www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings Burial cloths

Here notes on the Greek:

John stooped down and looked through the opening and 'saw' [blepo] which means to percieve and to understand at the same time.

John then steps aside and Peter enters the tomb and 'saw' [theoreo] which means intellectual knowledge alone. To perceive. Whence we get the word theater. He viewed the scene.

Peter witnessed or viewed the scene.
John saw it and understood it.

John now enters the tomb and �saw� [eido] the wrappings - which means he knew in an intimate and understanding way. He understood what the wrapping ment - right away.

John saw [edio] the wrappings still properly rolled and he also saw the sheet that covered the head laying apart and folded in one place.... (I am still not sure exactly what this means) but no body inside them and �believed� [pisteuo] which is a Greek word related to 'trust' or have 'faith' so John now knows and believes the resurrection.

So it is like this�

They both arrive - John looks inside and sees and understands at the same time that Jesus is not there.

He steps aside and Peter goes in first and sees (witnesses without understanding) the scene.

John then goes inside and sees the condition of the wrappings and immediately knows and believes for sure - that Jesus has risen from the dead.

While John knows and believes that Jesus had risen from the dead - he did not yet know [eido]that scriptures had predicted this. He did not realizes yet that scripture foretold this.

John and Peter then leave �to their place�. Without speaking.

Mary now leans in to look and she now sees two angels - one at the head and one at the foot where Jesus had been (OK!! NOW I GOT THAT!! � NOW I know what this would have meant to the Jew of the times!! Oh!! Man!! What a mind blower to a Jew who knew his history!!!).

Mary saw [theroreo] the angels without understanding. Peter saw the wrappings without understanding. Mary did not see the wrappings she saw angels - Peter did not see angels he saw the wrappings. Yet - they both saw (without understanding) the same thing. I know what that means but I am not telling.

Mary did not know [edio] what became of Jesus� body.
Peter saw the wrappings and did know [edio] what had happened to the body.

After Mary speaks with the two angels she turns and saw Jesus [theroreo] but does not [edio] really know it is Jesus.

Jesus speaks her name and now she [edio] knows it is Jesus.

Jesus then says to her �Do not cling to me. I have not yet ascended to the father.� The Greek word can mean either to-touch or to-cling - but James would touch him - so here is is being used as 'cling'. What Jesus was telling Mary was - do not cling to me as if you would not be seeing me again - I am not yet gone for good (assended to the father) so I will be around for a bit. So instead of clinging to me right now - go and tell the disciples that - I have risen.

Rose2, without you or Stephnos I would not have looked so deeply into this.

I remind you that this is only my opinon and I am not certain on portions of it. Perhaps I should have written nothing unitll after I have investigated - rather than confuse you as I invetigated.

-ray

Ray,
An interesting comparison. The Shroud of Turin as the (entulisso or linteamina) and the Sudarium of Oviedo. Very interesting but I will have to wait the share the findings until tommorrow.
Stephanos I

Thanks... I know of this but have not investigated in depth. I would appreciate your take on it.

I do wish I had held off on writing while I was investigated... because I explored several opinions and that must be confusing to anyone. Trying each out.

I have tried very hard to see if it might actually read any different from the traditional view of the bindings being in one place and the other 'sheet' (whatever that was) being folded neatly in another place - but it did not really work.

I just now consulted www.peshitta.org [peshitta.org] and it too seems to be saying that the linen wrappings were in one place and the linen that covered the head - in another and neatly folded. This translation says 'head' and not 'face' and that can be a big difference.

I cannot be certain beyond a doubt what size the folded head covering was... a smaller napkin or a large shroud like sheet or what!

Nor can I be dead certain between the wrappings being simple ties around the limbs or a full temporary wrapping (neck to toe with another head sized sheet about the head something like a hood).

It makes some sense - if you imagine a bust - that you could take a hand towel size cloth - place it on the top of the head and let it drape all around - in other words - one sheet for the whole head - but that is not the final wrap of the head - which was also wrapped about with strips (mummy like).

I really wish I knew. This is now bugging me.

I am also trying like heck to fit the shroud of Turin into the picture - but right now - I really do not know. It depends upon what the wraps really were like. After all - the Turin shroud shows direct contact with the body - and full wrap with head or face napkin - would go against that. Perhaps the Turin shroud was only used between the cross and the tomb?? But that does not seem to be practical either.

