Posted on 08/21/2024 8:04:03 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Sometime in the mid-'80s, I remember going to Atlanta with a group from my church to see the Shroud of Turin, the linen cloth that some have claimed was the cloth that Joseph of Arimathea used to bury Jesus and place Him in the tomb. I remember images and videos in that crowded exhibit hall that told the story of the shroud, and of course, the shroud itself was on display in a glass case.
I was probably 12 or 13, so I wasn’t mature enough in my faith to be able to conclude whether it was real. I do remember the controversy surrounding the dating of the artifact even then, and there were rumors that people were experiencing healing after coming near the shroud. Nevertheless, it fascinated me enough to keep an eye on any news I see about it even today.
The Shroud of Turin first came to prominence in the 1350s, and by the 16th century, it had a permanent home in Turin, Italy. For hundreds of years, the faithful believed that it was Jesus’ burial cloth, and plenty of people believe it today. But in the ‘80s, some researchers concluded that the shroud only dated to the Middle Ages.
Now, a group of Italian researchers have used a new technique called Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS) to study the shroud. Comparing the shroud to another linen sample that dates to the New Testament era, they conclude that the cloth dates back to the time of Jesus.
Scientific Technique Dates Shroud of Turin to Around the Time of Christ’s Death and Resurrection
Liberato De Caro discusses his peer-reviewed findings, based on an X-ray method of research, used to determine the age of the shroud’s fibers.⤵️ https://t.co/uLzCh09gCt— National Catholic Register (@NCRegister)
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
“If that were universally true, God would not have commanded Israel to make them at certain occasions...”
I think everyone can agree if God gives a specific command that can serve to bypass a general rule God has given. Absent such a specific command, however, the general rule is still in effect.
In commanding the making of images for the Temple and other instances, it is clear that God is not by-passing his own rules at all. After all, the First Commandment doesn't forbid the making of images; it forbids making them for the purpose of worshipping them:
“You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them... (Exodus 20:4-5)
“My question to you, is WHY would you kneel and pray to an IMAGE of Mary when God invites you into a personal relationship with him as FATHER through the Holy Spirit and Jesus.”
In my question is why do people hold the Apostle Paul in such high regard? He never really even met Jesus, he talks about Jesus coming to him but this was 40 or 50 years after Jesus had already passed away and risen.
That’s why we have theology.
How many have taken college level theology classes? I certainly have and it almost turned me into an unbeliever because it is so factual in regards to the documentation and the validity thereof in a historical context. Theology rarely delves into faith.
Theology is an investigation into the authenticity of all things relating to Christianity and Hebrew, all things; documents, historical documents validity of documents validity of translations validity of people, the archaeological tepresentations... the screening of texts, comparative studies of various translations of text from differing ancient origins.
To study Faith go to Sunday school, a lot of times people take a few years theology, which is a facinating “science” and come away less a Christian than before. TMI? Perhaps, it can become a quest, or a pursuit. A gut feeling or inner peace may be the only explaination some would ever need.
Heart knowledge? Yes! I also think head knowledge is important to comprehend the historical times, idioms, practices and surroundings.
There’s not a day goes by when I see some representation of a Biblical scripture primarily because there is nothing new Under the Sun, and Human Nature might be finite.
But it’s very interesting to me when I hear or see something or read something or catch a news item that it just clicks in my head that is like just like what happened in this particular chapter or verse, or book... it’s amazing.
It’s also very helpful to understand that it was all understood during ancient times thousands of years ago.
You’d need a Transporter, wouldn’t you?
“the First Commandment doesn’t forbid the making of images; it forbids making them for the purpose of worshipping them”
No, there’s two sentences which both contain a prohibition on a different thing. Both are forbidden.
If I said to my kid: “Don’t borrow the car without my permission. Don’t return the car without filling up the gas tank.”, then nobody would assume I meant the kid could borrow the car without my permission as long as he filled up the gas tank.
