Shroud of Turin shown amid new research

[catsnknots]

This is something I would love to go and see... don't know if it is real or not but I still think it would be amazing. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/shroud-of-turin-shown-amid-new-research/story-fn3dxix6-1226609705959

THE Shroud of Turin has gone on display for a special TV appearance amid new research disputing claims it's a medieval fake and purporting to date the linen some say was Jesus' burial cloth to around the time of his death.

Pope Francis sent a special video message to the event in Turin's cathedral, but made no claim that the image on the shroud of a man with wounds similar to those suffered by Christ was really that of Jesus. He called the cloth an "icon," not a relic - an important distinction.

"This image, impressed upon the cloth, speaks to our heart and moves us to climb the hill of Calvary, to look upon the wood of the Cross, and to immerse ourselves in the eloquent silence of love," he said.

"This disfigured face resembles all those faces of men and women marred by a life which does not respect their dignity, by war and violence which afflict the weakest.

"And yet, at the same time, the face in the Shroud conveys a great peace; this tortured body expresses a sovereign majesty."

Many experts stand by carbon-dating of scraps of the cloth that date it to the 13th or 14th century. However, some have suggested the dating results might have been skewed by contamination and have called for a larger sample to be analysed.

The Vatican has tiptoed around just what the cloth is, calling it a powerful symbol of Christ's suffering while making no claim to its authenticity.

The 4.3-metre-long, one metre-wide cloth is kept in a bulletproof, climate-controlled case in Turin's cathedral, but is only rarely open to the public. The last time was in 2010 when more than two million people lined up to pray before it and then-Pope Benedict XVI visited.

It was only the second time the shroud has gone on display specifically for a TV audience; the first was in 1973 at the request of Pope Paul VI, the Vatican said.

The display also coincided with the release of a book based on new scientific tests on the shroud that researchers say date the cloth to the 1st century.

The research in "The Mystery of the Shroud," by Giulio Fanti of the University of Padua and journalist Saverio Gaeta, is based on chemical and mechanical tests on fibres of material extracted for the carbon-dating research.

An article with the findings is expected to be submitted for peer-review, news reports say.

[azureline**]

1857.

[**meep**]

Actually she said belief only in the BODILY resurrection. I offered several alternatives of resurrection interpretation.

Doesn't have to be enforce, then show me where it's written by the Catholic CHurch that belief in the "bodily" resurrection is a criteria for being a Catholic. 

I am not aware of different versions of  Resurrection.  As far as there being criteria for being a Catholic, it is a matter of accepting the teachings of the Church.   Catholics have many opportunities to renew their baptismal vows.  During every Mass, they profess their faith ie the Nicene Creed and TBH, it has never occured to me to think how many of them believe in what they declare.   As Az and She ele said earlier, it is a personal thing.

[azureline**]

Actually, the statues had fig leaves added and the removal of some of them caused some damage.(as I recall) however, I did see some with intact bodies....

It was Dan Brown who perpetuated that myth, it may not be factual.....

[**meep**]

This thread would have been far more interesting if it had stayed on the actual title subject.

Now it's boring boring boring ...

*yawn*

There is another thread that does contain interesting information.  Not sure if you read it.

http://community.ebay.com.au/topic/Community-Spirit/Shroud-Turin/500161388?start=0

[cat_mioux]

This is my opinion on The Shroud. I'm remembering what I've read so I may not have the facts correct.

Religious artifacts were big money spinners in the Middle Ages. There were literally hundreds of 'splinters of the Cross', The Virgins Milk, body bits of Saints .... these artifacts brought in the pilgrims who paid to see these 'holy relics'.

Many, if not all, of these so called relics were fake.

It doesn't take much imagination to find the motivation to make the relic that would top all relics - the shroud of Jesus. Obviously, who ever made it was a genius in artistry and most likely, science and anatomy. I believe a wealthy person/family paid this genius to make this relic, knowing they would bring in the money.

There is documentation and paintings of "the Shroud" before the 14thC  but this shroud seems to be a poorer representation. I think this was possibly one of the first attempts to make a shroud. But it was believed at the time this cloth was mostly seen as a fake and was possibly proved to be one.

Until the "genius" was found to make a better one. This one was far superior. So ... the Shroud has been known of for many centuries, but the one we are talking about was probably made in the time the cloth was carbon dated to (13thC-14th C).

When you look for a man who had knowledge of art, science and anatomy, you look to Da Vinci.

[cat_mioux]

Thank you meep

[azureline**]

the contamination of cloth used to repair the burnt shroud brings the carbon dating into question.

[lakeland27]

the shroud does not even make particular sense, a shroud is surely wrapped around a body, how did that become a flat one-dimensional image .

[**meep**]

It might be the same one I saw some time ago, Rabbit. I think one of the problems later pointed out was that while you could certainly create an image using that method, to create something as detailed as the image on the shroud would mean using an actual body and leaving it exposed for several days. Unless you did it in the middle of a very chilly winter, there would be obvious difficulties.

C&P from Answering the Savoy/Leonardo DaVinci Hypothesis By Richard B. Sorensen

Technical Problems 1.

The production of a photographic image via a camera obscura would require an unknown number of crucified cadavers, as they rot fairly quickly (refrigeration was not invented until the 1800s), and it must certainly have taken a number of attempts to get an image in focus with the correct exposure and with the lifelike accuracy of the image on the Shroud of Turin.

It is uncertain where such cadavers could have been obtained. An alternative is that a super-accurate sculpture of a crucified Christ was carved and used for this, which included all of the whip marks, contusions, and lacerations as described above. See the following articles for more information on the characteristics of the body depicted on the Shroud:

http://www.shroud.com/bucklin.htm

http://www.shroud.com/bucklin2.htm

2. Although Leonardo described a camera obscura in his notes, there is no mention of it being used as a photographic device. Rather, it was used as an aid for visualizing scenes in order to paint them. Furthermore, there is no hint of him using or experimenting with any type of photographic process involving light-sensitive silver compounds; the invention of photography and film took place over three hundred years later. Dr. Allen has produced some evidence that the properties of silvering were known in medieval times, but there is no record of anyone employing them to produce a photograph until the 1800s.

Just because the raw materials for these an advanced technologies existed, does not mean that someone actually developed and employed them, particularly before human knowledge had advanced enough to make this type of work truly possible.

Leonardo would therefore have had to invent the concept of photography, use the correct silver compounds (Dr. Allen points out that only silver sulphate will really work), build and use a darkroom for preparing the cloth (the linen must be soaked in a solution of diluted silver sulphate and then air-dried in a light-proof environment prior to being exposed), and understand that the image could only be retained and set by washing the cloth with an ammonia solution.

The last step of washing the Shroud to remove the silver sulphate is critical because there are no silver-related compounds on the Shroud such as would be present in an actual photograph

This article goes into a lot more detail.  I only have a link to PDF so won't post here but if you google:  Answering the Savoy/Leonardo DaVinci Hypothesis By Richard B. Sorensen

you should be able to find it.

[cat_mioux]

the shroud does not even make particular sense, a shroud is surely wrapped around a body, how did that become a flat one-dimensional image .

The official report of the dating process, written by the people who performed the sampling, states that the sample "came from a single site on the main body of the shroud away from any patches or charred areas."

From Wikipedia.