Basic HTML Version
with aloes and oil and ammonia, did
indeed induce shadings on the in–
side of the glove (Wilcox, pp. 16, 66,
95). But all this could prove is that
brown stains could be produced on
cloth by this method, though not a
perfect image, even in such a closely
fitting covering as
á
glove.
·
Only one other theory remained:
the idea of " a sudden radiance of
our Lord's body at the moment of
the resurrection"
(ibid. ,
p. 119). This
is the "scorch theory" which invites
comparison to the images left in
Hi roshima, Japan, by the first
atomic bomb which, even while it
was vaporizing the bodies of its vic–
tims, simul taneous ly cast their shad–
ows and permanently etched them
into concrete pavements. But of
course this theory is the very essence
of circular reasoning; it assumes the
conclusion yet to be proven true and
then uses the theory as part of the
proof. Moreover, there exists no
The PLAIN TRUTH
December
1978
Church
and
IIth ed.• ''lconóelast": ''Tbere can be
no doubt that t)le early Christians we,:e
unani.nous in condemning heatbeo im–
age-worsbip and the various customs,
some immoral,
with
whicb it was associ–
ated. A form of icooolatry especially
deprecated in tbe New Testament was
the theo prevalent adoration of the im–
&ge$
of the reigning
cmperors
(see Rev.
xv.2). lt is also tolerably certain
that.
if
for .no other reason besides the Judaism,
obscurity, and poverty of the early con–
vetts
to
Christianity, the works of
art
seen in their meeting-houses cannot at
tlrst
ha
ve been numerous•.,
Such, basically, was the Christian
view for 300 yeats. And any art contain·
ing images that crept in must be at–
tributed solely to the conversion of
Gentiles to the Christian ranks.
"It was a common accusation brought
against Jews and Christians tbat they
had 'no altars, no temples, no known
images' ... tbat 'they set up no image or
form of any god' . .. and this cbarge
was never denied; on the contrary Ori–
gen gloried in it ..."
(ibid.).
Eusebius. even in tbe fourtb century,
'~in
refly toa request ofConstantia, sis–
ter o Constantine, for a picture of
Christ, wrote tbat it was unlawful to
proof a rad iation burst could any
better produce detailed images of
wounds, blood ftows, hair and
beard, or a
precise
image of a !bree–
dimensional body on a flat cloth
than any other suggested -methods.
In Search of a Past
" I am coiwinced that this is the
shroud that covered Jesus Christ af–
ter His crucifixion." So declared Dr.
Max Freí of the University of Zu–
rich after painstakingly testing for
pollen grains in the linen of the
shroud and analyzing them.
"My analysis of pollen grains has
been confirmed under the electron
microscope beyond any reasonable
doubt. ... I isolated from the shroud
more than a dozeri pollen grains
from plants growing in Jerusalem
and surrounding deserts. They grow
only in the Near East," he said.
"T he pollen most found on the
shroud is identical to the most com-
possess images pretending
to
represent
th~
Saviour either in bis divine or in bis
bwnan nature, and added that to avoid
tbe reproach of idolatry be had actuaUy
taken away from a lady friend tbe pic–
tures of Paul and of Cbrist whü:b -she
had..
(/bid.).
Wrote Eusebius to Constantia: "And
since you have written about some sup–
posed likeness or other of Christ, what
and what kind of likeness of Cbrist
is
there? ... SÚch images are forbidden by
the second commandment. They are not
to be found
in
churches, and are forbid–
den among Christians alone."
This was tbe original teaching of the
Catholic Church. But Christianity was
soon well on the way toward corruption
of its original doctrines.
Continuing in tbe
Britannica:
"Sim–
ilarly Epipbanius [fiftb century) in a
Jet–
ter to John, bishop of Jerusalem, tells
how in a cburch at Anablatha near Be–
thel he had found a curtain painted
with tbe image 'of Christ or of sorne
otber saint,' which he had torn down
and ordered to be used for tbe burial of
a pauper."
By the end of the sixth century tbe
early Christian battle against images
and icons was lost.
mon pollen in the sediment of Lake
Tiberias, in Israel"
(National Enqui–
rer,
Nov. 29, 1977).
But even if we accept that the
pollen proves the shroud once re–
sided in Palestine, it would not nec–
essari ly connect it with Christ, for
Dr. Freí also found in its fibers poi–
len from the area of southeastern
Turkey ! T h is finding would, per–
haps, support Jan Wilson's theory
that the shroud itself is none other
than tbe famous
Mandylion
(mean–
ing "napkin" o r "handkerchief" in
Arabic) which had been brought to
Constantinople from Edessa in east–
ern Turkey. From there he post–
ulates the Knights T emplars took
the shroud to the Holy Land before
bringing it to France.
The Byzantine Connection
Fifty years before the shroud enters
history in the possession o f Geoffrey
deCharnay and the Lirey church,
33