Creationism dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by Vatican's astronomer

[Amelia]

Fri 5 May 2006

Creationism dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by Vatican's astronomer

IAN JOHNSTON

BELIEVING that God created the universe in six days is a form of superstitious paganism, the Vatican astronomer Guy Consolmagno claimed yesterday.

Brother Consolmagno, who works in a Vatican observatory in Arizona and as curator of the Vatican meteorite collection in Italy, said a "destructive myth" had developed in modern society that religion and science were competing ideologies.

He described creationism, whose supporters want it taught in schools alongside evolution, as a "kind of paganism" because it harked back to the days of "nature gods" who were responsible for natural events.

Brother Consolmagno argued that the Christian God was a supernatural one, a belief that had led the clergy in the past to become involved in science to seek natural reasons for phenomena such as thunder and lightning, which had been previously attributed to vengeful gods. "Knowledge is dangerous, but so is ignorance. That's why science and religion need to talk to each other," he said.

"Religion needs science to keep it away from superstition and keep it close to reality, to protect it from creationism, which at the end of the day is a kind of paganism - it's turning God into a nature god. And science needs religion in order to have a conscience, to know that, just because something is possible, it may not be a good thing to do."

Brother Consolmagno, who was due to give a speech at the Glasgow Science Centre last night, entitled "Why the Pope has an Astronomer", said the idea of papal infallibility had been a "PR disaster". What it actually meant was that, on matters of faith, followers should accept "somebody has got to be the boss, the final authority".

"It's not like he has a magic power, that God whispers the truth in his ear," he said.

[Dr. Shane]

Another reason why Sunday should be honored. God's authority comes from creation. The church's authority comes from tradition. If God didn't create the world in six literal days, there is no reason to honor the seventh as the Sabbath and the church should be within its authority to change the day to Sunday.

[olger]

"Another reason why Sunday should be honored." I thought that was where this was headed.

oG

[bevin]

Quote:

---

God's authority comes from creation. The church's authority comes from tradition. If God didn't create the world in six literal days, there is no reason to honor the seventh as the Sabbath and the church should be within its authority to change the day to Sunday.

---

You keep inventing bogus reasons to want to keep short-age creationism.

God's authority comes from His creating and maintaining the universe. It doesn't matter how He did it.

No church is 'within its authority' to force any day of worship on anyone. The Mark of the Beast is not compulsory Sunday worship - it is compulsory worship any day of the week.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

It isn't me inventing reasons.

Quote:

---

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

---

Why, Lord? Why is the seventh day the Sabbath?

Quote:

---

For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Ex.20:8-11)

---

You mean this story is true, Lord?

Quote:

---

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. (Gen.2:1-3)

---

Wow! How is that possible? Modern-day science says it can't be so.

Quote:

---

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8,9)

---

What are You trying to say, Lord?

Quote:

---

Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? (1Cor.1:20)

---

Lord, are You trying to cast doubt on all the PhDs that embrace Darwin's theory?

Quote:

---

For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. (1Cor.3:3)

---

Lord, do You understand all the ways they date the rocks and fossils?

Quote:

---

Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors, And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed? Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place; That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (Job 38:2-13)

---

OK, Lord. Thanks for clearing that up. I guess You take this literal six-day creation week pretty seriously.

[Bravus]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. (1Cor.3:3)

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

This one keeps on cropping up. Question: How do we tell the things of good that are foolishness to the world from the things that are just plain foolishness?

[Dr. Shane]

I believe the verse does has its application to the creation/evolution discussion altough I think it is easier to understand outside of it.

Paul is addressing new converts. He is telling them that since they are still carnel he is feeding them with milk and not whole food. An applicable example of this would be trying to discuss the Sanctuary doctrine with a new convert. Or even giving a copy of "The Ten Commandments Twice Removed" to a nonbeliever. These things are spiritual and thus foolishness to the carnel minded.

Living in an evolution-educated society, means that discussing a literal creation week with an unbeliever would be foolishness. Yet many of our evangelists present the Sabbath doctrine to evolution-minded nonbelievers in prophecy crusades without giving them any reason to doubt evolution. In that context, this verse may be applicable.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Yet many of our evangelists present the Sabbath doctrine to evolution-minded nonbelievers in prophecy crusades without giving them any reason to doubt evolution

---

and even more give very poor reasons - reasons that are so bad that in my opinion they count as lies - that to any well-educated audience tells them that the evangelist is a source of bad mis-information.

No wonder the SDA church is failing amongst the educated sector of the world's population.

/Bevin

[Barbara]

What to say when God created the wolrd what is to say He could have made rocks and other things any age He wanted.

I think many of the question we may have about creation may not be answered until we join Him in Heaven.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

---

reasons that are so bad that

in my opinion

they count as lies

---

Thanks for prespective. Is that reference to a PhD in a science or a degree in theology? Or the opinion of an ex-adventist evolutionist?

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Thanks for prespective. Is that reference to a PhD in a science or a degree in theology? Or the opinion of an ex-adventist evolutionist?

---

One of the characteristics of religion over science is that religious people appeal to authority figures, and science people are always looking for reproducible experiments.

