Was the Bible Meant to be Taken Literally? - Guy Consolmagno

Complete video at: fora.tv/2008/03/02/Brother_Guy...
Astronomer, author and Jesuit brother Guy Consolmagno discusses the creationist theory of the origin of life, arguing that this theory rests on a literal interpretation of the bible that is not practical.
-----
Brother Guy Consolmagno discusses "God's Mechanics: How Scientists and Engineers Make Sense of Religion."
With wry humor, Brother Guy Consolmagno shows how he not only believes in God but gives religion an honored place alongside science in his life. His book God's Mechanics: How Scientists and Engineers Make Sense of Religion offers an engaging look at how - and why - scientists and those with technological leanings can hold profound, "unprovable" religious beliefs while working in highly empirical fields.
Vatican astronomer Guy Consolmagno is a Jesuit brother with advanced degrees from MIT and the University of Arizona. A highly respected planetary scientist whose research focuses on meteorites, asteroids, and dwarf planets, Consolmagno is the author or co-author of numerous books and publications, including Brother Astronomer and Turn Left at Orion. He even has an asteroid named in his honor (4597 Consolmagno, known to its friends as "Little Guy").
He has served as chair of the Division for Planetary Sciences of the American Astronomical Society and is a past president of Commission 16 (Planets and Moons) of the International Astronomical Union - Grace Cathedral

[@quemacha]

If the RC church doesn't let science get in the way of taking the Virgin Birth and Resurrection of Christ literally, why does it have a problem with taking the Genesis account of creation literally?

[@stansell1]

Jesus said, "My flesh is true food and my blood is true drink."

[@mechfeeney]

In my opinion the largest flaw to his ideology is that, while science may be constantly changing, at least it is dynamic (in the sense that it is forward moving thinking) rather static and out-of-date.

[@abelovedchildofgod7383]

In my judgment it is your "science" that is ideological as far as I am concerned. The Faith is not only static in its unchanging truth but it is also ever energetic and renewal in its intelligibility as it is ever ancient, ever new and eternal in its nature.

[@Kreadus005]

Hi. Comp Sci grad here. Its not that we view everything literally... its just that we can easily detect when something's meaning isn't clear and absolute. If the bible is meant to be taken as metaphor, simile, and wisdom... then its subjective. Its wishy washy. Its aloof. Its not precise. So its hard to draw any moral conclusions from it. People use their morality to filter the bible. That filter changes person to person, day to day.

[@Aironnes]

Nothing in science is ever proved.

[@AtSwimTwoBricks]

Well, that all really depends on which sense of "prove" you assume. Science can certainly prove things in the sense that a court of law can prove someone guilty; meaning just that the weight of evidence points to one explanation as the most likely with a high level of confidence.

[@versioncity1]

Because meaning & understanding can still be derived from it regardless if it is true or not. It's like saying why read fiction? why read poetry?

[@versioncity1]

I genuinely don't know what you mean. Tell me if I'm getting it wrong but your position seems to be - the more we discover (in science) the more we understand God as a creator - but that just seems like word play, where you are just substituting (for example) cosmology with the word God. There is no area of science that points to a God or intelligent design. Often science leads us to greater questions and more unknowns, but nothing that points to a conscious creative force.

[@jackskellington765]

How the hell do these people know that the bible isnt supposed to be taken literaly?? They werent there wen the people wrote the books and they (bible scholars/theologians/etc)...

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 Ok, thanks for the positive reflection on the discussion. By the way, I studied biotechnology, have worked 20+ years in the field.

[@mechanicmike69onYouTube]

@ivlfounder Actually it's the fact that it is true that has you responding.

[@theseanze]

Fantastic point. Aligns with lots of psychological studies on predictable irrationality. People who live with blinders, totally focused on their little world of personal experience, will interpret everything else through that lens.

[@cabbysmack2]

I had the pleasure of watching his lecture when he came to Cornell University and talked to him briefly afterward. The Guy (no pun intended) is absolutely brilliant, plus he really knows his science (MIT grad).

