Fact or Fiction

During the week prior to Easter, a very interesting news special took one to the Roman Catholic cathedral in Turin, Italy to view behind bulletproof glass the so called divine apparition known as the Shroud of Turin. As the television camera panned across the crowd, hundreds were literally mesmerized by the spectacle of the shroud; elderly women were pathetically sobbing, men were mechanically genuflecting, young school children were praying up ward at it. Indeed, this piece of ancient cloth has been the talk and excitement even among born again Christians. While mentioning some thoughts about the shroud to a brother, he stated his allegiance to the scientific findings (regardless of the fact that the Bible flatly opposes these findings!) and believed that to question the veracity of its genuineness was something akin to blasphemy. (Two years ago a team of some thirty experts in various areas of science spent considerable time in determining whether the shroud was fact or fiction. The majority of them felt that it was the actual burial shroud of the Lord Jesus Christ.)

Not One Shroud But Many Strips

In this brief consideration of the Shroud of Turin, the question may be simply posed—what are Christians to think about the shroud? Surprisingly, although the shroud seems quite novel to us, the great John Calvin had written about it in 1553. In order to understand what Calvin wrote, one should be enlightened as to the burial procedure, particularly in Christ’s own burial. We read in John’s account that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, “took the body of Jesus, and bound it in linen bandages, along with the aromatics, as is the burial custom of the Jews.” John 19:40, Tra slation by William Hendriksen. Dr. W. E. Vine, noted Greek scholar, states that Christ‘s body was firstly wrapped with a full length shroud and then wound tightly with bandage–like strips, for the Greek word for cloth in Matthew (sindon) means shroud, whereas in John, the Greek word (othonion) indicates bandage–like strips. A workable solution in harmonizing these two words is available. The feasible solution is that, “the clean linen cloth in which the body had been wrapped, was now torn in swathes or cloths, into which the body, limb by limb, was now bound, no doubt between layers of myrrh and aloes, the head being wrapped in a napkin.” From The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, p. 642, vol. 2. John states that the two disciples encountered a napkin and the linen bandages (John 20:6, 7), no mention is made of a shroud for if it had existed, it now existed as t he long bandage–like strips.

Conservative theologians such as Merrill Tenney, Leon Morris, and William Hendriksen have all written that the burial cloth was simply, “bandage–like wrappings,” “thin strips of bandages,” “long bandage–like strips,” or “strips of linen.” Such being the case, we have ample grounds for rejecting the shroud as fact for it is inconsistent with the J ohannine account: that Peter and John did see two piles of burial covering, not one.

Calvin‘s Thoughts on the Shroud

Calvin wrote about the shroud in 1553, “. . . that his head was wrapped in a napkin refutes the falsehood of the Papists, who pretend that the whole body was sewn up in one linen cloth, which they show to the unhappy masses to adore. I overlook their ignorance of Latin, which led them to make the word “napkin” (which was used to wipe sweat off the face) into a covering for the whole body . . . but this gross falsehood is intolerable, for it openly contradicts the gospel history. To this is added the fabulous miracle which they have invented, that the likeness of Christ’s body is impressed on the linen. I ask you if such a miracle had been performed would the Evangelist have suppressed it when he is so careful to relate less important things?” Commentary on John, John Calvin, vol. 2, p. 194.

The Nails in Christ’s Palms

Perhaps the greatest objection to the shroud is its adherents’ insistence (and some medical doctors’), that it is impossible for the weight of a body to be suspended by the nails through the palms (hands), that the nails had to be driven in between the ulna and radius (bones of the forearm) at the area of the wrists. Historical data has shown that Jesus was nailed to a Latin cross; it would have been impossible for the sign above his head to be fastened on the other two types of crosses also used (the St. Andrews cross and the St. Anthony cross.) “On the Latin cross a pegma (Greek) or cornu/sedile -Latin) supported the weight of the body to prevent it from tearing the hands free.” New Bible Dictionary. p. 282.

The modern research team that will soon publish their findings insist that the nails had to go through Christ’s wrists, for that is how they are found on the shroud. What are we to say of this? Turning to John 20:24, 25, we find Thomas the doubter blatantly stating, “unless I see in His hands the marks of the nails . . .” (NIV). Here we find God’s infallible Word deciding the issue for us. Christ’s hands were pierced, not His wrists, therefore the shroud may be rejected on these grounds.

The Bible Our Standard

As Christians we must remain grounded in the Word of God. Where scientific investigation leads astray, we must remain steadfast and be counted fools for Christ’s sake. We can reject the authenticity of the shroud on the following grounds: The New Testament account of the grave clothes mentions two pieces covering Christ, the shroud is one piece of cloth, Thomas saw the nail prints in Christ’s hands, not his wrists as the shroud would have us believe, we are to walk by faith, not by sight, the Shroud of Turin can do nothing for Christians except become an object of idolatry and falsehood, and the last reason we should consider is that satan, the enemy of our souls, has the ability to deceive and work lying wonders.

Science is not Infallible

In closing, a thought from the late Dr. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, “If you study the history of science you will have much less respect for its supposed supreme authority than you had when you began . . . let us remember that so many of their assertions are mere suppositions and theories which cannot be proved, and which may very well be disproved, as so many have been disproved during the past one hundred years.” Authority, p. 40.