Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jesus-era leper sheds light on Turin shroud mystery
Haaretz .com ^ | December 16, 2009 | Haaretz Service

Posted on 12/17/2009 4:57:12 AM PST by bogusname

Israel experts said on Wednesday that a burial shroud known as the Turin shroud, assumed to be the type used to wrap the body of Jesus, did not actually originate from Jesus-era Jerusalem.

The conclusion was based on excavation discoveries of a first-century C.E. shrouded man found in a tomb on the edge of the Old City of Jerusalem, which also revealed the earliest proven case of leprosy.

Along with the DNA of the shrouded man, this was the first time that fragments of a burial shroud have been found from the time of Jesus in Jerusalem, which, unlike the complex weave of the Turin Shroud, this shroud was made up of a simple two-way weave, as the textiles historian Dr. Orit Shamir was able to show...

(Excerpt) Read more at haaretz.com ...


TOPICS: General Discusssion; Religion & Science
KEYWORDS: godsgravesglyphs; helixmakemineadouble; leper; leprosy; letshavejerusalem; medievalfake; medievalforgery; medievalfraud; shroud; shroudofturin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

1 posted on 12/17/2009 4:57:13 AM PST by bogusname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bogusname
The article contains a number of points showing what an unusual burial this was. Organic remains are usually not preserved in the humid ground of Jerusalem, there was no secondary burial, this is the earliest known case of leprosy. So, this is quite a singular find, eh?

And in conclusion: the weave of the cloth here is not like the weave of the cloth in Turin, therefore the Turin Shroud is a fake.

Huh? How did we get there?

2 posted on 12/17/2009 5:03:44 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Macbeth is ripe for shaking, and the powers above put on their instruments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

Date;ine star date 12171.5
Excavation of a tomb near the former New York City of an itinerant day laborer named John Doe reveals that 21st century Americans were not buried in wool suits with neckties but in denim cloth pants and shirts made of what was called chambray.
Rather than the woolen pinstripes alleged to be used ( a complex and advanced fabric) at the time, this proves that the suit of the alleged “Keith Olbermann” dates from some fifteen centuries later, when it was used to hold feminine hygiene products.


3 posted on 12/17/2009 5:08:17 AM PST by steve8714 (To paraphrase St. Paul; Ain't no harm in havin' a little nip, but don't fall down, bust your lip.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

... cause, you know... lepers always got buried in the finest cloths available.

Let’s not forget that Joseph of Arimathea likely provided the shroud. Joseph was from the Sanhedrin. He probably got a burial shroud like the Sanhedrin would have used. I’m guessing that the Sanhedrin burial shrouds may have been a bit higher quality than lepers’ burial shrouds.

And given the response to the woman anointing him with oil, I don’t think Joseph would have said, “Wait... I can’t use this shroud; it’s too nice... I’ll go find a beggar’s shroud.”


4 posted on 12/17/2009 5:17:28 AM PST by dangus (Nah, I'm not really Jim Thompson, but I play him on FR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Alex Murphy; HarleyD

How sad that so many require a piece of cloth of questionable origin to help justify their faith.


5 posted on 12/17/2009 5:19:28 AM PST by Gamecock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

How sad that so many would spend so much time trying to debunk a piece of cloth in order to debunk an entire faith.


6 posted on 12/17/2009 5:22:03 AM PST by silverleaf (More folks being invited to the White House for Holiday parties than are being sent to Afghanistan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Well, the face of Christ was beaten so bad He didn’t look human. The guy on the shroud was in pretty good shape. Christ’s scalp was torn apart by blows to the head with a rod while He was wearing a crown of thorns. The shroud fella showed no such trauma. In addition to these things, they also plucked out His beard. Since the Bible says long hair is shameful for a man we can conclude our Lord had short hair.
It degrades the incredible sacrifice Christ actually did make to assume the comparatively healthy chap on the shroud of Turin is our Lord. Let us not be ignorant of nor ungrateful for what terrible things Christ had to endure for our sakes.


