They would not have needed to unwind fourteen feet of linen from around His body, scattering already-placed spices in the process, then re-wrapping Him once the task was completed.

Since the women had to finish the men’s hurried burial preparations, the sudarion would reasonably have been set aside in the tomb by Joseph and Nicodemus during their early preparation, because by that time it had done its job of absorbing the blood and pulmonary fluids and probably interfered with their putting myrrh and aloes around the Lord’s head. Because it was blood-stained it would need to be included within the shroud once the women had done their work, so it would not have been discarded, just set aside so as not to interfere with the women’s ministrations, to be afterwards included within the shroud. But the Resurrection left the face-cloth still where the men had put it, “rolled up in a place by itself” (Jn. 20:7).

Another reason to suppose that the face-cloth was not inside the shroud after the men’s job was done has to do with the studies that have proven there is 3-D information within the Shroud image. The intensity of the face image, being dependent on the distance of the face from the inside of the sindon, indicates that there was no other cloth intervening between His face and the outer shroud. If there was, it would have distorted the image, and no such distortion is apparent.

The sight that greeted the eyes of Peter and John when they visited the tomb, therefore, was the face-cloth rolled up by itself, where it had been put during the men’s hasty preparation, and the main shroud, with its closing ties still fastened, in a collapsed heap. In my opinion, this sight prompted John to believe in the Resurrection (Jn. 20:8 ) because the ties were still fastened. The image burnt into the microfibrils of the surface of the shroud that was in contact with the body would not have been visible at that time, being on the underside of the fabric and unseen until the sindon was unfolded. So it was not an image on the Shroud that would have impressed John when he looked into the tomb.

Feuillet also offered some valuable insights on John 20:7 (page 19):

the linens in question must be the shroud, but perhaps also the ties of the hands and feet which, in the account of the resurrection of Lazarus (Jn 11:44) are called keiriai. It seems that John does not specify that only the linens are still there while the body of Jesus had disappeared. Since John does not use the verb menein, but the verb keisthai, I prefer to translate, not “lying on the ground”, which is an unnecessary addition to the text, but rather “spread out flat, sunk down”, a sense perfectly attested by keisthai. The verb entulissein used by Matthew (27:59) and by Luke (23:53) in connection with sindôn suggests a big sheet which completely enveloped the body of Christ. John wants to suggest that, the body of Jesus having disappeared, the two parts of the shroud (upper and lower) have come together. A very spiritual conception of the corporal resurrection and the only acceptable conception.

Conclusions

The above study, differentiating between the various Greek terms used to describe the burial cloths used in both the typical burial accorded to Lazarus and the more involved preparations given for the Savior, allows us to say that Scripture itself supports viewing the Shroud of Turin as the genuine burial cloth of Christ. I think we can be confident that, when all of the data is in and all of the criticisms of the skeptics have been addressed, the Shroud of Turin will be shown to corroborate inerrant Scripture. 1

1. Biblearchaeology.org: FURTHER RUMINATIONS ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN 05 June 2022

The Cloth of Oviedo, alleged to be the sudarium associated with Christ's death, contains blood images similar in appearance to those on the Shroud and can be historically traced to the 7th century (9). In Figure 3 the equally scaled dorsal head wound marks on the two cloths are compared with one another. The similarity of these two complex patterns is evident enough to suggest that these two cloths were in contact with the same wounded body, presumably within the same short time period. Should further research reveal stronger relationships between these two relics, the accuracy of the 14th-century date of the Shroud will be clearly doubtful, as the Cloth of Oviedo is considered at least the 7th century.

The Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin are two clothes with very different trajectories. However, tradition has regarded both as relics of Christ. Each of them, separately, has been analyzed to verify the possibility of being sepulchral cloth. The result of scientific studies favors a confirmation of tradition. Both fabrics are Z-spun, and they are related in time and place according to the Raymond Rogers analysis. Both cloths were used on a male individual who had died in an upright position fully compatible with crucifixion, after having suffered torture that produced severe pulmonary edema. Both individuals have endured recognizable torture such as the crown of thorns. Both cloths have been used on an individual with common anatomical features. The Man had a beard, mustache, and long hair. A good correspondence is also observed between various anatomical elements of the face, such as the nose with its nostrils and fins, the brow ridges, the size of the mouth and chin, and even the shape of the beard. He had also in both cases long hair and at his back resembling a ponytail. Both individuals shed bloody fluid from their noses and mouths. Once the presence of blood in the face of the Man of the Shroud is highlighted, a good correspondence can be seen among many stains, in particular, the clot that convinced Msgr Ricci of the identity of both faces coming down from the mouth. The edge of a drop near the “epsilon” on the forehead remained in the Shroud while the central part remained bonded to the Sudarium. The coincidence of the blood group, which in both cases is group AB, is very significant since the probability of coincidence is approximately one in a thousand. The distribution of stains of vital blood in the nape area corresponding to the crown of thorns coincides with 75 percent of its geometric arrangement. In addition, both cloths show an accumulation of dust in the part that covered the nose. With a 3D model of the head of the Man of the Shroud it was verified that the central stain of the Sudarium should have come from a real face with the same specific anatomical features of the Man of the Shroud. It is extremely unlikely that all of these coincidences occur by chance. Tradition could very well be right.

Both the Shroud and the Sudarium clearly show death by crucifixion, and in the case of the Sudarium the subject died in an upright position after torture that caused a pulmonary oedema, perfectly compatible with crucifixion, as both hanging and being impaled on a stake can be eliminated. Both subjects bled through the nose and mouth. The blood is postmortem and lifeblood in the same areas on both cloths. Both subjects underwent torture that is recognisable as beingh crowned with thorns, leaving lifeblood flows on the nape of the neck. When a photograph of the Sudarium is superimposed on the nape area of the Shroud the geometric coincidence between the stains is 75%. Possible discrepancies are due to the fact that the Shroud is not creased in this area while the Sudarium is. The blood group on both is the scarce AB. The chances of the blood group coinciding is approximately one in a thousand ... and it does coincide. 


It is especially notable in that the blood on the Sudarium, shed in life as opposed to postmortem, corresponds exactly in blood group, blood type and surface area to those stains on the Shroud on the nape of the neck. If it is clear that the two cloths must have covered the same corpse, and this conclusion is inevitable from all the studies carried out up to date, and if the history of the Sudarium can be trustworthily extended back beyond the fourteenth century, which is often referred to as the Shroud’s first documented historical appearance, then this would take the Shroud back to at least the earliest dates of the Sudarium’s known history. The ark of relics and the Sudarium have without any doubt at all been in Spain since the beginning of the seventh century, and the history recorded in various manuscripts from various times and geographical areas take it all the way back to Jerusalem in the first century. The importance of this for Shroud history cannot be overstressed. 


The Shroud and the Sudarium


International scientific research has found a series of decisive correspondences between the Sudarium of Oviedo and the Shroud of Turin. Raymond Rogers analysed under his polarized light petrographic microscope threads of the Sudarium and threads of the Shroud. He concluded that there was a significant probability that the fabric of the Sudarium of Oviedo was related in time and place to that of the Shroud of Turin. The Sudarium of Oviedo covered the face of a corpse of someone who died in analogous conditions to crucifixion and had also previously been mistreated to the point of having the hair soaked in blood. This is what this cloth shows. In short, the crucifixion is the execution that best fits the features presented by the Sudarium of Oviedo.
 
Moreover, the use of a sudarium to cover the face of the corpse perfectly fits in with the Jewish traditions. A crucifixion of an individual of any country under the Roman domination would have most likely ended with the corpse deposited in a mass grave without any kind of consideration. From the Roman point of view, it was not intended to use any sudarium to cover the face of a crucified person. On the contrary, in the crucifixion of a Jew, there was an urgent need to stop the bleeding since the blood had to be prevented from being lost. In fact, it was prescribed in the legislation of the Pentateuch and in the instructions of the Sanhedrin, to collect the blood and bury it together with the executed. In this case, a Jewish bleeding corpse, with a bruised face, in which the fluid from the lung oedema could be seen leaking from the nose and the mouth, would undoubtedly have been recommended to use any type of cloth to cover the face of the executed and to retain the blood. This mandatory custom could have been performed in the time that Pilate took to grant permission to take the corpse for burial and pious Jews who tended to the crucified would have been in charge of this.

 The main stain that was in direct contact with the face can be divided in three parts: the upper, the lower and the central one. Thus, we can see that the upper part corresponds to the forehead of the face of the Shroud, and the lower part to the mouth and finally, the narrower and central part of the stain that connects the upper and the lower parts, corresponds to the nose.
 
Starting at 13 min:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDmEPuAvIWc

One can start anywhere they want, but if one wants to explain why the right side seems to mirror the center, the middle of the cloth from top to bottom shows where it was folded over on itself. In other words, somebody applied this cloth, somebody held this cloth to a dead man's face. How do we know it was a dead man's face and not a live woman's face? That's because all of these stains have been reproduced in a laboratory. The stains are made up of one part blood and six parts pleural edema fluid. Pleural edema is what happens when somebody dies from suffocation or asphyxiation, and this liquid gathers in the lungs (plural) as edema. Then, when the body was moved, all of this liquid came out. So the first challenge in the laboratory was figuring out how to reproduce these stains and how they got onto the cloth.

That's their model head that was used, and in the bottle is actually human blood mixed with pleural edema fluid. It's an exact replica of the liquid that is on the cloth, the stains. It's like there are some stains on top of others, and what that means is that the first stain had already dried before the second stain got on top of it. That's why there are border lines of the stains within each other. It's similar to spilling coffee onto a tablecloth, and if you spill more coffee immediately two seconds later, you won't be able to differentiate which stain is which. But if you let the first stain dry, it will have its own shape and edges, and then if you spill more coffee on top of that, there will be further edges formed inside that, allowing one to see which was the first stain and which was the second stain.

The only way to reproduce that first major stain exactly was if, first of all, the body was dead. There was no way that these stains could have been produced if the body was breathing. Secondly, it was a man because the stains were formed by somebody with a beard. And, this evidence from the laboratory shows the results of scientific forensic tests that have been done. Most importantly, here, the first group of stains were formed by somebody who was in an upright position with both arms outstretched. Because of what we're talking about, everyone will immediately say, "Ah, crucified man." But scientifically, one can't say that. All one can say from a scientific point of view is that it was a dead body, a male body, in an upright position with both arms outstretched. It's perfectly compatible with crucifixion, but science can't affirm 100 percent that it was a crucified body.

