Press Release: Marino Endorses Antonacci Petition and Proposal

Full Text & YouTube Video:

Proposed Minimally-Invasive, Scientific Testing of the Shroud of Turin Endorsed by Shroud Expert

Monograph Publishing: Longtime Shroud of Turin expert, author Joseph G.Marino, has endorsed a recent Petition to Pope Francis and a proposal by one of the world’s leading authorities on the Shroud, attorney Mark Antonacci, to scientifically test the famous linen cloth long-reputed to be the burial garment of Jesus Christ.

“A new generation of promising research is currently being developed that could resolve the remaining mysteries regarding the  Shroud of Turin.”

St. Louis, MO (PRWEB) October 29, 2013

Joseph G. Marino, theologian and Shroud of Turin expert, has had over 35 years of researching the famous cloth purported to be the burial garment of Jesus Christ. He has appeared in numerous media and documentaries, and authored and co-authored (with his late wife, M. Sue Benford, R.N., M.A), several articles including Discrepancies in the Radiocarbon Dating Area of the Turin Shroud, (Chemistry Today, 26.4, (July-August). Marino contends that the Shroud samples removed for carbon dating purposes in 1988 contained threads from a 16th century repair that was invisibly rewoven into the same vicinity as the original fibers. Marino has recently endorsed Mark Antonacci’s proposal and petition to Pope Francis ] to allow further examining of the Shroud of Turin, its blood marks and other samples from the cloth, at the molecular and atomic levels.

In contrast, Antonacci contends that particle radiation emanating from the body wrapped in the Shroud not only explains the cloth’s medieval radiocarbon dating, but many other unparalleled features on the cloth including its unique body images. Antonacci first presented this test proposal and his image-forming hypothesis in his first book The Resurrection of the Shroud, (New York: M. Evans and Co., 2000). He presented an updated test proposal during the keynote address of the international conference held in conjunction with the Shroud’s last exhibition in 2010, Can Contamination Be Detected on the Turin Shroud to Explain its 1988 Dating?, (International Workshop on the Scientific Approach to the Archeiropoietos Images, Frascati Italy, May 4-6: 239-247). His image-forming hypothesis, Particle Radiation from the Body Could Explain the Shroud’s Images and its Carbon Dating, can be found at Antonacci, M. (2012), Scientific Research and Essays, Vol. 7(29).

The Shroud’s radiocarbon dating is the only scientific test result among thousands that is inconsistent with the cloth’s authenticity as Jesus’ burial garment. This aberrant result has recently been challenged by scientists at the University of Padua in Italy who obtained an average date of 33 B.C. +/- 250 years using three different methods to date fibers from the Shroud. The provenance of these samples has also been questioned. If molecular and atomic technology were applied to the Shroud, it could determine, once and for all, the source of all dated samples. It could further test all proposed explanations for the Shroud’s radiocarbon dating and its unique images from naturalistic to artistic to miraculous. This technology could independently reveal the Shroud’s actual age, the identity of the man buried within it, if it is a forgery and whether a miraculous event occurred to the dead body wrapped within it.

The Shroud of Turin has only been scientifically examined in a comprehensive manner once, 35 years ago. While this examination revealed extensive, startling information, a new generation of promising research is being developed that could resolve the remaining mysteries regarding this famous cloth.

Antonacci and Marino contend that the world has everything to gain and nothing to lose by testing the Shroud of Turin and its samples at the molecular, atomic and other non-invasive, scientific levels.

Mark Antonacci, President
Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation (RSF)
Cell: 314-704-0537
Office: 636-938-3708
markantonacci(at)testtheshroud(dot)com

Joseph G. Marino
(614) 477-1480 or
JMarino240(at)aol(dot)com

The RSF designs, advocates and funds some of the most sophisticated scientific testing of the 21st century. For the last two decades, it has supported a variety of scientific research and information relating to the age, origin and authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.

