Posted on 04/08/2023 7:32:28 AM PDT by DoodleBob
What was created by the artist - the realistic depiction - was based on THE ACTUAL OBJECT (the shroud). It was NOT based on a legend.
This is not difficult to understand.
As usual, you’ve missed the point, and that’s fine.
Agree.
When I saw this, that was the very first phrase that entered my mind.
I’ve been studying the Shroud since I was in 6th grade(I’m 58 now!). I’ve read every book, pro and con, any peer reviewed scientific studies I could get my hands on, and I’m convinced the Shroud is authentic.
Thank you. No reference to wounds in that passage. The hearer must infer them.
I got to see the Shroud in 1978, It was a marvelous experience. After dinner that night walked by the Cathedral and could see them setting up for the scientific study’s that were to follow the public viewing.
As usual, you’re wrong and that’s expected.
Quit trolling.
You do realize that makes you a troll, right?
“IMHO, this is a work of art based upon a set of assumptions, which may or may not be correct. Even if all of the assumptions are correct, it is still just an artist’s impression of how Jesus appeared under the shroud, with the artist’s imagination, biblical accounts, and two thousand years of prior art filling in the blanks from the limited forensic information that could be derived from the shroud itself.”
Try reading up on the scientific investigations of the image on the Shroud, you’re shooting from the hip.
The “artist’s” work her is not so much “interpretation” as rendering into 3-D form the data/image imprinted on the shroud: which itself cannot even be reproduced by modern physicists: the do not even have a good mechanism to explain how it was formed. It is for that reason that the weasel word “legend” used in this thread is inadequate, because in context, it implies the Shroud is “known” to have been a man-made relic or scrap of cloth, and either pious or scheming interlopers took the opportunity to attach it to the story of the Crucifixion.
“Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen.”
(Luke 24:5b-6 NKJV)
He died and rose. I want to embrace both His death and Resurrection. 1 Cor. 2:1-2
I want to embrace both His death and Resurrection.With good reason: That Christ died a real death is the necessary condition precedent for the reality of His Resurrection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.