The logical conclusion is that, of course, the cloth was held to the face. There are little double holes in the cloth that were made by pins, probably made of bone. And that was pinned to the hair. In other words, the cloth, with the purpose of the cloth, you've got the double holes. One can see them. That's where the cloth was pinned to the beard or to the hair to hold it on. The idea originally would have been for the cloth to have been wrapped all the way around the head, but it came up against an obstacle. The head was at an angle. It had to be at an angle to form the stains the way it was, which, and it would have been resting like this against the arm. And rather than force it, the person who was putting this cloth over the face, the cloth reached here, and so they just folded the cloth back over on itself, which is why there are four stains. One can see this in the diagram here on the left. Instead of wrapping it all the way around the head, something stopped whoever was applying the cloth from wrapping it all the way around the head. We can assume that because of the angles, it was the face that was stuck against the arm. This is for the first group of stains. So, it was wrapped around the head like that. You can even calculate in the laboratory how long the body was in that position, and it was anywhere between 45 minutes and one hour without much more stains to be formed.

The question would be, why would there be a cloth on Jesus's face in the first place?  We're talking about a man who had undergone terrible torture. The body was dead, and the Romans were only concerned with playing out the death penalty. So, afterwards, one could say there was a Jewish sensibility related to the belief that the soul is in the blood.  In the case of a crucifixion victim, where the shoulders are most likely dislocated, when you're taking the body off the cross, the pressure comes off the lungs, and therefore, the fluid starts coming out of the nose and mouth. That would be the second position. First of all, the cloth was over the face for between 45 to 60 minutes with the body still upright and still on the cross. So, there is a distinction on the cloth between lifeblood and post-mortem blood. Yes, there is. You can distinguish that from taking samples from the cloth and the blood that came out through the nose and mouth mixed with the pleural edema fluid is postmortem blood. 

There's a bit of a myth that dead bodies don't bleed, but they do, though not with the same intensity as a live body. If one cuts a dead body, blood will come out, though it won't spurt and it will stop before an equivalent wound would stop bleeding in a live body. This is because there is no heart beating to push the blood around the body, but a dead body does bleed when wounded, just to a lesser degree and with less force. The live blood comes a bit later because the second position, corresponding to the forehead, was actually the most difficult part to reproduce in the laboratory to get the stains exactly the same as they are on the original. In the end, the only way that could have been done was with a body lying on the ground, with the arms still outstretched, face down, and with the feet higher than the head. Why would the feet be higher than the head? Because the blood dripped out through the nose and mouth.

The body appears to be going up the face, but if the body is face down at an angle, it's down the face. This is why, if the feet are higher up than the head, then the blood would drip in that manner. If you're in an upright position, obviously you're talking about dripping up the face, that's the stain at the top there. But it's actually dripping down the face because of the position the body was in. And we also know that would have taken between another 45 minutes to one hour. So we've reached a point where we're between one and a half hours to two hours after death, where first the body was left upright, then it was taken down and left on the ground for the same amount of time.

 When I say left, it doesn't mean that it was abandoned and that nobody was there. It was placed on the ground and was in that position for that time, of course, alright. Then the third position is the arms were moved.  The arms were put in a more natural position, and then the cloth was wrapped all the way around the head. And then the stains, if you look at the photograph in the middle, you can see the dots corresponding to wounds on the back of the head. That is bloodshed in life, that is life blood on the cloth, okay? It's not postmortem blood. And again, that corresponds to wounds made in the head by several sharp objects, perfectly compatible with what was later known as the crown of thorns. In other words, you've got sharp thorns penetrating the skin while the body was still alive, and those are the wounds that are on the back of the sudarium. And to my mind, they're probably the most interesting and significant blood stains on the cloth, for the simple reason that they match the stains on the Shroud of Turin. They match both as a fairly close pattern, but also they're both the same blood type.  Which is maybe the same blood group and the same blood type, in other words, bloodshed in life, and it's a blood type that was not particularly common in Europe, I understand, but was more common in the Middle East. Again, like in every single thing that you can ever come up with in science and history, there's always somebody who's going to argue against that, sure, with good credentials. 

No matter how much you might think that's a good and noble thing to do, it's not good science. But it's equally applicable to the other side. There are people who will try to use the information from the Shroud in the Sudarium to prove that Jesus was alive, that he never died, and all of that kind of thing. And that's ignoring the evidence to try and put forward their beliefs, or their lack of beliefs. Yes, and even to that point, even if it could be known it was Jesus on the Shroud, it still doesn't necessarily prove that all his teachings were true. It wouldn't necessarily follow. So we don't want to make too much of this. 


Identifying Blood


The presence of human blood on the Sudarium of Oviedo has been verified by different specialists throughout the years. The first analysis was carried out by Baima Bollone1 who in 1985 directly took seven thread ends from the clean areas of the Sudarium as well as thread ends from bloody spots2. He performed a generic blood diagnosis by microscopic observation and by three identification approaches:




http://museodelapasion.blogspot.com/2015/



Figure 3. Comparison of dorsal head wound marks on the Shroud of Turin (a) and the Cloth of Oviedo (b).

Five reasons why the Shroud of Turin could be authentic

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/04/17/five-reasons-why-the-shroud-of-turin-could-be-authentic-113215

Shroud of Turin front and back negative image. Burn marks from a 1532 fire run the entire length of the cloth.
Today, Christians celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ commonly known as Easter or, less commonly, Resurrection Sunday.
If it were not for this event Christianity, the world’s largest religion, would not exist and Jesus, instead of being the most significant person in history, would have been just another forgotten Jewish man crucified by the Romans around  33 AD.
For those who are truly celebrating Christ’s resurrection today and not absorbed with chocolate-covered marshmallow bunnies, here are some questions, facts and answers that you could roll like eggs at your family’s Easter gathering.
First, the BIG question: Does scientific evidence for Christ’s resurrection exist today? The answer, millions of other faithful and I believe, is “yes” and it is called the Shroud of Turin.

What is the Shroud of Turin? 
It is a linen cloth measuring 14.3 ft by 3.7 ft with the mysterious negative image of a crucified man appearing on the front and back. The Shroud is the most sacred religious relic that exists in the world today as well as the most studied, tested and analyzed.
The Shroud of Turin is preserved in an underground vault in the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, Italy. The next time it will be on public display is April 19 – June 24, 2015.
It has only been since 1983 that the Shroud has been “owned” by the Holy See. (In Catholic-speak this means the current pope.) At that time it was gifted from its previous owners, the House of Savoy, a royal European family in possession of the Shroud since 1453.
The Shroud’s existence and ownership can be directly traced from the year 1390 to the present. However, before 1390 the chain of custody is not historically definitive but there are many interesting clues.
Now, in honor of Easter, here are four scientifically proven groups of reasons and one Biblical reason pointing to the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.


1. The cloth and what is on it
Scientists have concluded that human male blood appearing on the Shroud is a rare type AB. The blood penetrates the cloth as you would expect but the blood on the cloth was there BEFORE the image of the crucified man. “Blood first, image second” is a phrase familiar to Shroud researchers.
Moreover, the image of the man does not penetrate the cloth and was formed at a later time. Even more remarkable, is that the man’s image can be scraped away with a razor blade because it sits on TOP of the cloth.
Researchers have determined that the weave of the flax linen cloth would have commanded a high price. This is consistent with all the Gospel accounts in the Bible stating that Joseph of Arimathea a “wealthy man,” donated his own tomb and provided the burial shroud that wrapped Jesus.
Additionally, pollen found on the Shroud is consistent with the types of plants and flowers in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus.
Adding to the mystery is travertine aragonite limestone (road dust) almost exclusively found in the vicinity of Jerusalem, is also on the Shroud around the knees and feet.

2. The substance comprising the image is still unknown
Scientists all agree that paints, pigments, stains or dyes could NOT have been used to create the man’s image. This is because substances available to an artist centuries ago would have penetrated the cloth, similar to the blood.
Scientific tests conclude that the substance forming the image was applied with 100 percent consistency. The depth of the image only penetrates the top two microfibers everywhere on the Shroud without ANY variation. A human artist would not be capable of such consistency
More baffling is the man’s image is a photo negative and a “positive image” is only reflected when a photo is taken. This astounding fact was discovered in 1898 by Secondo Pia, an Italian amateur photographer, when he applied the “new technology” of photography to the Shroud.
The man’s image also contains “distance information” which means the image can be read like a 3D map when using relief mapping techniques first developed by NASA. This technology was used to develop the History Channel’s 2010 mega-hit documentary The Real Face of Jesus?

3. The formation of the image
How was the image formed on the cloth? The answer to this question can be found in a 2012 study by world-renowned Shroud researcher Professor Giulio Fanti of Padua University in Italy. His study strongly suggested that the force which caused the man’s image to be imprinted on the cloth was radiation released in the form of an electrical discharge. In layman’s terms, a burst of light and energy.


4. The age of the cloth
Headlines such as: “Shroud of Turin is not a medieval forgery” were typical of what appeared across all media platforms around Good Friday, March 29, 2013. The headlines referred to Professor Fanti’s Shroud dating test, debunking the faulty 1988 carbon-14 testing concluding that the Shroud was a “middle age forgery” dating from the years 1260 – 1390. The carbon-14 test was performed on an outer piece of the Shroud that had been sewn on later for handling purposes.
Fanti’s 2013 test method’s examined the decay rate of microscopic fibers within the Shroud as compared to similar linen cloths known to be both older and newer. As a result, Fanti concluded that the Shroud ranged in age from 280 BC to 220 AD with a 95 percent confidence level. That timeframe obviously includes 33AD when Jesus was wrapped in his burial shroud.