[@l4a3e4g3]

The earth is flat!!!

[@aaronswartz4034]

Yes, the earth is flat !!!

[@hackman669]

so what rock have you been living under for the past 500 years?

[@357MagnumBob]

That is, not every statement is to be taken as absolutely literal. There are literal sections (e.g. historical narrative, like Isaiah 36, prophecy, like Daniel 8:21-22, Matt 24:1-2). The reader is expected to be clever enough to figure out the difference (Matt 15:15-17). There are sections clearly not meant to be taken as absolutely literal, like Ezek 17:1-10. The text directly states "set forth an allegory and tell it to the Israelites as a parable." Not always literally, but always SERIOUSLY.

[@versioncity1]

Thats because science is an ongoing question and does not assume answers without some sort of evidence. You said science points to a God yet you haven't demonstrated how. You can't be serious about your 'light' quote, can you? If you read my answers to you, you would see that I have already said that I think Jesus, as a man, probably existed. It is pointless trying to 'prove' God, or Jesus as a Messiah; it can't be done. There is no evidence; it's faith based.

[@Johnwillbegone]

He's a Jesuit.

[@hackman669]

So what does he do for fun?

[@mojave19]

hackman669 Study the cosmos.

[@hvgriggs]

The USA uses a subset of English. The rest of the world uses the full set of English words. Spelt is indeed a correct word. In the USA, they have simplified verbs and so they use spelled. Both are right, although usage is determined by your location.

[@versioncity1]

I'm not too sure what point your making. - Yes, of course I understand that you can believe in a God/creative force. And of course you can, if you wish, believe your life has a great purpose. But because you, or whoever, believes such, it doesn't mean its true, or mean that by holding such a belief its evidence of anything else.

[@versioncity1]

I'm not sure I do get where your coming from. yes of course anyone can have a 'slant' on anything. What makes something viable is proof or evidence; but I don't see what that has to do with deriving meaning & purpose from something. (in terms of literature as we mentioned above)

[@Tap0k]

How do you explain the Earth suddenly being round? Where's that?

[@d25615]

It's a vain imagination

[@rationalrex1914]

As an agnostic, I am so confused. The two religions, Judaism and Catholicism which had anything to do with the writing and codifying of the Bible do not take it literally. Why then do those who had nothing to do with the writing of the Bible take it literally? I do not understand this dichotomy.

[@versioncity1]

if what is verifiable?

[@versioncity1]

I'm not too sure what that means. But I think you could say the same of the bible or any religious text.

[@punishalltrolls]

2011 Gallup survey: "Three in 10 Americans interpret the Bible literally, saying it is the actual word of God. That is similar to what Gallup has measured over the last two decades, but down from the 1970s and 1980s. A 49% plurality of Americans say the Bible is the inspired word of God but that it should not be taken literally, consistently the most common view in Gallup's nearly 40-year history of this question. Another 17% consider the Bible an ancient book of stories recorded by man."

[@AtSwimTwoBricks]

Of course. My beef is with the idea that a very good understanding is *required*. I personally reject a variety of gods for a variety of reasons. Some are incoherent, some unsupported, some contradict what we see. Some understanding is required for these, but there are gods so poorly defined there's nothing I could accept if I wanted to. Not believing in such a god is almost forced upon me. And then there are the gods I simply know nothing about. I disbelieve precisely because I know nothing.

[@onserfdez7958]

Ahab and Nebuchadnezzar, and Jeroboam and...well, please look in the archeaological data bases and see what they have discovered over the centuries. Fictional characters do not have seals and palaces and are written about by other historical people from the same eras. Please investigate, scientifically.

[@lashingsofgaut]

@DementorBob ok. fair point

[@bartholomewpmalleck844]

God is the creator of all things, the heavens and the earth (Gen. 1:1; 2 Mach. 7:28). The Scripture nowhere gives a scientific description of the origin of the world. The ancients referred to the earth as a building set on firm foundations. God raised the earth to make dry land appear.

