One of the most common and thoughtful objections to the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin comes from a close reading of John 20:6-7. The passage reads:
"Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He 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."
At first glance, this seems to conflict with the idea that the Shroud of Turin—an approximately 14-foot-long linen cloth bearing the full-body image of a crucified man—could be the authentic burial shroud of Jesus. After all, if John is clearly describing a separate head covering, how can the Shroud, which includes the image of the face, be the burial cloth?
This concern is both valid and important. The strength of any case for the Shroud's authenticity must rest not only on scientific and historical grounds, but also on its faithfulness to the biblical text. Fortunately, when we look closely at the cultural context, language of the passage, and related historical artifacts, we find that John 20:6-7 is not only compatible with the Shroud of Turin—it may even support it.
1. Burial Customs in First-Century Judea
Jewish burial customs in the first century typically involved washing and anointing the body, followed by wrapping it in linen cloths. According to the Mishnah and other sources, the body might be wrapped with one main shroud and additional cloths, including a separate head covering, often referred to as a "napkin" or "sudarium."
This practice aligns well with John 20:6-7, where two different cloths are mentioned. The main burial cloth—the linen wrappings—and a separate head cloth that had been placed around the head of the deceased.
2. What Is the Sudarium of Oviedo?
There is a cloth in Oviedo, Spain, known as the Sudarium of Oviedo, which has been preserved since at least the 7th century and is believed by many to be the very head cloth described in John 20. It is a small, bloodstained cloth with no image, roughly 34 by 21 inches in size, and contains type AB blood—the same blood type found on the Shroud of Turin.
More importantly, forensic studies show that the bloodstain patterns on the Sudarium match those on the face of the Shroud. The size, shape, and placement of the stains have led researchers to conclude that the two cloths could have covered the same body.
Unlike the Shroud, the Sudarium was not used for burial but rather for covering the face immediately after death, which was a common Jewish practice to show respect and preserve dignity. Later, it would be removed and the body wrapped in the larger burial cloth.
3. Interpreting "Separate" in John 20:6-7
The Greek word used in John 20:7 for "separate" is "chōris," which can mean apart from or distinct, but does not necessarily imply a large distance. The verse also notes that the face cloth was "folded" or more accurately, "rolled up" (entylissō in Greek) and placed by itself.
This detail has been taken by some to mean the face cloth was treated reverently and placed in an orderly manner near the head of the burial site. This does not contradict the idea that the main burial cloth (the Shroud) would include the image of the face, especially if the face cloth had been removed prior to wrapping the body fully in the linen shroud.
4. Consistency With the Shroud of Turin
If we assume that Jesus’ body was first covered with the Sudarium immediately after death—while still on the cross or during transport to the tomb—and then later wrapped in the larger linen cloth (the Shroud), John 20:6-7 makes perfect sense.
The Sudarium would have been bloodied and removed before the body was laid in the Shroud. It would then have been placed respectfully at the head of the tomb space, separate from the linen wrappings. This is exactly what John describes.
Moreover, this sequence not only reflects Jewish burial practice but is also consistent with the data from both the Shroud and the Sudarium. The Shroud shows no sign of being disturbed or opened, and there is no decomposition present—suggesting the body left the cloth quickly and mysteriously, which aligns with the resurrection account.
5. Supporting Evidence From Early Christianity
While the Shroud of Turin is more widely known today, the Sudarium of Oviedo has its own long and well-documented history. Some early Christian writings refer to burial cloths of Christ, plural, and relics associated with the passion circulated throughout the early church.
Importantly, neither cloth contradicts the biblical account; rather, they may be seen as two pieces of the same burial tradition: one covering the face immediately after death, and the other used for burial in the tomb.
6. A Complementary Witness
Instead of seeing the Shroud and the Sudarium as conflicting, we should view them as complementary. Together, they provide a fuller picture of what may have happened between the crucifixion and the resurrection.
The Shroud bears witness to the suffering, crucifixion, and disappearance of Jesus' body, while the Sudarium gives forensic insight into the immediate moments following death. John’s Gospel captures this reality with careful attention to detail, not creating conflict, but showing the reverence and precision with which Jesus' body was handled.
Conclusion
Far from disproving the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, John 20:6-7 actually supports a scenario in which multiple cloths were used in accordance with Jewish burial customs. The presence of a separate head cloth, the Sudarium, does not contradict the Shroud’s authenticity but enriches the narrative and provides even more historical and forensic depth.
As believers who care deeply about both the authority of Scripture and the testimony of history, we don’t need to choose between the two. Instead, we can allow both the biblical text and the physical evidence to speak—together pointing us toward the mystery and majesty of Christ’s death and resurrection.
The Shroud and the Sudarium may just be two quiet witnesses, left behind in a borrowed tomb, silently proclaiming the greatest story ever told.
