Wads4

No I go along with the interpretation that it is a 13th century forgery. If it contains pollen grains and flowers from Palestine that would hardly be surprising as the "Holy" land was seething with Christian crusaders at that time who had access to local textiles and could have manufactured the shroud locally. As for the Whangers, I would take them with a large pinch of salt.

"Some statues in the Middle East are based on the Shroud face image, the earliest dated AD 31." (Orthodx Freethinker)

If I am correct it was forbidden during the first three centuries to make any images or icons of Christ. This ws in line with the Jewish prohibition on graven images,-also taken up by the Moslems later on. There is a story (somewhere) about how the Empress Theodora requested a portrait of Christ from Bishop Eusebius, and it was refused on the above grounds,--that there was not, and could not be such a thing as "Christian art". If this is so, then how come the Whangers claim there were statues of Jesus around in the 30's AD? I think what is actually the case is that such statues were of Apollo, who was being "Christianised", complete with halos and sun-burst.

Wads4

"As I've shown before, there are imprints of flowers and plants on the shroud that are native only to the area in which Jesus was crucified. Would a forger travel all the way from France to Israel just to round up some flowers? "

Yes,-if he was already on his way there to clobber the Moslems, and capture Jerusalem for Christendom, and please the Pope, and get automatic forgiveness of "sins" (by the Pope),-and be able to enrich himself with booty and captured terrority.

Wads4

Perhaps he has in mind the Crusaders sacking of Constantinople in (I think) 1204, when treasures were taken to the West, mainly Venice. This of course does not establish that there was a shroud amongst the booty.

Wads4

"Originally Posted by Orthodox_Freethinker
The Catholic Church does not have an official opinion on either side given that the authenticity of the shroud is still an on-going investigation. The Catholic Church encourages the individual Catholic to form his own conclusion on the shroud. "

Why does the Vatican refuse furthur carbon-dating tests?- are they afraid they might confirm the first lot?

Early Christ icons in the Byzantine Empire depict a Christ that looks nothing like the shroud image, but is much more semitic,-as well as those ones which resemble adapted Apollos. This is contrary to what you claim about the shroud being an authentic image.

Alf

Nothing wrong with that except you claim there is no real evidence against his existence. That requires you to argue against every piece of evidence against his existence that has surfaced + a tall job.

Also, even if there were no real evidence against there is no real evidence for him either - at least none that I have seen. Thus it is nothing wrong just that it isn't rational.

It is not rational to conclude that just because there is no evidence against that we should therefore believe. There is no real evidence against Santa Claus either - yet you do not believe that Santa exist. There is no real evidence against the flying spaghetti monster either, yet you do not believe it exist. Why then, then special pleading? Why say that in the case of God is it reasonable to think he exist merely becuase you don't find the evidence against his existence to be to your satisfaction?

We don't believe in Santa even though there is no evidence against his existence. We don't believe in santa because there is no evidence in favor of his existence either. It is exactly the same situation for God so if we don't believe in Santa the rational thing is to not believe in God either. Otherwise we just arbitarily pick and choose and select to believe some thing and disbleives other things even though they both meet exactly the same criteria. This is why it is irrational.

Alf

John A. Broussard

I thought you were through with the Shroud mystique.

That's the point to the several threads in this forum. There's no sign of X-rays, no sign of real blood. No sign of radio-activity either, though some early "scholars" claimed the shroud was created in a burst of gamma rays given off by Jesus as he resurrected.

There's also a nice discussion of the carbon-14 dating of the Shroud. Care to guess the date of the cloth?

Oops. Never mind. You said we were finished with subject.

Salaam

Wads4

"Why would the "SHROUD OF TURIN" even be mentioned before it arrived in Turin? Before being in the hands of the Catholic Church, it was given a different name. "

In 1389 Pope Clement VII declared the shroud to have been a painted forgery, manufactured for the purpose of deceitfully obtaining money from the faithful; so if the Catholic church decided that then, why are you still trying to resurrect the shroud on the basis of the testimony of the "Whangers" who are committed Christians with an axe to grind?
That, plus the little matter that there were no less than 43 "shrouds" in circulation in medieval times. As for carbon-dating,--a real physicist Thomas J. Pickett, calculated in 1996 that in order for the c-dating results to be skewed by 1300 years, the cloth would have to be contaminated with twice its own weight in foreign materials. Likely,-or not?

Orthodox_Freethinker

It's obvious by now that the shroud was not painted. None of the scientists who analyze the shroud would make such a claim. The exact method that was used to create the shroud is still unknown, with one of possibilities being that the resurrection of Christ made the imprint.
As far as carbon dating goes, there are several logical explanations as to why the tests have been innaccurate so far.

Peace.

Orthodox_Freethinker

DNA testing on the shroud has shown the blood to be real. Furthermore, these aren't "early" scholars but are recent scholars who still provide evidence for their conclusions. You haven't even bothered to explain why the imprints of bones and teeth are on the shroud. It seems that all you can do is claim it isn't there when close analysis shows that it obviously is.

Peace.

Wads4

I can't be bothered to argue this case any more; time to move on.

Pieces.