news.scotsman.com— Believing that God created the universe in six days is a form of superstitious paganism, the Vatican astronomer Guy Consolmagno claimed yesterday.
May 5, 2006View in Crawl 4
That is an extremely dated view of what Christians believe. For one thing, a consideration of the context: Genesis 1 is poetry. Good poetry does not state things in the same way as we have come to expect from science texts. Further, calling the Bible "the written word of god" without qualifying that statement by, at the very least, mentioning that the Bible is a transcription of the interactions of people with God written by those people is an omission that makes clear that what you are doing is merely comparing semi-literate Christian doctrine to your own, presumably more educated, worldview. I could just as easily dismiss the "science" of alchemy in a similar way. If I were to do that and then use my conclusions to dismiss science, would that not make me a fool?
>That's almost as bad as Darwinists who believe we turned from ape to man in a 10,000 year timeslot.this is why you don't belong here. the above statement is not darwinist. its is based on some preachers distortion of evolution-twisted to make a twisted point. saying that in a place where science types hang out is meant to provoke.
Following Stanley Hauerwas, you are both kind of right here. The worst thing about the modern American Church is the way in which they spend some much time flag-waving and supporting the troops and buying stuff, they forget that their real duty isnt to capitalism, but to Christ. Is Christ a straussian economic liberal? I very much doubt it.
I didn't really mean it as being disrespectful at all.. I too used to consider myself Christian. I certainly think it works against Christianity to make heaven a country club for those who accept it as "they way things are." Especially when that means perhaps holding back a lot in this life when you could be wrong! :)
I heard this guy on "Quirks & Quarks" last week. He's pretty much a nutcase. I think it's great the Vatican has an observatory, but it'd be nice to have someone manning it who isn't some kind of new-age weirdo.I do agree religion and science have gotten along in the past and should be able to get along just fine now. The religious nutters pushing this anti-science agenda seem to be doing it more because they believe their culture is being undermined by exposure to new cultures and ideas and should reign supreme than any kind of actual threat to the existence of their religion from science.
CornStarch,"It actually is a theory because it has failed to be disproved riskable :)"You're confusing "capable of being disproved" with "failed to be disproved". The first is a method by which you can determine if a scientific theory has merit, the latter is what people use to add a false sense of weight to their arguments. I could say, "Intelligent Design is the most likely way life was created" and follow-up with, "...and it has yet to be disproved." What does the fact that it has not been disproved mean? Nothing, since it can neither be proved nor disproved since Intelligent Design is founded in myth. Intelligent Design was thrown out of science classes by the Supreme Court for this specific reason. Following up a statement with a fact doesn't make the original statement true.-Riskable<a class="user" href="http://riskable.com">http://riskable.com</a>"I have a license to kill -9"
move on folks... no science here. move on... move on... no science.move on folks... no science here. move on... move on... no science here.------"The problem with the Vatican is they teach a flawed version of the Christian faith...."Actually the Catholic Church teaches in total OPPOSITION of Christs Teachings:<a class="user" href="http://jahtruth.net/darth.htm">http://jahtruth.net/darth.htm</a>This is not a new position for the Catholic Church--way back in the 1960s official Cathlicdoctrine wasBoth of you need to realize that Catholicism is more than a branch of Christianity, andisn't in the same group as like Christian Reformed followers or Bap"I'm more willing to believe the thousands year old Vatican, with their extensive library,than some offshoot seedling religion created for political reasons or mentally challenged,self-declared messiah"Well their extensive library is also suspected of keeping important historical andbiblical information occult from the general public, catholics and even clergy in lowerhierarchy levels, such as priests, bishops and deacons. Not to the mention that the verystablishment of what we now refer to as the 'Roman Catholic Church' happened for politicalreasons.This guy can't speak for Christians or CatholicsJust because you claim yourself Catholic, doesn't make you Christian.hristianity existed LONG before the Romans (who started Roman-Catholocism) came to believein the religion. The very first form of Christianity was actually a branch of Judaism,practiced by the followers of Jesus, during and immediately after his life.To say that the Roman-Catholics invented Christianity is laughable.2 Peter 3:8 - "However, let this one fact not be escaping your notice, beloved ones, thatone day is with God as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day."Exactly. I'm actually studying the Bible right now [I'm a student], and I've found thatmost critics have a lot of misconceptions about the BibleSorry, wattssw, ym is NOT literal day everywhere. Take Sabotage's example of Genesis 1 andGenesis 2 both are ym. Critics of the Bible often claim that it contradicts itself. Whenyou look at it more closely you see the categories involved are not contradictory in thestrict sense.No, that's what most of the Vatican thinks. The pope himself has condemned creationism.