5. Shroud is totally consistent with Biblical accounts of Jesus’ death
Is it a coincidence that every mark left on the Shroud is consistent with the physical torments endured by Jesus Christ as described in the New Testament Bible Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?
The cloth reveals the man was brutalized with a crown of thorns. He wasrepeatedly scourged with Roman flagrum, and suffered nail puncture wounds on his wrists and feet. His knees were bruised from falling and the mark of a spear wound is on his side. Also consistent with the Gospels is that the man in the Shroud had no broken bones.
It is important to note that the Shroud indicates nail marks are on the man’s wrists and not on the palms of the hands as is commonly depicted in statues and paintings. This is intriguing and accurate because the Romans knew that hands would not have supported the weight of a hanging body during crucifixion. However, an “artist forger” would have been more likely to have painted nail wounds on the palms so not to counter accepted norms.
Finally, the larger question for Easter Sunday is how did the Shroud survive fires, wars, clashes of civilizations and general tumult for centuries? For example, the strange marks running the entire length of the Shroud are evidence of just how close a 1532 church fire came to destroying the folded cloth.
It is possible the Shroud survived as evidence of Christ’s resurrection for those who need proof in order to believe in him?
Remember what Christ said to “Doubting” Thomas who insisted on seeing his nail wounds after his resurrection before Thomas would believe in Jesus.  “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” John 20:29 NIV
Christians who already believe that the events of Easter Sunday really happened do not need the Shroud of Turin to confirm their faith in Christ’s resurrection, but the Shroud could be considered the perfect intersection of faith and science.






How did the Turin Shroud get its image?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-shroud-of-turin#7147

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33164668

1. It's a painting 1
If this were true, it should be possible to identify the pigments used by chemical analysis, just as conservators can do for the paintings of Old Masters. But the Sturp team found no evidence of any pigments or dyes on the cloth in sufficient amounts to explain the image. Nor are there any signs of it being rendered in brush strokes. In fact the image on the linen is barely visible to the naked eye, and wasn't identified at all until 1898, when it became apparent in the negative image of a photograph taken by Secondo Pia, an amateur Italian photographer. The faint coloration of the flax fibres isn't caused by any darker substance being laid on top or infused into them - it's the very material of the fibres themselves that has darkened. And in contrast to most dyeing or painting methods, the colouring cannot be dissolved, bleached or altered by most standard chemical agents. The Sturp group asserted that the image is the real form of a "scourged, crucified man… not the product of an artist". There are genuine bloodstains on the cloth, and we even know the blood group (AB, if you're interested). There are traces of human DNA too, although it is badly degraded.
That didn't prevent the American independent chemical and microscopy consultant, Walter McCrone, who collaborated with the Sturp team, from asserting that the red stains attributed to blood were in fact very tiny particles of the red pigment iron oxide, or red ochre. Like just about every other aspect of the shroud, McCrone's evidence is disputed; few now credit it. Another idea is that the image is a kind of rubbing made from a bas-relief statue, or perhaps imprinted by singeing the fabric while it lay on top of such a bas-relief - but the physical and chemical features of the image don't support this.

2. It was made by a natural chemical process
If the coloured imprint comes from the darkening of the cellulose fibres of the cloth, what might have caused it? One of the doyens of scientific testing of the shroud, Raymond Rogers of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, argued in 2002 that a simple chemical transformation could do the job. He suggested that even very moderate heat - perhaps 40C (104F) or so, a temperature that post-mortem physicians told him a dead body could briefly attain if the person died from hyperthermia or dehydration - could be enough to discolour the sugary carbohydrate compounds that might be found on the surface of cotton fibres. It doesn't take a miracle, Rogers insisted. This is a reassuringly mundane idea, but there is little evidence for it in this particular circumstance - it's not as if it happens all the time on funeral shrouds. Another idea is that the discoloration of the fibres was caused by a chemical reaction with some substance that emanated from the body. The French biologist, Paul Vignon, proposed in the early 1900s that this substance might have been ammonia, produced by the breakdown of urea in sweat. That won't work, though: the image would be too blurry. In 1982, biophysicist John DeSalvo suggested instead that the substance could be lactic acid from sweat. This compound is one of those responsible for so-called Volckringer images of plant leaves, left for years between the pages of a book: substances are exuded from the leaf and react with paper fibres to produce a dark, negative image.

3. It's a photograph
Secondo Pia's photograph showed that the image on the cloth is a negative: dark where it should be bright. This deepens the mystery, and Pia himself casually suggested that the shroud could have been made by some primitive kind of photography. That idea has been inventively pursued by South African art historian Nicholas Allen, who argues that it could in principle have been achieved using materials and knowledge available to medieval scholars many centuries before genuine photography was invented. The key to the idea is the light-sensitive compound silver nitrate, the stuff that darkened the emulsion of the first true photographic plates in the 19th Century, as light transformed the silver salt into tiny black particles of silver metal. This substance does seem to have been known in the Middle Ages, Allen says: it was described in the writings of the 8th Century Arabic alchemist, Jabir ibn Hayyan, and also by the German Dominican Albertus Magnus in the 13th Century. It could have been coated on to the cloth in a darkened chamber and exposed to sunlight through a lens - made of quartz not glass, since the silver is in fact darkened by ultraviolet light, which glass absorbs but quartz does not. Allen has made replicas of a shroud this way using model figurines. But how the image stays on the cloth when the silver is removed, and how mediaeval forgers gathered all this sophisticated knowledge about optics and chemistry without there being any trace in surviving documents poses problems for the idea. So do various issues about the exact shape and contrast of an image made this way. For most Turin Shroud theorists, Allen's idea is a triumph of ingenuity over plausibility.


Experts question scientist’s claim of reproducing Shroud of Turin

 the crucified body of Jesus, called the Shroud of Turin.  However, CNA spoke with experts who maintain that there are still several major differences between the new shroud and the ancient one.
According to Reuters, Luigi Garlaschelli, an organic chemistry professor at the University of Pavia announced that he and his team “have shown it is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud.”  The scientist plans to present his findings at a conference on the paranormal this weekend in Italy.
The Shroud of Turin is considered by many to bear an image of the face of Jesus Christ. Made of herring bone linen, the shroud is nearly four feet by 14 feet and bears faint brown discolorations forming the negative image of a crucified man.
The shroud’s positive image, revealed by modern photography, shows the outline of a bearded man.  While skeptics contend that the shroud is a medieval forgery, scientists have been unable to explain how the image appeared on the cloth.
Garlaschelli and his team, who were funded by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics, created their image by placing the linen over a volunteer before rubbing it with a pigment called ochre with traces of acid.
The linen was then “aged” by heating it in an oven and washing it with water.  Reuters reports that the team then added blood stains, burn holes and water stains to finalize their product.
CNA spoke with Dr. John Jackson who runs the Turin Shroud Center of Colorado and is a physics lecturer at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs.  Jackson led a team of 30 researchers in 1978 who determined that the shroud was not painted, dyed or stained.  He explained to CNA that that based off the Reuters report as well as photos of Garlaschelli’s shroud on the internet, it appeared that it doesn’t exactly match the Shroud of Turin.
Dr. Jackson first questioned the technique used by Garlaschelli’s team, taking issue with the method of adding blood after aging the cloth.  Jackson explained that he has conducted “two independent observations that argue that the blood features on the shroud” show “that the blood was on it first, then the body image came second.”
Dr. Keith Propp, a physicist who is also a colleague of Jackson's, told CNA that while Garlaschelli’s shroud “does create an image that could’ve been done in medieval times,” there are a many things that “are not consistent with what the actual shroud shows us.”
For example, he continued, we know that the blood contacted the shroud before the body “because there’s no image beneath the shroud.”  He added that this image pattern would be difficult to duplicate “because it would ruin the blood stains.”
Another area concern for the scientists is the three dimensionality of the shroud. 
Propp explained that while Garlaschelli’s cloth does have some aspects of light and dark to create a three-dimensional perspective, “it’s nowhere near as sophisticated as the shroud” and that “it misses out on the accuracy and subtleties that are in the actual image.”
Dr. Jackson from the Turin Shroud Center also touched on the same point, saying, “The shroud’s image intensity varies with” the distances in between the cloth and the body.  While he admitted that the images of Garlaschelli’s shroud on the internet look authentic, when taken from a 3-D perspective, “it’s really rather grotesque.”
“The hands are embedded into the body and the legs have unnatural looking lumps and bumps,” he explained.
Jackson noted that he or his colleagues would be open to testing the Garlaschelli shroud or any other “idea about the shroud relative to the scientific characteristics that have been documented in respect to the shroud,” however to do so they would need “more detailed information about what was specifically done.”
Garlachelli’s technique has also received criticism from other experts.  One scientist from the Shroud Science Group, a private forum of about 100 scientists, historians and researchers provided CNA with some of the critiques made in the forum.
One English-speaking expert explained that the blood used on the Shroud of Turin is not whole blood.  “They didn't just go out and kill a goat and paint the blood on the cloth.  The blood chemistry is very specific,” he said explaining that the blood is from “actual wounds.”
He added that most of the blood on the shroud flowed after death. “The side wound and the blood that puddles across the small of the back are post-mortem blood flows,” he said, adding that blood flowing after death “shows a clear separation of blood and serum.”
Propp added, “In some ways, it comes out better than most others I’ve seen before.  Still there are too many things – the shroud is more than just the image.”
Jackson also pointed out that Garlaschelli’s findings have yet to be peer reviewed.  What scientists need “to do is present their work for publication before their peers.”  
He explained that any person can conduct his or her own research, but it doesn’t matter whether or not the author believes his or her hypothesis was proven. In the end, what the scientific community decides “upon seeing and reviewing the work” is what counts, he said.
Pope Benedict has announced that the Shroud will be open for public viewing in 2010 and that he is planning to visit the image at some point during its exposition.
The Catholic Church has not taken an official position on the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.


