Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: davidbu@loowit.wr.tek.com (David E. Buxton) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: The Shroud of Turin Message-ID: Date: 4 Apr 91 05:54:50 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Lines: 29 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , wales@cs.ucla.edu (Rich Wales) writes: > Replying to Gene Gross's article about the Shroud of Turin: > > . . . . > > The results of the C-14 testing, announced in October 1988, pointed to a > 14th-century date for the fabric of the Shroud. (The Shroud's history > can be traced with absolute certainty only back to the 1350's.) Such a > date, of course, would conclusively rule out any possibility of the > relic having been the burial cloth of Christ. I personally would not put a whole lot of credence on a C-14 dating analysis. There are too many examples, such as recent Hawaiian lava dated to be millions of years of, to convince me that C-14 and other dating schemes can really be trusted. I would not throw out the shroud on the basis of C-14 dating. One thing that does give credibility to the team that investigated the shroud is their make up of for example agnostics, at least one Jew, a JW, etc. I wish I had the list at my finger tips. While I find the shroud valuable in that it gives us a lot of insight into how Jesus probably died, I would not dream of going to worship such a relic. And so for that reason I hope there is always some question about its authenticity. And yet what I have read about it sounds very convincing to me. Dave (David E. Buxton)