Prof. Avinoam Danin and the New Pollen Tests In mid-July, 1999, Avinoam Danin released his studies of new pollen tests. Danin continues the botanical work begun by Dr. Max Frei, the Swiss botanist who discovered Mid-East pollen on the surface of the Holy Shroud. I have included a few of those press releases from Danin’s research for your information. DANIN PRESS RELEASE ST. LOUIS, August 2, 1999 Two scientists say bits of ancient pollen found in the Shroud of Turin offer evidence that the mysterious cloth with the outlines of a human body is indeed the burial cloth of Jesus Christ. The finding, being presented Tuesday at the 16th International Botanical Congress in St. Louis, clashes with carbon-14 dating a decade ago that indicated that the shroud dated back only to 14th century Europe. It is likely to generate enormous interest among people who passionately believe in the cloth as a Christian relic. But this new evidence is unlikely to convince skeptics who have long challenged the shroud's history. The most recent research indicates the cloth is far older than the 14th century — dating at least to the 8th century and possibly as far back as the time when Christ was crucified in what is now modern Jerusalem. The test was conducted by a botanist from Israel and a retired Duke University medical professor who has spent more than a decade researching and writing about the shroud. They re-analyzed long lasting pollen found on the shroud and found that the shroud seems to fit the burial of Jesus as described in the New Testament. The shroud has pollen from flowers that only come together in one place: the Jerusalem-Hebron area. The flowers blossom sometime between the months of March and May, the time when Christ was crucified. The pollen from those flowers, combined with other evidence, dates the shroud to at least the 8th century and probably long before, said the botanist, Avinoam Danin of Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The flowers placed next to the shroud bloom only an hour a day, so they were picked sometime between 3 and 4 p.m. before being placed next to the body, Danin said. Christ is believed to have died late in the day, so his body would have been prepared shortly after. Danin and Uri Baruch of the Israel Antiquities Authority then compared the shroud to a smaller cloth that is believed to have been placed directly over Christ's face, then covered by the shroud. They found the pollen, the blood stains, and flower remnants on both cloths matched perfectly. Since the face cloth has been publicly displayed in Spain since the 8th century, the shroud must be at least that old, Danin said. The face cloth is mentioned in church documents that refer to events dating back to the 1st century in Jerusalem, Danin said. The shroud itself has been displayed in a Cathedral in the Italian city of Turin since the 14th century. Danin, who is Jewish, declines to talk about the religious implications of his finding. He said Monday it is not up to him to say this is proof of Christian beliefs or that this is the actual burial cloth of Jesus, but "you as a reader have to figure out how one and one and makes two." His co-author, Alan Whanger, who is Methodist, says he is partially driven by his religious beliefs. "We did a scientific examination. One can interpret it any way one wants," said Whanger, a Detroit native. "For me, it's testament of the validity of one Jesus of Nazareth." Danin’s study was reviewed by other botanists and published by the prestigious Missouri Botanical Gardens. "Coming from outside of the Christian community gives Danin added credibility because he doesn't have a vested interest in promoting it one way or another,'' said John Iannone, president of the Holy Shroud Task Force, a privately funded organization devoted to determining the truth about the shroud’s origin. But a noted Catholic theologian said even if this is proven to be Jesus’ burial cloth — and that's still a wide open question — it doesn't affirm faith. At best it only re-affirms what is already believed about God and Jesus of Nazareth. "It's part of Catholic tradition that you cannot empirically prove traditions of faith," said Lawrence Cunningham, former chairman of theology at Notre Dame University. "Therefore, however important the shroud, it is basically peripheral to Christian faith and ought to be seen in that light. My faith would not rise or fall whether or not the shroud is authentic," he said. But there has been what Cunningham calls a cottage industry of studies concerning the shroud with Dr. Alan Whanger as one of its chief practitioners. In 1988 a tiny portion of the shroud was concluded to be from the 14th century using radio carbon dating, the long-held scientific method of counting isotopes of carbon atoms. That conclusion made many people think the shroud was not a real relic. Whanger and his colleagues said that the part of the shroud that was tested was contaminated with extraneous materials and life forms, and was not representative of the rest of the cloth, so he concludes that the carbon dating was not accurate for the cloth as a whole. University of Arizona professor Paul Damon, who did the carbon dating study, could not be reached for comment. Whanger was studying photographs of the shroud and spotted flower imprints. He called in Danin who looked at the patterns "and in 20 seconds he said ‘these are the flowers of Jerusalem.’" BOTANIST USES POLLEN TO PLACE SHROUD OF TURIN IN MIDEAST AT EARLIER DATE By Adelle M. Banks Religion News Service A Jerusalem-based botanist, working with a team of colleagues, has determined that the Shroud of Turin probably dates to before the eighth