7 posted on 12/17/2009 5:25:24 AM PST by bogusname (Banish All Liberals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: steve8714

LOL


8 posted on 12/17/2009 5:26:22 AM PST by bogusname (Banish All Liberals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

A faith that requires a piece of cloth is not worth having.


9 posted on 12/17/2009 5:26:24 AM PST by Gamecock (A faith that requires a piece of cloth is not worth having.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
the History Channel had a show this week about Jesus, about Jewish burial practices of His time, about the events as described in the Bibles. It was fascinating.

They also,examined a Christ-era shroud found in a Jerusalem tomb, covering the bones of a TB victim (presumably the contagious disease is what prevented his being reburied)- the composition of the cloth was not dissimilar from the Turin Shroud. The entire concept of a large piece of cloth being used as a shroud, instead of smaller pieces of linens used as “wrappings” to bind the body- is still up to debate. However, the events and trauma surrounding the described crucifixion and entombment of Jesus, did lead to a plausible scenario that his burial was atypical in many aspects and normal rituals may not have occurred on the day of his death.

10 posted on 12/17/2009 5:28:31 AM PST by silverleaf (More folks being invited to the White House for Holiday parties than are being sent to Afghanistan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I believe the Turin cloth is not Jesus’ but the logic here is flawed. Maybe everyone who was buried back then used the same cloth, but I doubt it.


11 posted on 12/17/2009 5:28:58 AM PST by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

How sad that so many require a piece of cloth of questionable origin to help justify their faith.
___________________________

How said a person would spend his time on earth attacking other believers.


12 posted on 12/17/2009 5:30:27 AM PST by Radl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

You’re exactly right but the leaps in logic archeologist make, represented by this article, is stupid.


13 posted on 12/17/2009 5:33:01 AM PST by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

the anti-faith, not Christianity, seems to be the one, that “requires” proof of the origins of the shroud of Turin

CS Lewis did not need the Shroud of Turin to be a Christian, neither do the rest of the world’s Christians

if it is proven a faux relic, the faith will go on even as the anti-faith rejoices in its seeming triumph


14 posted on 12/17/2009 5:36:39 AM PST by silverleaf (More folks being invited to the White House for Holiday parties than are being sent to Afghanistan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bogusname
How sad that so many require a piece of cloth of questionable origin to help justify their faith.

I don't need a piece of cloth to justify my faith, but if it is real...and we will probably never know...it is just plain cool.

15 posted on 12/17/2009 5:45:06 AM PST by Drawsing (The fool shows his annoyance at once. The prudent man overlooks an insult. (Proverbs 12:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

This is utter nonsense.

Complex weaves incorporated not only into clothing but magnificent tapestries are very prevalent during the first century BC - weaving had been around for thousands of years.

http://www.mansfield.edu/~art/Papyrus2GeoffreyBeadlea_picture_of_women_weaving_in_th.htm


16 posted on 12/17/2009 5:48:20 AM PST by blackminorca
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demshateGod; All

“Maybe everyone who was buried back then used the same cloth, but I doubt it.”

Of course they used the same cloth. They bought the cloth from the leading cloth factory at that time. The advanced post-industrial age manufacturing processes in place at that time prove that there is no way the shroud of turin was Christ’s burial cloth. therefore Christ is not the son of God, and you should immediately begin practicing Islam before we nuke your ass.

Sincerely,

Mahmoud Ahmedinijad

/sarc off


17 posted on 12/17/2009 5:48:44 AM PST by johncocktoasten (Practicing asymetrical thread warfare against anti-Palin Trolls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: bogusname
"... unlike the complex weave of the Turin Shroud, this shroud was made up of a simple two-way weave..."

Uhh... Joseph of Arimathea was rich? Hello?