Yeah, that’s a good counterargument. Forget this is a religious relic; just look at the history of forgers. None of them made much attempt to acquire materials from the proper time period until tests were invented that could differentiate such materials from simply materials that “looked old enough”.
Where’s the “Not this shit again” meme?
The Shroud is authentic, and Christ is Risen!
All those “proofs” that the Shroud is a medieval fake have fallen by the wayside.
And the Shroud was originally an Orthodox relic. But the Orthodox Church does not base faith in the Resurrection on the Shroud or other relics!
No, there is no punctuation in the original Hebrew; it is a translators choice. Likewise, even the numbering of the commandments came into practice and the verse numberings were added much later than that. The command to have no other gods and to make statues to worship them is clearly one commandment.
Previously Liberato De Caro, had his June 30, 2017, PLOS ONE article, "Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud," retracted becauses the data were not sufficient to support the conclusions presented.
De Caro's still has another published article, "Turin Shroud hands’ region analysis reveals the scrotum and a part of the right thumb" (Journal of Cultural Heritage, Vol. 24, March-April 2017, 140-146).
Sounds like a very scientific and believable explanation. That does it, your explanation is now "settled science"
--sarcasm tag required by law
One doesn’t even need the “new” research here. The Shroud is authentic already.
The expression, "photographic negative," refers to a image of a scene where the bright parts of scene appearing dark and the dark parts of a scene appearing bright. It doesn't mean that the Shroud of Turin image was actually a photographic negative produced by the same chemicals using in 19th-20th century photography.
“No, there is no punctuation in the original Hebrew”
I’m afraid you’ll have to do better than that, since there are two subjects, two objects, two verbs, so there are clearly two sentences giving two prohibitions even if we didn’t have the punctuation to clue us in on that.
What a flippant attitude towards the burial cloth of our Lord which shows His Solemnity, Majesty, and intense Suffering. Not one paint stroke on the body of the Shroud. Carbon 14 only picked up a fire it was in. What I notice about Shroud scoffers is they tend to be very drive-by. Because anyone who studies it in detail starts to realize it’s real. We can’t replicate it to this day. The energy necessary to burn our Lord’s Image on the Shroud is equal to 8 billion watts. He has left us pictorial evidence of the power of His Resurrection and we get this ho-hum stuff. Do you not see why He did this? Are we not surrounded by unbelieving pagans? Your five words are very revealing. You hate it because many “Catholics” believe it’s authentic, don’t you? Your post is more about anti-Catholic hatred/bigotry than the Shroud. The woman who was healed by touching the hem of Jesus’ garment. those healed by Peter’s shadow or handkerchiefs that had touched his skin, just old worthless Catholic “relics”, right?
That would be true in contemporary rules of grammar, but in what is essentially one large run-on sentence in an ancient text, it is not so clear-cut and translators do the best they can. Without punctuation in the original, it is not at all certain that what we have here is two sentences.
“...but in what is essentially one large run-on sentence in an ancient text, it is not so clear-cut and translators do the best they can”
Using this argument, I can say every book of the Bible is a “large run-on sentence” that we can have no hope of interpreting or understanding. But that would be foolish, and obviously an argument simply constructed to avoid a plain reading of the text and what that plain reading would tell us.
There is no "plain reading of the text" if one does so apart from context and discerning the particulars of any given text. If we were native speakers at that time we could easily do it, but even scholars, 3000 years removed from the original text disagree and sometimes just flat-out don't know what the original writers intended. Translators do the best they can, but even they have biases and make mistakes. Most of us non-scholars rely on translations and there are bound to be differences in interpretation.
“Most of us non-scholars rely on translations and there are bound to be differences in interpretation.”
Yet you’re not doing that. You’re making arguments that maybe two sentences should really be one sentence and the translators just got it wrong. Because why? Well, I’ll refrain from “mind reading” and let everyone else make their own speculations as to why.
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.