century and was located in the Jerusalem area. Avinoam Danin, a member of the department of evolution, systematics and ecology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, announced the findings Monday, August 2 in St. Louis, where he is attending the XVI International Botanical Congress. They will be published by the Missouri Botanical Garden Press in a paper titled "Flora of the Shroud of Turin." The findings conflict with other studies of the shroud, which some believe was the burial cloth of Jesus. In 1988, a team of scientists used carbon-14 dating tests and concluded the shroud dates to the Middle Ages. But Danin believes the shroud is much older because of links made between pollen grains and blood stains on both the shroud and the Sudarium of Oviedo, which some believe is the burial face cloth of Jesus. That cloth has been in the Cathedral of Oviedo in Spain since the eighth century. "There’s no possibility that this cloth in Oviedo and the shroud would both have the same blood stains and these pollen grains unless they were covering the same body," Danin told Religion News Service. "And being a resident of that church in Oviedo since at least 760, there’s no way that it could be a fake from the 14th century." Danin said pollen grains of the thistle Gundelia tournefortii were found on both the shroud and the cloth housed in Oviedo. He called them "very hard evidence." "This plant is growing only in the near East," he said. "It is not growing in Spain. It is not growing in Europe. It is from Middle Eastern origin."The plant, which continues to bloom to this day, blossoms at a certain time of year. "The time of the formulation of the image and the position of pollen on the shroud due to the indicator plants is March and April," he said. "This is a physical and biological indicator, not biblical." A New Port Richey, Fla. writer who has studied the shroud says the two specific months named in Danin’s research are "very significant." John C. Iannone, author of "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence" (Alba House, NY, 1998) said the finding makes the shroud "consistent with the time of the Passover and the Crucifixion." He added that "those flowers would be fresh in the fields around Jerusalem" and "readily available for a burial." Iannone also is president of the St. Louis based Holy Shroud Task Force, a group of doctors, scientists, writers and historians interested in furthering research on the shroud. Danin is a member of the group’s advisory board. "It moves the date back considerably," Iannone said of Danin’s findings. "What it does is it substantially increases the case for authenticity, or certainly antiquity. It gives us one more instrument to debate the carbon-14 dating." Despite the difference in the findings, Danin voiced his respect for the experts who used the carbon-14 dating method. "The carbon-14 dating was wonderful, but true for one corner of the shroud," he said. "We are not questioning their accuracy." The other writers of the paper are Dr. Alan Whanger, professor emeritus, Duke University Medical Center; Mary Whanger, of the Council for Study of the Shroud of Turin in Durham, N.C.; and Dr. Uri Baruch of the Israel Antiquities Authority. TESTS TRACE TURIN SHROUD TO JERUSALEM BEFORE A.D. 700 By William K. Stevens, New York Times, August 3, 1999 An analysis of pollen grains and plant images taken from the Shroud of Turin, believed by many Christians to be the burial shroud of Jesus, places the cloth’s origin in or near Jerusalem before the 8th century, scientists said here today. The finding appeared to contradict the radiocarbon dating tests that in 1988 led a group of experts to put the origin of the cloth at between A.D. 1260 and 1390, and to conclude that the shroud was most likely a medieval forgery. But revisionist scholars have raised many doubts since then. The rectangular linen shroud, which bears faint traces of a man's face and body, is one of the most venerated objects in the Roman Catholic Church, although the Vatican, after the 1988 tests, said it appeared to be inauthentic. Avinoam Danin, a botanist at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, said at a news conference at the 16th International Botanical Congress here that flowers and other plant parts apparently were placed on the shroud, leaving pollen grains and imprints. Analysis of the grains and the images, he said, identified them as coming from species that could be found only in the months of March and April in the Jerusalem region. The pollen of one plant, a thistle called Gundelia tournefortii, was especially abundant on the cloth, and an image of the plant was identified near the image of the man's shoulder. Some scientists say this may have been the species from which Jesus's crown of thorns was plaited. Two pollen grains of this species were also found on another ancient fabric, called the Sudarium of Oviedo, which many believe to be the burial face cloth of Jesus. A first-century origin for the face cloth has been documented, the scientists here said, and it has been in the Cathedral of Oviedo in Spain since the eighth century. The shroud has been kept in Turin, Italy, since 1578. Both the Sudarium and the shroud appear to carry type AB blood stains, and the stains are in a similar pattern, Dr. Danin said. "There is no way that similar patterns of blood stains, probably of the identical blood type, with the same type of pollen grains could not be synchron-ic, covering the same body." he said. "The pollen association and the similarities in the blood stains in the two cloths provide clear evidence that the shroud originated before the eighth century." He did not