Monograph Publishing is a multi-dimensional company based in St. Louis, Missouri specializing in high quality publications, design, fine art prints and photography. http://www.monographpublishing.com

New Book About Christ’s Relics from Ignatius Press

hat tip to Joe Marino for this lead

imageThis book, published just a week ago, looks fascinating. (But is that a lepton in the upper left-hand corner of the cover?)

It’s called Witnesses to Mystery: Investigations into Christ’s Relics  and it is by by Grzegorz Gorny (Author) and Janusz Rosikon (Illustrator). It is only available in a hardcover edition. The price at Amazon is $23.77.

  • Hardcover: 336 pages
  • Publisher: Ignatius Press (October 22, 2013)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 158617844X
  • ISBN-13: 978-1586178444
  • Product Dimensions: 11 x 8.8 x 1 inches

The publisher, a significant Catholic publisher and film and music producer, offers the following description:

In this lavishly illustrated large coffee-table volume, writer Gorny and photographer Rosikon embarked on a two year investigative journey to seek the truth behind all the relics associated with the passion of Christ. The authors investigated a rich body of documentary evidence found in various museums, archives and churches surrounding sacred objects believed to have been preserved since Jesus’ lifetime, exploring and collaborating with historians and scientists in their attempt to verify the relics’ authenticity. They reach their conclusions not so much on the basis of faith as on the evidence supplied by historical sources and expert scientific opinion.

The relics associated with the Passion – the suffering, death and burial of Christ – have long proved something of an enigma for the scientific community. Relics investigated, and photographed, for this glorious volume include: the Cross, nails, crown of thorns, pillar of scourging, Christ’s tunic, the Veil of Manoppello, the Sudarium of Oviedo, the famous Shroud of Turin burial cloth and more.

Grzegorz Górny is a reporter, essayist, and film and television producer. He is the founder and editor-in-chief of the quarterly Fronda, and from 1994 to 2001 he co-authored a program under the same title that aired on the Polish national television. He has produced various documentary television series and authored numerous articles for European publications. His books includeBattle for Madrid (2010).

Janusz Rosikon is a photographer and a member of the Polish Journalists’ Association and the Association of Polish Artistic Photographers. His photographs have been featured in Time,Newsweek, and Reader’s Digest and various European publications. His work has been exhibited in public galleries in Poland, England, Austria, and North America. 

Album cover news you could have avoided if you didn’t read this blog

maybe Max can see something in this

imageThe blog Brave Words & Bloody Knuckles (and Yahoo News in turn) is reporting:

Virginian metallers LAMB OF GOD has checked in with a post about their upcoming 10th Anniversary edition of As The Palaces Burn:

“Many of you have asked, and yes, there is a face in the cover of As The Palaces Burn. The artist who has done all of our albums, Ken Adams, recreated the face of Jesus in the shroud of turin using a wiring diagram representing technology as a deity.”

Maybe I can get my cataracts put back in.

Ideas for conferences

imageCharles Freeman, by way of a comment, asks:

Can anyone enlighten me on these conferences? When I read papers from those held in the past they only seem to include papers from those who believe the Shroud is authentic,in fact they even seem to be used primarily as a meeting place for old friends (nothing wrong in that). So if someone sends in a paper arguing in favour of the radiocarbon dating or a haematologist sends in a paper disputing that there are bloodstains on the cloth , do they get rejected or accepted on scientific merit? It is a pity that there never seem to be actual debates -perhaps I am wrong but it seems to be largely papers read out .

I would certainly like to see a DEBATE on the alternative routes from Jerusalem that a burial cloth might have reached northern France in view of the fact that we have early relics close to Lirey that were said to have come from ‘the Lord’s tomb’ as well as all the crusader evidence of cloths being brought back to France from crusades earlier than the 1350s. These seem to have been relevant but completely neglected in favour of the Edessa route (that as a historian, I can find no merit in but could be included as one of the alternatives by someone who believes in it).

Should conferences be open to opposing views on authenticity? I think so.