"The Romans crucified Christ"Sort of. The Roman government crucified Christ at the behest of the Jews. Regardless, the Romans *also* are the source of the Roman-Catholic Church. There's a reason the word "Roman" is in the name.As for the source of the word "Catholic", it most certainly *does* predate the creation of the Protestant churches. It in fact predates the Roman-Catholic church, originally used simply to describe an all-encompassing religious view (based on the original meaning of the word "catholic").
I think i understand what your trying to say.But i do have beliefs, and one of those beliefs is not believing in magical powers/beings.Go ahead and believe what you want. But don't talk s**t about peoples beliefs or lack there of.And seriously dude, do you think you can convince someone that there is a God/gods with your little BS equation...You got the equation wrong jackass.First Amendment = Freedom of Religion.Now go suck dicks in hell.
>a day can be a 1000 yearsOh, so you are basically admitting that a day in the bible is not a day? So the bible is not true as written, and thus nothing in it can be trusted. Ok, I agree.
mscfMay 5, 2006
That is an extremely dated view of what Christians believe. For one thing, a consideration of the context: Genesis 1 is poetry. Good poetry does not state things in the same way as we have come to expect from science texts. Further, calling the Bible "the written word of god" without qualifying that statement by, at the very least, mentioning that the Bible is a transcription of the interactions of people with God written by those people is an omission that makes clear that what you are doing is merely comparing semi-literate Christian doctrine to your own, presumably more educated, worldview. I could just as easily dismiss the "science" of alchemy in a similar way. If I were to do that and then use my conclusions to dismiss science, would that not make me a fool?
starmanjonesMay 5, 2006
>That's almost as bad as Darwinists who believe we turned from ape to man in a 10,000 year timeslot.this is why you don't belong here. the above statement is not darwinist. its is based on some preachers distortion of evolution-twisted to make a twisted point. saying that in a place where science types hang out is meant to provoke.
gandercoreMay 5, 2006
Following Stanley Hauerwas, you are both kind of right here. The worst thing about the modern American Church is the way in which they spend some much time flag-waving and supporting the troops and buying stuff, they forget that their real duty isnt to capitalism, but to Christ. Is Christ a straussian economic liberal? I very much doubt it.
psyconiusMay 6, 2006
I didn't really mean it as being disrespectful at all.. I too used to consider myself Christian. I certainly think it works against Christianity to make heaven a country club for those who accept it as "they way things are." Especially when that means perhaps holding back a lot in this life when you could be wrong! :)
happyscrappyMay 6, 2006
I heard this guy on "Quirks & Quarks" last week. He's pretty much a nutcase. I think it's great the Vatican has an observatory, but it'd be nice to have someone manning it who isn't some kind of new-age weirdo.I do agree religion and science have gotten along in the past and should be able to get along just fine now. The religious nutters pushing this anti-science agenda seem to be doing it more because they believe their culture is being undermined by exposure to new cultures and ideas and should reign supreme than any kind of actual threat to the existence of their religion from science.
