Shroud of turin and carbon 14 dating
In 1987 the Shroud was subjected to carbon-14 dating technology which dated it to the 13th century.
Predictably, the result has been criticised for a range of reasons.
The image of the man on the Shroud can be read by 3D imaging technology. In addition, medieval paintings show the nails in the palm of Christ’s hands, the Shroud shows the nail wounds in his wrists which is anatomically correct.
The flesh of the palms would not have supported the weight of the man’s body. Pollen from the Shroud is not only from the Jerusalem area, but from Turkey and the other places the Shroud is supposed to have resided.
In addition, traces of the spices used for Jewish burial have been discovered. The bloodstains on the Shroud are real human blood, not paint.
The flow of the blood accurately reflects crucifixion and subsequent burial.
Popes have come to gaze on the Shroud; Benedict XVI said when he visited in 2010 that “we see, as in a mirror, our suffering in the suffering of Christ”. They refer to the 1987 Carbon-14 dating and say, “It’s medieval. That settles it.” But the believers bounce back, and year by year, as modern technology advances, more and more evidence accumulates which causes anyone who reads the research to be sceptical of the sceptics.
It has been venerated as such for centuries, and since the 17th century, when it came to Turin, has been the cathedral’s best-known treasures.An exact copy of the Shroud of Turin, the linen cloth that wrapped the body of Jesus Christ, is displayed at the chapel of the Cahtholic Armenian patriarch's residence in an east Beirut neighbourhood (JOSEPH EID/AFP/Getty Images) Sceptics may dismiss the Turin Shroud, but there is good evidence the relic is authentic A verse in the epistle to the Hebrews asserts that faith is “the substance of things hoped for – the evidence of things not seen.” The resurrection of Jesus Christ is an event forever hoped for, but it is also an event unseen.Believers in the Shroud of Turin, however, insist that the Shroud is the substance of this hope and the evidence of this unseen event.The question immediately arises, “If the Shroud is a medieval forgery how did they do that?
” Professor Nicholas Allen of South Africa proposed that the materials and knowledge to produce a “photograph” existed in the Middle Ages.Fanti’s method dated fibres from the Shroud to 300 BC–400 AD.Of course, there are critics who argue that Fanti’s methods are unreliable.Like a tennis ball, the hypotheses are whacked back and forth.