Jesus' Shroud? Recent Findings Renew Authenticity Debate

nATIONAL gEOGRAPHIC ^ | April 9, 2004 | Bijal P. Trivedi

[RaceBannon]

I never believed it was what the claim says.

It has become an idol, a statement of faith.

Thatis another reason I disbelieve it. if it was REALLY from Jesus, God would have destroyed it to prevent it from becomming an idol, like it has.

[RaceBannon]

It may be a genuine burial cloth, but there is no way it was Jesus' burial cloth.

[Eisenhower]

It's not an idol...people do not worship it as God, which is pretty much the definition of idol. It is an object of curiosity and reverence for some, for if it is in fact what some people think, it's pretty special indeed.

[RaceBannon]

Well, an idol is a representation that people pray to, or revere, used in a way that gets them closer to God, just like little statues. People KNOW those statues aren't God, but they pray to them/through them/revere them, use them as symbols of their faith.

That is an idol.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Quit altering titles to further your agenda.

[polemikos]

A fake?

None of the naturalistic or artistic theories proposed for the Shroud has held up to scientific scrutiny. None can satisfy the image criteria that must be:

• three-dimensionally encoded (even modern photography is not)
• focused,
• vertically collimated image
• exhibit gradual tonal changes
• function as a negative;
• superficial and confined to the topmost fibrils in which the density of pixels (quantity and lengths) of a single color produces different color tones;
• free of any chemical agents, pigments, dyes, colorants, emulsions, binders, or any other liquid or powder free of any byproducts produced as a result of an application of such;
• chemically conjugated carbonyl product, the result of accelerated oxidation and dehydration of the cellulose fibers of the linen;
• free of any mechanical or light source directionality;
• anatomically correct (including the flow of venous and arterial blood) in a way that only a late twentieth century - medical forensic pathologist could comprehend
• unique (no other similar artifacts)
  
  While it may be a fake, your lack of proof belies your statement as an article of faith on your part.

[polemikos]

Well, an idol is a representation that people pray to, or revere, used in a way that gets them closer to God, just like little statues . . . That is an idol.

Actually, no, it's not. An idol is a false god.

Too many confuse the absolute ban on worshipping idols and an early ban on making images of God with the making of images themselves. God forbade images of Himself because He had not revealed himself in visible form to the Israelites on Mt. Horeb. As God explains in Deut 4:19; He was concerned that they would mistake the object for Himself.

God forbade the worship of statues, but he did not forbid the religious use of statues. Instead, he actually commanded their use in religious contexts: (cf. Ex 25:18-22; Ex 26:1,31; Num 21:8-9; 1 Kgs. 6:23–29, 7:29, 7:36; 8:6–7; 2 Chr. 3:7–14; Ezk 41:17-18).

Later, God indeed revealed himself to man in many forms. But, more important, in the Incarnation of Christ his Son, God showed mankind an icon of himself. Paul said, "He is the image (Greek: ikon) of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." Christ is the tangible, divine "icon" of the unseen, infinite God.

Now, if you can produce even a single individual that worships the shroud as a god, please let me know.

[Destro]

Do an exoeriment I saw on the Discovery channel. Take your face or even a doll's face and rub it with some sort of cream like Nivea, then take cloth and cover the face - and then remove to see the image.

What you get is stretched out rubber like oval face rather than a photographic depiction.

[RaceBannon]

The entire first group of words is the actual title, and I added at the end, so anyone who searched will find it under the title name

so, quit splitting hairs, the shroud is not from Jesus, get used to it, this idol is false.

[RaceBannon]

The Cherubim on the top of the Ark were IDOLS???

Moses serpent, which no one was SUPPOSED to pray to was an idol? It became an idol, that was why God orderd it down!

No one worships those little statues of Mary as God, either, but, they use little statues of Mary, or Crucifixes to aide them in worship, just like pagans do, and THAT is an idol.

[scottro]

A crucifix can become an idol ,as a statue , a rock , or a piece of jewelry . I know that God doesn't want me to worship these things , so I try to not focus on them because eventually my heart will be drawn to them for answers , instead of meditating on His word . One time I had a crucifix ring and I had to throw it away because I was drawn to it instead of God ... I can't speak for everyone, but for me it could have became an idol..

[polemikos]

The Cherubim on the top of the Ark were IDOLS???

Not sure what you are asking here. Are the cherubim idols? Of course not. Did I say that they were? No. Might some confuse a statue with an idol? Well, as your question suggests, it appears that you do.

Moses serpent, which no one was SUPPOSED to pray to was an idol? It became an idol, that was why God orderd it down!

Not sure what you are asking here. Was the serpent an idol? As long as it was used as the Lord commanded, of course not. Did I say that it was an idol? Obviously not. Did the serpent have salvational powers? Clearly yes. Was the use of the serpent necessarily idol worship? Obviously not. Might some confuse a statue with an idol? Well, as your question suggests, it appears that you do.

No one worships those little statues of Mary as God, either,

Hey, some progress! I'm glad to see that you recognize that Catholics don't worship statues.

but, they use little statues of Mary, or Crucifixes to aide them in worship, just like pagans do, and THAT is an idol.

Again, you are confusing 2 separate concepts: idols and statues. Your confusion seems to arise out of a lack of understanding of pagan practices. Pagans during the time of the early Israelites would actually worship a natural object as a god.

Unfortunately, such fundamental confusion leads to the unbiblical practice of banning statues in worship contexts.

For your "argument" to hold, all natural objects would have to be banned if they aided worship. Say, you don't use a printed Bible as a worship aid, do you? Tsk, tsk.

[RaceBannon]

Thanks, you proved my point.

[polemikos]

Thanks, you proved my point.

Which was?

[A.J.Armitage]

Moses serpent, which no one was SUPPOSED to pray to was an idol? It became an idol, that was why God orderd it down!

But wait...

Why didn't He destroy it first?

[xJones]

My faith doesn't depend on whether the Shroud is true or not. But with all this attention on the Shroud, God help us if the Ark of Covenent is ever found.:)

[RaceBannon]

LOL!!!

Wow, that and the Red Heiffer!

[RaceBannon]

To teach people to obey, and, to use it as a symbol later in John chapter 3

NOTHING else thatis a Christian prayer idol (statues, candles, crucifixes) are ever mentioned in the Bible, and the serpent on the Pole was to symbolize Jesus lifted up on the Cross, but the Jews did not know that at the time.

[A.J.Armitage]

To teach people to obey, and, to use it as a symbol later in John chapter 3

That's why it existed in the first place. I didn't ask that. I asked why God didn't destroy it. This you have not answered, nor, I suspect, can you. After all, if God was in the business of destroying everything associated with Himself that would be used as an idol if not destroyed (which is the principle you appealed to for why the SoT can't really be associated with Christ), the brazen serpent would certainly have been destroyed. It was not.

[Destro]

So is a Bible printed in Chinese pictograms, idolatry?