If you want on or off the Shroud of Turin Ping List, Freepmail me.
Ping!
Ping! Any feedback would be appreciated.
From the article it seems that the shroud is the cloth that belonged to Joseph of Arimethea. Am I correct?
Father Francis Filas was the Jesuit who held talks on this and set up along with his brother Thomas who was a composer of show and litugical music, a foundation to promote it.
I met Tom in his later years when he was our local organist and had the pleasure of perfoming his hymns
There was another “documentary” called “The Face of Jesus” .. I believe it was a couple of years ago. It was the most awesome thing I had ever seen.
Scientists and computer people used the Shroud and remodeled it laying across a body .. then they added in red blood coloring; marks of the scourging; punctures of the thorns; and then they colored His hair the color it would have been in life (black) .. and then, they animated it and brought His face into view .. I GASPED OUTLOUD AND STARTED SOBBING .. I was totally moved by the results. His eyes were so life-like, it was stunning.
One of the reasons the picture on the Shroud seems to show a much older person is because it was it was a reverse light picture .. like a negative .. thereby removing all the coloring.
I wish somebody would replay it because it is just stunning. I would like to record it, save it, and show it to my family. Most of them are Christians and I suspect they will have the same response I did.
Heb_11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Mat_12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
No tunics...No shroud...No apparitions of Mary...
If you want on or off the Shroud of Turin Ping List, Freepmail me.
The Gospel accounts of Jesus' burial indicated that the burial party was severely time pressed to get Jesus' body in the grave before the onset of the Jewish Sabbath and Passover at sundown. Handling a corpse during the sabbath would make the burial party, if they were Jewish, ritually unclean and unable to partake of the religious events. If McDowell's account of the burial ritual is correct, then an argument could be made that the burial party in great haste could have just folded the shroud in half to cover Jesus' corpse which would correlate to the image on the Shroud of Turin.
McDowell's commentary went on to explain that despite all of the historical evidence he had gathered and presented, belief in Jesus as the Son of God was still a matter of faith.
That is simply not a possible explanation. To skew the age of the Shroud from first century to 14th Century as the carbon dating reported, the amount of contaminating material by weight would have to be over 60% of the weight of the tested sample. That means the contaminate has to OUTWEIGH the Shroud material. The Shroud materials have been examined under powerful electron Microscopes and no such bacteriological contamination has been found, and certainly not in such massive quantities.
However there is peer reviewed science that DOES account for the discrepancy. Three different scientists, approaching the problem from three different disciplines all came to the same conclusion, proving that the tested samples were not homogenous with the main body of the shroud, and were not consistently homogenous throughout the samples themselves, varying from a 40% original/60% non-original to 60% original/40% non-original mixture, with the non-original material being a cotton patch that was applied in the 16th Century by a very skillful technique known as French invisible Reweaving in which the patch threads are actually re-twisted into the threads of the original material. The tested sample was taken contrary to agreed protocols from a site called the RAES corner which all scientists involved had agreed should not be tested because it fluoresced differently than all the rest of the Shroud. That was confirmed by the chemical testing of threads taken from the control sample left over from the C-14 testing, when it was discovered that the cotton portion of the patch had been dyed to match the color of the Shroud. . . with a dye that fluoresces. Another researcher used statistical means, and a third photo-microscopic examinations of the photos of the burned samples and all three came to the same conclusions that the tested samples were non-homogeneous.
One basic tenet of C-14 testing is that the sample to be tested MUST be homogenous with the thing being tested. That tenet was FAILED to be observed in the Shroud of Turin testing, resulting in an accurate test of a mixture of 16th Century threads combined with 1st Century threads which, depending on the C-14 testing lab because the bifurcation of the patch was diagonal down the original singular patch that was cut from the Shroud and then five smaller patches were cut from it. . . and the farther from the edge of the Shroud toward the center, the more original material is included in the sample, resulting in an greater percentage and therefor an earlier tested date.
Harry Gove, the inventor of the C-14 test that was used to test the Shroud, when asked what date must the original material have been if a 60% contamination of 16th Century material is mixed in by weight before the test. He did some calculations and came up with 1st Century, give or take 100 years.
All three findings were submitted to scientific journals, were peer-reviewed, and published. in other words, their findings were validated, proved, by other scientists. These findings account for the discrepancies account in the C-14 testing because the weight of the contaminate is correct. . . It has been found.
Seeing the name Candida Moss set off an alarm in my brain, so I searched:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3234535/posts
Then they just wasted almost TEN MINUTES on a South African photographer's absurd Camera obscurer's hypothesis that has been falsified so many times it is absurd to have wasted the time on it. There was an agenda at work here. It was almost as if there were two different people who made this program. One who handled the first 40 minutes, and then one for the next fifteen. If I were to make a guess, given the selective one sided commentary presented, that entirely negative ten to fifteen minute "gotcha segment" would have been under the production and direction of Joe Nickell, publisher of The Skeptical Enquirer.
Let me falsify the camera obscure hypothesis:
Then, they completely sabotaged the Shroud by bringing up the now completely falsified 1988 Carbon 14 test. . . and NOT showing the peer-reviewed science that showed it had been falsified. They used mealy-mouthed description by claiming "samples" were taken from the edge from the edge of the Shroud, wording it in such a to imply that there were three separate samples, when in fact only one sample was taken and then cut in three pieces. At no point did they tell the audience that it had been proved their sample was made of a patched area of the Shroud. Whoever was doing that segment left it as a conclusion that the Shroud was a forgery miraculously created by an unknown photographic process in the 14th Century, and snidely implied the Shroud should be believed as an authentic burial cloth only by deluded true believers who really want it to be, and crackpots in denial. The segment was almost dripping with smugness.
I then think they cut back in the person who made the first portion of the program at the end. The tone of the program changed completely from the previous segment when they tossed in the Sudarium of Oviedo as a bone to the Shroud aficionados. The much older cloth with matching blood stains to add mystery to their story. As far as I know, no one has done a C-14 test on the Sudarium, but its providence is traceable without doubt to the Fifth Century.
In my view, while about 75% of this was excellent, inclusion of the C-14 and Camera Obscura segment with the way it was done, made the whole thing a sabotage hit piece, intended to leave the deliberate impression on the audience that the Shroud of Turin is a 14th Century fake.
5.56mm
We saw the Shroud last time we were in Italy. They opened the exhibition several days before we were to fly out and we had to go. It is well documented and exhibited nicely, and it was thrilling to see it. As was the traffic in Turin!! Yikes - we drive freeways in Los Angeles with impunity, but Turin is no-holds-barred. We were laughing/ screaming/ careening with the rest of them.
bookmark