An interesting article was written, titled Faith, Proof and Relics and there is part of the article that struck me:
The Shroud of Turin underscores an essential aspect of religion. Believers suspend their rational processes and undertake an act of faith. Yet the power of holy relics is that they offer the tantalizing possibility of concrete proof of that belief, setting up a battle between reason and devotion.
As I said before, the implication if the Shroud was to be authentic in date, is great and yet, it could cause a debate between religions to grow.
Would there be the possibility of religions coming together or would there be a wider gap in belief. Would there be calls that the Shroud proves nothing other than that it was a man or possible prophet?
The Shroud of Turin has always intrigued me in that throughout history, science has tried to find answers to how the world was created, scientists through their intelligence, designed the theory of evolution and yet they question the legitimacy of theory on an intelligent design.
Then through scientific experiments, scientists found fault with a piece of cloth with an image of a man that seems to support the story of Jesus, who was tortured and crucified.
We live in a time of when science is fact, but we find people who are not scientists, debunking the scientific "facts".
There is an irony of many sorts in that a doubt in a scientific "fact" and blind faith, led to the scientific proof that the scientific dating of the Shroud was wrong.
This proves a point that blind faith combined with doubt can lead to answers that may turn the "Doubting Thomases" of the world into a "Thomas the Believer".