Are debates a good idea?  Formal debates?  Roundtables (similar to cable news discussions)? I prefer the latter and think it is a good idea.

Bouguereau’s Mary

imageA reader writes:

My wife sent me these images.  A Canadian filmmaker has posted a retouched image of a Bouguereau painting of the Virgin Mary — using the face on the Shroud as a guide.  The results are, I think, stunning.

Image 1 is William-Adolphe Bouguereau’s1888 painting "Virgin and Child."

Image 2 is an animated gif showing how Julian Lasbliez, a Canadian filmmaker and artist, re-touched Bouguereau’s painting using the proportions of Christ’s face on the Shroud of Turin.

Image 3 is the final result.

I can’t exactly recommend any of his other work, but this is now officially my favorite image of Mary.  Lasbliez originally posted the photo here: LINK 

Click on the picture to get a zoomable jpeg. It is quite spectacular in larger format.

Paper Chase: The Turin Shroud by Jonathan Allday

imageThis past Saturday, Stephen Jones wrote in a blog posting, Lecture explores legendary Turin Shroud, which could show the face of Jesus Christ beginning with a quote from Welwyn Hatfield (Hertfordshire, England) Times 24 news site:

Starting with that assumption, Dr Jonathan Allday will explore an interest from his teenage years and see if there are rational reasons to doubt the carbon dating.

and then stating:

I can’t recall hearing of Dr Jonathan Allday before, so I hadn’t realised that he had authored a paper, "The Turin Shroud," in what I assume is a scientific journal, Physics Education, Vol. 40, 2005. It is behind a pay wall, but its abstract says:

"The Turin Shroud is a fascinating relic that has long intrigued many people. It is old—but how old? It has an image of a man’s body—but how and when did the image get there? This article examines the scientific aspects of the debate about the Shroud, focusing on the image itself and on the radiocarbon dating performed in 1988.

I can’t recall the paper, either. So I’m off to the USC library. Thanks, Stephen.

New Book by Dame De Saint-Simone

imageHat tip to Joe Marino for a new book lead:  A Historic Search for The Face of Jesus: The True Likeness of God by Ysatis De Saint-Simone

  • Paperback: 104 pages
  • Publisher: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform (October 21, 2013)
  • Language: English
  • Product Dimensions: 9 x 6 x 0.2 inches
    Publisher’s Description at Amazon

Never before in Myth, History or Legend has there been, or will be a Being like Jesus the Christ. ‘A Historic Search for the Face of Jesus’ presents the powerful physical presence of Jesus – as it was and is- in all its magnificence, for Beauty and Love are two of the attributes of God and He exudes them both. The book is based on a thorough research on His true likeness, which Dame De Saint-Simone compiled into a book to show to the general public a historic proof of the majestic beauty and the powerful physical presence of the Son of God. ‘A Historic Search for the Face of Jesus’ compares the true historic evidence of His likeness to the unfortunately inaccurate images that one sees in all media outlets, that more often than not, downgrade His physical appearance – to the point of being quasi malicious. This book contradicts with true evidence all of these by using the real images of Jesus found in different sources: i.e. a Mural of early Christendom (3rd Century A.D.), of His true image, the imprints of His image on the Vero-Ikon and on the Holy Shroud of Turin, the painting of the Sacred Heart that Sor Faustina, to whom He appeared, directed a painter to do, and of a real photo of Jesus taken by Sor Anna Ali in one of His apparitions to her – all of them resembling each other. A true historical evidence of how Jesus truly looked and still looks. If you really want know what Jesus looked like, you have in this book true evidence of the Beauty of God made Man.

Of those big-meaning words: Superficial, half-tone and striated

clip_image001

Colin Berry wonders: Why is the Shroud image so superficial, half-tone and striated? Is it on raised ribs of primary cell wall hemicellulose? With an interesting graphic, he helps us to imagine a possibility:

Note the way that the hemicellulose forms a series of interrupted striations on the surface of the cellulose fibrils. Then imagine an image being thermochemically imprinted by some means onto that surface. It is not difficult to see how the resulting image might exhibit bothhalf-tone character AND striations as reported per Shroud image if there were selective pyrolysis (chemical dehydration to yellow or tan products) of those interrupted hemicellulose bands or segments, leaving the cellulose relatively intact.

