-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
Thursday, April 08, 2004 11:36 AM
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] new dating for Turin Shroud
Blaine Borrowman wrote:
Well and good
comments, Terry, but not everyone accepts the "givens" of religious
belief as we do. Since the death, burial and resurrection
of Jesus Christ are in one way or other tied up with the shroud, it is
a critical evidence of the reality of the Savior's mission on the
earth--not merely that he lived, died and was buried--which is accepted
by most. The negative image on the shroud is believed by many
scientists to have been caused by a burst of radiation, since it shows
bone structure as well as surface image of the corpse. For instance,
the left thumb of the man enwrapped in the shroud was underneath the
right hand, both being clasped together, yet the shroud image shows the
bone structure of that hidden thumb. It shows bone structure
throughout the body as well.
Blaine
Terry wrote: I appreciate your response Blaine, but I am
still lost. Would this prove that Jesus was
radioactive? If so, would that prove He was the
Messiah?
Terry
**Blaine writes:
I am sorry you are still lost Terry, some of us do
seem to get lost easily. (:>)
There is no doubt a lot of confusion in the world today,
especially regarding what does or does not constitute proof. As far as
proof is concerned, however, I don't see that the visibility of bone
structure in the shroud image proves anything. For that matter,
science and religion, especially religion, seldom prove anything.
Would you agree with this?
Judging from
my observations, the best we usually get in science is support
for a point of view, or theory--and with regards to
religion, support for a belief. Those scientists
who tout the radiation point of view apparently feel the visibility of
bone structure on the Shroud of Turin supports their belief
that the negative images came about as the body of Christ was being
resurrected, the burst of radiation being part of the resurrection
process. No proof of this, of course, just evidence that supports
their belief system. If we want to believe something bad enough, we
can always find support for it, right? Some, for example, want to
believe grace without works is a part of the gospel of Jesus Christ,
so they find a few isolated passages to support this feel-good belief.
Boys (of all ages) who want to have sex with their girlfriends, or view
photos of naked women, find a few isolated passages in the Bible, or
lack thereof, to support their desire to do these things, and then
feel good about doing such. Same difference, I think, what do you
think, brother Terry?
================================================================================
I
dunno Blaine. Seems to me that people who keep looking for proof are a
little confused. If we had all the facts, we would not be walking in
faith. I guess maybe they just think differently than I do. I don't
have to find the ark, or examine a shroud, or feel the warm fuzzies, or
have a near death experience. I have just made up my mind to follow
Jesus, and I have made up my mind that the best way to do that is to
know what the Bible says about doing that.
I guess it would be nice in a weak moment to have absolute proof
of the truth, but then that would mean walking by
information, not faith. 