[@blazejames47]

I hate how almost ALL theists believe that the bible should not be taken literally JUST BECAUSE you would be considered insane in modern society for doing so. The bible was made thousands of years ago in a time when people had low knowledge of the world and gave the death penalty for just about everything. Of COURSE they would take the bible literally, and I believe everyone who doesn't is just giving an excuse for the madness written down inside of it

[@imorriso1]

I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. I don't recall a court ever "proving" someone guilty, just "finding" them as such (at the risk of devolving into semantic word games). I'm inclined towards the mathematic idea of a "proof" myself, though. ;)

[@onserfdez7958]

Unless you believe that things 'are' because they have a purpose. Or that all life arises from life. Or that there was a Prime Mover to start the universe in motion. That Logic dictates that there was a beginning and something started that 'beginning.' Unless you believe that Your life, my life, has a great purpose.

[@ArtemisScribe]

pardon?

[@Eromhsa1]

This guy evidently hasn't read Genesis chapter 1 because it does NOT say the earth is "FLAT"!

[@P.H.888]

He’s not restricted to Genesis chapter 1. He knows what The Hebrew Scriptures teach & what the ancient Hebrews believed, just what he said with the firmament over the top separating the waters!

[@Tap0k]

You spelt Cain and Abel right, yes. I'd say your English is pretty good!

[@versioncity1]

what do you mean "all" evidence? - You mean in relation to my last comment?

[@onserfdez7958]

Not if it is verifiable through historic, comologic, and logical proof and reasoning. Space/time did have a beginning. Something did come out of nothing and I understand that point of creativity to be the mind of God.

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 Yes, it overlaps with engineering obviously, but my field is genetic technology.

[@versioncity1]

Maybe you could examples of what you consider historical & scientific evidence. I don't think you can really have ethical evidence, at least not in the same way as historical evidence. But this was my point regarding deriving meaning. That 'ethical' (or other) meaning can be gained regardless if the story is true or not. Shakespeares work or dickens work was fiction but full of social, psychological & ethical meaning; as is most great literature.

[@weadone]

@AlexMD242 you've obviously never used a haynes manual then doc.......

[@Ryakki]

"Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB) And taken literally, as the bible itself DEMANDS... it's a badly written, silly, yet insanely evil fairy tale.

[@greenelf12]

@CandideNovella you know they are some people who take the whole thing in allegorical context, see:- The Gnostics.

[@jackferwerda]

that is my point. thanks. .. as far as your blog, sorry I probably won't have time to comment.

[@chd0043]

The Bible is not to be taken as absolutely literal. It is to be taken seriously.

[@bartholomewpmalleck844]

The earth is the dwelling place for man (Gen. 1:26-27). It was cursed on account of Adam's sin (Gen. 3:17-18). All creation awaits deliverance from this curse Rom. 8:19-22). At the consummation of the world, the earth shall be renewed and only the just shall henceforth dwell in it (2 Pet. 3:13; Apoc. 21:1).

[@bartholomewpmalleck844]

The earth is a flat disk surrounded by an abyss of waters, and held up by mighty pillars in the abyss (1 Kings 2:8; Ps. 23:2; 74:4; 103:5). Douay Bible, used by English-speaking Catholics. Catholics are forbidden to read (KJV) or any Bible translated or edited by non-Catholics. [See] Books, Prohibition of.

[@punishalltrolls]

1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.” Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...” Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...” Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.” Isaiah 45:18: “...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast...”

[@d25615]

Yes

[@mooredesign]

The Bible isn't written as a play by play account of everything that happened. For example, you do not here about Jesus getting up in the morning and putting clothes on, brushing his hair, etc. When you say that something happened "suddenly in Genesis 4:16-17 you could be way off the mark. There is no indication of how much time had passed, etc. Evidently, God did not see a need to have every single thing that happened written down.

[@onserfdez7958]

But fiction and poetry only have meaning because there is a reality to base everything upon.

