|
Post by Josh Parsley on May 11, 2006 11:35:07 GMT -5
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. news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=674042006
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on May 11, 2006 12:34:47 GMT -5
hmm ...
"Knowledge is dangerous, but so is ignorance. That's why science and religion need to talk to each other."
Me likey.
|
|
|
Post by josh on May 11, 2006 22:40:58 GMT -5
Creationism dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by Vatican's astronomer
It should read: "Vatican dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by Bible Believing Christians." Its amazing how they accuse the Bible of paganism, yet they are pagan themselves...
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on May 11, 2006 23:54:03 GMT -5
I see a lot accusing going around actually.
|
|
|
Post by justaman on May 11, 2006 23:59:50 GMT -5
I think all 'orgins' discussion should be removed. Public Education should be for written history and toward giving knowledge for the future. Not theological or scientificial therories of where humans came from.
Of course if a student wishes to pursue it they should be aloud to, but the teacher shouldn't be forced to instruct it.
There are SO many theories on how we came to be beside Intelligent Design and Creationism... and trust me that if a public school went beyond teaching the 'definitions' there would be words said.
I still remember in 9th grade when the teacher went over Creationism there was a HEAVY stress that it was only a theory and that you had the right not to believe it.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on May 12, 2006 1:41:23 GMT -5
Creationism dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by Vatican's astronomer
It should read: "Vatican dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by Bible Believing Christians." Its amazing how they accuse the Bible of paganism, yet they are pagan themselves... Pa-gan n. 1. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion. 2. One who has no religion. 3. A non-Christian. 4. A hedonist. 5. A Neo-Pagan. Pa-gan adj. 1. Not Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. 2. Professing no religion; heathen. 3. Neo-Pagan. Chris-tian n. 1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. 2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus. he-don-ist n. Someone motivated by desires for sensual pleasures. Ne-o-Pa-gan-ism n. Any of various religious movements arising chiefly in the United Kingdom and the United States in the late 20th century that combine worship of pagan nature deities, particularly of the earth, with benign witchcraft. How does the Catholic Church fit the definition of "pagan," especially with the later definitions?
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on May 12, 2006 3:17:27 GMT -5
It should read: "Vatican dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by Bible Believing Christians." Its amazing how they accuse the Bible of paganism, yet they are pagan themselves... Pa-gan n. 1. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion. 2. One who has no religion. 3. A non-Christian. 4. A hedonist. 5. A Neo-Pagan. The Roman Catholic Church does not believe in the Jesus Christ of the Bible nor do they follow his teachings so they cannot be Christian.Pa-gan adj. 1. Not Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. 2. Professing no religion; heathen. 3. Neo-Pagan. The Roman Catholic Church is not Christian, many Catholics will specifically say "I am not a Christian, I am Catholic."Chris-tian n. 1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. 2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus. The Roman Catholic Church does not follow the teachings of Christ, they follow the teachings of the Pope.he-don-ist n. Someone motivated by desires for sensual pleasures. Two words...Priest scandals.Ne-o-Pa-gan-ism n. Any of various religious movements arising chiefly in the United Kingdom and the United States in the late 20th century that combine worship of pagan nature deities, particularly of the earth, with benign witchcraft. 1Samuel 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft (they rebel against the teachings of Christ), and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry (they are idolaters because they worship saints and Mary as well as stubbornness against God). Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king (God rejects those who do not obey his word just as God rejected Saul, so he rejects those today who reject his word). How does the Catholic Church fit the definition of "pagan," especially with the later definitions? My stuff is in red...
|
|
|
Post by wkufan on May 13, 2006 1:17:43 GMT -5
Interesting observations, ejuliot.
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on May 13, 2006 9:39:58 GMT -5
He has a good point. I've never understood why science and Christianity (or any other religion for that matter) had to be mutually exclusive. The two mirror each other so nicely....
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on May 13, 2006 9:43:23 GMT -5
Pa-gan n. 1. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion. 2. One who has no religion. 3. A non-Christian. 4. A hedonist. 5. A Neo-Pagan. The Roman Catholic Church does not believe in the Jesus Christ of the Bible nor do they follow his teachings so they cannot be Christian.Pa-gan adj. 1. Not Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. 2. Professing no religion; heathen. 3. Neo-Pagan. The Roman Catholic Church is not Christian, many Catholics will specifically say "I am not a Christian, I am Catholic."Chris-tian n. 1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. 2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus. The Roman Catholic Church does not follow the teachings of Christ, they follow the teachings of the Pope.he-don-ist n. Someone motivated by desires for sensual pleasures. Two words...Priest scandals.Ne-o-Pa-gan-ism n. Any of various religious movements arising chiefly in the United Kingdom and the United States in the late 20th century that combine worship of pagan nature deities, particularly of the earth, with benign witchcraft. 1Samuel 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft (they rebel against the teachings of Christ), and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry (they are idolaters because they worship saints and Mary as well as stubbornness against God). Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king (God rejects those who do not obey his word just as God rejected Saul, so he rejects those today who reject his word). How does the Catholic Church fit the definition of "pagan," especially with the later definitions? My stuff is in red... "Two words... priest scandals" Oh yeah that's fair... blame all the problems on the few child molesters... not ALL priests do that you generalizing wench... geez... yes I just called you a generalizing wench. Can ya dig? Pft, whatever... I'm going to farmer's market for yummy sinfulicious tomatoes... MMMMMM
|
|
|
Post by victorialewis on May 13, 2006 18:13:36 GMT -5
It's more than a few child molesters, Morluna...and how about their victims? Ever read any testimony?
To spot a counterfeit, you need to know the Truth (Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh to the Father except by Me."). When you don't know the Truth, it's easy to be deceived.
Ask any soundly saved Christian, who came out of the RC church, and they will tell you it's a false religion. I came out of the Lutheran Church, and I can tell you:
1. No one brought a Bible with them to church, let alone anywhere else.
2. Salvation was never mentioned.
3. No one was encouraged to read God's Word.
I could go on, but I won't. Suffice it to say, after I was saved, and began actually studying about Martin Luther, I realized how far from the Truth the Lutheran church had gone (not talking Missouri Synod tho - my ultra liberal parents actually warned us about that one!!). In fact, my DH (raised a Roman Catholic) said attending the Lutheran church was just like going to a RC church - except no Virgin Mary or statues!
I once was blind, but now I see - John Newton
But I digress from the actual topic. Within days of being saved, I began to read my Bible, right from the beginning. (Now mind you - I was quite overeducated at this point) There came a point when I was struggling with Creation. I did find out, among other things, that the word for day -yom- actually meant a 24 hr day. Finally, I told God that I would rather stand before Him on Judgment Day, and have Him tell me that there was another explanation for a six day creation, than to stand before Him, and have Him ask me, "Why did you not take Me at My Word?" That settled it for me, and now I realize it makes perfect sense. In fact, He is so powerful that He could have taken much less time to create everything than merely six days.
You see, if you don't believe God in the beginning, it makes it ever so convenient to ask, 'Yea, hath God said?"
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on May 13, 2006 21:53:25 GMT -5
"Two words... priest scandals" Oh yeah that's fair... blame all the problems on the few child molesters... not ALL priests do that you generalizing wench... geez... yes I just called you a generalizing wench. Can ya dig? Pft, whatever... I'm going to farmer's market for yummy sinfulicious tomatoes... MMMMMM GeneralizeGEN'ERALIZE, v.t. To extend from particulars or species to genera, or to whole kinds or classes; to make general, or common to a number. Copernicus generalized the celestial motions, by merely referring them to the moon's motion. Newton generalized them still more, by referring this last to the motion of a stone through the air. 1. To reduce to a genus.WenchWENCH, n. 1. A young woman. [Little used.] 2. A young woman of ill fame. 3. In America, a black or colored female servant; a negress.WENCH, v.i. To frequent the company of women of ill fame. I guess you could generally say that I am reduced to the genus of a colored (black) servant (of God). ;DThanks Morluna! I would have never had any reason to look up the definition for wench if you had not called me one. How thoughtful of you!
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on May 14, 2006 0:27:08 GMT -5
"Two words... priest scandals" Oh yeah that's fair... blame all the problems on the few child molesters... not ALL priests do that you generalizing wench... geez... yes I just called you a generalizing wench. Can ya dig? Pft, whatever... I'm going to farmer's market for yummy sinfulicious tomatoes... MMMMMM GeneralizeGEN'ERALIZE, v.t. To extend from particulars or species to genera, or to whole kinds or classes; to make general, or common to a number. Copernicus generalized the celestial motions, by merely referring them to the moon's motion. Newton generalized them still more, by referring this last to the motion of a stone through the air. 1. To reduce to a genus.WenchWENCH, n. 1. A young woman. [Little used.] 2. A young woman of ill fame. 3. In America, a black or colored female servant; a negress.WENCH, v.i. To frequent the company of women of ill fame. I guess you could generally say that I am reduced to the genus of a colored (black) servant (of God). ;DThanks Morluna! I would have never had any reason to look up the definition for wench if you had not called me one. How thoughtful of you! Don't mention it. Anytime. I was thinking more like the pirate term, but whatever.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 21, 2006 20:54:40 GMT -5
christianity was built on paganism. sheesh...