So far - I am stumped. Still at square one (except now know what the two angels mean inside the tomb).

You see - and I will try to explain this well but I do not know if I can.

The Egyptian sarcophagus is called an Ark. In either Coptic or Hebrew - it is one of those words which can mean a couple of things - and which depends upon the context it is being used. You can see a hint of that in as much as it is used for the Ark of the covenant and also as the name of the reed boat in which Moses was found. So it is a box or a boat - but in either case it is a �container�. But more than just a container� like the Eastern sense of �icon� it is an �icon� of its contents.

And I have always known (early Coptic being the language Moses originally wrote his books in) that there was a connection between the Ark of the Covenant - and the concept of a sarcophagus. Now bear with me for a minute. The Egyptian sarcophagus is a bit like the Russian dolls (one inside the other). So once you open the wooden or stone sarcophagus (shaped like the deceased) you encounter the wrappings (shaped like the deceased) which are also known as sarcophagus (we call it a mummy).

Now if you think of the Ark of Israel - it is - in Egyptian anyway �the sarcophagus of the king� and should contain the king�s body. In Israel - it contains the sacred items (tablets, rod of Aaron, manna) but on top has two - angels - the two cherubim with wings. The invisible presence of God - settled - between these two angels as a dark cloud of inner fire. And in the tomb of Jesus - between the angels - was where the body of Jesus had been. And probably where the empty wrappings were. So the image is that God descended onto the wrappings (the sarcophagus) of Jesus. And visa verse that it was Jesus who invisibly sat between the angels of Moses� Ark.

In biblical way - what Peter saw was the wrappings and not angels - what Mary saw way angels and not wrappings. This indicates (in biblical ways that this is done) that both are the same thing. One sees it this way - the other sees it that way - but it is the same one thing. For example - Mary sees what looks to her to be the caretaker - and later - the same thing looks to her to be Jesus. The object does not �change�� it is always what it is� we just experience it in two ways. On the road to Emmaus - it WAS a stranger - yet it WAS Jesus. Do you see? The stranger did not �turn into� Jesus - it was already Jesus. The Caretaker did not �turn into� Jesus - it was Jesus.

The Ark of the Covenant - WAS - the tomb of Jesus. That is what the two angels mean. The Ark of the Covenant and the tomb of Jesus - are - the same thing. That is what a Jew would have understood.

Perhaps better said is that the Ark of Moses was the icon of the tomb of Jesus.

I always keep in mind that the gospels were written by Jews - for Jews. We (2000 years later) are secondary to that.

That may be the most important item I get from this investigation.

God be with you Stephanos.

-ray

After a few hours sleep, I have these thoughts to try out.

It seems to be that what John and Peter saw was two piles of linens. Mary saw not two piles of linens - but two angels dressed in white linen.

The boys saw these two piles as separated. Mary saw the two angels as seperated with one at the foot of the hewn slab and one at the head.

So I think we can assume that the two piles of linen were: one at the head and one at the foot of the hewn slab.

(Now I wonder if the Greek where we read �head� could possibly mean its position, at the head of the slab? and not its use (head-veil).

I have no trouble at all with the boys seeing one thing and Mary seeing something else - but both were seeing the same thing (in two ways). My past experience with mystics is that this is common. And it is one of the general rules that if everyone is seeing the exact same thing (in supposed vision) then it is less likely a genuine spiritual event. (I will explain that further down Stephanos).

Mary needed more help to believe (so she saw angels) John needed less by which to have faith (so he saw linens folded). (why folded?)

Now one would think that the linens were a bit soggy from the mixture of aloes and myrrh - but if something is folded - that would indicate it was not a soggy mess - but rather dry. ??

I am reminded of the opening to the book of Revelations - where Christ is standing in the holy of holiness - dressed as and officiating as the High Priest on the day of Atonement. This �peek� into eternity - coincides with Jesus' moment of sacrifice - and all indications are that in John�s vision Jesus is about to pour out the blood of his sacrifice upon the ark and I am now wondering if the folded linen in the tomb indicated that these were the garments of a high priest.

In the opening of Revelations, Jesus (the figure) is standing inside the holy of holies - dressed in the gold breast plate of the High Priest - the seven candle menorah is there - its seven flames are seven �stars� - and since the menorah stood inside the holy of holies in the earthly Temple - we are to understand it is the Day of Atonement and we are seeing in heaven - what Jesus is doing on earth (his sacrifice on the cross). It also corresponds to the veil of the Temple being torn (the purpose of the large curtain around the holy of holies was so that the public would not see inside). And here (the veil being torn) we see the use of the word 'veil' to indicate what was a huge and heavy curtain.

