Shroud Wars: Panel Review (Part 9)- The Proto-Photo & Shadow Hypotheses

Shroud skeptic Hugh Farey joins me to discuss Nicholas Allen’s Proto-Photo and Nathan D. Wilson’s Shadow image-forming hypotheses. While, Hugh is a Shroud skeptic regarding the Shroud in general, nevertheless he takes a “Pro-Shroud” position with respect to the validity of these two Shroud skeptical mechanisms. Finally, we also briefly discuss Picknett and Prince’s absurd notion that the Shroud Man’s images were made by Leonardo Davinci.

YouTube Video = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkU7MWJzT24

Rumble Video = https://rumble.com/v3wkrm1-shroud-panel-review-part-9-proto-photo-and-shadow-hypotheses.html

Audio Only Link = https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/real-seeker-ministries/episodes/Shroud-Panel-Review-Part-9–Proto-Photo–Shadow-Hypotheses-e2c3vf2

Recommended Sources (for further study);

a) Proto-Photo & Shadow Shroud;

*** Note the Copyright info for Nicholas Allen’s papers/book below is the following;

Allen, Nicholas Peter Legh. Turin Shroud: Testament to a Lost Technology. 2nd ed., LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing (2017).

Allen, NPL. How Leonardo did not Fake the Shroud of Turin. De arte (1995): Vol. 30, No. 52, pp. 32-39.

DText Copyright (C) 2017 Nicholas P.L. Allen Photographs Copyright (C) 2017 Glenn Meyer &
Nicholas P.L. Allen. Photographs of the Shroud of Turin courtesy of Mr Barrie M. Schwortz
(2017). CREDITS: 1978 Barrie M. Schwortz Collection, STERA, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
COPYRIGHT: 1978 Barrie M. Schwortz Collection, STERA, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Shadow Shroud main website = https://www.shadowshroud.com/index.htm

powerpoint-version-4.0-rob-seifkart-updatedDownload

https://www.nwu.ac.za/sites/www.nwu.ac.za/files/files/i-media/nwu&uENG052017/turin-shroud.html

Click to access orvieto.pdf

b) My Previous Shows & Blogs on these Mechanisms;

Shroud Solo Show (Part 11)- Sunlight-Based Hypotheses (Proto-Photo, Shadow & Solar Reflex Models) + Bonus Part 11B on Boiling and Painting Emulsion Methods

Evaluating the “Proto-Photo” Hypothesis (with SJ Thomason)

4 thoughts on “Shroud Wars: Panel Review (Part 9)- The Proto-Photo & Shadow Hypotheses

  1. Hi Dale,

    Good to chat.

    I’ve been hunting everywhere for my comments on the Hymn of the Pearl and finally found them at shroudstory. https://shroudstory.com/2022/05/03/focus-the-hymn-of-the-pearl/ [https://i0.wp.com/shroudstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/manuscript.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1]https://shroudstory.com/2022/05/03/focus-the-hymn-of-the-pearl/ Focus: The Hymn of the Pearlhttps://shroudstory.com/2022/05/03/focus-the-hymn-of-the-pearl/ In my essay, Slouching Towards Emmaus, I wrote about a short paper by Kim Dreisbach called “Liturgical Clues to the Shroud’s history.” Two items, in particular, caught my attention. The first was t… shroudstory.com

    Now to track down Athanasius!

    Cheers, Hugh

    Liked by 1 person

  2. And so to Athanasius….

    The Seventh Ecumenical Council (787AD), also called the Second Council of Nicaea, was about whether images of Christ were permissible or not, and eventually reversed the iconoclastic ideas previously current. During the Fourth Session, Bishop Peter of Nicomedia brought out a writing claimed to be from the fourth century Bishop Athanasius, mentioning an image of Christ in Beirut. There are various accounts. Jack Markwardt quotes a translation by John Mendham, 1850, The Seventh General Council, the Second of Nicaea, Held A.D. 787, in which the Worship of Images was Established, who mentions:

    “… a certain Christian had hired a chamber, and while living there he had placed opposite his bed a picture of the Lord Jesus Christ: it was painted on a tablet of boards and contained the image of Our Lord and Saviour at full length.”

    The Latin is either:

    “… quidam e Christianorum numero domicilium a quodam conductum habitaret. Hic ex adverto lectuli imaginem Jesu Christi Domini nostri fixerat: erat haec sane veneranda, quod integram Christi Domini proportionem exprimeret.” (Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Migne)

    “… one of the number of the Christians lived in a house rented by someone. Here he had fixed the image of Jesus Christ, our Lord, opposite the bed, which was particularly to be venerated, as it expressed the full proportion of Christ the Lord.”

    or

    “Porro juxta synagogam ipsorum, quae valde esse magna videbatur, Christianus quidam accepit ad pensionem celulam a quodam, in qua habitans, contra accubitum suum fixit imaginem Domini nostri Jesu Christi [Gr., in tabula] honeste depictam, et integrae staturae habentem Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum.” (Sacrorum Conciliorum, Mansi)

    “Moreover, near their synagogue, which seemed to be very large, a certain Christian took for lodging a cell from a certain one, in which, dwelling, he fixed opposite his bed an image of our Lord Jesus Christ [Gr., on a panel] honestly painted, and with the full stature of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

    The Christian left moved house and forgot about the image (!), which was then thoroughly desecrated by the Jews who moved in afterwards.

    However, there seems to be some doubt about whether this story is actually from Athanasius, and considerable doubt about whether another bit, which only occurs in Mansi, isn’t just made up completely. It only appears in a long footnote in Mendham, apparently as a quote from the Christian who so carelessly abandoned it when he moved house. He says (allegedly):

    “Nicodemus made it and gave it on his deathbed to Gamaliel. Gamaliel, when he was about to die, left it to James. James left it to Simon and Zacchaeus, among whose successors it was preserved until the destruction of Jerusalem. Two years before the destruction of Jerusalem all the Christians left it, and betook themselves to the kingdom of Agrippa. At which time, among other things belonging to the church, this image also was carried away, and ever since remained in Syria. This, I having received as my birth-right from my parents when dying, have had in my possession till the present time.”

    Even if any of this is actually true, there is nothing in this account to suggest that this image was the burial cloth of Jesus, and I do not think that “The Discipline of the Secret” is a good excuse for why not.

    Cheers,

    Hugh

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.