Posted on 10/05/2009 11:22:44 AM PDT by Gamecock
An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ's burial cloth is a medieval fake. The shroud, measuring 14 feet, 4 inches by 3 feet, 7 inches bears the image, eerily reversed like a photographic negative, of a crucified man some believers say is Christ. "We have shown that is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud," Luigi Garlaschelli, who is due to illustrate the results at a conference on the para-normal this weekend in northern Italy, said on Monday. A professor of organic chemistry at the University of Pavia, Garlaschelli made available to Reuters the paper he will deliver and the accompanying comparative photographs.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
That's obscene. I'm not a Jew, but I am a student of Shoah history, and that makes my blood boil.
So where does the idea that Jesus hesitated and thought that he might wave his wand and poof!! they’re gone?
I didn't say that ... I said that if He had wanted them to be gone, then they would be gone. I suggested that He did what He did deliberately, on purpose, and in accord with His eternal plan.
But this is an Incarnate God we are talking about. We should be rejoicing in the tangibility, not fearing it as a crutch.
I completely agree. Some folks seem very uncomfortable with the Incarnation. I don't know why.
He may very well have talked to a painter who claimed to have painted it.
He may very well have believed the painter.
If he did, then he not lie. But the painter may or may not have.
And you have no way to know. So your snide comment is silly.
But since you know for sure that the Shroud is a fake, you automatically believe that a painter told the bishop this so you take the bishop as an authority.
It only works if you’ve already made up your mind about the Shroud.
But in 1389, evidence about whether it was or was not painted was relatively limited. And modern evidence that it’s not paint but blood was impossible to them. So a reasonable person in 1389 could well believe that it was painted. Now for someone to claim he’s the painter of it, that’s a different story. But since we have not way to know anything about who this painter was that the bishop talked to, I guess as historians we’d have to reserve judgment on this painter’s veracity and the bishop’s acumen in believing him.
Unless, of course, we already know that the Shroud is a fake today.
Your prejudices today mess you up in your reading of history.
I have no problem believing that a lot of people believed it was painted in 1389. I have no problem believing someone claimed to have been the painter. I have no way to verify now that claim via the bishop.
But I can look at modern forensic and historical evidence and reach a judgment about the Shroud.
1389 is irrelevant.
First, you make the classic mistake of defining the commandment as Exodus 20:4-5, rather than Exodus 20:2-6, which in its totality makes the intent more clear.
Second, you presume the article in question is an idol, which is logic as circular as a perfect sphere.
No one disputes that relics have been faked. Medieval scholars were perfectly aware of faked relics and even wrote books about how to detect them.
The issue is this particular artifact, which has been studied like no other artifact in human history. None.
And the evidence preponderantly points to authenticity. That shouldn’t be hard. Except that authenticity points to tangible connection to Jesus.
That other relics, including Torah scrolls, are faked is utterly irrelevant to whether this relic is a fake.
Your link is to the LEGITIMATE Pope Clement VII, who was pope in the early SIXTEENTH CENTURY.
It’s a triple obscenity
Trying to profit off the Shoah.
Abusing a Torah scroll.
Preying on the religious sensibilities of the gullible.
Tar. Feathers. Rail. Use as directed.
Uh, how do you think you got the words of Christ transmitted to you?
by the hands of his disciples and students. Since you don’t trust them
I guess you better just toss out all your Bibles and join some other religion because you don’t got no words of Christ to attach yourself to without the apostles to whom he entrusted his message
totally
without exception
all of it
he wrote none of it down himself
without his students and disciples we have nothing
nada
zilch.
Exactly. But knowing the person's agenda makes it painfully obvious why he would neglect that tiny little datum in his "study."
Not to butt in, but as a goy, you’re not subject to the 10 Commandments, but rather the laws of Noah.
That said, number one of the laws of noah is “no idolatry.”
So you get to the same place.
Anyway, you seem to be taking the Orthodox view set out in Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim (Avodah Zarah) - The Laws of Strange Worship (Idolatry) -— being that idolatry is not limited to the worship of a statue or picture itself, but also includes worship of the HaShem with the use of mediators and/or any artistic representations of G-d.
In fact, Maimonides explains in chapter 1 of Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim (Avoda Zarah) in the Mishneh Torah that worship of HaShem by use of revered icons is one of the ways that idolatry, and thence paganism, began.
In short, yours is a respected, and very Jewish, position.
Rather ironic.
(I came to this thread because icon reverence is particularly disturbing to me, however well-intentioned.)
I'll accept your apology after you verify the quote and recognize you just twice called me a liar for no reason whatsoever.
But you told me that reverence is not the same as worship...I was merely using your vernacular.
"It is the graven image itself that gives offense."
To which I say: "Rubbish". I, at least, am acting consistently with my beliefs.
“That other relics, including Torah scrolls, are faked is utterly irrelevant to whether this relic is a fake.”
Sure. My point is that the fake-relic business is both old and new, and the seriously evil steps people will go to make money is unknowable. So one must be exceedingly careful not to let emotion or religious convictions cause one to make rash conclusions.
As an aside, as a Jewish resident of Israel, the cloth is not terribly surprising to me if real. There are victims of the Roman occupation of Israel are buried all over Israel, some in some really surprising states of preservation -— the climate is not far off from Egypt — and natural mummies and imprints and all sorts of things pop up on a weekly, if not daily, basis.
I am not expert on fabric (although I do own dry cleaning stores, go figure) and smearing people with oil, perfume, and collodial silver concoction was a common burial practice (made the deceased look fresh and new).
I could easily see how you’d end up with an accidental lithograph by happenstance.
That said, who knows if this was your Yeshua, or any of the innumerable other zealots who angered the Romans?
If you don’t understand the difference between reverence and worship on a theological level (anyone’s theology, Protestant or Catholic), then you might as well give up.
Your reliance on standard dictionary definitions, on a subject of this much importance, is what has ridiculed you all by itself, without any imposition by me.....
We can produce vitamins artificially so therefore there must not be any vitamins that came about without being produced artificially.
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.