[@versioncity1]

So how do any of these concepts/theories in anyway point to a God? Again you misunderstand, of course we can refer to actions or thoughts as good & evil, but generally speaking, these are to do with our behaviour to other beings. No evidence that God put this notion/question within us as you suggested. There is actually very little evidence of Jesus even as a man, and no evidence whatsoever as a divine being. It's belief based on faith and speculation, as you are demonstrating.

[@versioncity1]

Indeed, the world is an amazing place, I agree, from an ant under a rock to the planetary systems; but it isn't evidence of a creative supernatural being.

[@versioncity1]

"If" is the key word. The explanations & observations don't point to God they point to the cosmological theory of the universe. Good & evil. You misunderstand. - Yes we, as humans, can term actions of people good & evil if we wish, we can question right & wrong, we can behave in different ways. But how is this evidence of a God? Of course there are no artifacts of Oliver Twist. It is fiction. But there are no historic artifacts of Jesus or the disciples.

[@onserfdez7958]

What you said. That you think that "You could say the same of the Bible or any religious text." You get where I'm coming from, right? Anyone can have an opinion or slant on anything. This, however, does not make it true or even a viable theory.

[@Tap0k]

Yeah, how long have they been protesting now? 400 years? 5? 6? I've lost count. You'd think they'd have taken a break or something.

[@dookiecheez]

The speaker should have defined proof, and elaborated on how humble science is. Some people will take this to mean that it's reasonable to suggest that science doesn't have knowledge or proof of anything, let alone evolution. I hope that the speaker doesn't think one can over turn natural selection, heredity through dna, and other principles of evolution. I hear people saying the bible is metaphor and poetry, but I don't see any consistency in this approach.

[@AlexMD242]

Personally ,as a physician and currently undergoing psychoanalysis, i´d have to say that absolutely NO book is to be taken as a dogma.

[@abelovedchildofgod7383]

Except the Bible.

[@AlexMD242]

@@abelovedchildofgod7383 I said ABSOLUTELY NO BOOK WHATSOEVER

[@versioncity1]

I don't have an argument for no intelligent design. When anyone provides a shred of evidence for it, then I will look at it, consider it and then there can be a discussion. All I have ever heard so far is faith based assumptions and imaginative leaps.

[@versioncity1]

That's fine; and of course science has moved on from 40 years ago and in 40 years time it will of moved on again. But what your saying seems, to me, to go back to the age old argument from ignorance, (I'm not saying your ignorant) in that even though we know some of the 'unknowns' of 40 years ago, the new 'unknowns' we have now you seem to be implying are 'God'. - It's no different than before, just that our position has shifted a little.

[@niinja2]

where does the shuttle go rofl

[@Fexer12]

Honestly, you have to believe that the Bible in divinely inspired words from God himself before you even begin to reason or debate anything about it. to do that you have to first accept that there is a God, there are absolutes, and He has a way he wants you to live. Go read a book like Evidence that Demands Verdict (by Josh McDowell) Then come back and see if you comment the same. If you really want have an opinion that has weight to it...do your homework.

[@AtSwimTwoBricks]

I assume you watched the entire video given in the link... I'd say he's just a subscriber to liberal theology. That brand of theology is certainly not winning too many lay Christians over, but it has long been popular amongst priests, theologians and religious scholars. What he mentioned--God not existing, rather being the grounding of existence, and being suprapersonal rather than personal--remind me of Tillich. Claiming Jesus as symbol and taking his existence as irrelevant would complete it.

[@Elganko]

I really don't agree with this gentleman, he's really just playing with words when he says science doesn't prove anything, that it just describes. I'm loading the full video right now but I'm not expecting much wisdom, only a different perspective and more wordplays.

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 Ohh...touche! Yeah, like I don't understand religion in it's many forms and types, and as if I don't understand the closed minded mentality of those that follow one religion or the other. Sure, go on thinking there is something I don't understand. I'm the one continually reading, learning and accepting new information every day.

