Changes

:::: Okay, so by Catholicism's definition, he is a heretic.  I'd go along with that.  He didn't say that he believes "science is not in the Bible" (whatever that means), but that it ''contains'' scientific ''inaccuracies''.  That is, he believes that the Bible is ''inaccurate'' on some points.  Which means that ''he doesn't believe those points''.  Apart from denying that he said what he's reported to have said, nothing you've said refutes that.  And by the way (referring to your last edit comment), you are not in a position to be giving me orders.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:42, 11 September 2008 (EDT)

:::: Okay, so by Catholicism's definition, he is a heretic.  I'd go along with that.  He didn't say that he believes "science is not in the Bible" (whatever that means), but that it ''contains'' scientific ''inaccuracies''.  That is, he believes that the Bible is ''inaccurate'' on some points.  Which means that ''he doesn't believe those points''.  Apart from denying that he said what he's reported to have said, nothing you've said refutes that.  And by the way (referring to your last edit comment), you are not in a position to be giving me orders.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:42, 11 September 2008 (EDT)

:::: Don't you get it? You are offending me and my religion.  MY Pope doesn't surround himself with people that feel the Bible is inaccurate or believe in some of what the Bible says. You are misinterpreting what the Rev. says.  There is not an exact line where he says the Bible is inaccurate. How can you say that if he believe there is no science in the Bible a contradiction? You are looking from the outside-in and you think you have the correct answer. Maybe it is the other way around '''basing his views on the Bible rather than on secular science.''' He is saying God can do anything, this includes make ET's. He is putting God above science, not making any exceptions. -- [[Image:50 star flag.png|14px]] [[User:Jpatt|jp]] 22:50, 11 September 2008 (EDT)

:::::: How am I offending you and your religion?  I'm not having a go at you, nor at your religion.  My only criticism is of Funes.  As for whether the Pope doesn't surround himself with such people, it seems that he ''does'' (although of course I'm generalising from a few examples).  How am I misinterpreting?  The "exact line" in the report was "...the Bible should not be held to account for its lack of scientific accuracy".  That is, he is ''clearly'' saying that the Bible has a lack of scientific ''accuracy''.  That is, he is clearly saying that the Bible has scientific ''inaccuracies''. That is, he is clearly saying that the Bible has ''inaccuracies'' (qualifying them as a ''scientific'' inaccuracies doesn't mean that they are no longer inaccuracies).  So where the Bible says one thing and "science" says something different, he considers the Bible to be the one that's inaccurate, and therefore the one that he doesn't believe.

:::::: "''How can you say that if he believe there is no science in the Bible a contradiction?''":  Sorry, but that's not even a proper sentence, so it's hard for me to be sure what you are asking.  But to answer what you ''might'' be asking, he said that there was a lack of accuracy in the Bible's science; he didn't say that there was no science in the Bible.

:::::: When he says that the Bible has scientific inaccuracies, and he believes the science rather than the Bible, then he is clearly ''not'' basing his views on the Bible rather than science. And by the way, the question is not whether God ''can'' do anything.  The question is what God ''did'', and what He ''said'' He did.  That is, God ''could'' have made ETs. But this is contrary to what God said he ''did''.

:::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:32, 12 September 2008 (EDT)