Posted on 06/12/2003 6:16:08 AM PDT by Int
They also share a variety of features, including basic head shape, nose, and I disagree with you about the cheeks. (He was struck about the face -- are you seeing cheeks or swelling?)
Further, I do not buy your claim to expertise in identifying ethnic background from an old image on a cloth. It is your opinion, nothing more.
Another unique characteristic is the "crown of thorns" that was supposedly placed on the head of Jesus after he was scourged. Every photo, statue, etc. shows a ring-like arrangement of thorn branches on His head, concistent with Biblical passages describing a "crown." And yet the image on the shroud shown head wounds that are more consistent with a jumble of thorn branches that was pressed down on top of the head in a haphazard manner, leaving puncture wounds on top of the head as well as on the sides.
The difference here is that the Shroud of Turin is a remarkable subject manner even in a secular sense.
It is very important to consider the more recent history of the shroud when trying to determine its authenticity. For centuries, the shroud was very similar to a lot of those other "relics" that you described -- it generated a lot of interest among religious people, but not much more than that.
This all changed late in the 19th century when an Italian photographer named Pia Secondo was given permission to photograph it during one of its infrequent public displays. When he was developing the film, he made a startling discovery: the faint reddish-brown image on the light-colored shroud contained an incredible amount of detail when seen on the photographic negative. Secondo recognized the implication of this discovery immediately -- The image he was looking at on the negative bore all the markings of a photograph, and the shroud was actually the photographic negative.
The Shroud of Turin immediately began to attract a lot of attention in the scientific community, because nobody truly believed that someone could have created something like this 500 years before photography was even invented. And yet that is precisely what would have had to happen if someone had fabricated the shroud as a hoax.
It is apparently quite rare to unearth the body of somebody who was crucified. Of those who were buried, they were probably commoners whose bodies were tossed into a hole, probably sans shroud. Even if shrouded, however, the conditions wouldn't be right for the preservation of cloth.
Few victims of crucifixion would have been buried in the nice, clean, dry cave of a rich man -- though if they had, they probably would have had shrouds.
Even fewer would have had their shroud removed before their body rotted away from within, most likely rotting the shroud along with it. (In Jerusalem, bodies lay in the tomb for a year or so, and then the bones were removed and placed in an ossuary.)
I'm making no claims for the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. I am, however, not at all convinced for your arguments against it.
This is not necessarily a case of "Jesus leaving a mark" in a sense that He intended to leave a mark that would stand the test of time simply to serve as a relic.
The real story of the shroud is this: The image that you see on there may very well be the result of a "natural" process that occurs when a person rises from the dead (similar to the "shadows" of people that were burned onto the sides of buildings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki). I realize the implication here is quite startling, but there is no reason to assume that there is no "natural" cause that led to the image.
There is no indication of any kind of pigmentation on the shroud, and no sign of carbon residue indicating that the image was burned onto the shroud. The image resembles an X-ray more than anything else.
So sorry -- for some reason I though I was replying to ZD, who does doubt the authenticity. My apologies.
Yet they have determined the blood type to be AB...
Somewhere other than Post #33, that is. LOL!
That has not been determined! AND without DNA?
All living things have DNA, even if it was only Mary's Genes, there would be DNA! It is infact Paint!
First, as a long time coach of Special Olympic athletes, I have to tell you that not everyone shares your sense of humor.
Second, the face that you see in the "picture" you posted is a truer representation of Christ than any Shroud could depict. It is pure, without guile, innocent and loving. You should really consider dropping this picture from your FRepetoire.
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.