http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/experts_question_scientists_claim_of_reproducing_shroud_of_turin/

https://www.shroud.com/78team.htm  If anyone wants to wade through the recent findings on the shroud of turin.https://www.shroud.com/78papers.htm  I found these cited documentaries, sufficient to list the important details of the findings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MMOAV-xYFs  and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta6rWlAjNi0 http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF  I have no confidence whatsoever in ANY radiometric dating methods. I have read enough papers on the topic to be convinced that none of the radiometric methods can date ANYTHING accurately. These videos partially explain why that is the case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVuVYnHRuig and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPD5OlZK6Fw  there are far too many assumptions made to come to any accurate conclusions whatsoever using any of those methods. Nevertheless, upon reexamination, they found that the shroud is "between 1300 and 3000 years old". But there are dozens of facts that clearly conclude it is the burial cloth of the Messiah, Yahoshuah. (watch the documentaries cited) Fools want the whole world to think that https://www.shroud.com/78conclu.htm  all these scientists are FRAUDS; that they are all lying to the world about their findings! Each and every one of those scientists could sue any and all persons claiming the Shroud is a fraud for libel, slander and defamation! Fools want the world to believe they are more of an authority on the topic than the world's leading experts! Fools want people to imagine that the shroud has been fabricated WHEN NO MODERN TECHNOLOGIES CAN REPLICATE IT, in all its details; let alone those of the middle ages! "We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. " - https://www.shroud.com/78conclu.htm  So the next time some God-hating/God-denying atheist/evil-u-shun-ist steps up to claim the Shroud of Turin is a fraud or fabrication, ask them if they're willing to be scourged and crucified like Yahoshuah was in order to prove their claim, because that is what they are suggesting when they accuse the Shroud, the burial cloth of Yahoshuah Ha Meschiach, of not being authentic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sqTJWvemfU  People everywhere need to understand that the Shroud of Turin is the most studied artifact in the entire history of the world. So the scientific opinion that it is factually an image of scourged and crucified man and that image and the details of the Shroud cannot be replicated by any known method to date; should give pause to any and all skeptics to reconsider their opinion before claiming the Shroud is anything but the authentic burial cloth of Yahoshuah Ha Meschiach. People act like radiometric dating is a reliable method for dating things, when all forms of radiometric dating are not. Let me give an illustration as to why that is the case. A person buys a package of candles, new candles all the same length. In order to give an illustration of just one of the assumptions, they cut the candles into various lengths and light them all, then ask viewers to tell how long each one has been burning. The viewers carefully study the burn rate of the candles and come to their conclusions. given FACTS: the studied candles in question are all the same age, and candles have all been burning the same length of time in the same environmental conditions ASSUMPTIONS: each candle contains the same wax and composition, and were the same length when lit and burned by the same observed method that the viewers beheld. So of course the viewers all come to incorrect conclusions. And that is only very few of the reasons radiometric dating of any and all kinds are completely unreliable. https://www.facebook.com/notes/michael-swenson/christ-crucified-and-resurrected/735365403209088/

The Shroud of Turin, Authenticated Again
First among the major mysteries is how the image was made. Second, what is the substance constituting the image, which can be scraped away with a razor blade? The substance is undetermined — all man-made materials have been ruled out — and only rests on top of the cloth; it does not penetrate the cloth’s linen fibers. The third mystery is related to the second: Blood from the crucified man penetrated the cloth, as one would expect, but also preceded the impression of the man’s image. “Blood first, image second” is a mantra of Shroud researchers. This order is logical if the “man in the Shroud” was in fact Christ, who would have been wrapped in the linen Shroud days before the electrical event (see below) that accompanied his resurrection and resulted in the human image. The patterns of blood flow on the Sudarium are consistent with those of a crucified man.Fanti concluded that an electrical charge in the form of radiation is what likely caused the man’s image to be imprinted on the Shroud. He has also dated the Shroud to the time of Jesus, debunking the flawed carbon-14 testing conducted in 1988.  
I recommend that you research first the Shroud and then the Sudarium. Both have survived centuries. Their markings are consistent with Scripture accounts of Christ’s torture and execution. Both contain not only the same rare blood type but also pollen of a kind found only in ancient Israel. The Shroud and the Sudarium authenticate each other.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434153/shroud-turin-jesus-christ-blood-relic-sudarium-oviedo

Shroud of Turin in 3D
The first photographs that were taken by SECONDO PIA in 1898 showed the positive image of a man on the negative glass plates that he used, and also showed that the original image on the Shroud had the properties of a photographic negative. This aroused the interest of the scientific community and from that moment on the Shroud became the most investigated artifact in the world. One of these scientists, in the early part of the 20th century was PAUL VIGNON from the University of Paris, and he spent quite some time investigating the Shroud. One of his observations was, that the image on the Shroud varied inversely with the cloth-to-body distance, which means that the parts of the body that were close to the cloth, were imaged darker than the parts that were further away. The density of the image is proportional to the distance between the body and the cloth and that is caused by the fact that more fibers per square unit are discolored. This translates to 3D information encoding of the image in the grayscale of the photographs of the Shroud. VIGNON could not prove his observations scientifically.
http://shroud3d.com/home-page/introduction-3d-studies-of-the-shroud-of-turin-history

Physical Descriptions of Jesus
The Description of Publius Lentullus

The following was taken from a manuscript in the possession of Lord Kelly, and in his library, and was copied from an original letter of Publius Lentullus at Rome. It being the usual custom of Roman Governors to advertise the Senate and people of such material things as happened in their provinces in the days of Tiberius Caesar, Publius Lentullus, President of Judea, wrote the following epistle to the Senate concerning the Nazarene called Jesus.

"There appeared in these our days a man, of the Jewish Nation, of great virtue, named Yeshua [Jesus], who is yet living among us, and of the Gentiles is accepted for a Prophet of truth, but His own disciples call Him the Son of God- He raiseth the dead and cureth all manner of diseases. A man of stature somewhat tall, and comely, with very reverent countenance, such as the beholders may both love and fear, his hair of (the colour of) the chestnut, full ripe, plain to His ears, whence downwards it is more orient and curling and wavering about His shoulders. In the midst of His head is a seam or partition in His hair, after the manner of the Nazarenes. His forehead plain and very delicate; His face without spot or wrinkle, beautified with a lovely red; His nose and mouth so formed as nothing can be reprehended; His beard thickish, in colour like His hair, not very long, but forked; His look innocent and mature; His eyes grey, clear, and quick- In reproving hypocrisy He is terrible; in admonishing, courteous and fair spoken; pleasant in conversation, mixed with gravity. It cannot be remembered that any have seen Him Laugh, but many have seen Him Weep. In proportion of body, most excellent; His hands and arms delicate to behold. In speaking, very temperate, modest, and wise. A man, for His singular beauty, surpassing the children of men"
 http://www.thenazareneway.com/likeness_of_our_saviour.htm

Shroud, new study: there is blood of a man tortured and killed 
According to Professor Giulio Fanti of the University of Padua, the analyses show how “the peculiar structure, size and distribution of the nanoparticles cannot be artifacts made over the centuries on the fabric of the Shroud.” Many fanciful reconstructions of the Turin Shroud being a painted object are once again denied.” Additionally, Fanti says, “the wide presence of creatinine particles bound to ferrihydrite particles is not a situation typical of the blood serum of a healthy human organism. Indeed, a high level of creatinine and ferritin is related to patients suffering of strong polytrauma like torture. Hence, the presence of these biological nanoparticles found during our experiments point a violent death for the man wrapped in the Turin shroud.”

There is no longer any doubt that the Shroud has wrapped the body of a man tortured and killed in the same manner as described in the Gospels for the Crucifixion of Jesus. 
http://www.lastampa.it/2017/07/11/vaticaninsider/eng/inquiries-and-interviews/shroud-new-study-there-is-blood-of-a-man-tortured-and-killed-c1jdACNKkTlD9YBPS4kFXM/pagina.html

Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud 2
We performed reproducible atomic resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy and Wide Angle X-ray Scanning Microscopy experiments studying for the first time the nanoscale properties of a pristine fiber taken from the Turin Shroud. We found evidence of biologic nanoparticles of creatinine bounded with small nanoparticles of iron oxide. The kind, size and distribution of the iron oxide nanoparticles cannot be dye for painting but are ferrihydrate cores of ferritin. The consistent bound of ferritin iron to creatinine occurs in human organism in case of a severe polytrauma. Our results point out that at the nanoscale a scenario of violence is recorded in the funeral fabric and suggest an explanation for some contradictory results so far published.

Conclusions
On the basis of the experimental evidences of our atomic resolution TEM studies, the man wrapped in the TS suffered a strong polytrauma. We studied a fiber of the TS by atomic resolution TEM experiments and WAXS. This is the first time that the TS is studied at this resolution and this range of view produced a series of experimental results, which thanks to recent studies on ancient dye painting, ferritin, creatinine and human pathology can be connected and understood in relationship with a macroscopic scenario in which the TS was committed [41,42,43]. In fact, the fiber was soaked with a blood serum typical of a human organism that suffered a strong trauma, as HRTEM evidenced that the TS is covered by well-dispersed 30nm-100nm creatinine nanoparticles bounded with internal 2nm-6nm ferrihydrate structures. The bond between the iron cores of ferritin and creatinine on large scale occurs in a body after a strong polytrauma [41,42,43]. This result cannot be impressed on the TS by using ancient dye pigments, as they have bigger sizes and tend to aggregate, and it is highly unlikely that the eventual ancient artist would have painted a fake by using the hematic serum of someone after a heavy polytrauma.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180487


Why Shroud of Turin's Secrets Continue to Elude Science
Di Lazzaro and his colleagues at Italy’s National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA) conducted five years of experiments, using state-of-the-art excimer lasers to train short bursts of ultraviolet light on raw linen, in an effort to simulate the image’s coloration. The ENEA team, which published its findings in 2011, came tantalizingly close to approximating the image’s distinctive hue on a few square centimeters of fabric. But they were unable to match all the physical and chemical characteristics of the shroud image. Nor could they reproduce a whole human figure.

The ultraviolet light necessary to do so “exceeds the maximum power released by all ultraviolet light sources available today,” says Di Lazzaro. It would require “pulses having durations shorter than one forty-billionth of a second, and intensities on the order of several billion watts.”

If the most advanced technologies available in the 21st century could not produce a facsimile of the shroud image, he reasons, how could it have been executed by a medieval forger?

For believers, the radiation thesis suggests that a “divine light” in the tomb might have seared the crucified form of Jesus Christ onto the shroud. “One could look at hypotheses outside the realm of science, a sort of miracle,” says Di Lazzaro. “But a miracle cannot be investigated by the scientific method.”..
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/04/150417-shroud-turin-relics-jesus-catholic-church-religion-science/

Shroud from Jesus' era found, researchers say
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/12/16/mideast.ancient.shroud/index.html?fref=gc&dti=1509309685785723

"Has Science Proven the Shroud of Turin to Be a Medieval Forgery?" (2): Shroud of Turin News 
April 2016
https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com.br/2016/05/has-science-proven-shroud-of-turin-to_19.html

They had found no pigments, paints, dyes or stains on the fibers. The image had 3D coding within it. There was no evidence of oils, spices or biochemicals. It was "clear" that the material had been in direct contact with a body -- but there was no explanation for the seemingly perfect image of the face.
Overall, they raised more questions than they were able to solve, with some things explainable by physics precluded by chemistry, and vice versa.
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/shroud-of-turin-mystery-italy/index.html

Was the Turin shroud 'painted' by bacteria?
The image on the Turin shroud was created not by human hands or any mystical power, as has been suggested, but by bacteria. The microbes, he says, multiplied in the wounds of a person who died very slowly, and whose corpse was then washed and wrapped in a linen sheet for burial. Washing the body made the wounds sticky, so the cloth stuck fast and became impregnated with bacteria. Finally, says Mattingly, the bacteria died, shedding proteins that oxidised, causing a stain in the cloth that turned yellow and darkened.
https://www.theguardian.com/guardianweekly/story/0,12674,979921,00.html?fbclid=IwAR3EG-WALCnTnlXfgG7S4erWV6Gen13GgeBB7tdVW3nSLNFNfjQSl_N_GTM

Giulio Fanti, Saverio Gaeta, The mystery of the Shroud The surprising scientific discoveries on the enigma of the cloth of Jesus, page 49
A linen fabric from Masada, the radiocarbon date of this Masada sample, assessed at the confidence level of the 95%, was between 59 A.D. and 213 AD: since the Jewish fortress was conquered by the Roman army in 74 AD, fabric fabrication cannot be assumed after this date.

