spin

Please read the following and decide whether the Turin Shroud can bear any direct relationship with the means of preparing the body of the Jesus of the new testament.


The synoptic gospels, eg Lk 23:53, tell us that Jesus was wrapped in linen (sindwn), ie the type of cloth, but cannot be taken as indicating the form of the cloth; sindwn could be used as a garment made of the cloth, the cloth used for straining purposes, and even as a shorthand way of talking about linen bandages (see Heroditus, 7.181.2).

At other times the gospels, eg Lk 24:10, tell us that Jesus was specifically wrapped in bandages (oQonion, pl oQonia - Q = theta).

Lk makes the means of covering the dead body clear for the period of writing, while the generic term sindwn was used earlier, the text gives the specific oQonia to make plain the fact that Jesus was not covered by a single large rectangle of cloth, such as the shroud of Turin.

Jn supplies a further clarification regarding the burial customs of the time. When dealing with the resurrection of Lazarus in 11:44, we are told that he came from the tomb with his hands and feet wrapped in bandages (keiria, pl keirias) and his face in a napkin or small cloth (soudarion). Jn further tells us that such a soudarion was wrapped around the head of Jesus, 20:7, and after the resurrection the soudarion was folded up and left by the bandages, oQonia, ie Jesus was wrapped in bandages with a separate cloth, a soudarion, around his head.


spin

Mountain Man

No need to read it. How can someone that never existed have a burial shroud? How can someone allegedly alive 2000 years ago have a burial shroud made more than 1300 years AFTER his alleged death?

Orthodox_Freethinker

" You say the Shroud is consistent with the Gospel account, but weren't there two cloths in the tomb and wasn't the body wound like a mummy?
Students new to the study to the Shroud are sometimes confused by apparent inconsistencies in the description of Jesus' burial cloth or cloths. In truth, the Bible - when read in Greek - uses a variety of terms to describe them. The Synoptic Gospels use the word sindon in the singular to designate the Shroud (Matt. 27:59; Mk. 15:46 (twice); Lk. 23:53). Sindon appears only six times in all of the New Testament.

In Jn. 19:40, the John uses the word othonia [Gk.] (plural) to describe the linen cloths used in the Burial. Othonia, a word of uncertain meaning, but probably best translated as a generic plural for grave clothes. The same word is used by Luke in Lk.24:12 what had previously been described as the sindon in Lk. 23:53. Note: vs. l2 (But Peter rose and ran to the tomb, stooping and looking in, he saw the linen cloths (plural) by themselves; and he went home wondering what happened.) does not appear in the most ancient manuscripts, but is added by later ancient authorities. Next we discover (keirias) [Gk.] translated by the RSV as bandages in Jn. 11:44's description of the raising of Lazarus. In actuality, linen strips used to bind the wrists and ankles and probably also used around the outside of the Shroud at the neck, waist and ankles to secure the Shroud to the body.

Finally we come to the word sudarion [Gk.] which is found in the canonical texts solely in John (11:44. 20:7) and Luke (l9:20; Acts l9:12). It is translated by the RSV as "the napkin which had been on his head" (Jn. 20:7) and earlier in 11:44 as the cloth with which Lazarus' face was wrapped. Scholars regard it as a chin band going around the face/head for the purpose of keeping the corpse's jaws closed.

John says that he was buried according to Jewish tradition. Excavations in the Middle East have unearthed bodies of Jews wrapped lengthwise in a single burial shroud just as we see with the Turin Shroud."
http://shroud2000.com/FAQs.html

Peace.

spin

You haven't actually said anything useful about sindwn, (note the omega in the nominative). Let me help you. In Mt 27:59, you'll note that the verb with it is entulissw, "twist or roll up", (from tulissw) and quite inappropriate for one large rectangle of cloth. Lk 23:53 uses the same verb as Mt. Mk 15:46 uses a similar verb, eneilew, whose first example in Liddell and Scott is with oQonioi, one again "roll up".

It should therefore come as no surprise that Herodotus 2.86.6 uses sindwn to describe the wrappings of a mummy and 7.181.2 for surgeon's bandages.

What makes you say this? The noun oQonion is a diminuitive of oQonh (eg Acts 10:11 & 11:5). It doesn't take much effort to see that the latter means sheet, while the former means something smaller than a sheet.

Now if we turn to Aristophanes' Acharnians, l.1176, you'll find oQonia being used for bandages for an ankle.

No, "grave clothes" is not what is said by the text.

If I can understand Tischendorf properly, some of the oldest manuscripts actually have the verse, though it is a minority.

What makes you conclude such? It doesn't make sense in the passage to talk of the fact that Lazarus had straps around his wrists and ankles and nothing else. In fact the text says that the keiriai were around his hands (not his wrists) and feet (not his ankles).

(Actually both the website you cite and you spell this word incorrectly. It should be soudarion. The Greek borrowed it from the Latin sudarium.)

Scholars may say what they like. The text actually says, to soudarion o hn epi ths kefalhs autou, "the soudarion was about his head," clearly not under the chin.

