Thursday, October 06, 2005

Dishonest headline and story fools people about the Catholic Church and the Bible

Screaming across the internet today was this headline and story:

Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.

Just going by the headline and first paragraph, you'd think that the Vatican just went bat-guano crazy. Fortunately, the truth lies in the next paragraph (which a lot of people are glossing over):
The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible.

That's right, folks. It's not the Catholic Church (as headed by the Pope) that has issued this document. It was a handful of clergy in the U.K. The headline is bogus. I have little doubt that the author is being deliberately dishonest with the headline in order to draw attention and positive praise to the article. Lo and behold, a bunch of suckers fell for it, too.

Furthermore, the article is littered with further dishonesty:
Some Christians want a literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis, taught alongside Darwin’s theory of evolution in schools, believing “intelligent design” to be an equally plausible theory of how the world began.

Uh, no. The "literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis" is Creationism, NOT Intelligent Design. Creationism and ID actually have very little in common. (They are not, as some have said, "two sides of the same coin.") In fact, ID and the Theory of Evolution have far, far more in common.

Also, most Christians actually don't want the schools teaching students about what they think the Bible says. The schools have screwed up just about everything else they've been teaching, so why would we want them teaching our religion to kids?
But the first 11 chapters of Genesis, in which two different and at times conflicting stories of creation are told, are among those that this country’s Catholic bishops insist cannot be “historical”.

Ah, yes. The old "two different versions of Creation" canard that skeptics love. I won't go into detail here (esp. since others have done so elsewhere online), but the short-short explanation is that Genesis 1 contains a detailed account of the whole Creation while Genesis 2 concentrates on the creation of man.

UPDATE: It's really kind of sad when certain people can't admit error in regards to this story (and these two, too) and try to distract people's attention by going off on some crazy rant and hurling elephants.

UPDATE 2: Just to give you a clue as to how whacked out these clergy in the U.K. are, here's one of the passages they claim is untrue:
Revelation xix,20

And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had worked the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshipped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with brimstone.”

Yep. A prophecy from Revelation that has yet to come to pass. "Well, it hasn't happened yet, but we know it's false!"

These two verses are still okay, though:
Luke i

The Virgin Birth

John xx,28

Proof of bodily resurrection

So the story of Creation and prophecy from Revelation are too fantastic to believe, yet the virgin birth and the resurrection of Jesus are still believable to these clergy? Strange...


Web Pages referring to this page
Link to this page and get a link back!