---

By: RIC CARTER Re: Shroud of Turin From: Cgastbook@aol.com Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 17:07:02 -0500 (EST) To: aanews@listserv.atheists.org Subject: [Atheist] re: AANEWS for February 9, 1997 from: AMERICAN ATHEISTS subject: AANEWS for February 9, 1997 A M E R I C A N A T H E I S T S ~~ A A N E W S ~~ #246 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2/9/97 http://www.atheists.org ftp: ftp.atheists.org/pub/ e-mail: aanews@atheists.org SHROUD OF TURIN IS PHONEY, SAYS MICROCHEMIST Male Model Was Daubed With Paint, Rolled In Sheet To Produce "Miracle" Many scholars question the historicity of Jesus Christ, the reputed god-man upon whom the Christian religion is based. And many more are skeptical of claims by some religious believers that the Shroud of Turin, a 14-foot cloth with the negative image of a man with nail wounds in his hands and feet, is really the burial garment of the alleged Jesus. Now, a report in the Sunday Times of London announces that microchemist Walter McCrone may have solved the riddle of the Shroud. McCrone, following twenty years of research on the cloth including an evaluation of radiocarbon dating, says that the image is not the result of some miracle, but merely the effect made by a male model being daubed with paint, then wrapped in the sheet to create the shadowy image some insist is that of JC. His findings will be included in a book due out next month titled "Judgment Day for the Turin Shroud." McCrone bases his new findings on examination of 32 separate samples of fiber taken from the shroud. Those samples were, in part, the basis for scientific evidence presented in the late 1980's that dated the cloth to the 14th century, a period known for the popularity of fraudulent relics. Other questionable antiquities included breast milk said to have come from the Virgin Mary, pieces of the crucifixion cross, even portions of a stairway JC is said to have climbed while being presented to Pontius. One claim being made by McCrone that is sure to cause a stir is his assertion that the image is not unique. He maintains that a similar image using the same painting technique exists in the form of a red Christ-like image painted in 1341 on the walls of the papal palace at Avignon in France. Despite the provocative nature of McCrone's work -- he has made a reputation in challenging artistic pieces and other antiquities including the famous Vinland Map -- the Shroud itself has a checkered past. It first appeared in the 1350's as the property of a French knight, Geoffrey de Charny, who purportedly knew the cloth's provenance, but was killed in the battle of Poitiers before sharing the information with others. As the popularity of questionable relics grew during the Middle Ages, the alleged burial rag then came into possession of Umberto II and the House of Savoy, who willed it to Catholic authorities in Turin, Italy. Since then, the Catholic Church has not taken any official position on the claim that it is indeed the burial cloth of the alleged Jesus Christ. Last summer, two scientists at Turin University ignited media interest and scholarly debate when they claimed to have found faint evidence of a Roman coin dating from the reign of Tiberius, about 29 C.E. The Catholic press immediately jumped on that story; "La Stampa" insisted that this was "new proof that the shroud is authentic. Critics, including American Atheist editor and science advisor Frank Zindler, said that the evidence was highly inconclusive. Zindler noted in a press release: "If the image of a coin over the eye were to prove authentic, it would be conclusive proof that the person wrapped in the shroud was NOT a Jew, and thus could not have been the Jesus featured in New Testament legend. In ancient times, only pagans placed coins over the eyes and in the mouths of their dead -- payment for carriage across the river Styx or its equivalents. A devout Jew would never do that. Moreover, most coins had human images on them, and such images were shunned by every good Jew of the time." -!- DB B2300sl/001027 ! Origin: Rights On!-Host/Moderator of A_THEIST-Edgewater_FL_USA (1:18/14)

---

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank