Posted on 09/21/2020 7:04:00 PM PDT by texas booster
Allow me to indulge the irresistible and put two publications side by side: Gary Vikan’s new book about a religious hoax from the 14th Century and the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report about the so-called “Russian hoax” of 2016.
Both the book and the report are quests for truth. Both provide extensive facts about their respective subjects. But while Vikan is clear in his conclusion — that the famous Shroud of Turin was not, as long purported, the burial cloth used on the body of the crucified Christ — the Senate’s report reflects disagreement on how to characterize, once and for all, what happened in the last presidential election.
President Donald Trump denies that Russian agents worked with his campaign to help him defeat Hillary Clinton; he repeatedly refers to that suggestion as the “Russian hoax.” In Trump World, facts do not matter.
But Russian interference was no hoax. The Kremlin, in fact, wanted Trump to be elected. The major U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Russian spies interfered in our election... We have known this since at least January 2017 when the director of national intelligence released a declassified version of a report on Russian meddling.
Now the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee has released its report on the matter, finding that representatives of the Trump campaign had communicated numerous times with Russian agents and had welcomed their help...
Fortunately, “The Holy Shroud: A Brilliant Hoax in the Time of the Black Death” was not written by a committee,
Vikan was director of the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore for nearly 20 years and its curator of medieval art for a decade before that. By the time he took his first job at the Walters in 1985, Vikan had developed a fascination with the Shroud of Turin...
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
It was Bob Morton, a petroleum company chemist from Oklahoma, who gave Vikan the most convincing answer. Morton and his daughter, Rebecca, figured out that a combination of tannic acid applied to a human body and iron sulfate applied to linen could create a kind of photographic impression like the man of the shroud.
He reviews a book about the Shroud and compares the controversy with the Russia Hoax - deeming both to be settled science.
In short, I believe what I believe and nothing written or spoken will change my beliefs.
Another broken writer from the ash heaps of history, the local newspaper.
“In Trump World, facts do not matter.”
Hey, Baltimore Sun! Project much!
No need to read past the projection.
Given the right paper and some chemicals, I can reproduce the Declaration of Independence. Therefore Declaration of Independence is fake.
Unless they can reproduce all the characteristics of the Shroud their theory is just a theory.
A better book might be the first half of
The Sign, by art historian Thomas de Wesselow where he disassembled all the doubting theories; the second half is his own strange theory that what the disciples and others saw after the resurrection was just the Shroud. Doesn’t explain Jesus walking to Emmaus.
https://www.amazon.com/Sign-Shroud-Turin-Secret-Resurrection/dp/0525953655/ref=sr_1_1
The Shroud sure has curious effects on some people.
Even lies can be true if you ‘believe’ them...that doesn’t mean they’re true.
#1 the Russian Collusion was done by the Democrats, FBI, and the CIA.
#2 the Shroud is probably real. So said the scientists that worked on it who weren't mysteriously given a million dollars.
Chemist Robert Morton explained at a Good Friday seminar at the Walters Art Museum's Graham Auditorium how a realistic shroud could be made using common scribe's chemicals available throughout human history.
Morton prepared linen cloth with an iron solution, and then brought the coloration out with tannic acids — revealing images of his wife, and his daughter?s boyfriend similar to the faint negative image on the shroud.
“The more pressure you put on it, the tannic acid moves around on the cloth so you get more reaction,” Morton said.
The article is shrouded in confusion.
It was his projection that made me want to post this.
It seems that Vikan is a well-known “anti-authenticist” and has railed against the Shroud (and religion in general) for years and years.
But no matter his opinion, or the opinion of the writer, they are both wrong.
And projectionists.
Wasn’t there human hemoglobin found in the Shroud? And various pollens from first-century Judea? And what about the photographic-negative quality of the image, not to mention the anatomical accuracy of the nail holes through the wrists, vs. the palms?
Deconstructing the “Debunking” of the Shroud
By real art historians and classicists that aren't blinded by Vikan's hated of religion. Daniel Scavone, Professor of History, University of Southern Indiana, USA
Karlheinz Dietz, Professor of History, University of Würzburg, Germany
John Markwardt, Historian, USA
Mario Latendresse, Physics, University of Montreal, Canada
Albert Dreisbach, Historian, USA
Mark Guscin, Classics Instructor, Spain
Joseph Marino, Librarian, The Ohio State University
Emanuela Marinelli, Classicist, Rome, Italy
Gino Zaninotto, Classicist, Rome, Italy
As we'd say when I worked in NYC, oy vey...
“Anatomy of the Shroud”[3],
showing wounds and bloodstains on the Shroud man's image which match the Gospels’ accounts of the beatings (Mt 26:67-68; 27:30; Lk 22:64; Jn 18:22; 19:3),
scourging (Mt 27:26; Mk 15:15; Lk 23:16; Jn 19:1),
crowned with thorns (Mt 27:29; Mk 15:17; Jn 19:2,5),
crucifixion (Mt 27:35,38,44; Mk 15:24-27,32; Lk 23:33; Jn 19:16-18),
death (Mt 27:50; Mk 15:37,39; Lk 23:46; Jn 19:30),
legs not broken (Jn 19:32-33),
speared in the side (Jn 19:34) of Jesus[4].]
Anything I’ve read about the shroud is that it appears to be an image of a crucified man that dates from approximately the time of Jesus. No shred of evidence that it is Jesus.
If there were any hint in church writings and/or scripture that Jesus’ burial cloth would be preserved / important, I might believe it. Same with the cross, or Noah’s ark, etc. - no physical reason why such things would survive to our day, and no spiritual reason for it. We believe because of the changing power of the Holy Spirit, in lieu of physical evidence.
This, and this alone, destroys any idea of the Shroud being a fraud from the Middle Ages.
What do you see? A smudge. You have to stand back 13 to 18 feet to see any image and that image is a negative image something not known in their day; secondly in a painting or drawing the closer you get to an image the sharper it becomes. The closer you get to the Shroud image it just becomes smudges.
The Shroud also possesses photographic-negative properties first discovered in 1898, that on the “positive image” clearly show every gruesome, agonizing, torment endured by the “man.” Additionally, the Shroud displays three-dimensional “distance information” resembling a topographical map but within the cloth’s two-dimensional image of the man.
The Shroud also possesses photographic-negative properties first discovered in 1898, that on the “positive image” clearly show every gruesome, agonizing, torment endured by the “man.” Additionally, the Shroud displays three-dimensional “distance information” resembling a topographical map but within the cloth’s two-dimensional image of the man.
There's lots more including the fact that the dating source was taken from a repair made in the 14th. century and not the actual Shroud itself.
It’s been said you could build a large house out of all the little wood chips and splinters of the cross in cathedrals all over Europe.
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.