Posted: Mar 31, 2010 5:13 pm
theidiot wrote:chairman bill wrote:Oh FFS! It's been shown to be a fake, therefore it can't be the face of this semi-mythical character. Whoah! Unless this is a miracle, and the truth is only apparent to believers. All you have to do is believe & you'll know it's truly the image of Jeebus. Halle-bleedin'-lujah, praise Dog!
Really? It has? I've never really been interested in the Shroud? But can you present this argument and the evidence in support of it, that the shroud has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt to be a fake?
Reading about the shroud on the wikipedia page, there is various pieces of evidence to argue the contrary, enough to say that it's rather difficult to argue that "it's been shown to be fake". There seems to be a quite reasonable argument that it wasn't, at least this is what I in my limited knowledge of it can garner from the wikipedia article, about the various ways the shroud was analyzed for it's authenticity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin
Well, using your very own seemingly reasonable (in a passive aggressive sort of way) approach, and accepting even that the Shroud has not been debunked (which assumption will fly in the face of Tim's clear summary, but let's leave that there for the moment) then on what basis do these opportunist charlatans (timing, anyone) claim that the Shroud can be used to "recreate" the "real" face of Jesus?