D1B wrote:JoltinJoe wrote:
Do you still think the world is flat?
Embrace science and reason.
Embrace this. They actually found a real 1st century burial shroud.
National Geographic: Evidence Against Jesus Link to Shroud of Turin?
...
Housed since 1578 in a Turin, Italy, cathedral, the Shroud of Turin is believed by many to have wrapped the body of Jesus Christ after his death in Jerusalem—but the cloth has been decried as a hoax by many others. Several studies have attempted to settle the debate.
Carbon-dating studies by three different laboratories in the late 1980s, for example, suggested the shroud was made between A.D. 1260 and 1390, long after the time of Jesus. In 2005 another study asserted that the 1980s test had been based on a patch added in the Middle Ages and that the shroud is actually 1,300 to 3,000 years old.
(Related: "'Jesus' Shroud? Recent Findings Renew Authenticity Debate.")
The weave of the Tomb of the Shroud fabric, the new study says, casts further doubt on the Shroud of Turin as Jesus' burial cloth.
The newfound shroud was something of a patchwork of simply woven linen and wool textiles, the study found. The Shroud of Turin, by contrast, is made of a single textile woven in a complex twill pattern, a type of cloth not known to have been available in the region until medieval times, Gibson said.
Both the tomb's location and the textile offer evidence for the apparently elite status of the corpse, he added. The way the wool in the shroud was spun indicates it had been imported from elsewhere in the Mediterranean—something a wealthy Jerusalem family from this period would likely have done.
First Such Shroud, Second Such Textile
Assuming the new shroud typifies those used in Jerusalem during the time of Jesus, the researchers maintain that the Shroud of Turin could not have originated in the city.
That's perhaps a big assumption, given that there are no other known shrouds from the same place and time for comparison—though in one case clothing had been found in a Jerusalem tomb.
"There have now been only two cases of textiles discovered in Jewish burials from this period," said archaeologist Amos Kloner of Bar Ilan University. And both appear to contradict the idea that the Shroud of Turin is from Jesus-era Jerusalem.
As for the analysis of the newfound shroud, the researchers "checked their findings with the best experts, and this textile was found to be different [from the Shroud of Turin]," said Kloner, who was not involved in the new study, published today in the journal PLoS ONE.
To Kloner, the most important aspect of the new find is that the shroud could be carbon-dated. Examples of Jerusalem textiles from this period—never mind burial shrouds—are so rare that their main importance is in providing organic material for such tests.
The opportunity to compare the weave of this shroud to the weave of the Shroud of Turin is simply an added bonus, he said. "It is wonderful that they found this niche with the remains of a person, and even remains of hair," Kloner said.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... m-leprosy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That's pretty weak. Because the shroud they discovered is different than the Shroud of Turin, that proves that the shroud is not from that region at that time.
More to the point, your article contains misinformation. Textile experts have already confirmed that the weave of the Shroud of Turin is consistent with a cloth know to that region and dating to 40 AD.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/previou ... rview.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Flury-Lemberg also discovered 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 surprisingly similar to the hem of a cloth found in the tombs of the Jewish fortress of Masada. The Masada cloth dates to between 40 B.C. and 73 A.D. The evidence, says Flury-Lemberg, is clear: "The linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin does not display any weaving or sewing techniques which would speak against its origin as a high quality product of the textile workers of the first century."
Given this evidence, the shroud would have been owned by a wealthy resident of that region, given its professional stitching. Jesus' body was claimed by Joseph of Arimathea, who was a wealthy member of the Sanhedrin, and he buried Jesus along Nicodemus ben Gurion, another member of the Sanhedrin. Jesus was laid in a tomb owned by Joseph. (Incidentally, Joseph and Nicodemus are understood to be the sources of the Gospel information about what transpired before the Sanhedrin).
hetic that you try to rat pack Joe and he STILL single-handedly collectively hands you your asses.