So for the curtain (veil) to be torn means - that we can now see inside to what is taking place - and what is taking place is what John sees at the opening of Revelations. So you see - the reader is supposed to make this connection.

Apparently - looking inside the tomb - is now paralleled with these - also. In as much as the two angels represent the two cherubim on the Ark - between which the �cloud of presence� descended - only once a year - ON THE DAY OF ATONMENT.

According to Jewish tradition: The Presence of God was always between the cherubim of the tent that Moses had built. And when Solomon built the First permanent Temple the Presence descended into the holy of holies and took its seat on the Ark. Some time later (before the Babylonian exile) the Presence left the Ark (because of Israelis unfaithfulness) and only descended between the cherubim ONCE a year - on the Day of Atonement.

Now here is the ritual of the Temple on the Day of Atonement: Of the course of High Priests - the one High Priest to do the ritual is selected by lot. He is chosen by divinging the will of Providence (he draws the one white stone from all other stones which are black). He then dresses in pure white linen (the only time of the year his entire clothing is all white) and straps a gold girdle around his chest and waist (the gold girdle seen in the opening of Revelations). He then fears for his life because his job is to take the brass bowel containing the blood of the scarified lamb - and to take that bowel into the Holy of holies. As he enters - the Presence of God is either already waiting or it descends onto the Ark between the cherubim. The High Priest then spills the blood upon the ark - and upon the ground - and dipping his fingers into the bowel he touches blood onto all four corners of the Ark (hoping that he is still alive after!!). With that - he emerges out of the Holy of Holies - and if he is still alive - he thanks God and he then continues as the Chief High Priest (above all other High Priests) for the year - until next year when the lots is done again.

Now I really do not want to say to much about the mechanics of a vision� but if one reminds oneself that an angel is pure spirit (can only be experienced by our minds) and have no material physical bodies therefore it is impossible for our senses to experience what is pure spirit - and if one reminds oneself that when God�s voice was heard on Mt Sinai it sounded like thunder to some, but to some they heard the voice of God - and all who heard the voice of God that day heard a bit different words because it spoke to each about their personal sin - than one can know that these experiences are direct experiences to the senses of the one who is experiencing them. There is always an external material and physical focal point (the thunder, the linens) but that spiritual part of the experience takes place upon the senses of the one having the vision.
That is all I can say without confusing anyone. Many times scriptures report that God speaks to the visionary through a dream - by having the vision take place within the senses of the visionary.


Dear Rose2, if you have not given up reading this thread (and who would blame you if you did!) I think we are very close to a firm determination that the two piles of linens and the two angels - represented a parralel between the tomb and the Ark of the Covenant. This is perhaps better said as that the tomb and the body of Christ are the - rel - Ark of the Covenant and the Ark of Moses is but an 'icon' of that.

-ray

Please excuse my ignorance, and I really enjoy reading your speculations. The positive information is that the Peter and John did see the cloths and Mary and the other women did see the angels and later Christ. Why does that assume that Mary did not see the cloths? Is it because it was "not written" - perhaps it was obvious that if Peter and John saw the cloths that because it was already stated that the cloths were actually there, of course Mary also saw them (no need for repetition) but Mary also saw the angels and Christ.

Exactly Rose2.
And lets get it straight about "Aloes" has nothing to do with the Aloe plant that we know.
It was a dry fragrant wood.
Stephanos I

The studying I did last night was very interesting.
There is the head napkin (sadarion) which is believed to be preserved in the Cathedral of Oviedo in Spain. It measures 84 cm (about 33 inches) by 53 cm (about 21 inches.)Interesting to note that this is approximately the size of an anti mensium in the Eastern Churches.This Sadarion has been documented since the first century.
The Shroud of Turin if authentic (and I firmly believe it is ) would have been around 14 ' long.
Hence formerly in Latin Church the altar cloth measured "yeah you guess it" 14'.This Shroud would have been the Entulisso which was lying there.
Both of these items have blood stains on them and both are AB, DNA tests conclude that they are from a male (XY) and that they are from the same person.

