Proof that Catholics are actually Atheists in disguise

Proof that Catholics are actually Atheists in disguise!?
Creationism dismissed as 'a kind of paganism' by the Vatican. http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=674042006 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. ___ Is that not proof that Catholics are the Anti-Christ who reject the word of God?
Religion & Spirituality - 17 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
No - obviously. What it is is proof that one particular Roman Catholic official does not believe that one particular literal interpretation of the creation account is true. Jim, http://www.bible-reviews.com
2 :
Roman Catholicism is a blend of Paganism and Christianity.
3 :
Catholics were the first Christians, do I sense some sort of jealousy here?
4 :
Catholics believe in God, therefore they're not atheists. Idiot.
5 :
The people in the Vatican at present are not true Catholics. They are wrong about what they said.
6 :
If the Vatican thinks creationism is rubbish, then for once I have difficulty in disagreeing with the Vatican. Are Catholics Christians? Yes they are.
7 :
Even though there are rumors about what is going on in the Vatican and after what the former priest Alberto Rivera had shown, Catholics are Christians and are not atheist. Beware, there are some people out there claiming to be Christians but are not.
8 :
I have met a lot more Catholics who are Atheists, than Catholics who believe the Bible is the Word of God. Catholics argue that the Biblical 6 days of Creation are actually 6, 24 hour days, as we experience 'days' on Planet Earth. They sneered at me in a Catholic College in Ireland, when I mentioned the possibility of God existing in a different dimension of time. Yet the ancient Greek idea of, Kiaros Time = Eternity: and another dimension of time: Cronos Time, = Time regulated by the movement of our Planet as it orbits our Sun: is not unknown to them. In addition, some of the Professors at the college were avowed Atheists.
9 :
Again the same protestant attack on the catholic church.... Obviously you need to back to school or take some sort of reading comprehension class... Some things have a scientific/medical explanation, like mental illnesses, STD's or chemical reactions. On the other hand other things do not, things like possession, Divine intervention (people who's cancer was cured unexpectedly/inexplicably), occurrences like the children of Our Lady of Fatima, when the sun danced out of a rainy day... The Catholic Church has long since accepted the need for science, yet maintained that nothing comes before God. And if has a scientific explanation then in most cases it is accepted. Here's an example... Before anyone can be considered possessed they must first pass a series of tests, which include medical tests to rule out science. If there is any scientific explanation then the person is not considered possessed but mentally ill. The Catholic Church has accepted science why can't scientist do the same???
10 :
As Jim said, no.
11 :
Haha, no it isn't proof of your claim at all. It's very wise to have science (real science, backed by evidence) to go hand in hand with religion. Using pseudo-science to back up religious claims only harms that religion more.
12 :
So your saying that a Priest is not allowed to give a alternate explanation as a possibility.I read no where that he said this was official Church doctrine which of course it's not. I personally do not believe the earth or universe was created in 6 literal days. If you knew anything about Religious history you would learn that many of the ancient Jews came out from Pagan Religion as we know for fact that the Sumarians Version of a great Flood story is much older than the Jewish flood story. And all these groups pagan and Jewish lived close to each other and their was trading between the differing tribes so it was only natural certain ideas and beliefs would be exchanged. The trouble with people like you is you believe the Bible is some sort of magic book, but the truth is much of it is story's taught to teach a moral lesson. Example do you believe the Sun stopped it's natural movements for 24 hr's as in one story in the old testament? I'm sure you do, but why does no other continent or place in the rest of the world from that time has no such action happening in there history but only the Jews. I mean outside of earth rotation the sun would have had to not moved any where else also and those living in the dark side during it's so called not moving would have recorded 24 hr's of darkness. I remember when all of you fundies believed in the missing day story...
13 :
No your just a hater like a ton of fundies on here. He is just saying that religion and science do not clash. what is PR? Because the pope is not a disaster as you fundies WISH. Good day.
14 :
1. The Astrologer does not speak for the Catholic Church. 2. This really isn't anything new. Catholicism has rejected the Creationist view for a very long time. The Creationist view is that the world was created 6,000 years ago and in a literal 6 day cycle. All science that points to a much older earth is considered "satanic" and wrong. Catholicism has always held that God did create the world and everything in the world--including us. This is not a thing of Atheism. But, we also teach that the 7 day story is not to be taken literally as 7 24 hour days. If you look at the days, you will see something interesting: Day 1- God formed the Earth and made day and night Day 2- God separated the waters—waters on earth and waters in the sky (rain) Day 3- God separated the waters of the earth to form land to bring forth vegetation. Day 4—God created the stars, the moon and the sun to separate day from night and to let people mark the fixed times (seasons), the days and the years. **This corresponds with Day 1—making of day and night** Day 5 –God created all the living creatures in the water (fish and such) and the sky (birds and such). He blessed them and told them to be fertile and multiply. **This corresponds with Day 2—making of water on earth and the sky** Day 6—God created creatures to live on the land (cattle, oxen, sheep), including humans. **This corresponds with Day 3—God forming land.** Day 7—Day of rest, the Sabbath. Days 1 through 3 are days of formation. Days 4 through 6 are days of creation and they correspond with each other. This does not mean that 1 day equals a 24 hour day as we know it. We also see in the Bible that one day to God could be 1,000 years to us. Catholics believe in the story of Creation, but not in Creationism—which states that God created the earth and everything on the earth in 7 literal 24 hour days. Here is what we *must* believe: 1. Creation of all things by God at the beginning of Time 2. Special Creation of Man 3. Formation of the First Woman from Man 4. Unity of the Human Race (with God) 5. Original Happiness of our First Parents 6. Divine Command placed upon Man to prove his obedience (to till and *protect* the Garden) 7. Transgression of that command at the instigation of the Devil (ate the apple, didn't protect the garden from Satan.) 8. Fall of our First Parents from a State of Grace 9. Promise of a Future Redeemer Does that sound like atheism? We do not believe in Darwin’s theory of evolution either, but we do believe that it is possible that God created the world through an evolutionary process, but that it was not a random accident of genes—it was His plan and His way completely.
15 :
Do not let the small groups of Atheists and Creationists make you believe that we have to choose between God and Science. This is not true. Taking the stories of Creation in the Bible as figurative language for a real primeval event is not rejecting the word of God. It is using faith and reason to reconcile the truth of God's Creation described in the Bible with the truth of God's Creation discovered by Science. Most Catholic Christians and non-Catholic Christians do not take the stories of creation in the Bible literally. Catholics believe the book of Genesis tells religious truth and not necessarily historical fact. One of the religious truths is that God created everything and declared all was good. Catholics can believe in the theories of the big bang or evolution or both or neither. On August 12, 1950 Pope Pius XII said in his encyclical Humani generis: The Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. Here is the complete encyclical: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html And here is the Address of Pope John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on October 22, 1996 speaking of the Theory of Evolution: http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02tc.htm Here is an interesting article about Pope John Paul II's opinion in the matter: http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=4627 The Church supports science in the discovery of God's creation. At this time, the big bang and evolution are the most logical scientific explanations. As long as we believe that God started the whole thing, both the Bible and responsible modern science can live in harmony. The Clergy Letter Project an open letter endorsing the Theory of Evolution signed by over 12,000 clergy from many different Christian denominations: http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/rel_evol_sun.htm With love in Christ.
16 :
So they are admitting that an aspect of their belief system is pagan originated, finally they are starting to get it. I wonder how much of the bible would be left if you were to rip out every belief that is pagan orientated. He may be right about religion needing science, but science most certainly does not need religion. But seriously an Atheist doesn't believe in a deity and Catholics do, case solved!
17 :
Roman Catholicism obviously has many problems including its increasingly psuedo-scientific view of creation. However, I don't believe that this makes them "atheists". However, it does make them deniers of the truth relative to God as the Creator. There is very little difference between the secular elite in today's academia and the parochial elite in today's academia. One believes in Darwinian evolution and the other believes evolution "perhaps" guided by God. In days past when Rome took the side of "science" it usually resulted in that "science" being disproven. When Galileo proved "scientifically" that the world revolved around the Sun the RCC hounded Galileo to recant his findings because they were at odds with RCC doctrine which was based on psuedo-science. It wasn't until about twenty years ago that the RCC finally admitted that MAYBE Galileo was right! When any person or any denomination such as the RCC denies the Genesis account of creation and the numerous other accounts attributing creation to God they are putting themselves on a very slippery slope. They have certainly removed themselves from the realm of Bible believing Christianity and placed themselves into the realm of those that accept concepts that are neither scientific or Biblical. True science and the Bible have no quarrel whatsoever.

What do you think of my idea for a sequel series to Chick Tracts

What do you think of my idea for a sequel series to Chick Tracts?
As everyone knows the wonderful Jack Chick is over 70 years old and probably wont be with us much longer. So I figure I am going to stat writing tracts to keep his subjects alive and keep his legacy alive. Here is some characters from my series "Matt Tracts"...... Henry - A 11 year old Christian boy with good moral values Jack White- A former Catholic priest who exposes the lies of the Vatican Parker Davies- A 19 year old bookish Christian who was once a Hindu and exposes the Hindu agenda. Virginia Dome- A 18 year old Christian college student and former Catholic witch who exposes the witchcraft of Catholicism. Al Barbo Mohammad- An ex-Muslim who was saved by Virginia Dome when he was about to blow up her college in the name of Allah. He is now a good Christian. Jack Chick- Based on the great man himself, a good evangelist. Mrs. Lyons- A evolutionist who works for the Vatican spreading lies and phony proof of Evolution. Father Dakker- A Vatican agent posing as a Protestant minister. Sybil- A 16 year old worldly girl with secular values. Old Widow Trumbell- A 88 year old widow and a very good Christian who used to be a Vatican witch. So what does everyone think of my series and characters for "Matt Tracts". They are all pro-Christianity and will be based on Chick Tracts and will keep the legacy going?
Religion & Spirituality - 5 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Sure, we could use the laughs. And something that makes Evangelicals look ridiculous is always welcome.
2 :
You don't appear to be filled with enough hate to fill the shoes of Jack Chick.
3 :
I think it's a great idea, but you need a much wider variety of ages for your characters....it's not only teenagers who read Chick tracts, and it's not only teenagers who need to be saved either. People relate to what they identify with. If I were you, I would create a series of tracts that are age group related! No one has ever done that.......:) May God bless you with your plans!
4 :
I love the absurdity of propaganda. It is a good laugh, go for it!
5 :
i think if you need to use fun stories to "prove" a religion, that you should find another way to make money

Sell the Vatican, feed the world

Sell the Vatican, feed the world?
I just saw this video for the first time last night: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bObItmxAGc Sarah Silverman irreverently (and hilariously) beckons the Pope to sell his Vatican City and use the 500 billion dollars or so to build himself a nice, reasonable condo for him and his friends, and use the rest to feed every human being on earth. Here are the questions: 1. Could it work? Is it feasible? Could the city be sold, even in partitions? Could the money go to feeding those who need it? 2. Would it be adhering to what Jesus taught for the Catholic Church itself to sell its posessions and give the proceeds to the needy? 3. Would it ever, in a million years, happen? If it sold, the buyer would likely be Italy. @ Thatius - not everyone would need to take part in the money. We could feed those without access to good nutrition for years and years. Jesus told us not to store up treasures on earth. We should, he implies, act as though the end will be tomorrow. The Vatican City provides nothing that couldn't be obtained elsewhere. The church is, at most, 1650 years old. Age is irrelevant. What is more important, an old, old city or humanity?
Religion & Spirituality - 7 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
WWJD?
2 :
No, the Pope is an evil Sith lord, he wont do that.
3 :
that vatican is not a city it is a country so yes you can sell it but who would by it. and who would sell it
4 :
I'll answer the questions as you have listed them. 1. I wouldn't trust anything that leaves Sarah Silverman's mouth. But though it wouldn't be flawless, it'd be do-able. 2. It would be what Jesus would want, yes. Compassion and love for each other is all Jesus ever wanted, though there are many people who imagine Jesus wielding a chainsaw for some odd reason. 3. No, man loves money, we are all vulnerable to greed. The Pope is a man, maybe he is holy and chosen by the Almighty, but he is just a man, and I prefer to pray to the one who made me.