It may be time to restart those kitchen experiments. It could start with attempts to strip off the outermost PCW layer of cells selectively, or even the hemicelluloses only, and see whether the surface then resists thermochemical dehydration (aka “scorching” ;-) .

Bravo to new ideas and experimentation.

Meet me in Saint Louie, Louie. Meet me at the fair.

imageJoe knows because I wrote to him yesterday. My intent was not to dump on him or on plans for a St. Louis conference. I was criticizing the announcement. My point wasn’t even to criticize the Mark Antonacci’s ideas. I have done that in the past and I will do so again just as I criticize Colin Berry or Stephen Jones or Barrie Schwortz or Giulio Fanti or anyone else who pops up on my radar screen. It isn’t easy, HOWEVER, to criticize Joe because he is just too nice, way too trustworthy, way too responsible and way too effective.  He proved that with Ohio 2008.

As I told Joe in a private email, maybe it was because I had just been invited to a neighbor’s home for wine and cheese only to find out after I got there that I had really been invited to meet a political candidate that I would never have voted for under any circumstance.  Similarly, I didn’t like clicking on links that suggested a complete solution to the carbon dating results and how the image was formed. It doesn’t matter that I think it is nutty. Heck, I think every single hypothesis ever suggested for the image is nutty. And, no, I don’t have an idea that is better than any of them.

I trust Joe. But I got an uncomfortable feeling when I started clicking. Maybe it was just me. I would have avoided the links. 

The conference needs a website. Somewhere there should be a tab or something that says “Sponsors.”  There, there should be a “safe” description of the sponsors. And maybe there, there should be a link to their websites. I know the conference will be open and objective. But give that appearance, too.

Okay, I did a crappy job of speaking out yesterday. I apologize to Joe and everyone else. I’ll be there in 2014.

Another In Case You Missed it on STERA’s Facebook Page

imageBarrie Schwortz is featuring another “In case you missed it” paper on the STERA Facebook page, a paper by John L. Brown.  I covered this same paper on this blog earlier this month in Paper Chase: Microscopical Investigation of Selected Raes Threads from the Shroud of Turin. It is good to be reminded to read this paper because it is so significant.

Barrie writes:

In 2004, Ray Rogers was working on his final research on the Shroud and wanted to get an unbiased, independent researcher to evaluate his own observations on the Raes sample. He chose John Brown, a highly regarded materials scientist in Atlanta, Georgia to examine the samples. Brown completed his work and wrote a paper titled, "Microscopical Investigation of Selected Raes Threads From the Shroud of Turin

( http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/brown1.pdf )

Some thoughts on the St. Louis conference announcement

imageSo we have a conference in St. Louis followed in three weeks by coming five weeks after an IEEE workshop in Bari, Italy sponsored by the Technical University of Bari and the International Center for the Turin Shroud Studies.  Is this not insane?

Maybe!

So who is sponsoring the conference in St. Louis? It is worrisome.  First there is Mark Antonacci’s Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation. After that there is a faith and values video production company, Salt River Production Group, that talks up Antonacci wanting to prove the resurrection on the company website. You might recall Paper Chase: Mark Antonacci’s Hypothesis on this blog.

I went clicking on the announcement I got as an email from Barrie Schwortz.

One Click: What is the first thing I see when I click on Antonacci’s Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation?

Sophisticated, Nuclear Technology Applied to the Shroud of Turin Could Definitively Disprove its Current Radiocarbon Dating Theory, and Prove, Irrefutably, the Source of its Images and its Many Other Unique Properties – Thereby Unraveling the Secrets of One of Life’s Greatest Mysteries.

