Re: [asa] Resurrection of the Shroud?

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <>
Date: Mon Apr 21 2008 - 16:21:56 EDT

I'm going by memory, so cannot justify the point. The claim was that the
tested fibers came from a patch that repaired damage from a fire, not
from the original shroud material. I consider the argument suspect, for
this should have been obviously avoided by anyone collecting the material
to be tested.

My basic argument is that the shroud does not represent the separate
winding and face covering noted in John 20:6f. See also 19:39f. So it
must be a fake, however dated by radiocarbon.
Dave (ASA)

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:27:05 -0400 writes:
Is anybody here familiar with the book "Resurrection of the Shroud: New
Scientific, Medical, and Archaeological Evidence" by Mark Antonacci
(2000)? If I used the search facility correctly, it does not appear to
have been reviewed in PSCF.

This book has become popular among some in my church who are into
evidentialist apologetics. As I understand it, the author is a lawyer,
not an expert in any of the fields of his subtitle, which is a red flag.

I remember reading the article in Nature in about 1989 where an
international team of experts did a careful radiocarbon dating study and
seemed to show quite clearly that this relic was manufactured around
1300-1400 and therefore was a medieval forgery (as the church originally
said when it appeared). I thought that was the final nail in the coffin.
 But this guy seems to be claiming to have discredited the radiocarbon
dating, along with making a variety of other scientific (or
pseudoscientific) arguments that make a case which seems convincing to my
non-scientific friends who have read it.
Of course I have to wonder if it rates with other books that make a
"convincing" case to the non-scientist, like "Worlds in Collision" or
"Chariots of the Gods" or various "creationist" books.

So, I would be interested in any evaluation of this book by someone
(preferably from a Christian perspective) with expertise in the relevant
science. Particularly in the radiocarbon aspect, where I find it hard to
believe that a result that looked so conclusive in 1989 would have been
discredited by 2000.

Allan Harvey, ASA Member

Get the MapQuest Toolbar, Maps, Traffic, Directions & More!

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Apr 21 16:30:48 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 21 2008 - 16:30:48 EDT