Shroud of Turin new claims that it's real hits the airwaves

[demosincebirth]

A viewing of the The Shroud of Turin, thought by many to be the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, will reportedly be televised Saturday on Italian State TV in what is said to be former Pope Benedict XVI's parting gift to the Catholic Church.

The televised viewing of the shroud on Holy Saturday will be the first in 40 years, according to a report in the Guardian newspaper.

The centuries-old linen cloth - one of the world's most famous relics - contains a faint impression of the front and back of a human body, along with blood, dirt and water stains from age. Many Roman Catholics believe the impressions were left by the body of Jesus after his crucifixion.

"There was no portrait made of Jesus so, really, the shroud still remains the best single thing that we have," said Russ Breault, president of the Shroud of Turin Education Project Inc., an organization "dedicated to raising awareness and understanding" of the shroud, according to its website.

The shroud's authenticity, however, has long been a subject of deep debate.

MORE: Is Face of Jesus Christ Revealed?

Skeptics believe the 14-foot cloth was faked during medieval times. Scientists have used various methods, including carbon dating, to test the authenticity of the fabric, and some results have supported the belief that the cloth is a medieval forgery. But there might be new evidence to support the view that the shroud is real.

Scientists at the University of Padua in Northern Italy have conducted experiments that show the shroud dates back to around the time of Christ's life, according to an article in the Daily Telegr

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/shroud-turin-hits-airwaves-amid-claims-real-121809828--abc-news-topstories.html

[goldent]

1. We need to have an open and exhaustive study on this...

When it was found from carbon dating that it was from the middle ages I was not at all surprised, and of course the RCC did not officially claim it to be authentic. If there is any question about the dating, it should be redone until they can come to a consensus.

[demosincebirth]

2. the scientist who say its a fake are usually atheists and hard to convince if it was really dated

to the time of Christ, which I think it is.

[goldent]

3. I can't speak to the scientists involved

but I do find that some atheists on message boards will make uninformed scientific statements, claiming it is a fake. And some religious do similar things claiming it is real. I really don't get it - whether or not it is fake is not some kind of competition where we have to take sides. I'm happy to let it be studied and studied until we are certain, regardless of the result.

I was not surprised when it was initially dated to the middle ages, as I thought the odds that it survived from the time of Christ was very low. If further study shows it clearly dates back to the time of Christ, I would be excited, but not sure if it would really change anything.

[okasha]

4. I don't pretend to know

how old the Shroud is, who made it, or whose image it represents. The thing that intrigues me is that it is a perfect photographic negative, something that would would be impossible for a medieval artist to imitate in paint without a reference image i.e., another photo negative. If further testing is done, I'd hope they would check for the presence of silver salts.

[demosincebirth]

5. "The thing that intrigues me is that it is a perfect photographic negative."

that is is what baffles me. No way did they have that knowledge at the time some say it dates to.