Three More Clicks: The Salt River Production Group tells us:

This is what Mark Antonacci has to say.  He is a friend of mine and one of the world’s leading experts on the Shroud of Turin.

[ . . . ]

Many other medical and scientific findings from the Shroud clearly demonstrate that it wrapped a tortured, crucified corpse, whose unprecedented frontal and dorsal body images resulted from radiation. This scientific and medical evidence also shows that the source of this radiation was necessarily the length, width and even depth of the dead body wrapped within this burial shroud. The new tests and experiments along with prior scientific, medical and archaeological results would prove that after Jesus incurred all of the wounds of the passion, and was crucified, killed and buried in Jerusalem, his corpse gave off particle radiation while it was wrapped in his burial garment. This event is not only consistent with the resurrection of Jesus Christ, but it left unfakable evidence of its occurrence throughout the cloth. . . .

Perhaps this conference could have been announced in a way that didn’t focus so much on the sponsors. Perhaps Antonacci could have redesigned his home page before the announcement. Rightly or wrongly, one gets the sense of a poorly disguised agenda for the conference.  And it’s not that there aren’t plenty of people who think the International Center for the Turin Shroud Studies has an agenda. Will we have repeats of the atmosphere of suspicion about the paper selection process for Dallas 2005?  It is worrisome.

St. Louis Conference Dates Announced: October 9-12, 2014

imageThe following is from an email sent early this morning to the STERA mailing list by Barrie Schwortz:

The organizers of next year’s St. Louis Shroud Conference have just announced the dates for their event. This is the information I just received from Joe Marino:

An international Shroud conference titled "Shroud of Turin: The Controversial Intersection of Faith and Science" is scheduled for October 9-12, 2014. Co-sponsored by Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation and the Salt River Production Group, the conference will be held at the Drury Plaza Inn, 355 Chesterfield Center, Chesterfield, Missouri 63017,just west of St. Louis and less than 20 miles from Lambert – St. Louis International Airport.

Subject matter for the papers is open to any major aspect of sindonology, including Science, History, Art, Theology and can also include other relevant artifacts such as the Sudarium of Oviedo, Manoppello Cloth and the Tilma of Guadalupe. Abstracts should be submitted electronically to Joe Marino (JMarino240@aol.com) no later than 15 May 2014. (That date has changed from a previous announcement.) If for some reason the abstract cannot be sent electronically, please send to Joe Marino / 2408 Sovron Ct. / Dublin, Ohio 43016 / USA. Authors will be limited to a maximum of 2 (two) papers as primary or secondary author. Abstracts will be sent to selected reviewers, who will not be informed of the identity of the author. Authors will also be required to send vitaes. Authors will be notified of acceptance no later than 30 June 2014.  English will be the official language of the conference. The conference will begin on Thursday evening October 9th and end at noon on Sunday October 12th. Monday, October 13th is the Columbus Day holiday.

KEY WEBSITES:
Conference Info:  http://shroud.wikispaces.com/St.+Louis+Conference+2014 Registration: under construction
Hotel: https://www.druryhotels.com/propertyoverview.aspx?property=0121

Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation: http://www.resurrectionoftheshroud.com/
Salt River Production Group: http://saltriverproductions.com/

I couldn’t get the hotel link to work. I was able to get the above picture and this description from another site:

The new 10-story Drury Plaza Hotel Chesterfield is approximately 22 miles west of downtown St. Louis. This suburban hotel is 19 miles from Lambert St. Louis International Airport adjacent to I-64 and the Chesterfield Westfield Mall.The 275-room hotel features free wireless internet access in all guest rooms lobby and meeting rooms one hour of free long distance per room every night an indoor/outdoor pool and whirlpool exercise room guest pantry and guest laundry facility. Everyday a free HOT! QUIKSTART breakfast is provided and includes scrambled eggs sausage biscuits and gravy made to order pancakes juices hot and cold cereals toast fresh fruit milk coffee tea pastries and other assorted baked goods. Along with the breakfast Drury’s value package includes free evening beverages and snacks offered daily.Each guest room has microwaves refrigerators iron and ironing boards hairdryers coffeemakers TVs and telephones with voice mail.