Just in reference to the finding of Masada, it is remarkable the fact that numerous parameters derived from the FT-IR and Raman analyzes were very close to those of the Shroud linen. Even if you can't stating a priori that the two linen fabrics have comparable dates, in any case, is significant that the chemical characteristics of the two fabrics are comparable to each other. The final datum of this spectroscopic analysis, with reference to the linear combination of the ratios considered, has provided for the Shroud sample a value of 300 BC ± 400 years at the 95% confidence level.
https://b-ok.cc/md5/F722F74F3953395133840D1411204303

The Shroud has the characteristics of a Jewish funeral cloth from the 1st century (corpses buried intact, with eyes and mouth closed); the linen fabric was produced in the Judaic environment: it does not bear traces of fibers of animal origin (the Mosaic law prescribed to keep separate the wool from the linen); among the geological particles found there are various minerals typical of Jerusalem.

The body image is not produced by organic or inorganic pigments, but is due to a chemical reaction of the linen polysaccharides and contains three-dimensional information. The body image affects a thickness of 0.2 thousandths of a millimeter and is so superficial as to be to think that it was formed following the release of a very intense energy in a very short time. All these features make the image still unexplainable by science, much less reproducible.

The Shroud of Turin: 2.6. The other marks (6): Writing
https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-shroud-of-turin-26-other-marks-6.html?fbclid=IwAR1Pj6-lQ_4UNzCdIcWu_DguTL1KTCPSHRAPuZKRldhd75ebF2pagftDOOE#6






http://www.sabanasanta.org/monedas.PDF
http://www.shroudresearch.net/hproxy.php/abstracts.html

How can you explain the existence of other revered shrouds aside from the one in Turin?

They are, basically, self-confessed copies of the true Shroud. The House of Savoy used to send them as gifts to churches and monasteries, in the same way as we send postcards or photographs today. Often, they even wrote on these copies extractum ab originali, that is, ‘taken from the original’. They are all hand-painted, and very rough copies, showing how difficult it is to paint something which really looks like the Shroud.

Barrie Schwortz was a member of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (often abbreviated as STURP) a team of scientists which performed a set of experiments and analyses on the Shroud of Turin during the late 1970s and early 1980s. STURP issued its final report in 1981.

After 18 years as a skeptic, in 1995, when confronted with the evidence that the blood on the shroud was of a tortured man, he became convinced of the authenticity of the Shroud, and became a Christian.

The Shroud and the jew: Barrie Schwortz at TEDx ViadellaConciliazione
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G4sj8hUVaY

"At the beginning of my work, I was very skeptical about its authenticity. I felt no particular emotion toward Jesus because I was raised as an orthodox jew. The only thing I knew about Jesus was that he was a jew, and this was all. ".
After 18 years of study, the full conviction came when "the Blood Chemistry Allen Adler, another jew who was part of the study group, I explained why the red blood remained on the Shroud. The old blood would have to be black or brown, while the blood on the Shroud is a red-crimson. It seemed inexplicable, instead it was the last piece of the puzzle. After nearly 20 years of investigation, it was a shock for me to discover that the piece of cloth was the authentic cloth that had been wrapped the body of Jesus. The conclusions I arrived were based exclusively on scientific observation ".
He has no doubt Schwortz: "Once we came to the scientific conclusion that the cloth was authentic, I have come to understand also the meaning. This is the forensic document of the Passion, and for Christians around the world is the most important relic, precisely because it documents everything you read in the Gospels of what was done to Jesus. I think there are enough evidence to prove that this is the cloth that wrapped the body of Jesus ". The truth about Jesus is the task of faith, he states that "from the point of view of science that cloth wrapped the body of man spoken of in the Gospels".
The study of the Shroud has not only convinced of the authenticity, but it has also changed, evidently, also on a personal level.
"At the beginning of the investigation - said Schwortz -, I knew of God, but it was not very important in my life. I had not thought of God, when the avevo 13 years. I was not very religious, it was almost a requirement for my family. Since then I have moved away from the faith, religion and God, until I reached the 50 years. When in 1995 I came to the conclusion that the Shroud was authentic, I built the site www.shroud.com . I started to collect the material and put it to the public. I began to speak publicly about the Shroud around 1996 ".
This dualism, however, could not continue: "When people started asking me if I was a believer, I could not find the answer. At that point I questioned myself and I realized that God was waiting for me. I was really surprised to see that within me there was a belief in God. Fino a 50 years I had pretty much ignored the faith, and suddenly I found myself face to face with God in my heart. Basically I can say that the Shroud was the catalyst that brought me back to God ". He concluded amused: "How many Jews can say that the Shroud of Turin has led them to faith in God"?

Schwortz runs as well the website:
https://www.shroud.com/

The STURP Team
https://www.upra.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Lecture_1.pdf

Murder at Golgotha: Revisiting the Most Famous Crime Scene in History

http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=AAEB124AA3618D3645D9A4DC512EC08D

Seamless robe of Jesus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seamless_robe_of_Jesus?fbclid=IwAR2On8MP26m_IypW8cezqKZzI4JZlMwyCC2UBuTBdDPbY0yEZXLpWDYv_zw

Is the Body Image Formed by Pigment Substances?

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-shroud-of-turin#7165

The Shroud of Turin FIRST CENTURY AFTER CHRIST! , Giulio Fanti, page 324
The analysis performed by the first author on dusts vacuumed from the Shroud identifies some pigments on the linen fabric, but these are relatively rare and therefore inadequate to explain any coloration producing the body image as a result. Parallel analyses on image fibers, again conducted by the first author, definitely confirm on the other hand the absence of pigment or of any other intake substance on the image fibers, in harmony with the results obtained by the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) in their 1978 direct examination of the body image.

The image is in fact the product of chemical reactions (oxidation, dehydration, and conjugation) of fibers on the image’s surface. Among the pigments present in the vacuumed dusts, the first author found particles of lapis lazuli (a blue-colored precious hard stone) mixed with iron oxide particles (which are red), leading them to suspect external contamination had occurred in the course of the centuries. It is a known fact that in the past centuries artists
avowedly made copies of the Shroud, touching the sacred Linen with their paintings, in order to confer to them qualities of the highest order, but physically contaminating the Shroud in the process.

The minimal evidence of pigments found among the vacuumed particles of the Shroud is not even sufficient for reproducing a hundredth part of the whole image. Probably these traces derive from later contaminations, when artists were allowed to physically touch the Shroud with their paintings in order to create another relic. In support to this hypothesis is the fact that in the vacuumed particles have been found red particles (iron oxide) and particles of other colors (e.g., blue lapis lazuli).

Let us think of a hypothetical artist who tries to reproduce these characteristics on a linen cloth using a simple painting technique: difficulties seem insuperable. First of all, the artist should dip the brush, not in the color, because there are not pigments on the threads, but in an acid capable of shading the linen chemically. However, the artist has to see what he or she is painting, so the acid (usually transparent) should be pre-emptively colored, though, at work completed, he or she should eliminate any evidence of pigment, because on the Shroud there is no colorant. Since colored fibers are side by side uncolored ones, the brush must have only one bristle with a diameter not superior to 0.01 mm (0.00039 in.). Inexplicably, the artist also has to be able to color the part of the straw in the inner side of the bundle without coloring the adjacent straws, since the color is uniformly distributed around the circumference.

Is it a painting ?
If this were true, it should be possible to identify the pigments used by chemical analysis, just as conservators can do for the paintings of Old Masters. But the Sturp team found no evidence of any pigments or dyes on the cloth in sufficient amounts to explain the image. Nor are there any signs of it being rendered in brush strokes. In fact the image on the linen is barely visible to the naked eye, and wasn't identified at all until 1898, when it became apparent in the negative image of a photograph taken by Secondo Pia, an amateur Italian photographer. The faint coloration of the flax fibres isn't caused by any darker substance being laid on top or infused into them - it's the very material of the fibres themselves that has darkened. And in contrast to most dyeing or painting methods, the colouring cannot be dissolved, bleached or altered by most standard chemical agents. The Sturp group asserted that the image is the real form of a "scourged, crucified man… not the product of an artist". There are genuine bloodstains on the cloth, and we even know the blood group (AB, if you're interested). There are traces of human DNA too, although it is badly degraded.