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on May 22, 2006 15:54:49 GMT -5
Is Morluna still slinging around racist terms and calling African American females wenches?
True science will always be compatible with God. So called "science" like most isotope dating and creation are incompatible mainly due to the age of the earth. Erroneous isotope dating methods come up with billions of years but the true biblical account puts the age at around 6000 years.
|
|
shangxin
Full Member
"Who is this lady?"
Posts: 106
|
Post by shangxin on May 22, 2006 16:34:39 GMT -5
A wench is a derogatory name for a woman (usually to call her a "lesser") in this day and age. Don't rely on dictionaries for slang or insults, especially since they are usally old editions. Duh.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 23, 2006 1:55:34 GMT -5
heh, wench... anyway, life doesn't spontaneously appear and progess as much as humanity has in six thousand years. besides, it doesn't explain the extinction of dinosaurs...unless you're a fundamentalist christian that believes that satan put dinosaur bones into the ground to deceive people like me.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on May 23, 2006 10:03:10 GMT -5
So Dusty, let me get this straight, you don't understand how a global flood would destroy most of the dinosaurs?
Job mentioned dinosaurs-leviathan and behemoth.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 24, 2006 2:58:40 GMT -5
micah, my little fundie friend, do you realize that if the earth is only five thousand years old and adam and eve were the only people god created...this means there was generations of incest...which is ironically forbidden by god--and the bible.
so does god simply change his mind, after the fact...or what?
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on May 24, 2006 12:59:57 GMT -5
My 2 cents time ... so how is it then that ALL da big lizards got destroyed? ALL of them? And what's about the water dwelling dinos? We still gots sharks and whales and all sorts of fishies!! They survived the floods, but how did the aqua-dinos not??
Behomoth ... heck, that could be any large animal that they'd never seen before! Elephants maybe. Leviathen too, any large water creature who happened to pop it's head up.
And what about the unicorns?!?!?
Good note on the incest. Argument I've heard is that it was okay then because it was needed and because they were the frist two people, the blood was still pure. Okay ... God still changed his mind! HE CHANGED HIS HOLY LAW!! Means ... it could happen again and, you know what, probably has. But y'alls wouldn't know that because yer stuck in the dark ages.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on May 24, 2006 14:39:45 GMT -5
Well, gee maybe they survived because they can live in the water and the others can't.
I believe some dinosaurs survived the flood. The vikings fought sea beasts, the knights fought dragons, cave drawings show men killing dinosaurs, and a dead dinosaur washed up on the coast of California in the early part of the 1900's (around 1930 I believe).
If you have ever actually studied Job's account it was obviously not an elephant he was describing as the tail of the animal was very massive where an elephant's is not.
Do any of you heathens even actually know why God forbids incest?
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on May 25, 2006 23:34:16 GMT -5
Well, gee maybe they survived because they can live in the water and the others can't. I believe some dinosaurs survived the flood. The vikings fought sea beasts, the knights fought dragons, cave drawings show men killing dinosaurs, and a dead dinosaur washed up on the coast of California in the early part of the 1900's (around 1930 I believe). If you have ever actually studied Job's account it was obviously not an elephant he was describing as the tail of the animal was very massive where an elephant's is not. Do any of you heathens even actually know why God forbids incest? You answered for MY argument! Thanks a ton!! So where are the rest of the deepsea dwelling dinos?? Why did all the other fishies survive, but not them?? Incest was banned, and smartly by God, because it produces mental weaknesses (like yourselves) from all the same blood mixing together, again and again. Wording is less then scientific, but I'm no science major by FAR! ;D
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 26, 2006 0:58:37 GMT -5
..and you know, micah...did you interview god in your prayers? a divine answer...a solution for every biblical contradiction?
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on May 26, 2006 14:21:42 GMT -5
Dusty,
Yes I know why incest was condemned by God but necessary when there were only two humans on the earth.
cervvy,
How do you know there are not any deep sea dwelling dinosaurs? Can you name several?
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 27, 2006 7:32:09 GMT -5
micah, so you admit that god changes as his world changes?
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on May 28, 2006 23:38:54 GMT -5
cervvy, How do you know there are not any deep sea dwelling dinosaurs? Can you name several? No, I can't name any. We gots sharks and whales and maybe a giant squid or two. But never as anything new popped up. No Long-necked, razor sharp toothed baddie. I could get if MOST of them still hid in the depths, but if all the other fishies survived that appear every day, why not the leviathons?? We have fossel remains of many different kinds of water dinos, but where are they now?? Strung up in museums, not swimming around.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 29, 2006 7:23:54 GMT -5
...we're trying to prove whether or not dinosaurs existed, yet no one is debating the existence of god. sheesh.
|
|