In my personal experience of SDA and other fundamentalist evangelists, including Dwight Nelson in Net '98(?) and many campaigns I have supported with my time and money over the years, and many non-SDA presentations I have seen on TV or been to...

the evangelists present anti-evolution arguments which are, in my opinion having studied the issue for 35+ year, well known and already refuted, and pro-Flood arguments which are also well known and already refuted

To make these arguments without having properly researched them is somewhere between gross neglience and deliberate lying.

Just look at the discussion David Koots and I are having in another part of this forum. Clearly he has not already done his research (he is always going to look things up, asking questions, or showing misunderstandings that such research would have already covered). I don't know what he says about the topic in his meetings, I hope he does not make such arguments at his meetings.

I have met a range of SDA evangelists - they are usually enthuisastic and ignorant, projecting certainty for the simple reason that they have never contemplated the possibility that their material is wrong. However I have met some that are more discerning and intellectually honest than that, and often present a very different - and to me, much more appealing - series of meetings where the true gospel of a loving God is presented, rather than the 'join our elite club' feel of the usual.

As for the TV evangelists, of all denominations - I would not buy a used car off any of them. I don't trust a word that they say.

/Bevin

[Ron Lambert]

Bevin, do you really expect us to take seriously what "the Vatican's Astronomer" says about the Bible doctrine of Creation? It is serious for him that he would dismiss as "paganism" what the Bible text clearly teaches. [edited by moderator]

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Bevin, do you really expect us to take seriously what "the Vatican's Astronomer" says about the Bible doctrine of Creation

---

I don't take seriously what ANYONE says, just because they say it.

If there is sufficient time, I want them to teach me enough so that I reach the conclusion for myself.

If there is insufficient time, I want them to have a proven track record of correct decisions.

/Bevin

[Bravus]

More logical fallacy... 'Well, the Catholics believe it, so it must be wrong...' (We saw the same issue in relation to the discussion of the rapture in another thread.) Surely every issue should be studied on its own merits, not on automatic opposition to Catholic positions?

[Ron Lambert]

Bravus, it is just that the "Vatican Astronomer" is no authority on Scripture. Of what possible value is what he thinks about Creationism? It is so outrageous that he wouold call it paganism, when Catholic teaching has embraced so much that is paganism.

[Gerr]

Hmmmmmmmmmm. From a religion that swallowed paganism hook line and sinker!

Gerry

[bevin]

The Roman Catholics, you would know if you studied your history, had what they considered solid scriptural reasons why Copernicus/Galileo were wrong.

I suspect that they have learned a little bit about the danger's of using one's own personal opinions about how literal various parts of the Bible ought to be read when they contradict solid science.

How do you know that the Catholic astronomer doesn't know his Bible very well? Is it just that he disagrees with you on how to interpret it?

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

---

in my opinion having studied the issue for 35+ year

---

So no PhD or degree in theology. Thanks for the info. That provides a lot of prespective.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

---

From a religion that swallowed paganism hook line and sinker!

---

While that is true, this is just one individual. I don't know if the Catholic church officially agrees with him. It does provide interesting discussion. Evolution is the foundation of secularism. The Catholic church made compromises with sun worship in order to incorporate that pagan religion into Christianity. It may well make simular compromises with evolution in order to appeal to the secular mind.

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

Shane said:

Quote:

---

in my opinion having studied the issue for 35+ year

---

So no PhD or degree in theology. Thanks for the info. That provides a lot of prespective.

---

Jack Sequiarra [sp] who was a missionary pastor from Unganda

or somewhere in Africa relates a story that the elders of the tribe related some very deep biblical thoughts, many of which was deeper than Andrew U puts out. None of them completed thier high school education, but had the bible to study from...

My studies and experience has catagorically emphisised that one should NEVER put down another, regardless of educational titles, because the educational course a person may cover, may leave him totally unprepared for the life experience that comes at him.

I see that all the time, Shane....First and foremost is EGW, who had a 3rd grade education. True, she was INFORMED by God of many things, and that she applied that information, but as for a formal education, well...we all know what grade she completed. And we know how prolific she was in writing.

[Bravus]

So basically, I'd say (I think bevin already got there) that someone's qualifications are in most ways irrelevant, in either direction: we shouldn't dismiss someone as either over-educated or under-educated, and we shouldn't genuflect to someone on the basis of their qualifications, but neither should we dismiss their opinions on that basis.

Bottom line - the quality of the information itself, and its consonance with the Bible.

My point was not that we should accept what the Vatican Astronmer says unreservedly based on his position (as an astronomer, in the Vatican or as a Catholic), but neither should we reject it based simply on his position. Like any information, we should judge it on its merits. Shane brought it because he thought it was interesting to discuss, and it is.

[Dr. Shane]

I am in total agreement. Some here talk down to others and insult them as if they had a PhD or were some kind of expert and they are not. Some of those here with a PhD are some of our most humble members. Maybe it is because those without the graduate degrees to back up their opinons feel they have something to prove and those with the degrees don't.

If the Bible says it, I believe it regardless what anyone says - degree or not.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

---

Shane brought it because he thought it was interesting to discuss, and it is.

---

Thanks for the credit but Ameila started this thread

[Bravus]

D'oh! And you mean 'Amelia' is not one of your pen names? <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[Ron Lambert]

Neil, You were close. His name is Jack Sequeira. Here is a link to his home page, Vineyard Ministries:

http://www.jacksequeira.org/

The box on the left has links including one to an order form for all his books, and one to his bio.