Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: orionblamblam
It is time to admit that you have no idea what you are talking about. I am truly wasting my time replying.

You are ignoring the science. Capillary action of a dye, ink or paint through the cloth would leave imaging throughout the cloth. You are ignoring the fact that the image is superficial to the outer crowns on the outmost fibers of the cloth faces. In other word capillary action will not work. You are also continuing to ignore the fact that numerous spectrographic tests, wet chemical analysis and microscopic examination have ruled out paint, dye, and ink.

As for how many people were crucified in the first century. Sometimes several thousand per month. But you fail to understand that almost all were not buried but left on crosses as carion or tossed into charnal pits, without benefit of Shroud. The Gospel accounts tell us that Jesus was an exception. Any shrouds that were used for a few would have decomposed in the tomb unless the tomb was empty. You might want to study up on 2nd-Temple burial practices in the environs of Jerusalem. Tombs were generally not opened for about a year for reburial of remains in ossuaries.

I realize that I am wasting my time replying to you. But it is fun. Shroudie
80 posted on 04/17/2004 2:48:08 PM PDT by shroudie (http://shroudstory.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]


To: shroudie
> You are ignoring the science.

No. My only problem here is that I'm debating a zealot.

> You are ignoring the fact that the image is superficial to
the outer crowns on the outmost fibers of the cloth faces. In other word capillary action will not work

Sorry, wrong. Capillary action will do this quite nicely. Fluids will often traverse cloth, leaving a dark stain at the outer extent, and little to no stain over the areas they've covered in gettign there. Now, if you have a stained cloth produced in the 1300's, and then allowed to age for 650 years... it's easy to see how the fainter areas in the interior will get even fainter, leaving only the exterior areas to have any visibility whatsoever.

Ergo: dye not on the interior =/ miracle.

And of course, if the dye or paint or stain or egg whites or whatever were not applied thickly, then it's again easy to see why the interior would not be stained, but just the exterior. And as for the "other" face...it's astonishingly easy to see two entirely amterialistic reasons for it to be there, as well, especially if it's seen via image processing.

>Any shrouds that were used for a few would have decomposed in the tomb unless the tomb was empty.

Huh. Then, how do we even know that this is an accurate burial shroud, and not just a fourteenth century beach towel? If all burial shrouds except for those magical few used in cases of resurection have decomposed... we'd have mighty few burial shoruds, wouldn't we? And if this one is the only one... how do you know it is what it's said to be?

> I am wasting my time replying to you. But it is fun.

No doubt it is. I'm sure you're using this as an excercise in your cutting-and-pasting skills.
81 posted on 04/17/2004 3:46:29 PM PDT by orionblamblam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

To: shroudie
Check out the previous post... I too have given up on Orionblamblam. Nothing moves him. He is willfully ignorant.
84 posted on 04/17/2004 6:04:04 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson