Rev. David Rives Quotes Galileo

The Retard-o-tron™ seized control of our computer and locked it onto the latest video by the brilliant and articulate leader of David Rives Ministries. The video appears at the website of WorldNetDaily (WND).

WND’s headline is Greatest minds in science once founded on God. What an attention-grabber! This is the stuff that keeps us returning to WND, day after day. They never disappoint.

The video’s title is Foundations of Science. It’s terrific! In a little over two wonderful, fact-filled minutes, the rev explains that belief in God was the original source of all science. Well, of course! How could it be otherwise?

The rev tells us that the great astronomer Johannes Kepler was a believer, and Galileo admired him. Stephen Hawking (an atheist!) respects Galileo. The rev then gives us this quote from Galileo: “It was well said that … the Holy Scripture can not err, and that the decrees contained therein are absolutely true.”

We have total confidence in the rev, but we nevertheless had to check that quote. Yes, it’s real — somewhat. Galileo wrote it in 1613 in a Letter to Benedetto Castelli. The full sentence was:

In regard to the first general point of the Most Serene Ladyship, it seems to me very prudent of her to propose and of you to concede and to agree that the Holy Scripture can never lie or err, and that its declarations are absolutely and inviolably true.

But immediately thereafter, starting with the very next sentence, he wrote:

I should have added only that, through the Scripture cannot err, nevertheless some of its interpreters and expositors can sometimes err in various ways. One of these would be very serious and very frequent, namely to want to limit oneself always to the literal meaning of the words … .

Thus, given that in many places the Scripture is not only capable but necessarily in need of interpretations different from the apparent meaning of the words, it seems to me that in disputes about natural phenomena it should be reserved to the last place.

In any other situation like this, we would conclude that we were being flim-flammed by a sleazy quote-mining dirt-bag. But that can’t be true here. We assume that the rev, being a most holy man, has his reasons for omitting the full context of his Galileo quote, and for not mentioning Galileo’s problems with the Inquisition. Our confidence in the rev is unshaken.

So click over to WND and take a look. You’ll find it a thrilling spiritual experience.

As we usually do with the rev’s videos, we dedicate the comments section for your use as an Intellectual Free Fire Zone. You know the rules. Go to it.

Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

13 responses to “Rev. David Rives Quotes Galileo

  1. Eddie Janssen

    It seems he does accept scientific knowledge anno 1615. We can only hope evolution and Big Bang will follow around 2300 AD when he will be (presumably) in heaven.
    By the way, he is not (yet) included in the Encyclopedia of American Loons.

  2. Alex Shuffell

    Galileo and Kepler both thought that the sun was at the centre of the universe. I wonder if Rives thinks this way too.

  3. Man. I get laid up for a few weeks and I come back to the rev without a tie! I’m sure Ken Ham is furious.

  4. “the Holy Scripture can not err, and that the decrees contained therein are absolutely true.”
    Guess what? All the critics of Galilei (yes, you Americans, he had a surname just like Barack) said the same, including Cardinal Sfondrati of the first Galilei affair of 1615.

  5. After more than three hours on the phone with AT&T, I think my email address should be working again. I was able to send an email to myself. It may take longer, as they say, for the correction to propagate through the internet.

  6. Doctor Stochastic

    Actually, Galileo (son of the famous musician) made a statement about the style, not the content of scripture.

  7. Charles Deetz ;)

    It appears that the rev. uses the same infallible technique that he uses to read the bible … selectively.

  8. So Galileo and many other scientist of the day swear they are xtian and believe!!!
    Anyone familiar with that time period knows what they did to those who stated that Cheeses was a fraud. They had these very pretty hanging poles that where used to warm their feet. You bet they believed, I would have too. But that still does not change the fact that Revis is a thrower of high grade BS.

  9. Galileo essentially lived in a theocratic police state, who knows what he believed? Heresy was a capital crime. David, if you have to go back 400 years to find a sincere Christian scientist, that in itself should tell you something. Incidentally, the quote from Galileo could in fact be used to bolster that the Bible is pro-evolution. Consider an omnipotent creator doesn’t need 6 days (no matter how long they are) to do anything. The Bible could be read as a prescientific metaphor for evolution. Sure most of the details are completely wrong but the essential quality of evolution as a progression of different types of animals culminating with man are all there.

  10. Troy: “…the essential quality of evolution as a progression of different types of animals culminating with man are all there.”

    A not-so-minor quibble — it’s very self-centered of us to think that we humans are the culmination. Every species of life now in existence is the culmination of its own heritage, in that it is the best adaptation so far to its own particular niche.

    Just because we are the only species to have developed technology does not mean we are the culmination. Think of all the species out there that can do certain things better than any human. For instance, we can’t fly or dive deep into the ocean without mechanical assistance, and we can’t outlive tortoises even with mechanical help. We can’t make our own food like plants can, an eagle’s sight is better than ours, dogs’ sense of smell is way better than ours (even if they don’t smell too good), and as much as we may want to, we’ll never be able to match rabbits when it comes to reproduction. The list is endless.

  11. That’s a good point RSG and I am completely aware of it. I was doing a bit of slumming trying to elucidate in the Biblical context, which clearly has man as the pinnacle of creation. I was more interested in quelling David Rives’ logic cascade rather than endorsing Genesis even as a metaphor.
    That said humans do have a unique skill set with the combination of opposable thumbs, reflective thought, written and spoken communication. On the whole it will most likely lead to our destruction, but there is the glimmer of hope that it could lead us off the Earth entirely into new ecological niches never imagined. This could then lead to possible allopatric speciation into several humanoid species. (Sci-fi writers take notice!)

  12. @Troy — After re-reading my post, I apologize if it seemed I was jumping down your throat. I see now where you were coming from re: elucidating in the biblical context.

    There is one overarching superiority we humans have — we are the only species that can prevent our own extinction from being caused by earth history’s main mass exterminator — cosmic impact. And the more that public policy is informed by Young Earth Creationism, the more likely that advantage will be negated.

    IMO, humble or not, that’s a big reason we should be ardent in our efforts to combat creationist thinking.

    We have only very recently put two and two together to make the connection between between evidence of mass extinctions revealed by paleontology and large meteor/asteroid/comet impacts discovered by astronomy and geology. Only by accepting the idea of natural causes vs. acts of god do we realize these past occurrences are likely to repeat.

  13. Well put. Having the ability to move asteroids is an awesome power. Obvious to rational people it would seem a powerful tool to move asteroids away from Earth saving countless registered voters. Of course moving a harmless asteroid into a collision course is also possible. With enough religious nuts running around and even achieving the highest echelons of power it is a bit sobering that I’d almost prefer to take my odds on a 1 in 50 million year event vs at some point someone of the Jim Jones ilk forces Earth to drink the Kool aid.