18 posted on 12/17/2009 5:51:09 AM PST by Enosh (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

“A faith that requires a piece of cloth is not worth having.”

Gamecock,

A piece of cloth?

Is that how you describe the progress we have had in the first 2000 years after Christ?

Tell me, what kind of progress was there during the 2000 years before Christ?

Piles of rock that got progressively bigger?

Religions that commit animal sacrifice to cleanse them of their sins?

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1135491.html


19 posted on 12/17/2009 5:54:26 AM PST by blackminorca
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLZdrPwp5vs&feature=related


20 posted on 12/17/2009 5:55:43 AM PST by blackminorca
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
"A faith that requires a piece of cloth is not worth having."

I agree, but sometimes God presents us with miracles just because he loves us, and not because we "require" it. Suppose just for a moment, that Christ did leave us the shroud and it is 100% authentic. Do you think he would have done so out of pure whimsy or without some higher intent?

Even St. Thomas the Apostle required physical proof of Christ's resurrection, and Christ did not turn him away, but invited him to probe the wounds. Indeed Christ blessed those who, "have not seen, but still believe," but he didn't exactly run Thomas out of town, either.

I don't need the shroud at all for my faith, but it remains an intriguing anomaly, and if it has drawn but one skeptic out of himself and turned him to God saving his soul, it is indeed, imbued with a touch of the miraculous.

21 posted on 12/17/2009 5:56:50 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: blackminorca

Gamecock isn’t anti-Christian, as he is a Calvinist, if I’m not mistaken. He’s just delving into anti-Catholicism.


22 posted on 12/17/2009 6:02:21 AM PST by Rodebrecht (Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

How sad that skeptics feel so threatened by a piece of cloth.

Since it’s just a stooooooopppppppiiiiiid piece of cloth, how come you Catholic-hating Calvinists don’t just ignore it?

How come you are irrationally compelled to jump on all Shroud threads?

It’s just a piece of cloth, isn’t it?

While our faith does not depend on it, your Calvinism seems to depend on debunking it.

Odd, now, isn’t it?

Get a life. Post on your Calvinist threads and leave the meaningless Shroud threads to those fools who study historical artifacts historically.


23 posted on 12/17/2009 6:12:54 AM PST by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

And let the record show, should affronted Calvinists whine to the Religion Moderator, that Gamecock was the first on this thread to personalize what was up to that point a discussion of the historical merits of the Haaretz article’s reasoning about the leper shroud.

Gamecock accused us of making our faith depend on a piece of cloth.

That’s a falsehood, because our faith does not depend on the Shroud. Gamecock knows it’s a falsehood. It was done to inflame. Gamecock sent his reply to his fellow Calvinists to invite them to hijack this thread.

I did not personalize this.


24 posted on 12/17/2009 6:17:10 AM PST by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
How sad that so many require a piece of cloth of questionable origin to help justify their faith.

Way to show the love of Christ to your brethren during the season of His birth.

I seem to remember the apostles having something to say about those who sow discontent among the believers for their own amusement.

I also recall Jesus himself having something to say about hurling accusations against others, and I have to believe that would go doubly so when those accusations are blatantly unfounded, purposely insulting, and obviously deceitful, like yours are.

Merry Christmas.
25 posted on 12/17/2009 6:17:32 AM PST by chrisser (Tweet not, lest ye a twit be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
How sad that so many require a piece of cloth of questionable origin to help justify their faith.

So many what?

Who requires a piece of cloth of questionable origin to help justify their faith?

26 posted on 12/17/2009 6:18:51 AM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
A faith that requires a piece of cloth is not worth having.

Far better to share the faith of Christ in the Church He founded for us: the Catholic Church.

27 posted on 12/17/2009 6:19:50 AM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

“Far better to share the faith of Christ in the Church He founded for us: the Catholic Church.”

Glad you left out “Roman.”


28 posted on 12/17/2009 6:26:49 AM PST by esquirette (If we do not know our own worldview, we will accept theirs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: bogusname

So this shroud was different from the Shroud of Turin? So what? Shrouds all came from the same shroud factory? No they didn’t. I would love for the Shroud of Turin to be authentic. Why? So I could fall down and worship it? No! Because it would make my belief in Jesus stronger? NO, because my belief could not be any stronger. I hope that it is real because if I had been a witness to Jesus death and burial and had been able to, I would have saved the shroud that he was wrapped in and protected it and passed it down to my children. It makes me feel good that some simple ordinary person might have done that so many years ago


29 posted on 12/17/2009 6:29:09 AM PST by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rodebrecht

Don’t be baited by the joyless. I guess it’s too bad Papists aren’t quartered any more.


30 posted on 12/17/2009 6:32:37 AM PST by steve8714 (To paraphrase St. Paul; Ain't no harm in havin' a little nip, but don't fall down, bust your lip.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: chrisser

Isn’t saying that an affront to a true Calvinist?


31 posted on 12/17/2009 6:34:23 AM PST by steve8714 (To paraphrase St. Paul; Ain't no harm in havin' a little nip, but don't fall down, bust your lip.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.; Gamecock
And let the record show, should affronted Calvinists whine to the Religion Moderator, that Gamecock was the first on this thread to personalize what was up to that point a discussion of the historical merits of the Haaretz article’s reasoning about the leper shroud.

Gamecock accused us of making our faith depend on a piece of cloth.

That’s a falsehood, because our faith does not depend on the Shroud. Gamecock knows it’s a falsehood. It was done to inflame. Gamecock sent his reply to his fellow Calvinists to invite them to hijack this thread.

I did not personalize this.

BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

32 posted on 12/17/2009 6:44:13 AM PST by Alex Murphy ("Though He slay me, yet will I trust Him" - Job 13:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ditter

As I stated in post #7 the Biblical account of Christ’s crucifixion indicates that the shroud of Turin was never wrapped around our severely battered Lord.
If you believe Christ was born of a virgin, died for your sins and rose from the dead, you are saved. Christ lives and likewise so shall we.


33 posted on 12/17/2009 6:45:18 AM PST by bogusname (Banish All Liberals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: bogusname
That is exactly what I believe but the Shroud of Turin is a fascinating story and I would LIKE for it to be true. Nothing in my belief of Jesus NEEDS for the shroud to be real.
34 posted on 12/17/2009 6:53:13 AM PST by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.; Alex Murphy; Religion Moderator
Gamecock accused us of making our faith depend on a piece of cloth.

Who is us? There are plenty of non-Catholics who have a fascination with the shroud, including Evangelicals.

It was done to inflame.

Gee, that sounds like mindreading, which is strictly forbidden 'round these parts.

Gamecock sent his reply to his fellow Calvinists to invite them to hijack this thread.

Sounds like mindreading.
Besides, this wasn't tagged as anything (devotional, Catholic caucus, etc) which makes it open. Want a closed thread? There are plenty of mechanisms to keep we evil Calvinists out.

35 posted on 12/17/2009 6:54:45 AM PST by Gamecock (A faith that requires a piece of cloth is not worth having.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: esquirette
Glad you left out “Roman.”

Why would I add it in? I'm not Italian. Neither is Pope Benedict.

36 posted on 12/17/2009 6:55:08 AM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
My Board of Directors impressed by your scientific methodology.

I am authorized to issue a $10 Million Albert Gore Grant to your data sequestration team to finally prove Anthropogenic Global Warming and silence the Right Wing Critics of our work.

Report to our offices at the University of East Anglia w/o leaving a Carbon Footprint. BTW, there was some trepidation among some of our board members that you might be harboring outdated binary gender normative attitudes, however we waited until they left to attend their daily NAMBLA Board meeting, and then confirmed you by voice vote.

We shall be publishing your results tomorrow. Good show and don't miss the Press Party!

