How many mistakes can you find?
. . . It was proclaimed a hoax. Many scientists even checked again 40 years later, after a husband and wife in upstate New York made some observations and formed one of the assumptions about the construction of the fiber, which prompted further tests. This time, the material itself satisfactorily tested for a garment 1st century AD period. No conclusion on the figure … But this time, far more sophisticated camera technology, some details of droplets of blood were clearly seen. While they were not allowed to do DNA testing – the Vatican, it prohibits again – the signs highlighted the Jesus history.
You can’t count mistakes in such senseless junk.
Is human suffering the primary portal to God’s love? An opening to all encompassing divinity?
Something else to ponder:
Human life is, perhaps, God’s gift of passage, His opening, our way in. Without it we have no entry into His light.
Read the entire posting at divineremedy.org: Chapter 41: Passage
You should read the entire article, John Dominic Crossan’s ‘blasphemous’ portrait of Jesus – CNN.com, if you are not completely up-to-date about this scholar. In my opinion, Crossan, having taught for 25 years at DePaul University, America’s largest Catholic University – now Professor Emeritus of Comparative Religion – is significantly influencing the more liberal wings of Roman Catholic, Anglican and mainline Protestant traditions.
Note: the story has only been up for a little over an hour and there are well over one thousand comments already.
Jesus, according to Crossan, was not buried in a tomb and there was no Resurrection in any sense that might be thought of as supernatural. About the Shroud, he once wrote:
My best understanding is that the Shroud of Turin is a medieval relic-forgery. I wonder whether it was done from a crucified dead body or from a crucified living body. That is the rather horrible question once you accept it as a forgery.
Here is a snippet from CNN this Sunday morning:
"If Hell were not already created, it should be invented just for you."
Other critics have called him "demonic," "blasphemous" and a "schmuck."
When John Dominic Crossan was a teenager in Ireland, he dreamed of becoming a missionary priest. But the message he’s spreading about Jesus today isn’t the kind that would endear him to many church leaders.
Crossan says Jesus was an exploited "peasant with an attitude" who didn’t perform many miracles, physically rise from the dead or die as punishment for humanity’s sins.
Jesus was extraordinary because of how he lived, not died, says Crossan, one of the world’s top scholars on the "historical Jesus," a field in which academics use historical evidence to reconstruct Jesus in his first-century setting.
"I cannot imagine a more miraculous life than nonviolent resistance to violence," Crossan says. "I cannot imagine a bigger miracle than a man standing in front of a tank in Tiananmen Square."
I’ve written about him before in this blog (Jesus as a Peasant Sage).
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." -Galileo
First of all, I have heard from others, that I handled the Besancon part of my posting about Alva B. See’s book poorly. I said nothing more about it than that some of it seems historical. That was careless treatment, someone said. I agree. With some help, I have lined out (see below the fold) some portions of the text to show what seems to have been guesses, or if we are to take the author seriously, “divine revelations.” Regardless, what is found in See’s book is not good, objective, well researched history.
The expert on Besancon, is Dan Scavone, renowned medieval historian, Professor Emeritus of History, University of Southern Indiana, who writes in “Documenting the Shroud’s missing years:”
History proceeds from documents, not arguments from silence. Besançon alone, of all the major theories of the Turin Shroud’s whereabouts during the missing 150 years, has documents to support its possession of the Shroud after the Fourth Crusade until about 1350, after which the Shroud’s history from Lirey to Turin is well established. No other hypothesis for the Shroud during this time—whether that of the templars, the Smyrna Crusade, or the Sainte-Chapelle—even mentions Jesus’ shroud. Nor can any other theory document a path of the Shroud from Constantinople to the ever-silent Geoffroy I de Charny.
Go read “Documenting the Shroud’s missing years.” Now! It is only eight pages and you will not regret it.
It seems a strange book, Naked Before God, by Alva B. See, Jr., with some twenty pages dedicated to the Shroud of Turin. Here is description of the book from Amazon (Tate, 2011):
Over a thirty-three-year period, A. B. See, Jr., experienced seventeen divine revelations, which help to answer the following questions: What does God really look like? How does God feel about war? How was the stone moved from the front of the tomb where Jesus lay? Does God have additional commandments for us to follow? How can the debate between creationism and the theory of evolution be finally resolved? Does Satan really exist? Is there going to be an Apocalypse? The author believes that the answers to these questions, as found in one of the most profound books of our time, can make believers out of unbelievers, bring hope to the broken, and point a way to happiness and fulfillment in the readers’ relationships. As readers discover and follow God’s mission, they will begin their own journey from individual darkness unto His holy light.
