Take time to read the article. I think you will be shocked. Take for example the following quote, "Creationism from a strictly theological view makes sense, but when it is used in scientific fields it becomes useless," Ravasi said. What exactly does a statement like this mean? That special creation has theological value but no practical value? Let Pope Benedict himself tell you, "the word of God can never simply be equated with the letter of the text"
Ministries such as Answers In Genesis that work in the field of creation science have been unambigious about what the real issue is. In an article on their website, Ken Ham has explicitly stated, "AiG’s main thrust is NOT ‘young Earth’ as such; our emphasis is on Biblical authority."
These statements from the Vatican clearly show that the battleground is not set upon scientific theory. The battlelines are as old as the papacy itself: Sola Scriptura. The pope has declared, "excludes by its nature everything that today is known as fundamentalism"
Contrast this to J.A. Wylie's account of a statement by the Archbishop of Mainz in his History of Protestantism, Volume 1, p.4 "Musculus says that many of them never saw the Scriptures in all their lives. It would seem incredible, but it is delivered by no less an authority than Amama, that an Archbishop of Mainz, lighting upon a Bible and looking into it, expressed himself thus: 'Of a truth I do not know what book this is, but I perceive everything in it is against us.'"
Mark it well my brethren, the papacy has not changed its stand against the authority of Holy Scripture to usurp it with their own. These issues while surrounding the subject of historical and biological science are truly a battle being waged upon the authority and sufficiency of Holy Scripture.
The 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith, together with the Westminster Confession of Faith, states: "The supreme judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Scripture delivered by the Spirit, into which Scripture so delivered, our faith is finally resolved."
Let this be the plumbline by which we judge this controversy.
I wish I could say that my opinion of the Vatican has taken a hit, but it hasn't. Their opinions are about as valuable to me today as they were yesterday.ReplyDelete
Since they hold that Muslims and Judaists are included in salvation, may as well include atheists and Darwinists.
More proof that popery should be an air freshener, not a church office.