Posted on 03/24/2005 7:17:27 AM PST by shroudie
Someone painted it many centuries ago.
Don't worship idols, such as burial cloth or other physical remnants.
True. But the presence of the second image does eliminate "artistry" as the means of imprint. If an artist could pull off a second, "watermark" image on a piece of cloth, he would have been hailed as an early master...
If nothing else, it narrows the possibilities, even if it doesn't overtly prove a particular theory. In this case, if the possibility of artistry is eliminated, there's not much more to attribute it to than the realm of "unexplained".
Indeed. Emphasis in this case belongs on the word theory.
First thing I thought when I heard this is that there was no way that a plate of glass that big could have been made during medieval times. Not possible !!!!
Some misguided people enjoy sowing doubt, while the rest of us thrive in our faith.
God bless you all, the doubters and the believers, during this Holy Season.
The important point is that Jesus is real and the Bible is true.
IIRC...The four postage stamp size samples were only taken from patches sewed on by medieval nuns. These repair patches to the shroud were undertaken due to a fire in their covent.
Seems these 'recent' patches along with surrounding fire damge would negate any accurate cardon dating.
Yet they did find plant pollen germane only to the Jerusalem area.
I heard Mother Angelica and a guest from a shroud study "committee" discussing the shroud a few years ago on EWTN. As I remember, the guest was Jewish. He was totally convinced that the shroud was authentic and probably made from a tablecloth -- perhaps used at the last Supper. He showed stains along the edges that appeared to have been made by cups of wine from the 12 desciples. I've never heard anything else about this. He conjectured that the cloth could have been provided by Joseph of Arithamea because it would have been a very costly article. What do you know?
It's Holy Week and, annually at this time, we must have the obligatory "the Shroud is a fake" story. Whether it is or isn't doesn't change the miracle of the risen Christ. Let's not let that fact be overshadowed or clouded by this debate.
I think the key to the analysis is usually not discussed. Before worrying about the image, I'd want to know a lot more about the cloth. Does it compare to other pieces of linen from the Holy Land of this era? As linen does not decay like silk, wool, or cotton, there should be contemporaneous artifacts for comparison.
First, how wide is this cloth? If it is wider than, say 36", that is difficult for a loom in the Holy Land to manage. Is it double-woven (this is a way to doublt the width of a fabric by essentially weaving it folded on the loom. It leaves an unmistakable mark in the center.
Does it compare more easily with woven fabric from 14th Cent Italy?
How about the linen fibers? There's a wealth of info just in the flax--type, spinning, tow, line?
You need textile experts from museums--and experienced weavers and spinners.
If it's 14th century--that should be easy to establish.
You have to be an RC to be into that kind of thing.
Shroud of Turin is Fake report - PING!
NOT!
If you want on or off the Shroud of Turin Ping List, Freepmail me.
Why is this story and many like it not placed in the Religion Section where it belongs? To imagine it being breaking news or a real news story is not, IMHO, credible. Everything in the piece appears to be mere speculation.
A few years ago I watched a very good and in-depth show on the Shroud. Both sides gave their arguments, and BOTH sides had compelling and very good evidence for their respective positions.
The carbon dating issue was raised, and it was pointed out that the dating was not necessarily on the Shroud itself, but on the various dust and pollen particles that had since gathered on it.
It seems that this is one issue that, no matter where you stand, you are on some pretty solid ground.
"Anthropologist William Meacham, a Research Fellow at the Centre of Asian Studies at the University of Hong Kong, added, "I would like to know how this unscientific idea could possibly get such major coverage, when it so clearly and obviously does not fit the known facts about the Shroud image." "
Of course the answer is that it fits the trendy set's agenda. They love the idea of everythng Church related being fake.
"Someone painted it many centuries ago."
How did they do that without using paint?
One of the few things everybody agrees on is that there is no paint on the shroud.
Actually, I'm an Episcopalian. Many of the Shroud researchers such as Barrie Schwortz and Al Adler are Jewish. Gary Habermass, a big proponent of the Shroud is Evangelical and teaches at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University. Russ Breault, a significant researcher who thinks the Shroud is authentic is Presbyterian and works for the 700 Club. And the list goes on and on: Baptists, Greek Orthodox, Methodists such as Al Whanger - - and by the way a wide spectrum of liberal and conservative thinkers.
Dan
"Someone painted it many centuries ago."
How did they do that without using paint?
One of the few things everybody agrees on is that there is no paint on the shroud.
Just think how many fake blue Gap dresses will be around in 2100.
They carbon dated what appears to have been a patch to a cloth that had been exposed to the air, handled, and subjected to heavy smoke from a fire. ...Just to be clear.
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.