What Scripture says
The Gospels say Joseph of Arimathea wrapped Jesus’ body in a linen shroud (sindōn, Mark 15:46, ESV). John says the body was bound “in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews” (John 19:40), and that on Easter morning Peter saw “the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself” (John 20:6–7).
The Bible says nothing about the cloths being preserved.
What the evidence says
History
What it is
The Shroud of Turin is a linen cloth about 4.4 metres long and 1.1 metres wide, bearing the faint front and back image of a man who appears to have been scourged and crucified, with wounds to the wrists, feet, side and scalp. It is kept in Turin Cathedral in Italy.
Its history
- Its documented history begins around 1354, in Lirey, France.
- In 1389, Bishop Pierre d’Arcis wrote to the pope claiming an artist had confessed to painting it. (No such confession survives.)
- It was damaged by fire in 1532, and the burn marks and patches are still visible.
- It moved to Turin in 1578.
- Some propose it is the same as the Image of Edessa (or Mandylion), a cloth bearing Jesus’ face recorded from the 6th century, which would push its history earlier. This is debated.
In 1898, Secondo Pia photographed it and found that the photographic negative showed a far clearer, positive image, suggesting the image on the cloth itself is a negative.
Science
The 1988 carbon dating
In 1988, three laboratories (Oxford, Zurich and Arizona) independently radiocarbon-dated samples cut from one corner. The results, published in Nature in 1989, dated the linen to AD 1260–1390, with 95% confidence. This matches its first appearance in the historical record.
Challenges to the dating
| Challenge | Argument |
|---|---|
| Repaired area | Raymond Rogers (2005) argued the sample contained cotton and dye, suggesting a medieval repair woven into the original |
| Inconsistent data | A 2019 analysis of the labs’ raw data argued the samples weren’t uniform, and the result shouldn’t be treated as reliable |
| Contamination | Bacteria, smoke from the 1532 fire, or handling might have altered the carbon content |
Defenders of the 1988 dating respond that the labs cleaned the samples thoroughly, that the repair theory is not proven, and that contamination large enough to shift the date by over 1,000 years is unlikely.
The image
How the image formed is still unexplained:
- It isn’t paint: the 1978 Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), a team of scientists, found no significant pigment forming the image.
- It is extremely superficial, affecting only the top fibres of the threads.
- It contains three-dimensional information about the body’s distance from the cloth.
- Attempts to reproduce it, by painting, scorching or chemical methods, have produced similar but not identical results.
Skeptics argue a medieval artist used an unknown technique; supporters argue no medieval technique can account for it.
Where they meet
Carbon dating in 1988 put the Shroud at about 1260–1390, but that sample is disputed, and how the image formed is still unexplained. Christian faith doesn’t depend on the Shroud; the case for the resurrection rests on other evidence (see section 7).
What’s still open
The Shroud’s date and how its image formed.
Bottom line
Carbon dating (1988) put it at c. 1260–1390, but that sample is disputed and how the image formed is still unexplained. It’s an open question, so this is rated Open.