Stephanos I

It appears from what I read, the reason why John saw and believed was the manner in which the burial clothes were unmoved. In other words not unwound, Jesus had just gone through them, and they lay were they were. As to the head cloth or the Sadarion, why was it rolled up and set apart?

Do you think it could mean that? They lay there still 'wrapped' but no body?

The certainly would be a shocker. And I too would tend to lean this way - but I am not sure I can find anything solid - to support it.

I have looked at, and tried, several diffrent ways - and I remain stumped.

Aloes was a wood huh? Powder. And so was myrrh - a powder. Well these would have been the very expensive items - donated by Nicodemus. I imagine olive oil would do (cheap).

I appreciate your patience with me.

How do you see it taking place?? What is the senerio you would lean to?

I used to have a book named "The Day Jesus Died" and I wish I knew where it was.

-ray

I did not notice any 'ignorance' except on my own part.

I can not answer what you propose.

I really do not know.

I consulted some older books that I jave which I thought for sure would give the Jewish customs as applied to Jesus in the tomb - but it gave very little.

There MUST be some writer - somewhere - who has given this much research.

-ray

Ray,
I would believe it was a very very reasonable assumption given the account and here is why.
#1 John takes great care to make mention of the particulars of how the burial clothes appeared.
(That was not mere coincidence but conveys a very signiifcant point.)
#2 Because he noticed the special conditions of the burial clothe, "He saw and believed."
Stephanos I

I just found this...

I had speculated to my wife - that perhaps the shroud of Turin may have been used only between the cross and the tomb.

I tend to agree with you Stephanos.

There seems to be disagreement between scholars as to if he was fully wrapped (bandage style) of just tied at hands, knees and feet - and the shroud folded over him. But the "shroud" method seems to not be the Jewish way - bandage wrapping was (with myrrh and aloes powder between the wraps).

John 19:40 "they took the body of Jesus and bound it with beruial cloths and spices, according to the Jewish custom."

That seems to say - the full wrap.

I have read that the face-sheet was used before the wrapping - and when the head was wrapped - it was laid aside... and so it was not part of the final 'wrap'.

I tend to lean with you Stephanos - the full wrap - washed and all - aloes powder and myrrh goo between the wrappings... and it remained like an empty shell - on the rock shelf between the two angels.

You are right Rose2 - there is nothing to say that Mary did not also see the wrappings between the two angels.

Rose2 - what are your impressions about the whole seneario? How would you tend to say the whole thing happened?

-ray

Ray,
Some other very interesting findings after some study on the Shroud and the Holy Mandylion of Edessa. (Modern day Urta in Turkey)
The Shourd was aproximately 14'3" in length and and 3'7" in width. Historically it seems to be the same piece of cloth mention by Eusebius and later by St John Damascene in his refutation of the Iconoclasts.
The Holy Mandylion was presented by the Apostle Thaddaeus to King Abgar V of which it was said that he was cured of leprosy.
As to what was spectacular to the Apostles Peter and John, look at the old mozarabic antiphon:
"Peter and John went to the tomb and saw on the Shroud the recent imprint of the Dead One who had risen."

It could very well have been the sheet that was used in carrying the most precious body of our Savior Jesus Christ to the Tomb.
As to it being "bandages" in which the body of Jesus was wrapped I am in no doubt, look at John 11:44 for the custom of the day for burial. They were long strips of cloth (I forget exactly what width) for winding around the body of the deceased and as you said the aloe and myrrh a resinous substance would have mad a shell through which Jesus passed.
Stephanos I

Dear Friends,

With respect to the Shroud of Turin, we know that it was formerly a relic in the sometime possession of the Templars.

It still belongs to the descendants of the Templar Knight Sir Geoffroi de Chancey, the nephew of a Templar of the same name who was burned along with Jacques de Molay and others at Paris.

The fact is that throughout the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church regarded the Shroud as a pious object, but not the actual shroud of Christ and it has never pronounced on this, despite a consensus coming from certain parts of the scientific community.

The Shroud is also venerated by many Orthodox and there are copies of it preserved in Orthodox parishes as their Epitaphion.

But other Orthodox regard it as a forgery precisely because the Face of Christ is imprinted on it and this contradicts the scriptural witness that Christ's Head was wrapped in a cloth that was separate from the winding sheet.

Alex

Alex,

Or, perhaps, more properly, to the legitimate successors of those who preserved it at the Pharos Chapel in the Bucholean Palace in Constantinople, before it was looted by the Crusaders.

Many years,

Neil