Vatican Astronomer Says Young Earth Theory Is 'Almost Blasphemous'
Brother Guy Consolmagno, astronomer and planetary scientist at the Vatican Observatory, has said that he finds Young Earth Creation theories that run contrary to science "almost blasphemous" in nature. He also argued that the Bible should not be used as a science book.
"It's almost blasphemous theology," Consolmagno told Fairfax Media during a visit to Australia on Wednesday.
"It's certainly not the tradition of Catholicism and never has been and it misunderstands what the Bible is and it misunderstands what science is," he said....
Perhaps I did read more into your comment, Martin. I apologize. I don't believe that one is limiting God in suggesting that the earth is young, which you don't seem to take to task as well.I do think that Scripture is our best resource as to what took place in the beginning. That I would not question. The fixed constants that you suggest which may have been altered due to supernatural events (like the time of the fall or the worldwide flood) are not problematic with that which is observed. Science and the Bible are very complementary. And many creation scientists would attest to that.
s c, What did I say that gave you the impression I support the idea of evolution? I said that I believe that a Christian worldview "recognizes the reality of natural law," but it doesn't elevate that reality to the level of an immutable principle. What we call natural law is simply a way of speaking of God's ordinary providence, the predictable patterns by which He normally upholds the universe in its regular functioning. But these "laws" are descriptive for man, not prescriptive for God-- that is, He is free at any moment to suspend His ordinary pattern of working and do something totally different, as we see, for example, when Christ changed water into wine quite apart from and outside of any known natural law. What Christ did by miracle "mimicked" the effect of natural processes, so that no scientist could have told the unique, miraculous origin of the wine by studying its properties. There may be many such objects in nature, supernaturally created. For the record, I do not believe in evolution, and the reason I do not is that evolutionary theories rest on the assumption of pure naturalism (naturalism elevated to an absolute principle) which I see as contrary to a Christian world view, that holds to God's miraculous divine interventions in earth's historical past.
Martin,God can do anything but natural laws do not conflict with what Scripture says; They,all the more,confirm it.The concept of evolution would be contrary to the Bible.A world that has death and dying in it prior to sin negates what God's Word says...don't know whether or not you have ever been to the answersingenesis.org website, but it offers answers to any and practically every related subject matter dealing with science/natural laws/thermodynamics,etc. I wouldn't question your profession as a Christian but,supporting the idea of evolution, for example, would negate Scripture. I guess you could be "respectful" but, with all due respect,incorrect in your assessment.
What is truly blasphemous is to elevate "natural law" above God Himself, so as to say that God Himself, throughout the whole of cosmic history, has been bound to work always within the framework of natural laws that we observe in the world today which give fixed rates to things like the speed of light, the law of gravity, the rate of radioactive decay in rocks, etc. It is blasphemous to place 'chains' on God by saying that He could never, at any time in the cosmic past, have suspended such laws. That is pure naturalism, which is contrary to the Christian worldview. A Christian worldview recognizes the reality of natural law, but it sees that as existing within the context of the inherent supernaturalism that permeates a God-created, God-ruled universe. Who knows what events in past history-- perhaps at the time of the fall, or the worldwide flood, or Joshua's long day, etc.-- may have altered the fixed constants we see at work in the world today, throwing off the careful calculations of scientists who are developing their theories on the assumption of pure naturalism. Pure naturalism is blasphemous; but there is nothing inherently blasphemous about belief in a young earth, if someone holds to that belief out of respect for the supreme authority of Scripture.
s c wrote: Again,no surprises.Truth, in general, runs contrary to the rc church. Thank you, Dorcas,for the additional info regarding the first 11 chapters of the Bible. I know that many catholics in the course of conversation do not place much value on the Bible. A common response from them, when quoting a passage, is "that's just written by man." Dorcas, again, it is always encouraging and a blessing to hear from one who has come out of that mess.You have a valuable testimony! We pray for those dear ones still ensnared in that cult.
