![]() You can find the results of the radiocarbon dating done by accelerated mass spectrometry here. The definitive testing of the shroud was done in 1988 by 3 independent laboratories (and possibly verified by a fourth) in Zurich, Oxford and the University of Arizona. Remember the burden of proof in this case is on the believer to prove that the shroud is genuine, not for the skeptic to prove it a forgery. Is the JREF correct when they affirm that Definitive tests prove absolutely that it is a forgery? The document still exists and has been shown to be unquestionably authentic. The bishop of Troyes (Lirey) knew who the artist was who painted the cloth and when and how he did it, and so reported to Pope Clement VII.Wikipedia, for what is worth, has a totally different story on the matter. I cannot find any real affirmative confirmation of this claim - I can only find claims that someone made paint of the same color as the shroud, but no confirmation that "chemical analysis" has been performed on the shroud at all. The “bloodstains” are not only red in color (they could not be, after that period of time), but they were shown by chemical analysis to be paint of the composition used in the fourteenth century.The areas that have been cut off were the worst kept in order not to destroy important parts of the cloth. True, but there are claims that the results might have been obtained by medieval repairs instead that from an original part of the cloth. Carbon dating of the fabric, done in three independent labs, showed that the linen fabric was woven about the year 1350.This is also totally irrelevant - the fact that Jesus has been depicted as a hippy guy with a beard does not rule out or confirm anything about his appearance (if he existed). We know nothing about Christ's actual appearance. The representation of the face of Christ on this cloth and in all paintings and sculptures is and always has been a formalized guess.This is completely irrelevant - either the cloth is from that place and time or it isn't. Such wrapping disagrees with the biblical description as well. Wrapping of a body in that size and shape of cloth was not done in Palestine at that period. ![]() In any case I don't see how we can easily make such assertion (it could be an uncommon type with few examples left). I cannot find any good source to verify this.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |