There have been expositions in 1998, 2000, 2010 and the current one.A tremendous amount of time, energy and money have been spent in each of those.
But if the newer thread is about half of what was tested – and some evidence suggests that – it is possible that the cloth is from the time of Christ.
No one has a good idea how front and back images of a crucified man came to be on the cloth.
Years ago, as a skeptic of the Shroud, I came to realize that while I might believe it was a fake, I could not know so from the facts.
Now, as someone who believes it is the real burial shroud of Jesus of Nazareth, I similarly realize that a leap of faith over unanswered questions is essential.
In recent discussions on the possible authenticity of the Turin Shroud (Sox 1981: Meacham 1983: Jumper et al 1984), the question of the value of C-14 dating persistently recurs.
Virtually all researchers agree that the test should be performed; sufficiently small samples can now be measured so that the appearance of the relic is not altered.
Some people believe that the shroud cannot be tested accurately and oppose such testing. The Shroud of Turin may be the real burial cloth of Jesus.
One reason: they think that a resurrection miracle changed the ratio of carbon 14 to carbon 12. The carbon dating, once seemingly proving it was a medieval fake, is now widely thought of as suspect and meaningless.
In this paper I shall examine the issue of the reliability of C-14 testing to produce an "absolute date" on the linen sheet known as the Holy Shroud of Turin and believed by some to be the gravecloth of Christ.
I have previously (Meacham 1983) treated the question of the Shroud's authenticity at length and shall confine my remarks here to the applicability and ultimate reliability of radiocarbon as an "authenticity test" of the relic.
One of the new articles quoted Pope John Paul II in 1998 saying continued research should be done.