offer a more specific date. Dr. Danin noted that the 1988 analysis was performed on a small corner of the cloth, while the new one involves the whole shroud and compares with a cloth known to exist before the eighth century. The sample may have been contaminated, said Alan D. Whanger, of Duke University Medical Center. The sample came from a water-stained, scorched edge of the shroud, he said, and carbon could have been added to the cloth, obscuring the true date of its origin. Also, living fungi and bacteria have been found growing inside the fibers, he said, possibly contaminating the sample. The following editorial was in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on August 5, 1999 Unraveling Secrets of the Shroud The Shroud of Turin, imprinted with the haunting image of a crucified man, is an article of faith, literally and metaphorically. That’s why its deepest mystery will never be unraveled. It’s not in any human power to determine, with finality or certainty, its spiritual meaning and purpose. Each individual is free to decide the shroud's symbolic value. But it is in science's power to make discoveries about the physical characteristics of the cloth: the article itself. Those discoveries, though, are subject to revision, as scientists learn more, develop new approaches, use new technologies and apply different disciplines of knowledge. That is part of the scientific adventure. A new study of the shroud examines pollen samples and plant images. It suggests that the shroud actually dates back to Jerusalem, to no more recent than the 700's, sharp contrast to an earlier study, which used carbon dating on a piece of the fabric close to the edge. That study indicated that the cloth was from the Middle Ages, sometime between 1260 and 1390 A.D. Each theory has its own partisans and detractors, as well as mediators who reconcile seemingly contradictory conclusions. Their debate, their observations, their continued study may eventually lead to a definitive answer about the age of the shroud. Almost certainly they will add to our general scientific knowledge about ancient artifacts and human nature. As the study of the Shroud of Turin gloriously illustrates, science does not always necessarily move forward in a linear direction. Contradiction and confusion can often be the germ of enlightenment. But the scientific method never can provide scientific proof for matters of religious faith. (from the Shroud of Turin Newsletter, December 25, 1999) [This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 08, 2000).]
Very interesting information. I believe that the shroud is the one thing that could possibly prove that Jesus even existed, but it's a long shot. We'd need a good DNA strain and a DNA sample from the woman reported to be his mother. (I wonder what the Y chromosome would tell us, if God is supposed to be his father?) Personally, I believe the shroud to be either a counterfeit* or else a case of mistaken identity. Jesus' physical description, varied as it is, could match pretty much anybody in the mid-east at the time. Nazareth PD would have a hard time finding him based off of a sketch artist's drawing. They could just as easily have some poor mud-stomper's burial shroud, and hence make a messiah out of a guy who probably just stomped hay into mud for bricks. If not for the fact that it would involve the destruction of a significant part of the shroud and the image on it, I would favor handing it over to the FBI or Scotland Yard. They've done fantastic forensic work on cases that even the most ardent Sherlock Holmes fan would consider unsolvable. Maybe they can lift more definitive evidence and let us know for sure if it's even a person or just a painting. (Although I do buy the story that the image had faded and was repainted carefully to preserve it.) Still, as I said, it would involve the destruction of a significant portion of the shroud. *Did you know that besides the thousands of "foreskins of Christ" that have been sold throughout history, if you took every "piece of the true Cross" that has ever been sold that you would have enough wood to build a fleet of Noah's Arks? Why wouldn't something like the shroud be of equal value to a counterfeitor? There have been other shrouds that had been proven fakes way back before we even HAD forensic sciences. ------------------ I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight, kill, and die for your right to say it.
Oxygen, Interesting theory... I wonder, though, why a crown of thorns would have been placed on such a mud-stomper...?
Heresy? Perhaps he had been the ringmaster of a group of political dissidents, so they 'crowned' him. As far as the wound in the side (I always forget about this), piercing the condemned was a common Roman practice to help them die quicker. It was officially frowned upon, so whoever was taking mercy on the poor soul had to be quick and only had one shot at it. The poor Roman who had taken such mercy on Jesu ben Josef missed the heart by a mile and has been villified by the church ever since. As far as actual study of the shroud, most universities are funded by the church. Even if they DO find something empirical that goes against the idea of the shroud being genuine, I believe they would supress such evidence if they wanted to keep their funding. Pretty shrewd of the church, eh? ------------------ I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight, kill, and die for your right to say it.
Oxygen, More interesting theory... Have you ever seen a documented case of someone being crowned with thorns before being crucified? I'm not sure which church you are speaking about which funds most Universities?