The term itself is clear in its significance from Latin, sudarium ie "sweat cloth". It is certainly not a strap.

We are dealing with what we can know from the new testament, as specified in the OP. Besides, you need to show that the new testament relates to Jewish tradition in this regard and not just claim it.

When it is necessary to do analyses of the language used in a text, don't trust your website with vested interests: do it yourself. This is why I supplied interested readers the links to the best Greek dictionary available.


spin

yalla

I read somewhere that at the alleged time of JC shrouds were not used in Jewish burials. Bodies were buried in their best clothes.
This custom changed when rabban Gamaliel considered it inappropriate and started the custom of simple white linen cloths.
His own death and burial was the stimulus for the change in custom from expensive funeral finery to the simple.
He died in the second century.
Thus the description of JC's funeral clothing is an anachronism.

Now I'm no expert and I'm not sure of this but by googling rabban Gamaliel I got this basic message above on a couple of sites describing Jewish burial customs and one cited r gamaliel as dying in the second century.

So it seems that.... JC's funeral gear is anachronistically described.
.....2C gospel dates are suggested
.....the "Turin Shroud" is vastly different to the clothes that a first century Jew would have been buried in.
I could be misinformed.

spin

Hell, twenty-one people were willing to talk about the Turin Shroud in a recent thread. Where are you when you are needed?

This rag keeps raising its head for some reason, despite the fact that it doesn't seem to have much to do with this forum. How about if we actually deal with what we can deal with here and get it over with? We look at the bible here not relics, so let's look at the bible and decide what the rag can have to do with it. If it has nothing to do with the bible, the shroud should be on a more appropriate forum.

So why don't the hordes of avid BC&Hers put this subject out of its misery and vote?


spin

spin

The question related to the new testament, not necessarily the real world. You were expressly asked to read the OP before voting. If you didn't, and gathering from your response you didn't, then you were not answering what was asked of you.

JoeWallack

JW:
From BDAG:

"ὀθόνιον, ου, Ï„ÏŒ (Aristoph., Hippocr. et al.; ins [e.g. the Rosetta Stone: OGI 90, 18 (196 b.c.)]; pap [e.g. UPZ 85, 8; 42–163/160 b.c.]; Judg 14:13 B; Hos 2:7, 11; EpArist 320; JosAs 13:5 cod. A [p. 57, 11 Bat.]. Cp. O. Wilck I p. 266ff. On the origin of the word s. HLewy, Die semit. Fremdwörter im Griech. 1895, 124f; Thumb 111; on the flax plant s. Zohary, Plants 78, Geobot. II 628) dim. of ὀθόνη but not necessarily w. dim. force in our lit.; (linen) cloth, cloth wrapping J 19:40; 20:5, 6, 7; Lk 24:12. The applicability of the sense bandage (UPZ 85, 8; PGiss 68, 11) to our lit. is questionable. S. AVaccari, in Miscellanea biblica, BUbach ’53, 375–86, w. ref. to PRyl 627, 9 (IV a.d.]. S. also JBlinzler, ΟΘΟÎ?ΙΑ etc.: Philol 99, ’55, 158–66; RBrown, AB: John 942 and JFitzmyer, AB: Luke 1548.—DELG s.v. ὀθόνη. M-M. Spicq."

Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. 2000. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. "Based on Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Wr̲terbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frhüchristlichen [sic] Literatur, sixth edition, ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous English editions by W.F. Arndt, F.W. Gingrich, and F.W. Danker." (3rd ed.) . University of Chicago Press: Chicago


JW:
I've increasingly come to see BDAG as a Christian Lexicon of Early Christian Literature. The translation of BDAG's translation is that in general, for the Greek of the time, "ὀθόνιον" is the diminutive form of linen cloth which includes a meaning of bandages. They qualify however that it doesn't necessarily have a diminutive meaning in Christian literature. Apparently though, BDAG is unable to provide a single clear reference for the qualification, instead referring to explanations of Bible scholars.

BDAG categorizes 19:40 here but considering that the context is a body which is bound by "ὀθόνιον" one wonders how the context could be any clearer that bandages or at least linen strips was likely intended.

So here's your assignment Orthodox_Freethinker, find a single clear example of "ὀθόνιον" being used with bound and referring to "grave clothes" in the literature of the time. BDAG, Brown & Fitzmyer couldn't, maybe you can. Otherwise, stop wasting time quoting Truth-challenged Advocates for that guy from the Christian Bible whose name escapes me at the moment but I think starts with a "J" or "Y".

By the way, Rogers has recently confessed to us that the shroud does indeed have paint on it. Have you decided on a tact yet, such as claiming he's wrong about this?



Joseph

P.S. You're the author of the site you quote from, aren't you? Not many people could find a peer reviewed article claiming the C-14 test was invalid.

FAITH, n.
Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.


http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

NZSkep

I thought everyone knew the answer to that. GODDIDIT duh!

Mountain Man

And I answered the question related to the NT and the shroud. Sorry you didn't like it.:huh: