Intelligent Design belittles God, Vatican director says

Catholic Online ^ | 30 January 2006 | Mark Lombard

[Luis Gonzalez]

"If the Bible is meant to be taken literally ALL the time..."

My question to those who argue that The Bible is to be taken literally, has always been where in The Bible does it say that you are to take The Bible literally?

[Luis Gonzalez]

"I think the Catholic Church is doing a great job in coming up with a way to keep their belief in God consistent with the facts on the ground."

The Bible can't be wrong, our interpretation of what The Bible says on the other hand, has been wrong quite often.

[js1138]

I think the Catholic Church is doing a great job in coming up with a way to keep their belief in God consistent with the facts on the ground

I think it has a bit to do with the average IQ of its membrship.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Well thank you very much....it's good to know that someone is actually reading what I write.

[Coyoteman]

As a former anthro student, I was NEVER called upon to abandon my faith. Indeed, one of my archaeology professors had been through seminary to become a priest, and he was in regular attendance to the Massess held at teh Catholic Student Center. He was a grand gentleman and I wish I had had the smarts to get to know him better.

Archaeologists truly are princes.

(Signed: An archaeologist)

[andysandmikesmom]

I read everything you write...because I think you are a very thoughtful poster, who writes incredibly well, and you articulate just about exactly how I feel...but whereas I run on and on(boringly so, I am sure), you sum things up, very nicely...I am sure that many lurkers as well, appreciate your thoughts...

[Al Simmons]

Excellent piece. Outstanding.

[Moonman62]

“Religious believers must move away from the notion of a dictator God, a Newtonian God who made the universe as a watch that ticks along regularly.”

Well, isn't that special?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

My question to those who argue that The Bible is to be taken literally, has always been where in The Bible does it say that you are to take The Bible literally?

Biblical literalism goes all the way back to the early Church fathers. However, there were differing points of view.

Here's a short article (relatively) written in 1908 to get you started. It's a hugh and series subject.

[VOA]

And it was another Catholic, Kepler, who demonstrated that the
orbits were elliptical, and he was not locked in a dungeon and
in fact had the patronage of various princes of the Church.

I'm sure Kepler would have been a very excellent astronomer
as a Catholic, but...
While I take Wikipedia with a load of salt, it seems to confirm my
recollection of Kepler's religional affiliation:

Johannes Kepler (December 27, 1571 – November 15, 1630), a key figure
in the scientific revolution, was a German Lutheran mathematician,
astrologer, and astronomer.

In 1587, after moving through grammar school, Latin school, and lower
and higher seminary in the Lutheran education system, Kepler began
attending the University of Tübingen as a theology student,
where he proved himself to be a superb mathematician and earned a
reputation as a skillful astrologer. (snip) Despite his desire to
become a minister, near the end of his studies Kepler was recommended
for a position as teacher of mathematics and astronomy at the
Protestant school in Graz, Austria.

source URL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler

[Al Simmons]

John Paul II is the one of the greatest examples of a man living his faith in the face of adversity we will ever see.

I will never get out of my mind the image of this man, in his last years, leaning on his staff, in obvious pain - yet remaining steady, hands clasped around it, eyes closed, in fervent prayer for the millions of lost souls in the world.

His statement on this matter seems to me the most reasonable and elegant interpretation of the topic. And is in agreement with St Augustine's view of the impossibility of understanding Genesis literally. Pretty good company to be in.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Give me the cliff notes on it.

I figured that if someone supports the idea of Sola Scriptura, then it has to be because Scriptures says that's what must be done, otherwise your belief would be contradictory.

Where does The Bible establish the concept of Sola Scriptura, A.K.A. textual Biblical literalism?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Where does The Bible establish the concept of Sola Scriptura, A.K.A. textual Biblical literalism?

I'm not aware of a version of the Bible that does.

I'm just saying you're treading into a morass of tradition and scholarship that you couldn't absorb in 10 lifetimes. Probably longer. ;)

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Alamo-Girl]

Indeed. Thanks for the ping!

[aruanan]

Intelligent Design reduces and belittles God’s power and might, according to the director of the Vatican Observatory.

He stresses that the theory of Intelligent Design diminishes God into “an engineer who designs systems rather than a lover.”

Ha ha ha. Man, they've gone over the edge. And the writer of the article! God as an engineer who designs a lover?

[Luis Gonzalez]

"I'm just saying you're treading into a morass of tradition and scholarship that you couldn't absorb in 10 lifetimes."

But you do...

Are you insinuating that you are higher than me in the evolutionary chart?

[dread78645]

Newton's universal law of gravitation, IMHO, conclusively rules out the hybrid models. Or at the very least, it makes them so implausible as to make them unworthy of consideration.

Shouldn't that be Newton's first law of motion, as demonstrated by Foucault's pendulum?

[DameAutour]

If the Bible is meant to be taken literally ALL the time, and you're a Christian who's not a Catholic, then why don't you take John 6:51 literally when Jesus CLEARLY says that his FLESH is to be eaten? The Bible is meant to be taken LITERALLY, ALL the time, right?

I'm a Christian. I don't believe the Bible is to be taken literally ALL the time. I don't believe ANY book is to be taken literally ALL of the time.

I don't even believe your post is to be taken completely literally. Nor is my answer.

I think one of the reasons people don't answer your question is the fact that they are thinking levels above the quality of your question. Anyone who is semi-literate knows that you cannot take literally every word of ANYTHING ALL the time. However, most literate people would not then conclude that you can't ever tell if something is to be taken literally or not.

Of course you can tell. It's not the crapshoot that you present it to be. First and foremost, you can look at context. Next, you can use logic. Also, and this is very important with the Bible, compare what you are reading to similar passages written by the same author. These are very basic rules of reading comprehension. You don't have to look to outside sources to understand everything you read in a book.

All writers use analogy, metaphor, simile, and symbolism to some degree. This is such a basic concept that I am having difficulty grasping the fact that I have to explain it to you. Wait now, I don't have to LITERALLY grasp anything. My hands are typing right now, not grasping. Wait, I just clicked with the mouse. I wasn't even LITERALLY typing right at THAT instant.

Do you see how pedantic and silly this is? Most people who seriously approach Bible reading don't engage in this kind of skeptical nonsense.

In addition to the normal instances of metaphor and symbolism contained in EVERY SINGLE BOOK EVER WRITTEN (even the most boring, technical books imaginable), some Bible writers also record dreams and visions that God caused them to experience. Now, they literally dreamed or envisioned. But the dreams and visions themselves, LIKE ALL DREAMS AND VISIONS, contain much more symbolism than LITERAL reality. Thankfully for those who struggle with reading comprehension, the Bible helpfully notes when something is a dream or a vision. Just as you might expect.

I must respectfully request that you not reply to my post without first reading it, and demonstrating that you did comprehend it, even if you do not agree with it (although I honestly don't see what you could possibly disagree with; not LITERALLY see, but, you know). I have no interest in the vitriol and animosity usually on display in these "crevo" threads. I'd love to get into a discussion about how a reader knows if something is literal or not, and I'd love even more to apply this to the Bible (a Book I have been studying and meditating on my entire life), but I don't want any of the nasty nonsense and I don't care to be dismissed.

[PatrickHenry]

THE VATICAN IS READING MY POSTS!!!!!!!

Either that, or they are in very close contact with Darwin Central.