I believe it's the Catholic church that provides most of the funding, which would make sense since they have the most money. Most of the ****** State University schools are thusly funded. San Jose State University was founded by priests originally to train suitable young men for the seminary, but the growth of the population soon required them to offer more secular subjects. Stanford University is pretty much the same way. This trend continues all the way back east. Basically, any school past High School is probably funded by the church. As far as documented cases of crucifixion, I find it intersting that, for all the hoopla and commotion that Jesu ben Josef supposedly made that there are no contemporary accounts of him. Even the introduction verses of the NT say, in so many words, "I didn't personally see this, but so-and-so told me that he heard it from a friend who got it from a merchant who heard it from..."yadda yadda yadda. There are no eye-witness accounts. The Romans themselves seem to regard the entire messianic movement as barely a ripple in their fabric of history, as few, if any, of their contemporary records mention a messiah who apparently represented a major threat to their empire. The study of Roman history is quite a tale. Rome wasn't built in a day, and it sure didn't fall in a day. What I believe the early Christians were has more to do with a fringe cult that had a new way of recruiting, a way that allowed them to barely walk the edge of the law. Given that they considered an honor to die for their beliefs, they weren't that different from the Islamic Jihad. After so many years of recruiting, it was only a matter of time before they became a fairly accepted religion and got somebody elected emperor who was sympathetic to their beliefs. It was just a case of slowly implementing it into society. As an example of how a religion goes from a minor sect to a major faith, I present the Gaians, as I have heard people who worship the planet as their mother called. At first they were ridiculed with names such as 'nature-boy' or 'moon-beam'. Now, it's not unusual for nature 'altars' to be set up on office desks. The ecologists have forced recycling upon us as a law because of this belief (I'm not knocking recycling, just their method). How long before an ecologist Gaian ends up in the White House? (I have this nightmare where this happens and we all end up skipping around naked in a big flower garden until a less-than-ecologically-conscious nation invades and wipes everybody out. Newt Gingrich skipping around naked..BRRRRR!) ------------------ I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight, kill, and die for your right to say it.
Oxygen - I like you and all, but if you EVER make me picture Newt Gingrich naked again, I will hunt you down!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! EEEEWwwwwww!!
Oxygen, The theory about the Catholic Church seems to be mute since the Catholic church previously declared the shroud "illigitmate" based on the erroneous carbon dating...?! That's one way to look at the life and divinity of Jesus Christ. Another way is to look at the fact that the Apostles walked with, observed, preached and caused to be documented the human life of Jesus Christ, His divinity and the fulfillment of the promise of salvation through Jesus Christ. The writings of the New Testament stand as a perpetual and divine witness to these realities.
Okay okay. No more Newt Gingriches... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! On the subject of the shroud, who were the Apostles anyway? Do they only appear in the bible? Or are there earlier sources? The bible was written...what, about 300 years after Jesu ben Josef was crucified. This, of course, would make any part of the bible impossible to be an eye-witness account. From a skeptic's viewpoint, if the events were taking place in modern times the Apostles would be found at airport and bus terminals handing out pamphlets. They quite possibly may have been little more than PR men for an odd cult that had excellent marketing skills. On the subject of the Catholic Church, I was sure that it was the Catholics who had the shroud. I haven't read a whole lot on it for awhile. I thought it was the scientists who said that carbon-dating the shroud was inadequate because of all the apparent mending that seems to have been done on it among other factors, and that all it would do is give us an idea of the age. ------------------ I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight, kill, and die for your right to say it.
Oxygen, The writing of the Bible began long before the coming of Christ. I believe the first translation started around 250 B.C. (the original manuscript, of course, was much older). There are many non-biblical sources which discuss the Apostles, many can be found on the internet. Here is the sequence of events concerning the shroud: Scientists did carbon-14 dating and declared the shroud to be from 14th century Europe. Based on this original testing, the Catholic Church declared the shroud to be illegitimate. An international, multi-denominational team of scientists continue to study the shroud. The Holy Shroud Task Force is privately funded. Recent study of the shroud proves the previous carbon-14 testing to be nonrepresentative of the shroud as a whole. Recent discoveries of pollen, flower impressions and blood type point more and more to the Shroud of Turin being that of Jesus Christ and to the burial facecloth that has been in a cathedral in Spain since the eighth century to also have come from the same body, most likely that of Jesus Christ. (BTW: I believe the facecloth was known to exist for about a thousand years before the shroud was found). [This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 12, 2000).] [This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 12, 2000).]
I'm not sure what to think of the shroud. I've been two different stories on the dating and I've heard there is a strong evidence that's it's from the 13th or 14th century not from the time of Christ. ------------------ Never believe anything until it has officially denied.
Vinnie, yup I think I know what you mean. I saw the name truestory and almost had a heart attack. Supporters of the shroud have claimed recently that the carbon dating tests were tainted by a long build-up of a microscopic wax like substance on the material that would serious bias the dating tests. I have not examined the shroud stories yet and so cannot make any substantial comments, for or against. The claimed 3d image in the cloth does seem to be an intriguing mystery.
