(Posted for comparison)
Posted on 03/25/2010 12:58:38 PM PDT by TaraP
The world will have an extraordinary opportunity to look upon an undistorted, never-before-seen, moving 3-D portrait of a man who many think is the crucified Jesus Christ.
In just one week, graphic experts will bring to life an imprint on the holy relic known as the Shroud of Turin, believed by millions to be the burial shroud of Christ.
The Shroud of Turin bears the full-body, back-and-front image of a crucified man that is said to closely resemble the New Testament description of the passion and death of Christ. The 14-foot cloth long has posed mysteries because of its age and its negative image of a bloodstained and battered man who had been crucified. Believers claim it to be the miraculous image of Jesus, formed as he rose from the dead.
The History Channel will air "The Real Face of Jesus?," a special two-hour event that premieres March 30 at 9 p.m. EST. It aims to bring the world as close as it has ever come to seeing what Jesus may have actually looked like.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Actually, from the Shroud, it appears that his nose may have been broken.
What a deep and profound statement.
You are very welcome.
Actually, from the Shroud, viewed as it actually exists, in a “folded over the head with both ends at the feet” panoramic, it appears that the man depicted has a two-dimensional head.
Look at full-length photos of the whole thing, not a cropped and flipped side-by-side view, and you’ll see that the man in the cloth’s forehead seems to touch the back of his head. The shroud’s subject’s skull has no crown. The shroud was folded lengthwise over the body, starting under the heels, running up the back, flipped over the crown of the head, and spread down over the face and anterior torso to the toes, but either about 4 inches of cloth are missing from the center of the fold, or the “Jesus” shown had a skull shaped somewhat like a transversely-peaked roof.
So, are you saying that he doesn’t appear to have a broken nose? I guess I lack your imagination/ability to visualize. :)
I have trouble reading maps, too.
Interesting ... especially since the translation from Latin is into Old English. Do you have a source for this information?
(Posted for comparison)
Imho, a compelling resemblance.
No, I’m saying that he doesn’t appear to have a broken nose, I’m saying that he doesn’t appear to have a three-dimensional human skull. I’m saying that the shroud, approximately 4.4 meters long and about 1.1 meters wide, appears to have been laid out flat, with the subject body placed on it lengthwise, heels at one end. The shroud was then pulled more or less taut and folded over the crown of the head and face and down the length of the anterior body to the toes. Except it wasn’t, because the figure in the shroud is missing the crown of its skull. The image almost reflects on itself, with the top of the image’s forehead touching the extreme “corner” of the back of the head. The top of “Jesus” head is completely missing!
Ok, call me dense, but are you saying that the Shroud is a hoax?
I think that you are mistaking a water stain for the back of the head touching the front of the head without a gap. Take a look here:
http://www.shroud.com/shrdwtr1.htm
On the right is the top of the front of the head and on the far left is the top of the back of the head. There is a gap there where the crown would be.
Saying that the Shroud is a hoax?
Yes.
That was done many years ago - first by the forensic scientist that was on the 1978 team - and he wrote a book on it - I forget the type - I'd have to look it up but I think it's AB.
I've been following this since the early '60's - Believe me, there are a lot of skeptics - the kind that would, as Thoreau said "find fault with the morning red - if they ever got up early enough. And there are a lot a atheists and dedicated groups that will do everything they can to tear it apart - even if proven. They have a vested interest in maligning the Shroud.
For every negative there are 100 positives, evidence wise. the preponderance is on the 'true' side - however, Bottom line is that is can never be proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt to be the Shroud of Jesus.
But it has been proven to be a burial shroud of the time and the place with all the points of the Biblical Crucifixion and the all the correct forensic details of a crucified man, etc etc.
Thereafter, it is up to us each to believe or not to believe. And that may be how it should be.
I see. Thanks. :)
Faith. It’s difficult.
Yes.
Then provide a credible explanation of how the image was put on the Shroud using 16th century technology.
The FACT is that 21st century scientists are unable to reproduce the Shroud's image using CURRENT technology.
I find this investigation to be incredibly hopeful. Thanks!
One of the biggest pieces of evidence against forgery is actually one of the most obvious:
A medieval forger would have based his forgery on the then universal belief that the nails were put through our Lord’s HANDS, he would have based this on everything he had ever heard and ALL artwork and Crucifixes. It wasn’t until much later that scientists realized that nails through the hands wouldn’t support the body’s weight and that the nails were actually put through His wrists, which is what the image in the Shroud shows.
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.