Comments on: This needs a stake driven through it’s heart.

By: ER

ER — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 21:47:44 +0000

To be fair, according to one documentary I saw, there is a case to be made that repairs (reweaving and patching after the fire) to the Shroud could have introduced recent fibers that could contaminate the results of C-14 dating. I don’t think the case can be closed on this mystery just yet.

Of course, it doesn’t matter whether the Shroud is authentic or not. It’s the body it covered we’re really interested in.

By: bowser

bowser — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 17:14:55 +0000

I think it demonstrates quite a bit. All credible evidence shows the cloth is not from the First Century. There is no provenance for this Shroud from the First Century to the 14th. Therefore the visage is not of Jesus Christ. The Shroud is a valuable remnant of a funeral of someone in the Middle Ages.

What it demonstrates is how some people in the face of all logic and all evidence can cling to a belief which is false. No amount of data, facts, information can blast them away.

We can see it right here, right now. They can want it so much they believe it. The wish is the mother of the thought.

By: ER

ER — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 05:32:58 +0000

Yes I saw that. Fascinating. But even if it is scientifically accurate and that is who is in the shroud, it tells us nothing about his divine nature, or lack of it.

By: Jody

Jody — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 04:59:12 +0000

Just saw this today on History Channel Doesn't change anything for me, but it was interesting

By: ER

ER — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 04:47:50 +0000

The Shroud proves nothing, either way.

If it is a medieval forgery, it is a fraud. If it does date back to the 1st century, that still doesn’t prove it’s Jesus. It just proves it is some guy who got crucified. There was no shortage of them in those days.

“Jesus, why’d you pick such a backward time and nation?
Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication.
Don’t get me wrong, don’t get me wrong, I wanna know, I wanna know…”

–Judas’ song, “Jesus Christ, Superstar”