Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: weikel
I think you missed my point.

If you look at the original shroud, you see the faint outline of a tall man with some distinguishable features. Let's assume that the guy who made such a thing would have been able to sell it for $500.

If you look at the negative of the shroud, you see amazing details about the position of the hands, the exact locations of the wounds, etc. (in other words, the shroud is actually the negative and the "negative" of the shroud is the real photograph). If someone in the 13th century truly had the ability to create such a thing, he would have been able to sell it for $500,000 instead of $500.

Logically, it seems that anyone with a profit motive would not have created the shroud as it was seen in the 13th century if he had the ability to create it as it was seen in the 20th century.

13 posted on 03/15/2002 7:21:45 AM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child
Some phony relics were indeed sold for bigh money I remember in " A Distant Mirror"( Barbara Tuchman) the King of France payed a helluva lot for a "piece of the true cross".
16 posted on 03/15/2002 7:24:34 AM PST by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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