The Image of Camuliana

image

Sister Jeanne asks:

Is it possible that the belief in acheiropoieta of Christ began with the discovery of an image on our Lord’s burial shroud? I had learned that the idea began with the legend of the Camuliana icon. I also wonder if there are examples from other world cultures that could have led to early Christian belief in such things.

For starters there is an entry in Wikipedia (which offers several references not included here):

The image of Christ that appears in Camuliana is mentioned in the early 6th century by Zacharias Rhetor, his account surviving in a fragmentary Syriac version, and is probably the earliest image to be said to be a miraculous imprint on cloth in the style of the Veil of Veronica (a much later legend) or Shroud of Turin. In the version recorded in Zacharias’s chronicle, a pagan lady called Hypatia was undergoing Christian instruction, and asking her instructor "How can I worship him, when He is not visible, and I cannot see Him?". She later found in her garden a painted image of Christ floating on water. When placed inside her head-dress for safekeeping it then created a second image onto the cloth, and then a third was painted. Hypatia duly converted and founded a church for the version of the image that remained in Camuliana. In the reign of Justinian I (527-565) the image is said to have been processed around cities in the region to protect them from barbarian attacks.[3] This account differs from others but would be the earliest if it has not suffered from iconodule additions, as may be the case.[4]

One of the images (if there was more than one) probably arrived in Constantinople in 574,[5] and is assumed to be the image of Christ used as a palladium in subsequent decades, being paraded before the troops before battles by Philippikos, Priscus andHeraclius, and in the Avar Siege of Constantinople in 626, and praised as the cause of victory in poetry by George Pisida, again very early mentions of this use of icons.[6] It was probably destroyed during the Byzantine Iconoclasm,[7] after which mentions of an existing image cease (however Heinrich Pfeiffer identifies it with the Veil of Veronicaand Manoppello Image [8]), and in later centuries its place was taken by the Image of Edessa, which apparently arrived in Constantinople in 944, and icons of the Theotokossuch as the Hodegetria. The Image of Edessa was very probably later, but had what apparently seemed to the Byzantines an even more impressive provenance, as it was thought to have been an authentic non-miraculous portrait painted from the life during the lifetime of Jesus.

I have not seen any mention of non-Christian acheiropoieta. That is an interesting and important question.

Paper Chase: Thomas & The Hymn of the Pearl

From  the abstract of Thomas & The Hymn of the Pearl by The Rev. Albert R. Dreisbach:

The Acts of Thomas, which contains the Hymn of the Soul/Pearl and may well be an
adaptation of an older work redesigned to provide “spy clues” pointing to the Shroud and its image(s). The Hymn of the Pearl is one of the earliest documents we have on Edessan Christianity Possibly dating from as early as the first century A.D., this hymn is described by Ewa Kuryluk as a work which:

…assimilates into an ancient tradition the new theology of Jesus’ incarnation, resurrection and transfiguration by transforming Christ into a soul. His dual nature rendered by his splitting into a humanlike anima – a son clothed in skin – and into a divine soul, an iconic dress of paradise. In the Syrian poem the essence of divinity resides in God’s clothing – a heavenly double of the mortal human skin [Emphases added.]

Gregory Riley offers a variant interpretation:

The Acts of Thomas, while containing many “orthodox” interpolations and 
revisions, nevertheless presents a like picture, and closes with a scene similar to 
that in the Gospel Easter stories; yet in the scene of the Acts, the body of the twin 
brother of Jesus remains in the grave, while his soul ascends to heaven. This is 
supported, among other passages, by one of the most famous poems in Gnostic Christian literature, the Hi’inn of the Pearl, which describes the archetypical journey of the soul for the Thomas disciple: the soul descends into a body, and abandons it upon return to the heavenly realms. (Riley, 178-79.)

