Be Ye Doers. . . Of The Word!

Is the Shroud of Turin authentic, or is it the product of a cleaver artist of the Middle Ages? This seems to be the primary question regarding the Shroud. If it is a fake, then it is nothing more (or less) than the thousands of other paintings of Christ which have been made down through the centuries. However, if it is authentic then the significance of this Shroud is one of major proportions for Christians all over the world.

What is the evidence for the Shroud's antiquity? Antiquity, not authenticity. We will deal with the question of its authenticity in a later article. But what evidence is there that the cloth we know as The Shroud of Turin is older than the 1300's? And is there evidence that the Shroud was ever in the part of the world where Jerusalem is located?

During the Middle Ages, prior to what is called the Renaissance in world history, archaeology was virtually nonexistent. In other words, there were no people or organizations digging up the ruins of ancient civilizations to see what kinds of tools they used, clothing they wore and so forth. Therefore, if we were to examine the artists' conception of Jesus which were painted during this time period, we would note a marked absence of realistic surroundings in those paintings. For example, the painting called Arrest of Jesus by a Flemish artist shows the soldiers carrying weapons typical of medieval times, not those which a Roman soldier would have carried. This example, and several others are discussed in Ian Wilson's book, The Mysterious Shroud. It is clear that the artists of this time period had very little knowledge about the weapons of Christ's time as well as the practices of those soldiers using the weapons.

Mr. Wilson makes this interesting observation, "It is therefore yet another fascinating feature of the Shroud that if its image is the work of an artist, he made no such normal artists' mistakes." If the Shroud is the work of an artist, not only would he have had to have extraordinary skill in placing the negative image on the cloth, but he would also have had to have knowledge of the Roman instruments of war, how they were used and explicit information as to the wounds that they would have made. Where would this artist have found this knowledge if it was not available. Our knowledge today comes form extensive archaeology of the Bible Lands as well as those of other Roman Empire colonies. This information was simply not available during the 1300's. Let's examine some of the specific features of the Shroud which would have required extensive knowledge of Roman practices.

"Then he released Barabbas to them; and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered Him to be crucified." (Matthew 27:26) Matthew, Mark and John all record in their Gospels that Jesus was scourged. Many today think that Jesus was whipped with an instrument called the "Cat of Nine Tails" which was commonly used during the days of the pirates sailing the seven seas. However, archaeology has shown that the instrument used by the Romans was more cruel than that. It was similar to the "Cat of Nine Tails", however, each strip of leather had a dumbbell shaped piece of metal or bone tied to the end of it. This Roman instrument, the Flagrum, was excavated at Herculaneum. The Shroud image contains whip injuries which have the identical dimensions of these dumbbell shaped pieces of bone or metal which would have been made by this instrument used by the Romans to scourge prisoners.

The typical artists' conception of the crucifixion of Jesus of the Middle Ages shows that the nails were driven into and through the palms of His hands. It was not until recent history that it was determined by experiments on human cadavers that the weight of an average body cannot be supported with a spike or nail driven into the palms. Also, recent archaeology of grave sites in the Middle East have given us hard evidence that victims of crucifixion by the Romans was carried out by driving a spike or nail driven through the wrist. The same experiments mentioned that have proven that a human body's weight cannot be supported by a spike through the palm also have proven that it can be supported by a spike driven through the wrist. The artists of the Middle Ages were probably not aware of this as is indicated by their depicting Jesus with the nail or spike driven through the palms. However, the Shroud image clearly has the wound created by the spike located in the wrist, not the palm.

"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 immediately blood and water came out." (John 19:33-34) As was indicated earlier, typical artists' conception of weapons in paintings of Jesus were those of medieval times which were very different than those used by the Romans. However, true to form, the Shroud's image of the chest wound is consistent, as a matter of fact, identical to the wound one would expect by the spears used by Roman soldiers which archaeology has provided for us today.