[@goldyaaron]

@Killjeser the Bible never says thou shall not kill... not once in the entie Bible if you look in the original hebrew/greek.... it says thou shall not murder.. which is a different thing... death was just merely the punishment for breaking the law...

[@bubbercakes528]

Science changes as the data is better able to be understood or read. The bible never changes yet is interpreted differently as people change throughout the years. I’ll take the science over the bible any day. I hope that their is something better after this life but I know that all religions today have been proven false.

[@thekaxmax]

Where did the water go after the flood? Also, how long did the flood last--40 days, or 150? How many of each animal--2, or 7? Not even the flood story is internally consistent. And if it's not consistent with itself, how can you know it happened at all? It's all just stories from different tribes mashed togetther and edited to look better. So it can't really be the word of god.

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit I am sorry if I upset you. What I mean is that there are far more beautiful things to claim proof of the existence of God than a contradictory book full of bigotry and genocide.

[@Futureplanet]

@KoRnmunk00 In the Hindu religion, Vishnu has the only deity to create the earth from a Lotus Flower. Is there some part of a religion which has a detail that another doesn't which gives it some sort of validity? So what that Christianity has a god with a Son? (and anyway, there are MANY MANY previous gods with sons. Like the Egyption god Horus. He was the son of God too, 2000 years before the fictional book of Jesus was written.

[@Vargseld]

I wasnt aware that Jesus wrote the bible.

[@jackskellington765]

Most certainly didnt meet the people who wrote the damn bible. So please stop trying to interpret for yourself wat u think the bible actually means.

[@myerssa7]

Does Mr. Consolmagno then draw a substative distinction between the decision to find metaphorical & spiritual fulfilment from his 30 year out-of-date physics manual & the other book on his desk? Is this decision ultimately a personal preference based upon one's own poetic & aesthetic sensibilities? Does a poem have an expiration date past which one's aesthetic palate _ought_ to find said poem objectionable? Must we continue to value metaphors which celebrate genocide, rape, slavery and misery?

[@IAMJESUSmovie]

Jesus Christ as returned. I AM.

[@MentorOfMinos]

Genesis doesn't say the earth is FLAT. It says that there is a firmament in the midst of the waters, and that the water above the earth which was kept in an equilibrium prior to the flood all precipitated during the flood which was why no one had seen rain before and why it terrified people so much. They had no idea what a flood WAS prior to Noah's day. This is typical banter from a Jesuit who has taken an oath to crush the heads of Protestant children against the wall. Read their oath sometime.

[@throwingpearls4601]

If a Jesuit is speaking, consider the possibility the opposite of what your hearing is actually the truth.

[@AtSwimTwoBricks]

I was shocked, though, when he called the common believer a pagan. Though I agree with most of what he meant by it, I don't think he has any authority to call their Christianity false and his true. I would argue that he's a pagan as well, in fact even more so. And by getting atheism wrong (by claiming that it requires an understanding of what the god is that's being rejected), I don't see him making too many friends on either side. Similarly in what he said about engineers, its truth regardless

[@mechanicmike69onYouTube]

@ivlfounder It hurts, I know. reality is tough.

[@ClowdyHowdy]

I'm wearing the grammar nazi hat today, so I'll point out that "spelt" is incorrect, and should be written as "spelled." I correct people's grammar when they incorrectly use it to point out another's grammar. Cheers mate.

[@bgilchrist228]

It tells you this man's mindset when he describes the Bible as one of his thick books on his shelf, I doubt he has read it.

[@mooredesign]

I don't know what you are referring to, can you explain?

[@LordYon13]

Well, if all science will be obsolete in the future, what's the point, eh? Let's stop looking, in fact, we may as well regress and roll around in the mud.

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit What makes you think we know anything specific about Him now? With ALL the books all we have are different religions and One God. How many children have you stoned? How many gays have you killed? How many Atheist have you killed? How many people have you killed by working on the sabbath. Yeah, and my characterization is ignorant. But yours is enlightened cause you have a two way radio with God.

[@BadMannerKorea]

This guy would get destroyed by Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens or Dawkins.