The first half of this monograph which is devoted to the significance of Thomas and the school bearing his name and their respective influence on the thought modes and writings from Edessa. Although a case can be made to support the traditional view that Thaddaeus/Addai was the original apostle who evangelized Edessa, this paper will consider the hypothesis that it was really Thomas who did so. Later, certain Docetic elements in the literature from the school associated with his name his name may have caused Thomas’ initial role to be remanded to the more obscure Jude Thaddaeus/Addai.

The second half of this paper will explore the interrelationship of the biblical Thomas, that disciple’s connection with the Shroud and the city of Edessa, the school in that region bearing his name, and a suggested interpretation of key passages in the Hymn of the Soul/Pearl which reveal both their potential dependence upon the Shroud and the latter’s significance at an early date.

Meanwhile, Part 2: “Works for Me”

imageMeanwhile, while the cotton wars were going on in this blog, Keith Witherup, over at ReligionForum.org, was also calling our attention to some ancient words to ponder. I often ponder these words, Are they symbolically, in a literary fashion, being spoken by the risen Christ, Is the author using Christ’s voice, in a sense, to describe his own burial shroud? The words are from the Robe of Glory (Hymn of the Pearl) in the Acts of Thomas. The hymn, with a peculiar two-image segment (below), is thought by some scholars to be older than the Acts of Thomas and is sometimes attributed to Bardesane of Edessa, a Gnostic poet, writing as early as A.D. 216. The words are found in different places in different Greek and Syriac versions of the Acts.

Suddenly, I saw my image on my garment like in a mirror
Myself and myself through myself [or myself facing outward and inward]
As though divided, yet one likeness
Two images: but one likeness of the King [of kings in some translations]

Witherup writes:

If you look at a photograph of the shroud you see two full size images of a man, one in which the image is facing outward and one inward. In more modern terms we describe these as front-side and back-side images, or ventral and dorsal images. They are, indeed, as in a mirror as they are full size and seemingly perpendicular to the surface. Those words, “as though divided, yet one likeness,” resonate with the two separate images that meet at the top of the head.

Works for me.

Works for me, too. Note these alternate translations:

And we might wonder about one of the illationes used in a late 7th century rite used in Spain, the Mozarabic Rite:

Peter ran with John to the tomb and saw the recent imprints of the dead and risen man on the linens.

Or about these words by Pope Stephen II, who reigned from 752 to 757:

[Christ] spread out his entire body on a linen cloth that was white as snow. On this cloth, marvelous as it is to see . . . the glorious image of the Lord’s face, and the length of his entire and most noble body, has been divinely transferred.

Should we ponder these words? Do they mean what I think they mean?

Meanwhile, Part 1

imageMeanwhile, while the cotton wars were going on in this blog, Keith Witherup, over at ReligionForum.org was disputing some video clips that argued that the image on the shroud is not Jesus because:

  • “Jesus’ body would have been washed and prepared according to Jewish burial law . . . This would then, supposedly, preclude blood stains from Jesus’ wounds appearing on the linen shroud, . . .”
  • “the Shroud of Turin is a single rectangular piece of linen, which the video author(s) argue, would not have been the case.” . . .
  • “the Bible makes no mention of an image appearing on Jesus’ shroud, . . .  no such image therefore exists.”
  • “that God would not allow a graven image to be made of himself.”

imageThe video clips ignore the carbon dating making me wonder why? Were the clips creators of the clips young earth creationists who have problems with the technology because it tells us that some things are impossibly too old. Note that according to various Gallup polls, somewhere between 40% and 50% of adults in the United States believe that "God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years"

Jones: “none of the three laboratories dated its sample to between 1260 and 1390”

BT writes from New London:

