Re: The Shroud of Turin

Bill Payne (bpayne15@juno.com)
Tue, 16 Nov 1999 22:02:07 -0600

On Tue, 16 Nov 1999 19:22:22 -0700 dfsiemensjr@juno.com writes:

>I am convinced by the radio-carbon
>date because the earliest record of the shroud proclaimed it a fake,
>McCrone's study proclaims it a fake, the technique for producing it
>was well-known during the 14th cent., the weave was not known until
>centuries after the crucifixion of Christ, and the shroud bears no
>similarity to the burial preparations in Judea at the time and the
>description in the gospels (see esp. John 20:7). The editor of _BAR_
>seems inclined to allow its authenticity, but I have read many of the
>arguments "supporting" authenticity and find them irrelevant and
>worse. Unfortunately, no amount of evidence will persuade "true
>believers" (cf. YEC) that they believe a lie.

I haven't yet read the entire section on the shroud in Grant Jeffery's
book, _Jesus: The Great Debate_, so I can't really respond to Dave.
However, since Kennan is going to prepare a balanced treatment for a
class, maybe he would agree to post the pros and cons for the shroud's
authenticity?

Bill