That didn't prevent the American independent chemical and microscopy consultant, Walter McCrone, who collaborated with the Sturp team, from asserting that the red stains attributed to blood were in fact very tiny particles of the red pigment iron oxide, or red ochre. Like just about every other aspect of the shroud, McCrone's evidence is disputed; few now credit it. Another idea is that the image is a kind of rubbing made from a bas-relief statue, or perhaps imprinted by singeing the fabric while it lay on top of such a bas-relief - but the physical and chemical features of the image don't support this.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33164668


Claim:
According to Dr. Walter McCrone and his colleagues, the 3’ by 14’ foot cloth depicting Christ’s crucified body is an inspired painting produced by a Medieval artist just before its first appearance in recorded history in 1356.
http://www.mccroneinstitute.org/v/64/The-Shroud-of-Turin

Reply: Walter C. McCrone, Jr. (1916-2002). Pioneer light microscopist. Leading Shroud sceptic. Was original member of STURP but never personally examined the Shroud. Claimed that just by visual microscope examination of particles taken from the Shroud by STURP in 1978, that there was no blood on the Shroud and that the image was a painting. He made these claims in the public media, being a beneficiary of lucrative publicity. McCrone's claims were refuted in every particular by exhaustive, wide-ranging, chemical, physical, xray and visual tests by STURP scientists, one of whom, Dr. Alan Adler, was a world authority in blood chemistry. McCrone breached his signed agreement with STURP that no articles would be published until all the findings could be discussed by STURP members and then they would be published in peer-reviewed journals. Unlike STURP's, McCrone's scientific papers on the Shroud were not submitted to external peer review but were published in his own journal The Microscope and in the public media. McCrone declined to defend his claims at scientific conferences to which he was invited, and in peer- reviewed journals. His unscientific prejudice against the authenticity of the Shroud was evident in his 1981 claim that, "I believe the shroud is a fake, but I cannot prove it." However, even fellow anti-authenticity critics, the late Prof. Edward Hall , Dr Michael Tite, Joe Nickell, Steven Schafersman and Picknett and Prince, regard McCrone's claim that the Shroud is a painting to be wrong. McCrone's credibility was seriously dented when his 1974 claim that the Vinland Map was a fake, turned out to be wrong. McCrone took scientific criticisms of this claim as a personal attack and refused to admit he was wrong. Prof. Harry Gove thinks McCrone was motivated by a dream of being "history's greatest iconoclast," he lacked objectivity and his testing was unsophisticated. McCrone's claim of old maps and paintings brought to his laboratory for authentication, that "very seldom do we find them to be authentic," indicates his negative mindset. His shroud papers include: McCrone, W.C. & Skirius, C., 1980, "Light Microscopical Study of the Turin `Shroud,' I," Microscope, Vol. 28, pp.105-113; McCrone, W.C., 1980, "Light Microscopical Study of the Turin `Shroud,' II;' Microscope, Vol. 28, pp.115-128; and McCrone, W.C., 1981, "Light Microscopical Study of the Turin `Shroud,' III," Microscope, Vol. 29, pp.19-38. His shroud book: McCrone, W.C., "Judgment Day for the Turin Shroud," Microscope Publications: Chicago IL, 1997. About: McCrone Research Institute, The Shroud Report, Wikipedia. Obituaries: New York Times; Shroud.com.
https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2008/02/shroud-name-index-m.html

The author contends that God left scientific proof of His existence 2,000 years ago in the image left on the Shroud, an image that could not have been faked and cannot be duplicated by modern science. This image could help all the people in the world answer life's greatest questions, Why are we here? What is the purpose of life? Where are we going?

BODY IMAGE FEATURES
The Shroud of Turin is a burial cloth over 14 feet long and over 3.5 feet wide. During the time of Christ, a deceased Jew was laid lengthwise on the cloth which was then folded over his head to cover the front of his body. A faint image appears for the man's full-length frontal and dorsal body images. But the image became most recognizable on May 28, 1898, when Secondo Pia first photographed it and recognized sharply defined images of a tortured and crucified man in the photographic negatives.

The body image is 3-dimentional. Features that lie closest to the cloth -- nose, forehead, cheeks, hands -- are the most intense, while areas of the body that are farther away leave a lighter impression.
The image is directionless; that is, there are no underlying brush strokes that go up, down, or side to side. This refutes the 1389 claim by Bishop Pierre d'Arcis of Troyes that the Shroud was a painted forgery by an unnamed artist. Regardless of whether the cloth was sloping downward, upward, or lying flat, only the parts of the frontal body image that were facing the cloth were encoded in a vertical, straight-line direction to their underlying points on the body. Since the crown of the man's head and the left and right sides of the body do not face the cloth, they did not become encoded.

A linen thread is composed of about 200 flaxen fibers. The image lies only on the topmost 2 or 3 fibers. These fibers are straw-yellow in color, yet the color does not penetrate into the threads. Remarkably, the coloring is found 360° around each colored fiber. When a fiber is cut, it is white on the inside. Also, where one fiber crosses another fiber, it is white on the underlying fiber. If one part of the image is darker than another, it is not because its fibers are encoded more intensely, rather it's because a greater number of colored fibers exist in that area.

The image does not consist of any pigments, dyes, or materials of any kind. It consists of oxidized, dehydrated cellulose. This is a natural material found in all plants and fibers and is the raw material from which linen is made. As it ages, linen naturally yellows from oxidizing and dehydrating. It will darken more over time if exposed to sunlight and radiation. Even though the entire Shroud has darkened, something caused its image to darken even more.

Linen consists of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen atoms that are single-bonded together. Something happened to the encoded body image fibers that caused many of its single-bonded atoms to break apart, allowing its carbon and oxygen atoms to then double-bond with each other, forming the straw-yellow image. One possible cause is particle radiation.

Scourge Marks
One hundred or more dumbbell-shaped impressions were left on the man (O—O) with slightly indented centers and upraised edges. These correspond to the Roman flagrum, a whip used for flagellation. Each leather thong had lead weights tied at the end. A "halo" of lighter color surrounds these marks. Ultraviolet light confirms this as blood serum. This is a process called syneresis. When skin is abraded, the emerging blood remains for only a few minutes before it begins to coagulate. As it does so, red blood cells and serum separate. The red cells form a clot, which then retracts in the wound. As the clot shrinks, the serum is squeezed out and settles around the edge of the wound. Since none of these features are visible to the naked eye, they could not have been created by an artist in the Middle Ages.

Facial and Head Wounds
The man on the Shroud has a mustache, beard and hair falling to his shoulders in a central part. His cheeks are swollen, and below his right cheek is a triangular-shaped wound. His nose is bruised and swollen, and the cartilage may be separated from the bone. The nose is scratched and dirty. The areas around the eyes are swollen. His face appears to have been beaten with a hard object such as a fist or stick) and injured in a fall. There are more than 30 head wounds produced by a cap made of sharp, pointed objects.

Hand and Arm Wounds
The man's left wrist has been pierced, and blood flows from the wrist to the elbow, in two parallel streams, one at 65° and the other at 55°. The same streams are on the right arm. This evidence confirms crucifixion. When a crucified victim hung on a cross, he could not take in air unless he pushed himself up with his feet to raise his shoulders and expand his rib cage. This movement alters the horizontal axis of the arms by 10°, thus producing two streams of blood on his arms. Sometimes to hurry death, the Roman executioners would break the legs of the crucified to stop them from breathing. Although many people believe Jesus' nail holes were in his hands, the Greek word used in the Gospels is cheir, which also means "wrist and forearm." Dr. Pierre Barbet said that a nail driven into the Space of Destot in the wrist would push aside four small bones without breaking them. Driving the nail here also spontaneously contracts the thumb inward to lie across the palm, which is why the thumbs are not visible on the Shroud.

Shoulder Injuries
Two broad excoriated areas occur across the man's shoulder blades. This is consistent with carrying a heavy crossbeam (80 to 100 lbs.). Falling under this weight caused scratches, lesions, and abrasions on the front of the man's knees. Patches of dirt are on the knees, nose, and bottoms of the feet. The man's right shoulder appears dislocated, another source of intense pain.

Leg and Foot Wounds
A large amount of blood resulted from a piercing wound to the foot. Pathologist Robert Bucklin identified the source of this flow as "a square image surrounded by a pale hole" in the metatarsal zone. From this wound, some blood runs vertically toward the toes, but most flows toward the heels and horizontally onto the cloth. This means the man bled in different positions -- vertically while on the cross and horizontally while being carried after he was dead. Why did most of this blood flow occur after the man had died? While the man was crucified in the vertical position, blood accumulated in the front and lower part of the foot. This blood flowed out after the nail was removed and the body was laid flat. The man's right foot was placed directly against a flat surface while his left leg is bent at the knee and his left foot rotated to rest on top of the right foot. A single nail driven between the metatarsal bones could affix both feet in a stationary position. In keeping with the Biblical prophecy that none of the Messiah's bones would be broken, like the Passover lamb (Exodus 12:46 and Psalm 34:20), Jesus' legs were not broken (John 19:36).

Chest Wound
On the right side of the man's chest is a large wound. Blood and watery fluid flowed out due to gravity, not a pumping heart. Most experts agree that the watery fluid came from the pleural cavity and from the pericardial sac surrounding the heart, while the blood came from the heart. The elliptical-shaped wound is about 4.4 cm long and 1.1 cm wide. This matches the shape and size of the Roman leaf-shaped lancea used by foot soldiers. All the blood on the Shroud is whole blood with blood serum, of blood type AB, and of a human male because of the presence of human DNA with both X and Y chromosomes.

Uniqueness of the Image
If a corpse could naturally leave body images or blood stains with clearly marked edges like those on the Shroud, it should have happened on other burial garments, blankets, shirts, trousers, soldiers' uniforms, bandages or other wrappings for the billions of people who have died. But it has not. All naturalistic methods to duplicate these stains have failed. The Shroud contains no traces of myrrh or aloes, perspiration, urea, or bodily fluids (other than blood). How were the sharply defined blood stains that were not in contact with the cloth transferred to it, and in the same way they appeared on the body? And how is it that these blood stains are so embedded in the cloth that they can be seen on the outer side of the cloth, the side not touching the body? Some extraordinary event occurred to this dead body that caused its blood marks and its full-length negative images to appear on the cloth. This had to occur within 2 to 3 days of the body being wrapped in the cloth, as there are no signs of decomposition, which takes place 2 to 3 days after death.


ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE
The Linen Shroud
The Shroud was woven in a three-to-one herringbone twill pattern and spun with a Z twist. Similar weaves have been discovered well before the time of Christ. Traces of cotton fibers were found of the Gossypium herbaceum variety, distinctive to the Middle East. No traces of wool were found, in keeping with Jewish law, "Neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee." (Leviticus 19:19).

A Roman Coin
It is possible that a Roman coin was placed over the man's right eye. Some features can be seen of a Pontius Pilate lepton minted between 29 and 32 AD. The Greek letters UCAI (part of the inscription for Tiberius Caesar) may be seen, along with a staff or lituus, and a clipped coin margin. Coins were used at Jewish burials only between the 1st century BC through the 1st Century AD.


Limestone and Pollen
A limestone sample from the foot region of the man in the Shroud was compared to a sample from the Ecole Biblique, the same rock shelf as the Holy Sepulcher and the Garden Tomb in Jerusalem. Both consisted of calcium carbonate in the form of travertine aragonite and were an unusually close match.
Dr. Max Frei, an expert in Mediterranean flora, identified 58 pollen grains on the Shroud, of which 42 grow in Jerusalem, where the cloth must have originated. Dr. Alan Whanger identified 28 species of flowers represented by flower images on the Shroud. All 28 species are found in Jerusalem. They all bloom in March and April (Easter) and would have been available at marketplaces or in fields. The flower images on the Shroud were from wilted flowers that were 24 to 36 hours old.