5 :
1. Plausibly, but you would only be able to give every human on earth a little under a hundred dollars. But the city could not be sold I'm afraid. Vatican city is a country and anyone who bought a country would have a lot of problems for doing so and any country that would buy it could very well provoke a holy war. 2. I guess so, but being a person who believes it's best to be charitable in ways that will help long term it goes against MY teachings. 3. ABSOLUTELY NOT. The Church is next to 2000 years old and Vatican City is its epicenter. To dismantle Vatican City would be to break a 2000 year old practice.* *Vatican city isn't 2000 years old but Saint Peter was the first pope.
6 :
Good question. Better than you might think..... Hope you read all this. Vatican wouldn't even have to be sold.... just the paintings alone in the churches are worth more than that. But, back to your question. Would it work? No. Why? Simply because all these who are now fed would make more babies, until the spaces were again filled up with starving children.... there have always been starving children all over the world. When a family produces 9 kids, they starve, or are intellectually compromised to the point of damage to their intelligence. Children who do not get enough to eat as babies, do not develop mentally. Plain, hard, cold fact. In Kenya right now, the average girl has her first baby at 14, with 13 more pregnancies in her life, and 9 live births. (Yup, you read that correctly.) In the bush, away from cities where there is no medical care, half of those 5 will die before age 1. Of those remaining, half will die before age 5. A Kenya women, living in a tribe with no medical care will be lucky to raise two children to age 16. But with medical care,( and most can now get it) about all of them live, being saved from milaria, and various other childhood diseases. (in 1960, the population of Tanzania was 4 million. It is now more than 20million, in just 50 years. Typical of Third World countries.) The planet doesn't need more children, nor more people. It can barely support the ones it has. In the final analysis, even Genetically Modified Foods has a limit. There are right now 6.7 billion perople on this planet, going to more than 8.3 is less than 30 years. Unless we find a way to stablize population, selling anything to feed anyone is putting a bandaid on a cancer. Sadly, no one, no government, and no worl leader, nor any national leader ever talks about limiting births... only China. And its efforts have in essence failed. If the family opted to have a child, and the fetus proved to be female, it is often aborted, since the family wants a boy to grow up and support them in a high paying job. This has been the policy in China for decades. The effect? Lots of men will never marry. And unmarried, ungrounded men make for riots. Look who makes up the Taliban, and Al Quaeda.... almost every single one, an unmarried man between the ages of 17 and 40 . The world doesn't need to feed any more people. It needs effective birth control, and a promise to its older citizens to have worry free elder years, so that they find no need to have 8 children, hoping one will turn out well enough to support them all. This problem exists all over Third World countries. And they do not allow birth control, nor abortions. A Kenyan girl would stand in line a month for pills, which any American can get for freeeee at planned parenthood. Abortions are not available.....Worse, none of these countries will accept any outfit pushing birth control. Go figure. So, no, her idea wouldn't work. (whoever she is.....) Would it ever, ever even happen. No There is an old saying..."When the patio is being flooded by a faucet which it turned on, quit mopping, and turn off the faucet." It is the same principal.... ya gotta turn off the faucet.
7 :
Yet... Sarah Silverman has sold her belongings to do the same? Why do people continue to insist that others do things which they are not willing to do themselves? I find that odd. Anyhow, Vatican City is it's own country... so her suggestion is obviously ignorant. How to you sell off a country and all of it's inhabitants? Answer: You can't!!! Furthermore, this logic is outright stupid. Let's say I had a billion dollar home, and I sold it... guess what? $1B goes by pretty quick and people can eat for awhile, but this will not solve the problem of global hunger. It's this close minded train of thought which only allows people to look into the near future and not long term. The RCC does more, long term for the impoverished than any other organization in the world... and she's been doing this for almost 2000 years. NO other organization can even think of saying they do this.