Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
Readers respond AM v4 n3
A week ago I received my new issue of Answers (April–June 2009). Its lead story: “10 Creation Vacations.” You then proceed to suggest that folks go to eight (of the ten) major evolutionary propaganda vacation destinations. Huh? What were you thinking?
Paul A., Evansville , Indiana
Editor’s Note: Trips to destinations like Grand Canyon, even with all their evolutionary signage, can still be great opportunities to counter evolutionary teaching. As the article says, we are supposed to be in the world but not of the world.
Most children are inundated with the wrong story about history, including the Canyon’s formation. So visiting places like these, with the right resources in hand, will give parents an opportunity to show how the Bible helps us better understand the real world. Defending our faith can’t just be something theoretical. We believe it helps to see what propagandists are saying, in their own words, and then counter with God’s Word.
Regarding the choices of featured destinations, we asked various leaders in their field to recommend some of their favorite places. These are just samples, intended to spark interest in taking a creation vacation. We’ve listed many other examples online at www.CreationVacations.com, and we plan to keep adding to the list.
Thank you so much for including audio versions of your articles for subscribers! I commute long hours and take numerous trips and have my iPod with me to listen to sermons, audio books, and other downloads. This saves me from taking the magazine with me and depriving my family members the opportunity to read it in my absence.
Karen J., Alexandria , Virginia
Editor’s Note: See page 4 under “Subscriber Exclusives” for your code to access the downloadable audio articles.
As I read Tommy Mitchell’s detailed description of the physical torment Christ endured during his last hours prior to his death, I was reminded once again of the tendency [of other people] to over-emphasize the physical aspect of the crucifixion as proof of Christ’s love for his children.
While sensory images of thorns and nails which accompany emotionally charged evangelism depict a reality which mustn’t be downplayed, I was very pleased to see Dr. Mitchell point out in his conclusion that “His physical suffering . . . paled in comparison to the suffering he endured in his heart, as He took upon Himself the sins of the world and was separated from his father.”
Indeed, consider the remorse one experiences when confronted by conscience over just one sin. Multiply that remorse by the number of sins committed by a human during a lifetime, and then by the number of humans on earth—past, present, and future. That product is the “sin load” Jesus bore all at once, requiring His Father to turn away. Without a doubt, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani!” [My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?] was the cry which accompanied the pinnacle of our suffering Savior’s agony!
Lee W., Jonesborough , Tennessee
I was disappointed by the comments on the shroud, which showed little research into the shroud they were critiquing. Ken and Bodie correctly state that the body would have been washed and treated with spices before being buried, but in fact, forensic scientists who have studied the shroud found traces of extinct pollen and herbs consistent with spices on the shroud and concur that the body on the shroud had been cleaned before burial.
The blood marks are not those of a bleeding body, but one where the blood had already been dried and cleansed (blood clots continue for some time after death). Since the body was buried within three hours of Christ’s death, the shroud is perfectly consistent with this. I appreciate skepticism, but I think Ken and Bodie should examine the evidence they are disputing before commenting. This makes for bad research.
David C., Plano, Texas
Authors’ Note: Much literature has been written on both sides of the argument. While research is profitable, the article focused on the need to start with Scripture.
In such a short magazine article we could not go into great depth. So we stuck with foundational biblical arguments surrounding the shroud.
First, we wanted to dispel the myth that the initial single cloth for cleaning Christ’s body (after it was removed from the cross) was the same as the cloth later used for burial.
The article also explained that linen strips are the only things mentioned in Scripture as burial clothing. The Bible makes no mention of a one-piece burial shroud with the dimensions of the shroud of Turin.
So far, no one has pointed to scripture that distinctly mentions that Jesus’s body was buried in a shroud of the proportions of the shroud of Turin. If there is no basis in Scripture for it, then caution needs to be exercised and Christians need to refrain from reading into the text.
Visit www.answersingenesis.org/go/turin to read more detailed feedback regarding the shroud of Turin.
Answers in Genesis is an apologetics ministry, dedicated to helping Christians defend their faith and proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ effectively. We focus on providing answers to questions about the Bible—particularly the book of Genesis—regarding key issues such as creation, evolution, science, and the age of the earth.