Starting around page 150, for twenty pages or so, the Shroud is discussed in some detail. There are familiar details, details I’ve never encountered, and details that I can only think are too wildly crazy to be “divine revelations.” Here is some material supposedly from a conversation in the Spring of 1980 in the cafeteria of the Sloan Kettering Hospital in New York:
“Alva, as you may remember, my husband became a scientist.”
“Yes,” I responded.
“He is a physicist. His field, among others, is dosymmetry.”
“Dosymmetry,” I mused. “That has to do with radiology, doesn’t it?”
“Yes,” she said. “He was asked to be part of a team to go over to Turin, Italy, and examine the Shroud. He asked me to join the group as secretary.”
As I remember it, I said, “You really love Italy?”
“Yes,” she replied. “That’s why I jumped at the chance.” “That must be very exciting. Did he have an opportunity to actually handle it?”
"Oh yes,” she said. “You know, he was an atheist.”
“Really?” I said.
“A very devout one,” she laughed.
“And you are a fairly devout Episcopalian?”
“Yes, that’s correct,” she replied with a smile.
“What does all this have to do with the Shroud?” I asked.
“We were allowed to take one tiny little snippet of the Shroud and to analyze it.”
“How did he feel about the Shroud?’ I asked. “Particularly since he was an atheist?’
“He started off being extremely skeptical but then…”
“But then?” I said, asked, staring at her.
“Then he did the analysis. The snippet was radioactive!” she exclaimed as her face lit up.
“Well, I remember the story I was told and I believe it. It was about a man who sat on a rock in Canada in his backyard and it was uranium and he got irradiated. So why couldn’t the Shroud become irradiated in that way?”
“Roger told me this was the kind of radiation that only comes from an atomic blast.”
“That would lead me to a wild conclusion,” I said.
“Exactly,” she said. Then added while staring right at me, “Several soldiers sealed the tomb with an enormous stone they put there to keep people from robbing Jesus’s body or his disciples from stealing it and then making claims that he was resurrected bodily into heaven. How do you think that giant stone was removed?”
“I guess you’re telling me that you think it was removed by a mini atomic blast!” I exclaimed with an open mouth.
Exactly,” she said.
Then there is this about how the Shroud came to be in France. Some of it seems historical:
At the time of the fourth Crusade, Otho de hi Roche, Duke of Athens and Sparta, who was in command of the district of Blachernes where the Shroud was kept, received it as part of his recompense. He sent it to his father in 1204 a.d. and his father gave it to the Bishop of Besancon who placed it in the cathedral. It was exposed for veneration each year on Easter Sunday up till 1349. In that year, a fire broke out in the cathedral that caused slight damage to the Holy shroud. To save it from further damage, it was removed from the cathedral and in the confusion it was stolen and given to King Philip of France. King Philip gave it to his friend Geoffrey Count of Charney and Lord of Liry. It was natural that the Bishop of Besancon should try to recover the Shroud, but as the King of France had given it to his friend, it was impossible for him to do so. Two years later, a painted copy began to be exhibited in the Cathedral of Besancon to satis1y the devotion of those who had been accustomed to venerate the real Shroud; about the same time, probably a little earlier, Geoffrey of Liry employed a painter to paint a copy. Dom Chamart found conclusive evidence that the Shroud exhibited at Besancon after 1352 was only a painting, but a painting that had been copied from the real Shroud. He adds, “Dunod in his History of the Church of Besancon speaks of the Shroud preserved in the Cathedral of St. Etienne (Besancon) in the thirteenth century, and proceeds thus: ‘In March, i4, the church was destroyed by fire, and the box in which the Holy shroud was kept, seemingly without much formality, was lost. Some years afterwards the relic was found again by happy chance, and to make sure that it was the same as was formerly venerated in the church of St. Etienne, it was laid upon a dead man, who immediately revived. . . .