The Unwashed Body
Normally, Jewish custom requires a deceased body to be washed and anointed with oil. However, in the case of blood, it was to be buried with the body, since the "life of the flesh is in the blood." (Leviticus 17:11). Therefore, the body would not be washed, as is the case with the man in the Shroud. Also, with the Sabbath quickly approaching, the burial had to be completed before sundown.

A UNIQUE FORM OF RADIATION
The body image is due to a more advanced decomposition than the normal aging rate of the background itself. Only the application of radiation (light or heat) to cellulose will artificially darken it, as if it had rapidly aged. This radiation occurred at a low temperature since there are no by-products (pyrolytic compounds) from high-temperature degradation. In 1989, physicist Thomas Phillips first proposed that particle radiation had irradiated the Shroud. This source of radiation came from the man's body itself. Only proton radiation would explain all 32 of the Shroud's body image features.
1. lack of fading
2. lack of foreign materials or particulates
3. straw-yellow coloration
4. only the topmost superficial fibers of threads encoded
5. individual fibers encoded
6. fibers colored 360° around circumference
7. only outer layers of individually encoded fibers are colored
8. no coloration inside of fiber
9. fibers colored with similar intensity
10. oxidation and dehydration of body images
11. containing conjugated carbonyls (double-bonded carbon and oxygen atoms formed after single-bonded atoms within linen fibers broke apart) that
12. developed over time
13. accelerated aging of the body image
14. stability to water and heating
15. insolubility to acids, reductants and solvents
16. gross mechanical properties of linen intact
17. microscopically corroded appearance of fibers
18. lower tensile strength of fibers
19. reduction of the cloth's fluorescence at body images
20. lack of residue
21. highly attenuating or absorbing agent
22. agent operated over skin, hair, bones (teeth, coins, and flowers)
23. non-diffuse image with sharp boundaries
24. equal intensity for frontal and dorsal images
25. lack of two-dimensional directionality (latitude and longitude)
26. negative images with left/right and light/dark reversals that develop into
27. highly resolved, photographic quality images
28. without any magnification
29. with skeletal (and dental) features
30. three-dimensionality
31. encoded through the spaces between the body and the cloth
32. in a straight-line vertical direction

The author says, "Based on the available evidence, you don't have to be a scientist to wonder whether a supernatural radiating event occurred to the dead crucified man in the Shroud that caused his body images to develop over time on this burial cloth. You don't have to be a theologian to realize that all of the unfakable features and events encoded into this burial shroud are similar to the very same events and circumstances that are recorded to have occurred to the historical Jesus Christ." (p. 108)

How Neutron Radiation Creates New Radioactive CL-36 and CA-41 Atoms in Linen and Blood
Calcium (Ca-40) exists naturally in blood and limestone. Chlorine (Cl-35) occurs naturally in blood. If neutrons were released by the man's body, they would have ricocheted throughout the tomb. Each time the neutrons collided with atoms in the rock, cloth, blood, or other matter, they would have lost energy and speed. Occasionally, some nuclei within the cloth reacted by "capturing" an individual neutron, where it then joined other protons and neutrons within the nucleus. A new distinct atom was created that is so rare, it virtually does not exist in nature. Thus, some Ca-40 atoms become Ca-41 atoms, and some Cl-35 atoms become Cl-36 atoms. Since the half-lives of Cl-36 and Ca-41 are 301,000 and 102,000 years, respectively, almost all of the Cl-36 and Ca-41 atoms that were created 2,000 years ago throughout this burial cloth would still be present today.

Scientists have demonstrated that if a known number of neutrons irradiate material containing known amounts of chlorine or calcium, then known numbers of new Cl-36 and Ca-41 will be produced within the irradiated material. Both the presence of the newly created Cl-36 and Ca-41 atoms and their specific amounts can be determined by measuring the Cl-36 to Cl-35 and Ca-41 to Ca-40 ratios of the neutron irradiated material. An accelerator mass spectrometer (AMS) would be used to measure these ratios.

How Neutron Radiation Creates New C-14 Atoms in Linen and Blood
If the Shroud was irradiated by neutrons, additional Carbon 14 (C-14) atoms would have been created throughout the cloth. C-14 atoms are created from the common nitrogen atom called N-14. The N-14 atom has 7 protons and 7 neutrons and does not decay. After a neutron collides with and enters the N-14 nucleus, it causes instability within the nucleus, ejecting a proton. The resulting nucleus is a C-14 nucleus containing 6 protons and 8 neutrons. The newly created C-14 atoms remain within the molecular structure of the Shroud including the image and the blood marks. Knowing that the half-life of C-14 atoms is 5,370 years allows scientists to determine the age of an object by counting its remaining C-14 atoms. But if an event caused the Shroud to be irradiated with neutrons, this would make it appear much YOUNGER than its actual age because it would contain MORE C-14 atoms than the linen originally had. This would account for the 1988 erroneous Carbon 14 dating which concluded that the Shroud dated from 1260 to 1390 AD. If the world erroneously dismisses the Shroud as a fake, and yet cannot reproduce its image or blood marks, then it can be dismissing the most important artifact in human history, an artifact which proves the resurrection of Jesus Christ and Him being the Son of God.

Why the Blood Marks Are Red and Not Brown
The blood on the Shroud still retains a reddish coloration. The blood should have long ago turned dark brown or black. Dr. Carlo Goldini concluded from his experiments that when blood marks are first exposed to neutron radiation and then to ultraviolet light (sunlight), the blood marks display a bright red coloration. It is bright red regardless of the blood's bilirubin content, which has been the traditional explanation for the Shroud's centuries-old red coloration.

THE HISTORY OF THE SHROUD
1201 -- The Shroud is mentioned by Nicholas Mesarites, a Greek overseer of the emperor's relics in the Pharos Chapel of the Boucoleon Palace in Constantinople. "In this chapel Christ rises again, and the sindon [Shroud] with the burial linens is the clear proof because it wrapped the mysterious, naked dead body after the Passion."
1203-1204 -- Soldiers of the 4th Crusade attack Constantinople for payment for having deposed Alexius III, who had usurped the Byzantine throne, and reinstating his nephew, Alexius IV. Most of the capital's priceless relics disappeared, including the Shroud. Robert de Clari wrote, "There was another of the churches which they call Lady St. Mary of Blachernae, where there was kept the Shroud [sydoines] in which Our Lord had been wrapped."
1204 - 1350s -- Unknown whereabouts of Shroud.
1204 -- Coincidental disappearance of a cloth called the Mandylion (also called the Image of Edessa), said to bear the divine and miraculous imprint of the face of Jesus, made without any painter's pigments. It was labeled acheiropoietos, or "not made by hand." It arrived in Constantinople in 944 from Edessa where it had been since at least the 6th century. Some contend it was brought there in the 1st century by the disciple Thaddaeus ("one of the seventy" in Luke 10:1) or a messenger of Edessa's King Abgar V.
mid-1350s -- Shroud first public appearance in Europe in Lirey, France by Geoffrey de Charny.
1389 -- Shroud publicly displayed by Geoffrey de Charny's widow. He died a hero at the Battle of Poiteirs in 1356.
1532 -- Shroud incurs fire and water damage in Chambery, France when church catches on fire.
1578 -- The Shroud arrives in Turin, Italy.

The Impact of the Mandylion (Shroud of Turin?) on How the Face of Christ is Depicted in Art
Although the New Testament does not describe Christ's physical appearance, during the first 5 centuries A.D., Christ was usually portrayed as a young man, clean-shaven with short hair. But after the reappearance of the Mandylion in the 6th century, Christ is portrayed as having long hair, parted in the middle and falling to His shoulders. He has a thin mustache that droops to join a forked beard. His face is longer and more refined with a nose that is longer and more pronounced. His eyes are more deeply set and His whole countenance is set in a rigidly front-facing attitude. Some anomalies begin to occur: a transverse streak across the forehead, a three-sided square between the eyebrows, a V-shape at the bridge of the nose, a second V-shape inside the three-sided square, an accentuated line between the nose and the upper lip, a heavy line under the lower lip, a hairless area between the lower lip and beard, a traverse line across the throat, a raised right eyebrow, accentuated left and right cheeks, an enlarged left nostril, heavily accentuated owlish eyes, and two loose strands of hair falling from the apex of the forehead. Since all these features are visible on the Shroud of Turin, a strong argument is made for declaring the Shroud and the Mandylion to be one and the same. This premise is called the "iconographic theory" and was first developed by Paul Vignon. The artists modeled the somewhat vague and indefinite faint image on the cloth, as the photographic negative was not available for centuries, so they composed the best and most accurate representations they could. Dr. Alan D. Whanger of Duke University developed the "polarized image overlay technique" where 6th-century images of Christ in paintings and on Byzantine coins are superimposed over the Shroud image. He counted from 33 to 100 points of congruence.

The History of the Mandylion
In 1204, the Mandylion disappeared from Constantinople that same time as the Shroud. In 1978, Ian Wilson first asserted that the Shroud of Turin was actually the Mandylion that had been double-folded twice, so only the head region was visible. It measured 3'7". John Skylitzes, a Greek historian of the late 11th century, depicted the arrival of the Mandylion to Constantinople in 944. He shows the face of Jesus on a much larger cloth that has been folded. The Mandylion had traveled from Jerusalem to eastern Anatolia (Edessa) to Constantinople, the exact route of the Shroud. In the 6th century, Evagrius in his Ecclesiastical History referred to the Mandylion as acheiropoietos, or "not made by hands."

Why do the Gospels not mention an image on Jesus' burial cloth? Because the image we see today would have taken time to develop. There is no mention in history of an image until the 6th century. The body image was made by an event which caused the cellulose to age over time.

THE HISTORICALLY CONSISTENT HYPOTHESIS
This hypothesis says that only particle radiation consisting of protons and neutrons emanating from a disappearing body can account for all the Shroud's body image features. If the body suddenly disappeared while leaving behind a very small amount of the basic particles of matter, the cloth would have collapsed into the radiating body region. The parts of the cloth closest to the body (tip of the nose and lips) would have received the greatest amount of radiation as they would have fallen the furthest distance when collapsing. Other parts of the cloth received less radiation as they fell a lesser distance. Thus, a precise, 3-dimensional body image would have been encoded, with every degree of brightness/darkness at every point on the cloth being directly correlated with the original distances that the cloth was draped from the body. When the body suddenly disappeared, a brief vacuum would have been created, drawing the dorsal cloth up into the radiant body region and encoding the body image and blood marks on the dorsal side. The body of the man only had to give off less than one millionth of one-percent (0.000000015%) of the protons and neutrons in his body to have encoded his image on the Shroud, leaving dried blood marks that are bright red and not brown.

