Although the Vatican makes no claim on the shroud's authenticity as a relic, Pope Francis introduced a special TV appearance of the burial cloth on Holy Saturday.
Pope Francis sent a special video message to the televised event in the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, which coincided with Holy Saturday, when Catholics mark the period between Christ's crucifixion on Good Friday and his resurrection on Easter Sunday.
The Vatican, tiptoeing carefully, has never claimed that the 14-foot linen cloth was, as some believers claim, used to cover Christ after he was taken from the cross 2,000 years ago.
Francis, reflecting that careful Vatican policy, on Saturday called the cloth, which is kept in a climate-controlled case, an "icon" -- not a relic.
But Cesare Nosiglia, the Archbishop of Turin and "pontifical custodian of the shroud," said the special display on Holy Saturday "means that it represents a very important testimony to the Passion and the resurrection of the Lord," The Telegraph reported.
Many experts have stood by a 1988 carbon-14 dating of scraps of the cloth carried out by labs in Oxford, Zurich and Arizona that dated it from 1260 to 1390, which, of course, would rule out its used during the time of Christ.
The new test, by scientists at the University of Padua in northern Italy, used the same fibers from the 1988 tests but disputes the findings. The new examination dates the shroud to between 300 BC and 400 AD, which would put it in the era of Christ.
It determined that the earlier results may have been skewed by contamination from fibers used to repair the cloth when it was damaged by fire in the Middle Ages, the British newspaper reported. The cloth has been kept at the cathedral since 1578.
He also said his tests also supported earlier results claiming to have found traces of dust and pollen on that shroud that could only have come from the Holy Land.
The latest findings are contained in a new Italian-language book — Il Mistero Della Sindone or The Mystery of the Shroud, by Giulio Fanti, a professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at Padua University, and Saverio Gaeta, a journalist.
Fanti, a Catholic, used infra-red light and spectroscopy – the measurement of radiation intensity through wavelengths -- in his test. He said the results are the outcome of 15 years of research.
The Telegraph also reports that a new app, sanctioned by the Catholic church and called "Shroud 2.0," allows anyone to use a smart phone or tablet to explore the shroud in detail.
Contributing: Associated Press
8 comments:
Try Apollonius of Tyana being based on (and a distortion of) Christ.
See our site:
Lost Cultural Foundations of Western Civilisation
http://westerncivilisationamaic.blogspot.com.au/
How the Greeks constantly plagiarised the Old and New Testament.
Try Jesus never existed.
jesusneverexisted.com
Now you are being silly.
See:
Ancient History, archaeology, and the Birth of Jesus Christ
By Daryn Graham
Even though the countless Christians throughout the ages have differed significantly from person to person, all have but one true test of faith and that is the belief in Jesus Christ being none other than the Son of God, and indeed, God himself. According to the Bible which contains the earliest surviving accounts of Jesus life, Christ was born in a stable in Bethlehem in the Roman province of Judaea, during which time a census was being taken. Of course, once we determine exactly which census that was we can also discover the precise date for Jesus’ birth. But as to which census that was has left many an accomplished modern historian without an answer. However, doubting the accuracy of the Bible on these grounds is literally jumping hastily to unnecessary conclusions. As with so many things ancient, a little investigative work can help to fill in the picture. As I will now explain, the birth of Jesus Christ as told of in the Bible is firmly rooted in solid historical facts, and this is true also of the census during that humble, yet historically momentous and epoch-making birth.
The Census
The problem many historians in the past have faced is that the most common English translations of Luke’s gospel’s description of the census can be translated several ways. But, of course, considering millennia have passed since Luke wrote it, it is forgivable that some things have been lost in translation. The common NIV translation reads: “Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria) And everyone went to his own town to register.”[1] The problem for past historians is that the particular detail regarding Quirinius in this NIV translation can not have been the intended meaning by Luke. True, there was a census in Judaea during Quirinius’ governorship which began in 6AD,[2] but it was certainly not of the entire Roman Empire. The 1st century AD Jewish historian Josephus made that crystal clear by writing Quirinius’ census was confined only to Syria to determine the local inhabitants’ tax payments.[3] Of course, it is unlikely that Luke, who was a meticulous historian, was incorrect – it is rather that case that the translation itself is incorrect. But considering that even the influential, though at times unreliable, 4th century AD Christian historian Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History maintained this reading[4] it is understandable that it has gained so much credibility.
....
For rest of article, see: http://thebirthofjesuschrist.blogspot.com.au/
No, you are just writing nonsense.
The problems with Jesus historically are numerous and you can find them in the above link. Don' t expect the priests or the school teachers to tell you about them.
Of course for those who rely on faith, it doesn't matter.
From a non-Christian:
Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources Print E-mail
Michael Gleghorn
Written by Michael Gleghorn
Evidence from Tacitus
Although there is overwhelming evidence that the New Testament is an accurate and trustworthy historical document, many people are still reluctant to believe what it says unless there is also some independent, non-biblical testimony that corroborates its statements. In the introduction to one of his books, F.F. Bruce tells about a Christian correspondent who was told by an agnostic friend that "apart from obscure references in Josephus and the like," there was no historical evidence for the life of Jesus outside the Bible.{1} This, he wrote to Bruce, had caused him "great concern and some little upset in [his] spiritual life."{2} He concludes his letter by asking, "Is such collateral proof available, and if not, are there reasons for the lack of it?"{3} The answer to this question is, "Yes, such collateral proof is available," and we will be looking at some of it in this article.
....
http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223639/k.567/Ancient_Evidence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm
Blah, blah, blah...
That's what you are reduced to when you put aside Jesus Christ.
شركة كشف تسربات المياه بالرياض شركة البيت الابيض
شركة مكافحة حشرات بالرياض شركة البيت الابيض
شركة نقل عفش بالرياض شركة البيت الابيض
شركة تنظيف بجدة شركة البيت الابيض
Post a Comment