37 posted on 12/17/2009 6:57:08 AM PST by Kenny Bunk ("Let only Americans stand guard tonight." Gen. G. Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

You wrote:

“How sad that so many would spend so much time trying to debunk a piece of cloth in order to debunk an entire faith.”

Touche!


38 posted on 12/17/2009 7:06:54 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

‘Glad you left out “Roman.”’

‘Why would I add it in? I’m not Italian. Neither is Pope Benedict.’

To be accurate.


39 posted on 12/17/2009 7:50:10 AM PST by esquirette (If we do not know our own worldview, we will accept theirs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: steve8714
Isn’t saying that an affront to a true Calvinist?

Which part? Merry Christmas?

I'm sorry, I can't keep track of what every splinter group believes and doesn't believe - half of them can't agree among themselves without initiating a further splintering event. But, as Scripture reveals, the early Church had it's share of splintering, dissent, and distraction even when the Apostles were still running the show.

So many, however, believe in sola scriptura, that I would have to say to look to the Bible for the answer.

It is evident from scripture that there was quite a bit of celebratory hubub in heaven surrounding Christ's birth - and that's just what we, as humans, were allowed to see and document.

It is also evident that humans, in several cases, were personally invited to both witness and rejoice.

Although many people doubt the date is accurate (I have seen conflicting arguments for and against - and not all those against have the interests of the church in mind), I don't see how our predecessors possibly losing track of that date can be used realistically to infer that we should not celebrate the anniversary. How many events are recorded in the Bible in which heaven and earth simultaneously rejoiced?

I had a professor in college who said "whenever two lines on a graph intersect - it's important". Likewise, I would argue that, whenever Scripture says that Heaven and Earth rejoiced over an event - it's important.

I'm saddened that those before us didn't record, or lost track of, the date (if that, in fact, is the case. Right now, all we have is a lack of recording up to the point it shows up several centuries later). Considering the persecutions and turmoil in the early Church, we're lucky we got what we got from that era. Perhaps, in God's time, we will find some artifact from the period which fixes the day on a date which all can agree is accurate. However, in the meantime, we have what we have.

Jesus himself, with his mother, went to a wedding and joined in the celebration (and, alchohol was involved, in part thanks to His intervention, I would add). There is no scriptural recording of Heaven and Earth rejoicing at that event, yet Jesus and Mary were partying with Jesus as acting bartender for miracle #1. Ergo, my conclusion, from the examples in scripture, is that celebrating Christmas is not only scripturally permitted, but scripturally encouraged. And choosing to celebrate with a few cups of egg nog, long as you don't overdo it, is OK too.

Scripture (most specifically in Acts) encourages the community of believers - what better example of community is there than that of (most) Christians coming together and celebrating the anniversary of an event like no other? So we might have picked the wrong day two millenia ago. Humans are imperfect, and here we collectively screwed up, and then made the best of a bad situation by making an educated guess on the date. Seems to me that not celebrating Christmas because of an act of human incompetence is less preferable to celebrating it on what might be the wrong day. What's more important, the celebration, or that the celebration occurs on the exact date?

But I'm just going by what I read in Scripture, and that we're having this conversation at all is an example that YMMV...
40 posted on 12/17/2009 7:50:18 AM PST by chrisser (Tweet not, lest ye a twit be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

bump


41 posted on 12/17/2009 8:26:49 AM PST by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: chrisser
Ergo, my conclusion, from the examples in scripture, is that celebrating Christmas is not only scripturally permitted, but scripturally encouraged. And choosing to celebrate with a few cups of egg nog,

Were I a constable, or a sheriff, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts prior to 1820. I could have you clapped in irons for those remarks. Or perhaps exiled to Maine. Or both.

M*##y Christm@$!

42 posted on 12/17/2009 8:34:02 AM PST by Kenny Bunk ("Let only Americans stand guard tonight." Gen. G. Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack
.....but it remains an intriguing anomaly...