Thank you so much s c for your encouragement . My husband and myself are in such awe that the LORD had such mercy on two worms as us. We pray always for those dear souls still held captive by the enemy. Our prayer before our Fathers throne is always that He would open their eyes, and turn them fom darkness to light and from the power of Satan unto GOD............ Popery is a satanic religion!
Again,no surprises.Truth, in general, runs contrary to the rc church. Thank you, Dorcas,for the additional info regarding the first 11 chapters of the Bible. I know that many catholics in the course of conversation do not place much value on the Bible. A common response from them, when quoting a passage, is "that's just written by man." Dorcas, again, it is always encouraging and a blessing to hear from one who has come out of that mess.You have a valuable testimony! We pray for those dear ones still ensnared in that cult.
""It's certainly not the tradition of Catholicism and never has been and it misunderstands what the Bible is and it misunderstands what science is," he said."
It has never been the tradition of Roman Catholicism to accept the Bible as the Word of God. The Vatican and the RCC practice and teach idolatry and blasphemy because they do not obey the Bible - Or should it be they cannot obey the Bible?
This science stuff simply proves that the reprobates cannot receive the truth and the doctrines of Scripture.
"Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear"
JESUS said; John 5:45 45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. 46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" = So believe the words which Moses wrote - Who wrote the Book of Genesis - By the grace of God.
Brother Guy should first learn what blasphemy is, before he implies believers in the Genesis account are "almost" blasphemers. The blasphemer is the one who says God's account of Creation is false, thus calling God a liar. Barring salvation, that would put Brother Guy on the path to the wide gate, wouldn't it?
I understood your thoughts anyway. I have argued with this OEC fellow for years and he refuses to budge. They use their view of science to interpret scripture although many deny that charge. Many more do this then we can imagine; the RCC and others as well. The RCC does teach that the beginning chapters of Genesis are not to be taken literally (unless they make an exception)and that is why they don't have the doctrine of original sin with salvation by works a natural offshoot of that.
The fellow I argue with actually says "scripture" teaches an old earth which has always amazed me. Ankerberg and many others we consider to be YEC are not as an aside. I have seen a video of Ankerberg sitting side by side and agreeing with Hugh Ross in every detail.
A lot of our Christian brothers/sisters are YEC when interacting with other brethren, but OEC when they talk to outsiders. Gives them some sense of intellectual credibility, I guess?
So believing in a young earth is unscientific? Ah well you better start praying for salavation since virgins becoming pregnant is also unscientific. If you doubt one part of God's word it leads to trouble. Some things are taken on faith. As the Lord asked Job in 38:4 "where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?"
Buried in the article we find this Catholic shares the view with most Protestant Pastors
"A survey commissioned by evangelical Christian group BioLogos and released in 2013 found that 19 percent of 743 Protestant pastors who responded to the poll expressed certainty that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. Another 35 percent said while they believe that God created life in its present form in six 24-hour days, they express qualified certainty, or doubt the "young" age of the Earth"
btw- Doubting Scripture is rampant among even the most conservative Pastors today. For instance, a Synod we have fraternal relations with doesnt believe Moses recorded his own death in Deuteronomy
Wa hey...shoot...of all days to leave my 3rd world slng dictionary at home. Sorry govna, or is it matey? Anywayyyyyyyy, I'm on board with either and know that the one true church has a major role to play in the near future. Something that I just never get used to and for the life of me, can't begin to comprehend, is how any thinking human being can place the fate of their eternal spirits in the hand of mere men. Taking a persons word for something on some mundane matter is one thing but to trust mere men with your very soul and where you will go once this body dies? Trust mere men with your very soul when there are no 2nd chances to get it right? I just can't wrap my head around it. God left us a guidebook that tells us all we need to know for Christian living and salvation, so there will be no excuses. How is it that so many completely disregard the contents of this book for the traditions, dogmas, and doctrines of mere men, most.of which are even in direct contradiction of God's. Own Word?