WHAT DID THE APOSTLE JOHN SEE THAT MADE HIM BELIEVE THAT JESUS HAD RISEN FROM THE DEAD?
After the resurrection, when John and Peter ran to the tomb (John 20:3-5). John says that after he went inside, "He saw and believed" (John 20:. What did John see that made him believe that Jesus had risen from the dead? He saw that the linen wrappings had not been disturbed, just collapsed. No one had moved the linen wrappings to steal or move the body. John concluded that since no one had touched the wrappings, Jesus' body had simply disappeared from the shroud. He had gone right through the grave clothes.

WHY THE AUTHOR WANTS THE SHROUD TO BE STUDIED AT THE MOLECULAR LEVEL
There are currently over 7.3 billion people in the world. They have a right to know if there is unfakable, scientific, medical and archeological evidence that particle radiation emanated from the dead body of Jesus Christ as it disappeared -- and that this event occurred after he had been beaten, scourged, crowned with thorns, carried a heavy rough object across his shoulders, was crucified, killed, and buried. The ultimate goal of science is truth. If scientific testing confirms that a miraculous event happened to the dead body of Jesus Christ, it would clearly indicate there is a God, that He intentionally intervened in history, that Jesus Christ was the recipient of power, and that God and Jesus Christ are the source of ultimate power or truth. The same historical sources, whose critical events were prophesized centuries before they occurred, tell us that Jesus came to save all of humanity. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him." (John 3:16-17)

https://www.amazon.com/Test-Shroud-Atomic-Molecular-Levels/dp/0996430016

Did Jesus brake the law of the OT by wearing long hair ?

Without a proper understanding of what the rules were regarding hair, you will inevitably come to the wrong conclusion concerning the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.   In 1 Corinthians 11:14, the Apostle Paul declares that long hair is a disgrace to men, yet the man of the Shroud apparently has shoulder-length hair.  What constitutes "long hair" depends on one's own culture's subjective view; Paul himself would probably have had shoulder-length hair, as that was the norm for Jewish men of his day; and what Paul was speaking about is "men who wore their hair in styles peculiar to women"   Our concept of what Paul meant by `long hair' is usually affected by our own views of what constitutes long hair. While Paul was speaking of effeminate men who wore their hair in styles peculiar to women, Paul himself would probably have worn shoulder-length hair in keeping with the hairstyle of the other orthodox Jews of his day.  As a matter of fact, the traditional style for an orthodox Jewish man of two thousand years ago is much the same for him today: a ponytail of hair and sidelocks-precisely what we see on the Shroud."  1 Corinthians points out that, based on the original Greek, what Paul was talking about was not "hair as such" but "hairdo":

"[1 Cor] 14-15 ... Vs. 4 reads: having his head covered, lit. from the head; vs. 6 distinguishes between a not covering of the head and a cutting short of the hair, apparently assuming that even if the head is not covered the hair may still be long. The solution of this question must be sought in the two different words for hair which the Greek uses. [triches and kome] The first one means hair as such; the second, which is used here, means the hairdo, hair that is neatly held by means of ribbon or lace. That also fits the context which shows that the Corinthian women did not cut their hair short (vs. 6), but that they took it down in ecstasy."  This is confirmed by the Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, which shows that the words translated "a man wears long hair" (lit. "he wears his hair long") is one Greek word κομη (kome) (Marshall, A., 1966, "The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament," p.686).

This can be seen in the online Mounce Reverse-Interlinear New Testament of 1 Corinthians 11:14, where "has long hair" is based on one Greek word "komaō," the Greek root of kome.

Another commentary points out that what Paul was really concerned about was not the lengths of men's and women's hair, but "that man is to be distinguished from woman."  The final point in the passage is that man is to be distinguished from woman. Thus the Corinthians are to see that the woman should not pray with her head uncovered as the man does. They are reminded that in ordinary life man with his short hair is distinguished from woman with her long hair. If a man has long hair like a woman's, he is disgraced, but with long hair the woman gains glory in her position of subjection to man. Also long hair is actually given to her as a natural veil." (Mare, W.H., "1 Corinthians," in Gaebelein, F.E., ed., 1978, "The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 10 - Romans - Galatians," p.256).

"Paul's point is that men should look like men in that culture, and women should look like women in that culture":

"[1Cor] 11:14 Here the word nature probably means "your natural sense of what is appropriate for men and women": it would be a disgrace for a man to look like a woman because of his hair style. Although the norms of appropriate hair style (and dress) may vary from culture to culture, Paul's point is that men should look like men in that culture, and women should look like women in that culture, rather than seeking to deny or disparage the God-given differences between the sexes." (Barker, K., et al., eds., 1985, "The NIV Study Bible," p.2207. Italics original).
The real problem is an example of the old church member's supposed rebuke to the young minister who was proposing their church switch to a modern Bible translation:
"Young man, if the King James Version was good enough for St. Paul, then it is good enough for me!"
But in fact the same applies even to modern English translations, in that they weren't what St. Paul wrote in either. If an argument is to be made, that flies in face of a lot of other evidence (in this case that the Shroud is authentic and the image on it is in fact of Jesus), on the basis of only two words "long hair" in an English translation, then a Christian runs the risk of unwittingly "fighting against God" (Acts 5:39. NIV) by failing to check what the original Greek behind those two English translation words meant to the original writer (St. Paul) and his readers (the largely Greek members of the first century church at Corinth).

Among the edited out parts of your email you implied that this person you know is highly intelligent and university educated. Such a person would presumably be appalled if one of his colleagues adopted a superficial, `near enough is good enough,' approach in their profession. You might put this to him and ask why then does he adopt this same approach in the things of God?

Finally, there are other Biblical passages which show that long hair, per se, was not a problem to God.
Indeed, in Numbers 6:1-5 God Himself instructed Moses that, if "a man or a woman makes a ... vow of a Nazirite," then amongst other things, "no razor shall touch his [or her] head" for the duration of the vow:

"6 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Speak to the people of Israel and say to them, When either a man or a woman makes a special vow, the vow of a Nazirite, to separate himself to the Lord, 3 he shall separate himself from wine and strong drink. He shall drink no vinegar made from wine or strong drink and shall not drink any juice of grapes or eat grapes, fresh or dried. 4 All the days of his separation he shall eat nothing that is produced by the grapevine, not even the seeds or the skins. 5 `All the days of his vow of separation, no razor shall touch his head. Until the time is completed for which he separates himself to the Lord, he shall be holy. He shall let the locks of hair of his head grow long.'"
Indeed, in 2 Samuel 14:25-26, King David's son Absalom was praised for his very long hair:

"Now in all Israel there was no one so much to be praised for his handsome appearance as Absalom. From the sole of his foot to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him. 26 And when he cut the hair of his head (for at the end of every year he used to cut it; when it was heavy on him, he cut it), he weighed the hair of his head, two hundred shekels by the king's weight."
And Paul himself in Acts 18:18 had made a vow to "cut his hair," which would make little sense unless it was normally long:

"After this, Paul stayed many days longer and then took leave of the brothers and set sail for Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila. At Cenchreae he had cut his hair, for he was under a vow."
Of course many (if not most) in our post-Christian Western society may disagree that "man is to be distinguished from woman" by such things as hair-style. But that is not the point, which is, "does the fact that the Man on the Shroud has long hair contradict 1 Corinthians 11:14 and/or the Bible generally?" And the answer is "No, it clearly does not."  Given all of these facts, Jesus could have long hair as seen on the shroud and still not violate the Law of Moses.  

With all that said, you are correct, Jesus did not violate the law, even while still having long hair as I've just shown.  As you can now plainly see, I used pure Bible to validate it.  On top of all of that, you still haven't answered the fact that the titulus of the cross that was burned onto the fabric of the shroud during the resurrection identifies him as Jesus.  As you can now see, you "speak contrary to the Bible and everyone can see it."  Looks like you have to eat your own words.

Is the Shroud of Turin the burial cloth of Jesus? With Barrie Schwortz, member of the STURP team, Friday, 22/08 9 PM ( GMT -3 )

The shroud of Turin EXTRAORDINARY evidence of Christ's resurrection https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHHmiFbsxbw

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-shroud-of-turin

One common claim of atheists is that 'there is NO evidence of the historical Jesus'' Because ALL the Bible and ancient writings of Jesus could be written by anyone and were written by so many people, years after the events, which could easily be made up.

The Gospels of Matthew,[27:59–60] Mark,[15:46] and Luke[23:53] state that Joseph of Arimathea wrapped the body of Jesus in a piece of linen cloth and placed it in a new tomb. The Gospel of John[19:38–40] refers to strips of linen used by Joseph of Arimathea and states that Apostle Peter found multiple pieces of burial cloth after the tomb was found open, strips of linen cloth for the body and a separate cloth for the head.[20:6–7]

The shroud provides to the lost world the forensic facts and evidence of the horror of Jesus going to the cross. The Shroud bears the ultimate triumph of the Resurrection of Jesus (Yeshua) meaning Salvation. All this is recorded supernaturally on The Shroud of Turin, which proves the Holy Bible to be forensically accurate and perfectly reliable in every possible way.

By virtue of their substance and form, physical objects require no faith whatsoever. They can be observed, examined, touched, and even smelled. -- This is the very opposite of "faith." Thomas was not commended or blessed because he had "seen" Jesus after the resurrection, but those who believe WITHOUT SEEING ARE! (John 20:29)

The Shroud and the jew: Barrie Schwortz at TEDx ViadellaConciliazione
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G4sj8hUVaY

The Shroud of Turin is NOT A FORGERY FROM THE 14th century, as following amazing evidence will demonstrate. It is a length of linen cloth bearing the negative image of a man, which based on overwhelming evidence points to be Jesus of Nazareth and the fabric is the burial shroud in which he was wrapped after the crucifixion.







Shroud of Turin still surrounded with mystery and passion
Julia Buckley, CNN • Updated 13th April 2020
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/shroud-of-turin-mystery-italy/index.html