Jerome R. Corsi : '2nd face' on Shroud points to supernatural origin

Catholic Online ^ | April 28 2010 | Jerome R. Corsi

[Berlin_Freeper]

Fanti and Maggiolo concluded the shroud image was created by a "corona discharge," understood as a radiant burst of light and energy that scorched the body image of the crucified man on the topmost fibers of the shroud's front and back sides, without producing any image on the centermost of its linen fibers.

"Imagine slicing a human hair lengthwise, from end to end, into 100 long thin slices; each slice one-tenth the width of a single red blood cell," writes Daniel Porter, editor of ShroudStory.com. "The images on the Shroud of Turin, at their thickest, are this thin."

Fanti and Maggiolo found the faint image of the face on the reverse side of the shroud contained the same 3D information contained in the face and body image of the crucified man seen on the shroud's front side.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so very much for your testimony, dearest sister in Christ!

[Swordmaker]

That is very different than those of our day attempting to find proof from a bit of fabric based on man's standards of who is the authority that establishes if it is authentic or not. And those opinions will differ and change. There are already pasts testings etc. done that have said the shroud was not that used for Christ.

But because some want to "believe" the possibility they will search until they can establish that belief one way or another...in doing so they have taken the science of the research to a level outside of the science which has already made the determination. And the battles rage over which research is correct or not.

No, there you are wrong. The tests cannot say that... they can only make conclusions of what they test. The tests that have been done since other tests have in many instances falsified the earlier tests by doing better science using more definitive tests, which falsifies the "determinations" that the earlier tests may have indicated. One follows the science in peer-reviewed work... work that has been checked and re-checked and published in journals that are respected. True science builds on what was done before. Many of the so-called "deterministic" conclusions were never peer-reviewed, some never duplicated, or even not done by scientists.

[Bellflower]

Please ping us with the report. TY

[aruanan]

I disagree.......becausse the written record is the source of that verbal witness.... and as Christians we know who the author of that record is...I believe that record..and that God is the author of His written word...and that has stood the test of time and tide.

The source of the verbal witness was their sensory experience of the risen Lord about which some of the eyewitnesses wrote (as well as at least one who wasn't himself a witness). As John said, "We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth" and then later in his first letter, "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. We write this to make our joy complete. This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.

[shibumi]

"Why couldn't God make a Polaroid instead of a shroud?"

Because of the consummate inelegance of "instant" photography.

(And choosing not to do something should not be confused with the inability to do it.)

[shibumi]

"Now why can't the Universe's greatest artist do something just as good?"

Maybe He isn't interested in promoting the mythos of a Wiccan Nerd with a homosexual mentor.

[lupie]

I have always wondered what drives people to add others they don’t know to pings that the others have shown no interest in. I don’t get it. But I don’t suppose the pinger will answer. I have my suspicions though.

[Quix]

INDEED.

[brytlea]

Exactly. It matters not to me if it’s real or a forgery. I am curious, and a skeptic. I would love to know how it was made, whether it was made as Jesus was resurrected, or whether some really really smart person later made it as a deception. I am just interested in the truth. Many people are not.

[itsahoot]

The action in both of these, the ascension of Jesus into the sky, takes place about 5 weeks later than the encounters immediately after the resurrection in which he invites the assembly, and later Thomas, to handle his body.

The visible ascension is not necessarily what Jesus was talking about, since he apparently could enter and leave rooms instantly. It could well be a just a sign, not unlike what Thomas demanded by placing his hand in the pierced body of Christ.

[itsahoot]

Now why can't the Universe's greatest artist do something just as good?

Well He did create you, just so you could be here to denigrate the Faithful. What more could you ask?

[Moonman62]

Well He did create you, just so you could be here to denigrate the Faithful.

Faithful to what? A piece of cloth?

[itsahoot]

Faithful to what? A piece of cloth?

Now you are just being silly. Let it go, even Hawking has given up.

[oldfart]

“Now why can’t the Universe’s greatest artist do something just as good?”

Possibly because the intent wasn’t to form an image, that was simply a byproduct of the primary mission which was to resurrect His son. That He did quite well.

[potlatch]

Thank you Joya. I found your link very interesting indeed!

[caww]

.....”The source of the verbal witness was their sensory experience of the risen Lord about which some of the eyewitnesses wrote”......

...but that is after all how we communicate with those standing in front of us or walking along with us. They are there inperson. Again...mary did not need the cloth pieces to confirm anything...she saw the Lord...so did his followers.

Can’t hardly believe some trying to explain away the actual meeting with Christ Himself, by the hundreds, eye witnesses who saw and walked with him, the historial documents written and spoken that indeed He died..was buried..and rose again..........and yet put the weight they are if or not these cloth pieces were his or not. ....explaining these were “sensory” experiences.....I can’t stop chuckling because that is how we communicate. So then are you saying the burial cloth ...because it’s tangible....is of equal or more in value of that we have written in the scriptures?

[Bellflower]

My faith doesn’t put any store in relics and such, so whether it’s authentic or not, or supernatural or not, does not weigh all that heavily upon me.

People feel so pious when they think that their faith doesn't rest in any material witness. The Bible itself is words written on pages of paper, a material thing that you realize is rational and expedient to put your faith into the fact of what it says. Faith is the substance of things hope for and the EVIDENCE of thing not seen.

Do you really think that The LORD would not be completely involved if such a thing as a scientifically inexplicable picture of His resurrection was captured on His burial shroud and kept throughout the ages as a witness? Do you think He would allow for such evidence if it was to be considered completely inconsequential by the faithful?

If He deemed to allow for there to be such convincing material evidence of His resurrection left as witness as a to the truth of The Bible who are you to degrade it's significance? It is meant to help some faithless to actually believe that what The Bible says is true. It also helps those weak of faith to believe more strongly. Even those who have stronger faith if they are honest and not proud are helped to have their faith strengthened because if they study the subject of The Shroud of Turin they will be able to understand more completely what our LORD suffered for us and the hope of the resurrection is strengthened by the material witness that Christ lovingly left for us.

I believe that in His mercy and love he allowed for there to be evidence of His resurrection so that thoughtful people of good conscience and a true desire for truth would be able to know that what is written in the Bible is true. There is much evidence in this world other than just this shroud left to help the truth loving, seeking intellectual to be able to come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. It is apparent that The LORD has deemed to leave this astounding evidence as one tool that He uses to bring the lost into His fold.

[RegulatorCountry]

People feel so pious when they think that their faith doesn't rest in any material witness.

I don't need relics to believe in the God of the Bible, Bellflower. Neither do you. If this shroud is not what it's purported to be, I'm not wounded in the least. If it is, that's a fascinating and wonderful thing, and is no threat at all. I welcome it. But, I don't need it.

[RightOnline]

Kidding, right?

[RightOnline]

For what it’s worth to all of you.......this is nothing new. It has been known for decades that the image was formed by some sort of energetic event. “Coronal discharge” is probably inaccurate, but it’s the closest the researchers seemed to be able to come up with. That’s not a criticism, per se’. Just....nothing new here.

Also....not all of us are sold on the “second face” on the back of the Shroud. Far from it. There is zip for imagery on the side of the Shroud that wasn’t facing the body.

That is a simple fact. The process that formed/’scorched/ the image on the cloth was on one side only, and there is no way it caused a second image on the back. Look at their very definition: the image is formed on the outer/body facing fibrils only. That is true and accurate. The backside of the cloth was NOT facing the body.

No way there’s a ‘second face’, folks.