FRESH CLUE SHOWS TURIN SHROUD MAY BE GENUINE BURIAL CLOTH OF CHRIST

The Mirror ^ | April 2, 2004 | David Edwards

[NYer]

Additional Resources:

SHROUD OF TURIN
OFFICIAL SHROUD SITE
SHROUD STORY - Guidt to Facts

[Support Free Republic]

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
20	Wisconsin	260.00	7	37.14			173.00	11

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[NYer]

In the 1930's, French Shroud scholar Paul Vignon described a series of common characteristics visible in many early artistic depictions of Jesus. The Vignon marking, as they are known, all appear on the Shroud suggesting that it is the source of later pictures of Jesus.   A square U-shape  between the eyebrows.  A downward pointing triangle or V-shape just below the U-shape, on the bridge of the nose. Two wisps of hair going downward and then to the right. A raised right eyebrow.  Large, seemingly "owlish" eyes. This may be the result of coins placed over the eyes. An accent on the left cheek and an accent on the right cheek that is somewhat lower. A forked beard. Dr. Whanger (see below) has suggested that this may the result of a chin band tied around the head to keep the mouth closed. An enlarged left nostril.  An accent line below the nose and a dark line just below the lower lip.  A gap in the beard below the lower lip.  Hair on one side of the head that is shorter than on the other side. Christ Pantocrator, c. 1100 from dome of Church at Daphni, near Athens. Note U at bridge of nose, triangle on nose, raised right eyebrow, uneven hair, owlish eyes.

Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list

[ClearCase_guy]

For the next 1,200 years it was kept hidden in the Iraqi city, brought out only for religious festivals. In 944 it is thought to have turned up in Constantinople, Turkey

Editor! Timeline trouble in Aisle 5!

[Flightdeck]

"Mark Guscin, of the British Society for the Turin Shroud, says: "The discovery of the stitching along with doubt about the carbon-dating all add to the mountain of evidence suggesting this was probably the shroud Jesus was buried in."

Well, that's quite a stretch. I'd like to believe that, but isn't it possible, nay likely, that a given shroud from a given time period was used to bury someone other than Jesus?

[NYer]

Just as DNA and forensic science are proving guilt or innocence, forensics have also been used to document that Christianity's most treasured existing relic is indeed 2,000 years old, dating from the time of Christ.

The details of this historic confirmation will be unveiled in Secrets of the Dead Shroud of Christ, premiering Wednesday, April 7, at 9 PM on UNC-TV. Shroud of Christ documents the authenticity of the fabric experts’ work, revisits the forensic science community’s many attempts to accurately date the Shroud and follows bacteriologists’ quest to prove scientifically once and for all how the relic came to be. Featured in this special—and available for interviews—are two key experts: Barrie M. Schwortz and Dr. Stephen Mattingly.

FORENSIC VALIDATION FOR SHROUD OF TURIN!

[RoughDobermann]

FRESH CLUE SHOWS TURIN SHROUD MAY BE GENUINE BURIAL CLOTH OF CHRIST

How?

[Badeye]

Until something uncontrovertable comes along, I will remain firmly on the side of those that say its the longest running hoax in history.

[The G Man]

I was going to copy and paste the exact same quote. A pretty over the top statement by that guy.

[NYer]

Well, that's quite a stretch. I'd like to believe that, but isn't it possible, nay likely, that a given shroud from a given time period was used to bury someone other than Jesus?

As far as anyone knows, Jesus was the only victim of crucifixion that wore a crown of thorns and had his side pierced. These wounds are clearly visible on the shroud.

Check the links provided.

[RoughDobermann]

Until something uncontrovertable comes along, I will remain firmly on the side of those that say its the longest running hoax in history.

There's the rub... Nothing ever will. The Shroud is an article of FAITH, not something that can ever be verified.

[tiamat]

Interesting. this stuff fascinates me.

Okay. I may have just had a brain-storm.