There are other physical features of the Shroud image which strongly suggest that the image was made by the body of Jesus. As Mr. Wilson so aptly states in his book, "Although a forger would be expected to make the Shroud correspond with what can be read of his death in the Gospel accounts, the compatibility of the Shroud medical features with what is described in the Gospels is by any standards remarkable." (page 44)

Following are some of the medical features found on the Shroud which Mr. Wilson lists in his book on page 44: (1) There appear to be severe swelling below the eye, and other facial injuries. [See Mt. 27:30, Mk. 15:19, Lk. 22:63, Jn 19:3] (2) Apparent bloodstains on the forehead and all around the back of the head show something spiked was forced onto the head. [See Mt. 27:29, Mk. 15:17, Jn. 19:2] (3) The body is literally covered with the wounds of a severe scourging. [See Mt. 27:26, Mk. 15:15, Jn 19:1] (4) Scourge marks on the shoulders look blurred, as if something heavy has rubbed on them. [Jesus had to carry a heavy cross: see Jn. 19:17] (5) The knees look as if they were injured by repeated falls. [Jesus' cross had to be carried for Him: see Mt. 27:32, Mk. 15:21, Lk. 23:26] (6) There is no sign that the legs were broken. [See Jn. 19:33] Also, the nail wounds in the wrist and feet as well as the wound in the chest which we have already mentioned.

Needless to say, for an artist living in the 1300's to have "painted" the Shroud image would have required extraordinary skill and a degree of knowledge which was far beyond that of general knowledge of the time. But is there other evidence that the Shroud existed prior to the 1300's?

In 1973 samples of the Shroud were examined to try to determine if it could have been made during the time of Christ. Without going into great detail, it was determined that the possibility exists that the lenin was made in an area which would have been accessible to the people of Jerusalem. In short, no evidence existed that would have precluded the lenin from having been made during the time of Christ. However, the most interesting evidence was provided by a Swiss criminologist, Dr. Max Frei.

Dr. Frei examined the shroud pieces for traces of pollen. Pollen grains have exceptionally hard outer shells and can therefore last thousands of years. Dr. Frei's investigation centered around the presence of pollen which could have only come from the Middle East and the Jerusalem area.

Dr. Frei's examination brought some very interesting facts to light. As one would expect, some of the pollen found was from plant species that grow widely in France and the Mediterranean. This is where the Shroud was discovered to be in our account of the Shroud. In all, Dr. Frei identified pollen from fifty- eight varieties of plants. Of those fifty-eight varieties, most of them came from plants typical of, and in some cases exclusive to, the area of Jerusalem. The conclusion is that the Shroud would have spent most of its existence (in a condition to have attracted pollen) in and around the Jerusalem area. As Mr. Wilson states, ". . . the only reasonable inference being that it was somewhere in the Jerusalem region that the Shroud received its most prolonged exposure to the open air, pollens of course having less opportunity to migrate to the cloth as it hung in European churches or lay locked in their reliquaries."

The case for the antiquity of the Shroud is clear in the evidence presented here. It is a possibility — and only a possibility — that the Shroud existed in and around the Jerusalem area in or about the time of Christ. In our examination of the history of the Shroud of Turin no evidence has been brought forward which would make it impossible for the Shroud to be authentic.

In part three of our look at the Shroud of Turin, we will consider the evidence for the possibility that the Shroud was actually painted by a cleaver artist of the 1300's.

All Scriptures quoted are from the New King James Version unless otherwise noted.

See: The Shroud of Turin - Part 1 and The Shroud of Turin - Part 3

Sources:
1. Wilson, Ian. The Mysterious Shroud Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1986.
2. Heller, John H. Report on The Shroud of Turin Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1983.

Home | Article Series - Be Ye Doers! | Poetry | Inspirational Stories | Search | Plan of Salvation | Links of Interest | Contact Us!
Stephen Kingery & Associates | Raye's Gift Shop | USA MegaMall