Is Jones right? . . . On his blog he reported this:

clip_image001By the way Prof. Hedge’s claim that: "Hall’s [Oxford] laboratory dated its sample to between 1260 and 1390" is false and as a nuclear physicist involved in Oxford’s radiocarbon dating of the Shroud, he must know it is false. As Table 1 of the 1989 Nature paper shows, none of the three laboratories dated its sample to between 1260 and 1390 (the dates are years before 1950). That makes Oxford’s C-14 dates: "795±65" = 1090-1220; 730±45" = 1175-1265; and "745±55" = 1150-1260," an average of 1138-1248. So the highest of Oxford’s average C-14 date of the Shroud is over 100 years before the Shroud first appeared in the undisputed historical record at Lirey, France in about 1355! So Prof. Hall’s own laboratory’s 12-13th century C-14 dates don’t support his claim that the Shroud was forged "during the 14th century"! The "1260 and 1390" date was a statistically manipulated average of the three laboratories’ C-14 dates.

[Right: C-14 dates of "Sample 1" (the Shroud) from Table 1 of the Damon, et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, pp.611-615, 16th February.]

BT continues:

Could Jones be right? What don’t I understand? I don’t know the math of C14 dating.

What does Jones mean by manipulated? What makes it a manipulated average? I’d like to see the calculations.

Shroud Encounter in Alabama November 3rd

imageRuss Breault informs us that Shroud Encounter comes to Parkview Baptist Church, 305 Beltline Place SW, Decatur, Alabama on Sunday, November 3rd at 6:00 PM. Admission is FREE. See the promo video by clicking on the image to the right. 

He informs us, as well, that he will also be at Holy Spirit Catholic church in Huntsville, Alabama on that same Sunday November 3rd at 10:30 AM.  

Both events will feature a museum quality life size replica made from high resolution digital scans provided by Barrie Schwortz, documenting photographer for STURP.

Promo Video: Shroud Encounter Promo–Parkview Baptist Church–Decatur, AL Sunday November 3rd at 6:00 PM from Russ Breault on Vimeo.

Quote for Today on Carbon Dating

imageIn archaeology, if there are ten lines of evidence, carbon dating being one of them, and it conflicts with the other nine, there is little hesitation to throw out the carbon date as inaccurate . . .

— Biblical archaeologist Eugenia Nitowski
Founder of the Ariel Museum of
Biblical Archaeology

Hat tip to Stephen Jones from his most recent update to his October News posting.

Is the Shroud of Turin a Medieval Photograph?

This video was posted over at Smithsonian.com 12 days ago (recycled from a TV documentary might be a better way of putting it). Anyway, you might want to read a good paper by Barrie Schwortz, Is the Shroud of Turin a Medieval Photograph? 

image

Back in February, 2009, I posted Nicholas Allen’s Photograph Theory Just Won’t Die. I was right.

Sorry. The video embed from Smithsonian doesn’t work. You will need to click here or on the picture above and watch the video on the Smithsonian site. Smithsonian has only had three comments in 12 days so I doubt the video has attracted much attention on the web. 

Today’s How do we know: the man’s bones were not broken

imageJohn’s gospel offers prophetic fulfillment in telling us that none of Jesus’ bones were broken. This is important, theologically, because the law of Moses says that the Passover lamb must not have any bones broken.

Looking at the image of the man pictured on the shroud we see no convincing evidence of broken bones, although some have suggested that the man’s nose seems broken. But there is no way to know from the image on the shroud.

To use this observation as evidence of anything is trivial.

Crucifixion (Corpus Hypercubus)- Salvador Dali

Stephen Jones on the Stuttgart Psalter

imageStephen Jones has put together a thoughtful posting on the Stuttgart Psalter image of Jesus being flogged:  A 9th century depiction of Christ being scourged naked from behind with the scourgers’ fingers in the shape of the reversed 3 bloodstain on the Shroud!

Do read it. It is nicely done. I should mention, though, I don’t find the configuration of the fingers on a hand of each man doing the scourging very compelling. The whip mark distribution and the fact that Jesus is naked in the picture in a pose that seems shroud inspired is, to my way of thinking, more important.