[@Killjeser]

@Wanda4DecentValues The bible says to kill homosexuals in Leviticus and kill Non-believers in Luke, yet Thou shall not kill? It has to make sense to be literal

[@greenelf12]

@lizazoon Allegory and fantasy is not the same thing...

[@imorriso1]

He said nothing of the sort. He only said that technically minded people are inclined to be literal in their interpretation, as opposed to more poetic. Speaking of unfair generalizations, you do realize the last sentence you wrote makes you a huge hypocrite?

[@ArtemisScribe]

The Bible is made up of two parts, the Old Testement and the New Testement. The OT is fairly similar to parts of the Jewish Torah, all of the OT was written before the birth of Christ therefore it is older than 2000 years. The oldest known versions of the books that eventually became the OT are at least 3000 years old.

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit I know you mean, Adam and Eve rebelled against God and that's why everyone dies. And them being ignorant about good and evil before the fruit does not exempt them from justice, even though they did not know they where doing something wrong. I get that part. But why then, did Jesus preach against these ideas? I mean, assuming you read the bible cover to cover. He stopped an adulteress from being stoned and said not to kill a man working on the sabbath etc etc. against the law ...

[@CandideNovella]

If he agrees that the bible is not to be taken literally then why does he and so many other believers believe what the bible says about Jesus? I think the Bible literalist are crazy but at least they do not pick and choose what is true and not true in the Bible. My wife thinks the Bible is flawed and written by man but believes the Jesus story. I ask her to explain how she can choose that part as truth but no answer. He mentions the Iliad & Oddsey as examples but no one claims they are true.

[@Killjeser]

WOW. An atom has NEVER been seen. And it will never be. Because the light particle is is too big to bounce off an atom. Yet from calculations science PROVED it existed, split it and blew up Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[@Killjeser]

@TheRockHobbit Oh okay. Now I see what you mean. You believe in evolution but not that men arrived from another ancestor. I get it.

[@AndreaMaciejewski]

@Ipostle I've met Br. Guy. Your theory is completely wrong.

[@ivlfounder]

@mechanicmike69 to the point you can't understand it or even deal with it.

[@onserfdez7958]

The Bible is not to be taken literally? Then why believe in anything in it? I guess Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Daniel, Isaiah, Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc, where metaphors also? Maybe this guy should attend a Bible Study....

[@versioncity1]

When I say explanations & observations, I am talking about scientific observation with empirical evidence, not 'a persons' own observation & thoughts. Science is certainly not "edging that way' - there is not a single bit of scientific evidence of God/creator. Your idea of Good & evil is obviously based on mythology, again no evidence of this. The gospels are not evidence of jesus as God. They are stories. Although I do think Jesus as a man (flesh & blood) probably existed.

[@mooredesign]

When was it referred to as a flat plane?

[@eddyedmund867]

where is the dome, where are the pillars and where is the waters above us? also why is the earth shaped like a sphere when its supposed to be flat?

[@Markhuntonio]

If you are walking a beach thinking of finding a shell with a very specific and rare shape that feats your needs to acomodate lets say a iphone and after 50 years of searching you finally found one,would you think someone tunned(shapped) that shell for you because it was impossible for it to be that exact shape only by chance?I wouldnt,with undefined multiple tries from mother nature and an infinit amount of time eventually one shell had to come up to my needs.

[@P.H.888]

Doh 🥴

[@onserfdez7958]

Is all 'evidence' observable?

[@mompm]

@GundamizerFreedom you were going so well, you used logic, common sense and made an educated argument- then you started in with the lake of fire and Satan stuff- all stuff of fiction and fools not hypotheses, proving and observation

[@ivlfounder]

@mechanicmike69 Yet you attack the sexuality of McGrath who is married to Joanna Collicutt McGrath? Yeah right.

[@onserfdez7958]

Life. Infinity. Hope. Love. A woodpecker's tongue. A giraffe's blood supply. The concept and reality of blood clotting. The fine tuning of EVERYTHING! Just amazing.