group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem re- mains unsolved. But evidence taken at that time and
since has corroborated the belief the crucifi ed man was a Jewish male who lived in the area of Jerusalem or Ro- man Palestine. His death was not only consistent
with the New Testament account of Je- sus’ killing, but also with previously un- known facts about Roman torture and crucifi xion practices that have only been confi rmed by modern archaeology fi nds. Despite STURP’s conclusions, which
gave credence to the notion the Shroud was Jesus’ authentic burial garment, all of it was thrown into serious doubt in 1988 after the Vatican permitted its car- bon-14 testing. Carbon-14, used in dating things such
as bone, cloth, wood, and plant fi bers, is based on the decay of a radioactive iso- tope. Tiny samples from a corner of the Shroud’s fabric were sent to labs in the U.S., Britain, and Switzerland. All three labs declared the Shroud
originated between the years 1260 and 1390 A.D., more than a thousand years after Jesus died. Since its release 35 years ago, the car-
bon-14 dating result has become the cen- ter of controversy, with many criticizing its methodology and conclusions. Critics of the study note that the cloth itself was nearly burned in 1532 in Cham-
bery, France, during a fi re. The Shroud still shows both water marks and scorch- ing from the event. It has been claimed that nuns set upon weaving new cloth to the linen to hide fraying and damage. These and other patches may have been the cloth upon which the carbon-14 study was based. Statisticians Marco Riani, of the Uni-
versity of Parma in Italy, and Anthony Atkinson, of the London School of Eco- nomics, pointed out to National Geo- graphic that the laboratories conducting the carbon-14 tests were in full agree- ment on the ages of control fabrics from an ancient Egyptian mummy, a medieval Nubian tomb, and a medieval French ec- clesiastical vestment. Yet raw data from the same tests on
the Shroud yielded unusual results that diff ered by more than 150 years. When computers analyzed all 387,072
ways to cut the samples, they identifi ed a marked pattern of variations. “The dating which comes from a piece
at the top edge [of an uncut sample] is very diff erent from the date which comes from a piece taken from the bottom edge,” Riani told National Geographic. “Our research does not prove that the
Shroud is authentic, nor that it is 2,000 years old,” he said. But it does call into question the car-
bon-14 report’s assertion of “conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is medieval.”
APRIL 2023 | NEWSMAX 47
VIEWING Pope Francis leaves after praying in front of the holy Shroud, believed by some Christians to be the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth, on June 21, 2015 in Turin’s cathedral.
ALBERTO PIZZOLI/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100
