Shroud of Turin, 20 years later

[colliric]

and still no hard answers(I was about to say “and back at square one”, but that isn’t really true).

It just gets more and more mysterious everytime they look at it…

Why don’t they just accept it’s compleatly unexplainable?

 

[Belle10]

and still no hard answers(I was about to say “and back at square one”, but that isn’t really true).

It just gets more and more mysterious everytime they look at it…

Why don’t they just accept it’s compleatly unexplainable?

Is there something new going on with it? Forgive my ignorance

When the image of the Divine Mercy (using the original image painted under Saint Faustina’s direction – known as the Vilnius image) is superimposed over an image from the Shroud of Turin, the faces match perfectly. :yup:

People will never accept that something is unexplainable, unless their faith can carry them to that conclusion – but if they had that faith, then they would have their explanation.

 

[Leopard]

20 years later than what?

 

[MSParrott]

Is there something new going on with it? Forgive my ignorance

When the image of the Divine Mercy (using the original image painted under Saint Faustina’s direction – known as the Vilnius image) is superimposed over an image from the Shroud of Turin, the faces match perfectly. :yup:

People will never accept that something is unexplainable, unless their faith can carry them to that conclusion – but if they had that faith, then they would have their explanation.

Is there something new going on? I haven’t heard anything…

THAT is awesome - I never knew that!

 

[masondoggy]

When the image of the Divine Mercy (using the original image painted under Saint Faustina’s direction – known as the Vilnius image) is superimposed over an image from the Shroud of Turin, the faces match perfectly. :yup:

I did not know that!

That surprises me because I’ve read that St. Faustina was not satisified with the way the image came out. I think it was because it was nowhere near as beautiful as Jesus really is. But I just assumed it didn’t look like him either.

 

[mercygate]

It is not “awesome” or even remarkable that the Divine Mercy image resembles the Shroud of Turin image. The Shroud image had been widely publicized all over the place since 1898 when the photographic “positive negative” emerged from Secondo Pia’s photo lab.

 

[Belle10]

I did not know that!

That surprises me because I’ve read that St. Faustina was not satisified with the way the image came out. I think it was because it was nowhere near as beautiful as Jesus really is. But I just assumed it didn’t look like him either.

St. Faustina wasn’t satisfied with how the image was painted, but if you had actually seen Jesus’s face, no painting would do justice to His beauty and glory right?

The following is from thedivinemercy.org/message/devotions/image.php :

Many different versions of this image have been painted, but our Lord made it clear that the painting itself is not what is important. When St. Faustina first saw the original image that was being painted under her direction, she wept in disappointment and complained to Jesus: “Who will paint You as beautiful as You are?” (313).

In answer, she heard these words: “Not in the beauty of the color, nor of the brush lies the greatness of this image, but in My grace” (313).

So, no matter which version of the image we prefer, we can be assured that it is a vehicle of God’s grace if it is revered with trust in His mercy.

The Mother of Mercy Messengers do a wonderful “program” all about the Divine Mercy. It is very spiritual, very holy, just beautiful overall. I’ve seen it twice, and I urge everyone to go if they’ll be near your area. You can learn about them here: thedivinemercy.org/momm/index.php
In their program, they superimpose the images – that’s how I learned about it.

 

[Leopard]

20 years later than what?

 

[colliric]

This is not really entirly new, but many scientists now refute the carbon dating as being erranious for several reasons which include the following 3.

• The pollens taken from it in the 1970s
• The analysis by cloth experts (conducted on the section from which the red bloodlike substance was extracted and itself analysed in the late 1990s)less than 5 years ago(I think in 2003) that concluded it was at least 1200 years old and possibly old as 3000 years.
• The reputable scientific analysis of the opposite side of the shroud in 2004 that produced surprising results which showed there was a faint image on the other side. This makes the likelyhood of it being a medieval photograph highly unlikely as photographs do not produce that kind of effect, only radiation(simular to that which produces an x-ray) and possibly also gassious substances could have done that.

 

[puzzleannie]

I think those truly interested could benefit from reviewing the many, many past threads on this topics with their links and contributions. don’t know if a new thread with same info is beneficial. we also have many threads on the Divine Mercy, which is not the topic of this thread