Jesus is out of the House of David, right?

Are there any Jews living today that can trace their lineage that far back?

if a DNA sample could be gotten from the Shroud, and if a living decendant could be found to compare it to.....Maybe we could find out for sure?

[tiamat]

Duh!

Sorry about that!

You've already gone there....

that's what happens when you cook and Freep at the same time... you miss posts!

[mfulstone]

The shroud devotees should read their bibles. Particularly John 20: 6-7

Obviously, that was NOT Jesus' shroud.

[Badeye]

Yep. And I don't have a problem with others using "blind faith" in this regard.

Its just not for me.

I believe in God....I remain highly skeptical of the institutions Man has raised up in worship of God.

[Alberta's Child]

Until something uncontrovertable comes along, I will remain firmly on the side of those that say its the longest running hoax in history.

Even in science there is really no such thing as "uncontrovertable" when it comes to something like this. You act as if Carbon-14 dating is the definitive evidence in this case.

If you go back and look at all of the evidence related to the Shroud, you'll find (even before this latest piece of evidence was made known) that the probability of someone creating this on their own back in the 11th or 12th century was extremely remote. In particular, there is no question that the Shroud was "created" using a process that is identical to photography, when in fact photography was not invented until the 19th century. The notion that someone would develop a primitive form of technology 700 or 800 years earlier than this -- without leaving any other evidence of it for this period of time -- seems so highly improbable that I would consider it an "article of faith" that can't possibly be substantiated.

[Former Fetus]

The Shroud of Turin Research Project spent 120 hours examining the cloth in minute detail but was unable to explain how the image had got there. Barrie Schwortz, the project's photographer, says: "We did absolutely every test there was to try to find out how that image had got there.

"We used X-rays, ultra-violet light, spectral imaging and photographed every inch of it in the most minute detail, but we still couldn't come up with any answers.

"We weren't a bunch of amateurs. We had scientists who had worked on the first atomic bomb and the space programme, yet we still couldn't say how the image got there. The only things we could say was what it isn't: that it isn't a photograph and it wasn't a painting.

I was a graduate student in Chemistry when I attended the annual American Chemical Society convention and heard the speaker present the results from the studies of the shroud. I don't remember the name of the scientist who gave the talk, but I do remember that he introduced himself as an atheist who had joined the team in order to prove the shroud was a fake. After presenting, in detail, the scientific evidence for the authenticity of the shroud, he came to the question of what caused the image. He stood there and stated that Jesus of Nazareth, or whoever had been buried in that shroud, had emitted some kind of energy unknown to us that was responsible for the image. "Ladies and gentlemen", he added, "scientific honesty compels me to say that this man was raised from the dead!" There was no clapping at the end of his presentation, you could have heard the proverbial pin fall on the floor.

[trad_anglican]

The Shroud is an article of FAITH, not something that can ever be verified.

This is correct. The Shroud could be proven to be a hoax, but could never be proven to be the burial cloth of Christ. However, if it can't be proven to be a hoax, which it can't until the source of the image can be determined without doubt, then which is more likely, genuine or hoax? The longer it remains a mystery, the more likely its authenticity, in my opinion.

[ConservativeDude]

"Ian Wilson, co-author of The Turin Shroud: Unshrouding The Mystery"

I am fascinated that Ian Wilson is quoted on the "pro" side. He is a very serious skeptic of all things "religious". He is tough-minded. But, all in all, I have always thought, fair( for a non-believer). For him to go on the record like this is, well, interesting.

[aruanan]

The Turin Shroud has been either worshipped as divine proof that Christ was resurrected from the grave or dismissed as a fraud created by medieval forgers.

Stupid either/or.

"Scientists have been happy to dismiss it as a fake, but they have never been able to answer the central question of how the image of that man got on to the cloth."

More accurately, "Scientists who are devotees of the pseudo-science known as naturalism have been happy to dismiss it as a fake...."