markdohle's Blog

I doubt the Catholic Church will authenticate the Shroud as genuine with this experimental "WAXS" technique without other independent tests. Then again even if it was proven to be 2,000 years old it could have been just linen from the time that has nothing to do with a Jesus. 

The technique presupposes a parameter of enviromental conditions for 2,000 years.

"The experimental results are compatible with the hypothesis that the TS is a 2000-year-old relic, as supposed by Christian tradition, under the condition that it was kept at suitable levels of average secular temperature—20.0–22.5 °C—and correlated relative humidity—75–55%—for 13 centuries of unknown history, in addition to the seven centuries of known history in Europe. To make the present result compatible with that of the 1988 radiocarbon test, the TS should have been conserved during its hypothetical seven centuries of life at a secular room temperature very close to the maximum values registered on the earth."

https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/5/2/47

This is from the same guy to claim that partial scrotum is visible from the figure's conviently modest pose (then again it's what Jesus would do).

It's just a medieval forgery to those that do not see faith as a pathway to truth.

6 hours ago, Davros of Skaro said:

 

It's just a medieval forgery to those that do not see faith as a pathway to truth.

I was under the impression that the shroud had been debunked more than once and the medieval forgery was the latest hypothesis. I for one don’t believe the shroud is of Jesus myself and lean towards the medieval forgery myself. But I don’t keep up on this stuff so there could be more info out there.

14 hours ago, newbloodmoon said:

I was under the impression that the shroud had been debunked more than once and the medieval forgery was the latest hypothesis. I for one don’t believe the shroud is of Jesus myself and lean towards the medieval forgery myself. But I don’t keep up on this stuff so there could be more info out there.

It should be an open, and shut case that it's a medieval forgery. But there are those that want it to be otherwise for whatever agenda, or reason. The article just shows another example of the need for it to at least be maybe it's real with a shroud (pun intended) that it is.

The Church should just declare it authentic because they will just get away with it anyway to those that want to believe.

Just look how one arm is slightly longer than the other, the face being too narrow for an imprint of a face covering (should be stretched out some), and stylistically medieval among other things.

Faith is faith for a reason.

 

The church will niver come out and say the Shroud is without a doubt that of Jesus. 

Peace

Mark

3 hours ago, markdohle said:

The church will niver come out and say the Shroud is without a doubt that of Jesus. 

Peace

Mark

The Church says that Jesus was the Son of God, was crucified, then died, resurrected, and exalted by God with a straight face so why not?