riskableMay 6, 2006
CornStarch,"It actually is a theory because it has failed to be disproved riskable :)"You're confusing "capable of being disproved" with "failed to be disproved". The first is a method by which you can determine if a scientific theory has merit, the latter is what people use to add a false sense of weight to their arguments. I could say, "Intelligent Design is the most likely way life was created" and follow-up with, "...and it has yet to be disproved." What does the fact that it has not been disproved mean? Nothing, since it can neither be proved nor disproved since Intelligent Design is founded in myth. Intelligent Design was thrown out of science classes by the Supreme Court for this specific reason. Following up a statement with a fact doesn't make the original statement true.-Riskable<a class="user" href="http://riskable.com">http://riskable.com</a>"I have a license to kill -9"
starmanjonesMay 8, 2006
move on folks... no science here. move on... move on... no science.move on folks... no science here. move on... move on... no science here.------"The problem with the Vatican is they teach a flawed version of the Christian faith...."Actually the Catholic Church teaches in total OPPOSITION of Christs Teachings:<a class="user" href="http://jahtruth.net/darth.htm">http://jahtruth.net/darth.htm</a>This is not a new position for the Catholic Church--way back in the 1960s official Cathlicdoctrine wasBoth of you need to realize that Catholicism is more than a branch of Christianity, andisn't in the same group as like Christian Reformed followers or Bap"I'm more willing to believe the thousands year old Vatican, with their extensive library,than some offshoot seedling religion created for political reasons or mentally challenged,self-declared messiah"Well their extensive library is also suspected of keeping important historical andbiblical information occult from the general public, catholics and even clergy in lowerhierarchy levels, such as priests, bishops and deacons. Not to the mention that the verystablishment of what we now refer to as the 'Roman Catholic Church' happened for politicalreasons.This guy can't speak for Christians or CatholicsJust because you claim yourself Catholic, doesn't make you Christian.hristianity existed LONG before the Romans (who started Roman-Catholocism) came to believein the religion. The very first form of Christianity was actually a branch of Judaism,practiced by the followers of Jesus, during and immediately after his life.To say that the Roman-Catholics invented Christianity is laughable.2 Peter 3:8 - "However, let this one fact not be escaping your notice, beloved ones, thatone day is with God as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day."Exactly. I'm actually studying the Bible right now [I'm a student], and I've found thatmost critics have a lot of misconceptions about the BibleSorry, wattssw, ym is NOT literal day everywhere. Take Sabotage's example of Genesis 1 andGenesis 2 both are ym. Critics of the Bible often claim that it contradicts itself. Whenyou look at it more closely you see the categories involved are not contradictory in thestrict sense.No, that's what most of the Vatican thinks. The pope himself has condemned creationism.
kickmenowMay 12, 2006
"The Romans crucified Christ"Sort of. The Roman government crucified Christ at the behest of the Jews. Regardless, the Romans *also* are the source of the Roman-Catholic Church. There's a reason the word "Roman" is in the name.As for the source of the word "Catholic", it most certainly *does* predate the creation of the Protestant churches. It in fact predates the Roman-Catholic church, originally used simply to describe an all-encompassing religious view (based on the original meaning of the word "catholic").
Closed AccountMay 12, 2006
And why would we care what the Catholic church says?They're not Christian: <a class="user" href="http://othello.alma.edu/~07tmhopk/arecatholicssaved.html">http://othello.alma.edu/~07tmhopk/arecatholicssaved.html</a>And, for all you saying you can believe in the Bible and evolution both, you're wrong. You can't believe in both without contradiction: <a class="user" href="http://othello.alma.edu/~07tmhopk/creationevolutionboth.html">http://othello.alma.edu/~07tmhopk/creationevolutionboth.html</a>
montiffJul 9, 2006
I think i understand what your trying to say.But i do have beliefs, and one of those beliefs is not believing in magical powers/beings.Go ahead and believe what you want. But don't talk s**t about peoples beliefs or lack there of.And seriously dude, do you think you can convince someone that there is a God/gods with your little BS equation...You got the equation wrong jackass.First Amendment = Freedom of Religion.Now go suck dicks in hell.
stroggothMar 5, 2008
>Both science and God can and DO coexist. In your mind. See "Cognitive dissonance" on wikipedia.
stroggothMar 5, 2008
>a day can be a 1000 yearsOh, so you are basically admitting that a day in the bible is not a day? So the bible is not true as written, and thus nothing in it can be trusted. Ok, I agree.