It's also the only image in the history of art and photography to lend itself to 3D plotting.
I'll try to answer the wrinkle problem when you answer the 3D plotting phenomenon.
That would be relevant if the Shroud were a work of art. it's not, and it has been proven over and over again not to be a work of art or a forgery.
But no doubt you will once again deny the evidence of all scientific findings to date and come up with yet another theory.
Christian art again.
Hey pumparse ... 650Pope Pompous XVIII" And one you use or abandon to suit your argument. Typical and faintly pathetic evasion tactics by Pope. Why don't you try debating this like...
Irrelevant, and an evasion of the hard factual, medical and scientific evidence surrounding the Shroud.?
Hey pumparse ... 649I certainly wouldn't claim to prove the Shroud was either the burial cloth of Christ or evidence of his...
The New Testament also states that they had no time to bury Christ according to the customs of the day, since the Pbuttover was approaching and they were prohibited from working then.
Besides, only a matter of days ago you laughed at the suggestion Christ raised lazarus from the dead.
Believe it or not none of the New Testament books was written in English.
Until you find out what the Koine Greek words used to describe the enshrouding of Christ were, and how they translate into English, then you're not in a position to perform Biblical exegesis.
Hey pumparse ... 646Have they? When did you last study all of these datings? how about the coins from Roman-occupied Palestine -- why did a forger go to the trouble of acquiring these and putting them over the...
Not that you consider the Bible a reliable source anyway. Or at least not until this evening.
For your convenience:
Matt 27:59 "entulissoř" to twist, to entwine, to wind, to wrap. Your choice.
Mark 15:46 "eneileoř" to enwrap
Luke "entulissoř" as Matt above
John "deoř" to bind, tie, wind
Take your pick. Three different words used by the evangelists, who knows why. And no precise translation.
Art.
Irrelevant.
They got the dates right. Just a pity they were given samples from a repaired section. Sadly for McCrone the C-14 dating fiasco was not fianlly put to bed till 2002, 3 years after his publication.
You're on shaky ground appealing to McCrone here Le Dieu
His work has been refuted by virtually every scientist to have studied the Shroud, including all of those who were actually members of the STURP team of 1978, as McCroine was not. His work wasn't even published in peer-reviewed science journals, which should tell you how seriously it was taken by the scientific community.
But then again it doesn't surprise me that you appeal to the most fantastic notions to support your case. Just don't expect me to believe them just because you gloss them over with one reference to one scientist who didn't even study the image first hand.
Meanwhile other textile experts say the weave is peculiar to 1st century practice in Palestine and the bleach used to wash the linen, as well as the substance used to lubricate the yarn before weaving, are also peculiar to 1st century Palestine.
Decisions decisions.
Who do we plump for eh?
-- + His Holiness Pope Pompous XVIII
"This is all Blarney!" -- Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth I
