Research: Dating of Turin Shroud to Middle Ages Was Flawed

Read Time:1 Minute, 30 Second

by Arden Dier

Whether the Shroud of Turin served as Jesus’ actual burial cloth has long been debated—and a new study, while not weighing in one way or the other, is likely to keep that debate raging.

Researchers reanalyzed data compiled in 1988, when experts at the University of Arizona, Oxford University, and Switzerland’s Federal Institute of Technology conducted radiocarbon testing on pieces of the cloth.

Those experts ultimately dated the linen pieces to between 1260 and 1390, well after Jesus’ crucifixion. But the researchers who accessed the data in 2017 through a freedom of information request now claim those findings are invalid, per the Christian Post.

In a March study published in the journal Archaeometry, they say only edge pieces of the shroud were analyzed, not the cloth as a whole, though nuns are rumored to have repaired its perimeter in the Middle Ages.

As another study in 1981 determined “the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man … not the product of an artist,” the study authors say an accurate date can only be ascertained with a fresh review, which they request of the Vatican, per the Catholic Herald.

The problem, according to a release, is that the Vatican is reluctant to grant access to the shroud, which has been kept in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, since 1578—except for a short period during World War II.

Indeed, the Herald reports requests to review the shroud have been repeatedly denied, including as recently as 2007. Nonetheless, the Museum of the Bible in Washington, DC, hopes to break new ground.

Per the Christian Post, the museum aims to raise $2.5 million for a “groundbreaking, high-tech, innovative exhibition about the Shroud” in 2021.

Edited via Newser.

Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

4 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Martin Helo
4 years ago

Your point is well taken. Praise Jesus!

4 years ago

Interesting that whoever created the Shroud, as well as other artifacts, relics, whatever, had so little faith in the faith of Christians at the time that they felt they had to come up with this stuff.
Faith is a matter of spirituality. If one needs a blanket that just appeared suddenly in the middle ages, or pictures of saints, many of whom never actually existed, to confirm their faith, their faith is suspect to begin with.

Glenn Geist
4 years ago

The Christian Post – my oh my. Who would doubt their objectivity? Again I’m name dropping, but we once had an Old Master painting radiocarbon dated by a fellow named Walter McCrone, one of the experts who tested the “Shroud.” I had of course, conversations with him about the risible rag.

He maintained that the “blood” was inorganic pigment.In my opinion, it’s no more real than any of the literally millions of relics produced in the medieval period. Shroud of Turin or shroud of Urine, it’s a hoax amongst innumerable other religious hoaxes. Believing that it’s real requires so many facts to be overlooked that only a religious liar would give it any credit at all. First of all there was no supernatural “Christ” ever. The facial image is typical of medieval depictions, not of earlier ones and the head is all out of proportion to the body.

Making up a story about repairs is a contrivance and there were many other tests suggesting fraud. The McCrone Institute was the leading expert on microscopic analysis at the time. His work was best known for Shroud of Turin, the Vinland map, and the advancement of Forensic science in general. Just as in other types of fraud and politics, the idea is to find one contrived weakness in a massive argument and focus on it until OJ walks free with his bloody hands.

At the time this POS was debunked some defenders stated that they shouldn’t contest the findings but just wait for another generation that won’t have read the science and then start up the lucrative hoax once again. It’s working.

Reply to  Glenn Geist
4 years ago

I learned a lot from this, although I always believed the Shroud to be a complete hoax, then again, I agree that the whole supernatural Jesus nonsense is just that: nonsense.

Previous post Small Alaskan Villages Hire Cops Who Shouldn’t Be Cops
Next post Heat Exposure Killing Members of US Military
4
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x