The Shroud seems to be more compelling than originally thought. Check out the audio file and related link, and see what you think. -CL
The Shroud of Turin
The Shroud seems to be more compelling than originally thought. Check out the audio file and related link, and see what you think. -CL
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a generic Shroud of Turin cite, but I thought it was pretty interesting as it lets webbers search and amplify various sections of the Shroud, and it offers some explanations of the images.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.shroud.com/examine.htm
-CL
In early October 2009, an Italian scientist claimed to have “reproduced” the Shroud of Turin “to support his belief it is a medieval fake” rather than the burial cloth of Christ. The article can be found at:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/07/italy.turin.shroud/index.html?section=cnn_latest
First of all, what is interesting about this is not only that this alleged “scientist” started with his conclusion before he did any work at all, but that his funding and charter came from the Union of Rationalist Atheists and Agnostics. Gee, sounds like his study was totally objective and unbiased. Maybe he’d like to see some “scientific” studies done by the tobacco industry that “proves” cigarettes are healthy for people too.
Secondly, as the article states, he did not even have access to his primary object of inquiry. How, exactly, did he “test” his pre-conceived conclusion?
Third, creating an image similar to the one on the Shroud of Turin doesn’t prove anything except that a similar image can be created. To say that it “proves” the original to be a fake is akin to using Adobe Photoshop to put President Obama in your wedding pictures and then declaring that the actual commander in chief is a hoax because he wasn’t really at your reception. The conclusion simply does not follow the evidence. This is junior high philosophy stuff.
Additionally, the real Shroud’s imprint exemplifies the peculiar characteristics that usually belong to a photographic negative, which means that to see the image’s full details, a reverse-polarized image needs to be made available. That is a technology that did not even exist until the middle of the 19th century, which is to say that the original handlers of the Shroud had no idea what they were dealing with and had no way to “see” all the richness that the image held in secrecy. As such, I find the idea that they “forged” it somewhat dubious to say the least.
Fifth, the Shroud of Turin is really cool in my estimation, but it is not connected to any core tenet of my Christianity. Even if the Shroud were ACTUALLY proved to be a middle-ages creation, it would not challenge or diminish any facet of my belief in Jesus Christ. That belief is rooted in experience, tradition, reason and the biblical text & history, not religious relics.
Similarly, while I think that efforts at “proving” or disproving the Shroud’s legitimacy are somewhat interesting, it is important to note the article’s very first sentence regarding WHY this Shroud crusade was conducted, and that is: “...to support his belief.” The scientist (Luigi Garlashelli) has faith that the Shroud of Turin is not an image of the crucified Jesus, and he has fabricated an artifact to support that faith. It sounds like he also has faith that Jesus was/ is not God, which again is Luigi’s prerogative. Everyone has faith in something, even if not the same people and things, after all. But the way he has gone about his faith is all wrong. When we start with conclusions instead of hypotheses, the entire enterprise of inquiry has been sullied. Luigi, like many religionists, did not approach the subject with an open mind and thus manipulated standard scientific methodologies throughout the entire process to cook up exactly what he wanted to discover. Like so many other areas of life, you get out what you put in, and in this case what came out was a contrived, but not altogether unpredictable, faith claim. As for me, I am inclined to keep my faith in better stock.
-C. Lambeth
The saga continues with yet another study that purports the Shroud of Turin to be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus. Cut and past the link below for details.
ReplyDeleteAdmittedly, the findings of this study are not conclusive, and the most questionable aspect is the inclusion of a Latin phrase on the cloth. Nevertheless, while highly irregular, the inclusion of a Latinism may have viable explanations, even in first century Palestine, and especially as a later addendum to an early burial shroud or Greek and Aramaic inscriptions. Interesting stuff!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091120/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_shroud_of_turin
-C. Lambeth