Vatican Astronomer Says Young Earth Theory Is 'Almost Blasphemous'

"Now, if you're turning the Bible into a science book, then you're saying you should throw it out after three years and you don't want to do that" CPost

1102 reads

There are 2 Comments

Aaron Blumer's picture


The quantity of unexamined assumptions in the post is amazing.

In addition to arguing that science is supposed to go out of date, therefore the Bible should not be used 'as a science book,' he argues that there was no concept of a 'science book' when the Bible was written, therefore the Bible shouldn't be used as one.

Never seems to occur to him to ask what is a 'science book,' and why shouldn't the concept of a 'science book' also go out of date (especially since he's granted that it's a late invention). But the underlying assumption is that there are certain things "we" should not permit the Bible to speak about. Also assumed, "science" determines what the Bible may or may not speak about.

"Blasphemous?" if your god is naturalistic 'science,' yes!

dgszweda's picture

Unfortunately many creation scientists have used very bad arguments, bad science and bad theology to get across their point.  Some of it is so pervasive that it has corrupted the real understanding.  One of the main ones being that the earth is 6,000 years old.  The issue addressed in the article is based on a poll that Biologos has done around who believes the earth is 10,000 years old.  That is bad theology and science.  Since science doesn't confirm that it is 10,000 years old, and the Bible makes no mention of the exact age of the universe.

With that said, the Vatican Astronomer uses bad theology.  When has "good theology" been dictated by science or any other discipline.  A miraculous event happened outside the realm of science.  I would like this Vatican astronomer to explain how someone was born from a virgin, or how someone rose from the dead.  Both bedrocks of catholicism in which science has more conclusive shown to be false.