What the heck is so anomalous about one of the more technically-minded disciples recording an image of the big event?

The Shroud of Turin could be this technically-minded Italian city's answer to The Holy Birthplace of Obama, in Mombasa. In fact, according to the testimony of officials in Hawaii, Obama may be an example of saintly bi-location. At least no one in Turin makes THAT claim.

43 posted on 12/17/2009 8:42:39 AM PST by Kenny Bunk ("Let only Americans stand guard tonight." Gen. G. Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dangus; ClearCase_guy
Here is a link to the peer review article originally published on this subject: Molecular Exploration of the First-Century Tomb of the Shroud in Akeldama, Jerusalem

There is not much about the cloth itself except for this:

It is possible that the shroud was of a simple weave because it was made of a high quality (expensive) textile.

The article you posted is full of speculation not backed by scientific evidence. Note the use of the term investigators instead of using scientists.

a first-century C.E. shrouded man found in a tomb on the edge of the Old City of Jerusalem, which also revealed the earliest proven case of leprosy.

Note also that this is not the earliest proven case of leprosy, but instead the earliest found in Israel.

44 posted on 12/17/2009 8:44:24 AM PST by Between the Lines (For their sins of 50 million abortions God gave them over to be an ObamaNation {Romans 1:24-32})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: esquirette
To be accurate.

To be accurate, I left it out. I'm not Roman.

45 posted on 12/17/2009 8:46:11 AM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: bogusname
The Shroud of Turin will never be proved to be real and most possibly will be proved to be a fake. Not that it is a fake, just that it is easier to disprove something like this than to prove it.

It is by design that there is so little evidence to prove of Jesus' existence, His works and His divinity. For if we had proof positive of any of these things, what need is there to have faith?

46 posted on 12/17/2009 8:54:04 AM PST by Between the Lines (For their sins of 50 million abortions God gave them over to be an ObamaNation {Romans 1:24-32})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Well, as a lawyer, I have found that there is the meaning most people attribute to words, and therefore, that meaning is what they intend to communicate.

But - even though that common meaning (which is well understood by everyone), is conveyed, there are some people who when confronted, scurry over to the historic and less used meaning of the same word, claiming purity in meaning.

So - does “Catholic Church” mean to you the organization seated in Vatican City, and headed by Pope Benedict, or not? Because the fact is, that is known as the Roman Catholic Church.


47 posted on 12/17/2009 8:58:19 AM PST by esquirette (If we do not know our own worldview, we will accept theirs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: esquirette
So - does “Catholic Church” mean to you the organization seated in Vatican City, and headed by Pope Benedict, or not?

No.

48 posted on 12/17/2009 10:16:16 AM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: dangus; bogusname; Alex Murphy; All

I am interested in this burial for a couple of reasons, mainly my research interest in leprosy and death.

However, I completely disagree that a comparison of a shroud of a leper AUTOMATICALLY assumes that it would be the same type/weave of the Shroud of Jesus.

I agree with dangus that the burial shroud of Jesus was probably buried in a finer cloth, due to Joseph of Aramathea wealth and status. The Biblical accounts of the burial, (oil and spices) also show a more wealthy burial for Jesus, than ANY leper (who were outcasts and considered “the living dead”) would have had.


49 posted on 12/17/2009 11:17:34 AM PST by reaganaut (When we FACE UP to the Majesty of God, we will find ourselves FACE DOWN in Worship" - Matt Redman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bogusname
I too have pondered upon the sort of things you speak of, in relation to the Turin shroud, but this portion;

neglects that Jesus was a Nazarene.

If he were to have taken a vow of a Nazerite, included within the vow was prohibition to cutting the hair of one's head, or corners of the beard.

Samson was such a one or similar, it is understood.

50 posted on 12/17/2009 11:22:17 AM PST by BlueDragon (there is no such thing as a "true" compass, all are subject to both variation & deviation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson