Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 159
  1. #1
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Nexus
    that is one of the shortest and most accurate things I have ever read
    No it's not, it's just revisionist crap. Read the article I linked to. Not too long afterwards, the Church taught Copernican astronomy to the Chinese, and allowed their own cathedrals to be used as giant sundials (meridiane). See John Heilbron's book, The Sun in the Church: Cathedrals as Solar Observatories, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  2. #2
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    No it's not, it's just revisionist crap. Read the article I linked to.
    Actually the article you liked to is more accurately described as revisionist swill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Not too long afterwards, the Church taught Copernican astronomy to the Chinese, and allowed their own cathedrals to be used as giant sundials (meridiane).
    That is because Galileo was undeniably right and there were elements within the church which were pro-Copernican, notably the Jesuits. However what you cannot deny is that the church which directly persecuted Galileo. No amount of spin doctoring can change the facts that it was the church that threatened torture, placed under arrest and had his works placed on the ILP.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Actually the article you liked to is more accurately described as revisionist swill.
    I.e. Rincy can't refute the clear historical documentation that the Church was more sympathetic to Galileo than the scientific establishment of its day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    That is because Galileo was undeniably right and there were elements within the church which were pro-Copernican, notably the Jesuits. However what you cannot deny is that the church which directly persecuted Galileo.
    Only because they did what you advise today: kowtowed to the scientific establishment, which taught errant Aristotelian science and absolute geocentrism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    No amount of spin doctoring can change the facts that it was the church that threatened torture, placed under arrest and had his works placed on the ILP.
    No amount of real historical research by people like Heilbron, Drake and Schirrmacher can shake Rincy from his faith that the Galileo affair was a classic "science v religion" battle, when it was actually a science v science battle.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  4. #4
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    I.e. Rincy can't refute the clear historical documentation that the Church was more sympathetic to Galileo than the scientific establishment of its day.
    Yeah so sympathetic in fact that they threatened him with torture, locked him up and banned his book.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Only because they did what you advise today: kowtowed to the scientific establishment, which taught errant Aristotelian science and absolute geocentrism.
    Whether they did that or not, they certainly vigorously sought to censure him through their arm of enforcing religious orthodoxy: The Inquisition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    No amount of real historical research by people like Heilbron, Drake and Schirrmacher can shake Rincy from his faith that the Galileo affair was a classic "science v religion" battle, when it was actually a science v science battle.
    Not at all I have a lot of respect for Heilbron and Drake. However IMHO Schirrmacher is a no talent hack. That is, only slightly better than you.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  5. #5
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Yeah so sympathetic in fact that they threatened him with torture, locked him up and banned his book.
    A lot of that was politics since Galileo insulted the Pope who was a former close friend. Some Western countries lock people up today for saying the wrong things despite not advocating violence in any way, e.g. the Homonazi law in Sweden that resulted in a pastor being jailed for preaching about the wrongness of homosexual behaviour. Campus speech codes are not too different in principle either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Whether they did that or not, they certainly vigorously sought to censure him through their arm of enforcing religious orthodoxy: The Inquisition.
    Another thing atheopaths love to exaggerate, although only about 2000 people were killed over three centuries, compared with the millions by atheistic regimes last century. It's common for both lefties and atheopaths (often but not always the same thing) to single out certain cultures or religions for severe shortcomings common to most of the human race.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Not at all I have a lot of respect for Heilbron and Drake.
    Right, and both reject the usual "science v religion" revisionism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    However IMHO Schirrmacher is a no talent hack.
    As if you'd know, and you have yet to refute him. It should be a lesson that the church should not try to twist the Bible to fit the science of its day, whether Aristotelianism or evolutionism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    That is, only slightly better than you.
    Not that you're in much position to judge, as a totally unobjective atheopath.
    Last edited by Capablanca-Fan; 19-12-2008 at 02:56 PM.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  6. #6
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    494
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Another thing atheopaths love to exaggerate, although only about 2000 people were killed over three centuries
    An execution every two months for heresy. You're good value, Jono.

  7. #7
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,508

    Lightbulb Inquisition: myth v fact

    Quote Originally Posted by pappubahry
    An execution every two months for heresy. You're good value, Jono.
    As opposed to christophobic regimes like the French Revolution, Nazi Germany, and the Communists killing thousands per day. Note that the left's favorite religion, Islam, on 11-9 killed more people than in the Inquisition's three centuries.

    Also, secular "justice" was even worse than the Inquistions, and the secular prisons were also worse, so much that a monk in a secular prison uttered a heresy so he would be sent to the relatively cushy inquisition prison.

    The cited article, relying on historian Henry Kamen's The Spanish Inquisition, points out:

    Statistically, over the life of the Spanish Inquisition and in spite of spurts of major use, torture was "used infrequently" [K188] and only in cases of heresy [K189]; despite possible claims of Skeptics, there was not enough sophistication in the Inquisitors to use torture for the purpose of brainwashing. "A comparison with the cruelty and mutilation common in secular tribunals shows the Inquisition in a relatively favourable light. This in conjunction with the usually good level of prison conditions makes it clear that the tribunal had little interest in cruelty and often attempted to temper justice with mercy." [K192] One may as well credit Christianity for making the Inquisition less severe than it would have been had it been conducted by secular authorities addressing the same social fears and concerns! Prison sentences were often not literally observed; a "life sentence" could amount to only 10 years of incarceration [K201] and the term could be served at home, in a monastery, or in a hospital when prison space was limited. Kamen also notes that (despite Skeptical desires to see every Spaniard as cowering in fear awaiting a knock at the door from Torquemada himself!) that "over long periods of time and substantial areas of the country, [the Inquisition] quite simply did nothing." [! - K82] "In many Christian communities throughout Spain where internal discord was low and public solidarity high, fear of the Inquisition was virtually absent." A priest in Urgell, Spain in 1632 said that "he didn't recognise the Inquisition and didn't give a fig for it" -- and the Inquisition was "unable to take any action against him, nor indeed was it able to impose its authority on the people of that diocese." Resistance was not a matter of fighting off the Pope's armies, but of public cooperation: "Because the information available to inquisitors came not from their own investigations but almost exclusively from members of the public, it was in effect the public that dictated the forms of inquisatorial justice....where [ordinary people] refused to cooperate the tribunal was impotent and incapable of inspiring fear." [K178-9]

    So, in conclusion: Blame Christianity for the Inquisition? Hardly. Blame human nature, yet again, which humanists are so proud of, and blame also a propaganda machine that was so effective that "even today it is difficult to separate fact from fiction." [K305]
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  8. #8
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    A lot of that was politics since Galileo insulted the Pope who was a former close friend. Some Western countries lock people up today for saying the wrong things despite not advocating violence in any way, e.g. the Homonazi law in Sweden that resulted in a pastor being jailed for preaching about the wrongness of homosexual behaviour. Campus speech codes are not too different in principle either.
    I've posted the charges that the church laid at Galileo which were

    Whereas you, Galileo, son of the late Vincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, were in the year 1615 denounced to this Holy Office for holding as true the false doctrine taught by many, that the sun is the centre of the world and immovable, and that the earth moves, and also with a diurnal motion; for having disciples to whom you taught the same doctrine; for holding correspondence with certain mathematicians of Germany concerning the same; for having printed certain letters, entitled “On the Solar Spots,” wherein you developed the same doctrine as true; and for replying to the objections from the Holy Scriptures, which from time to time were urged against it, by glossing the said Scriptures according to your own meaning: and whereas there was thereupon produced the copy of a document in the form of a letter, purporting to be written by you to one formerly your disciple, and in this diverse propositions are set forth, following the hypothesis of Copernicus, which are contrary to the true sense and authority of Holy Scripture:




    Which confirms that the teaching of the Copernican system was widespread (which denies your position that it was resisted in academia) and that the church was mostly convinced of the system, when in 1633 they said explicitly it was against Holy Scripture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Another thing atheopaths love to exaggerate, although only about 2000 people were killed over three centuries, compared with the millions by atheistic regimes last century.
    As previously pointed out an execution every two month plus more besides who were tortured and recanted, just for religious unorthodoxy. You're right it's a storm in a tea cup and I can't see what Galileo was so worried about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Right, and both reject the usual "science v religion" revisionism.
    They may present cases in a restricted sense. However, it is not their work at issue here. It is the crappy little hack piece you linked to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    As if you'd know, and you have yet to refute him. It should be a lesson that the church should not try to twist the Bible to fit the science of its day, whether Aristotelianism or evolutionism.
    More likely people shouldn't try to use a collection of bronze age myths to understand the natural world.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Not that you're in much position to judge, as a totally unobjective atheopath.
    It is easy to see his quality by looking at his advertising.

    Schirrmacher studied theology from 1978 to 1982 at STH Basel and since 1983 Cultural Anthropology and Comparative Religions at Bonn State University.

    Studied but no mention of qualification...

    He earned a Drs. theol. in Missiology and Ecumenics at Theological University (Kampen/Netherlands) in 1984,

    This might qualify him to preach in a certain protestant churches but that is about it. I note too that in 1984 It was not called Theological University. It was called Theological College ("Theologische Hogeschool") until 1986.

    and a Dr. theol. in Missiology and Ecumenics at Johannes Calvin Foundation (Kampen/Netherlands) in 1985,

    and again some more general preaching qualifications.

    a Ph.D. in Cultural Anthropology at Pacific Western University in Los Angeles (CA) in 1989

    Pacific Western University is an non-accredited institution which is general regarded as a disreputable degree mill and it surprises me that anyone would list this on their CV. I also suspect this is Shirrmacher's claim to the prenominal of Doctor flows from this non-qualification.

    and a Th.D. in Ethics at Whitefield Theological Seminary in Lakeland (FL) in 1996.

    Another preaching degree.

    In 1997 he got a honorary doctorate (D.D.) from Cranmer Theological House.

    And an honourary preaching doctorate.

    In summary even though he seems to have spent 20 years studying all he is qualified to do is be a protestant minister.

    Now how about his other claims to fame...

    He is listed in Marquis' Who's Who in the World,

    Vanity press also known as The Hall of Lame. And it only goes downhill from there...

    Dictionary of International Biography, International Who is Who of Professionals, EU-Who is Who, Who is Who in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 2000 Outstanding People of the 21st Century, 2000 Outstanding Intellectuals of the 21st Century, International Who's Who in Distance Learning,

    More random vanity press publications even less recognised than the first listed Hall of Lame.

    Kürschners Deutscher Sachbuch-Kalender.

    ???

    So in short he has tried to exaggerate by using an anachronistic name of one institution (from College to University) and he also sports a doctorate from the unaccredited (and disreputable) PWU. He also boasts inclusion in several vanity press publications as if they are genuine accomplishments.

    Shirrmacher in nothing more than a village minister who seems to want to be an academic but lacks any credible academic qualifications.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  9. #9
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    I've posted the charges that the church laid at Galileo which were
    And I've pointed out that Heilbron wrote:

    ‘Galileo’s heresy, according to the standard distinction used by the Holy Office, was “inquisitorial” rather than “theological”. This distinction allowed it to proceed against people for disobeying orders or creating scandals, although neither offence violated an article defined and promulgated by a pope or general council. … Since, however, the church had never declared that the Biblical passages implying a moving sun had to be interpreted in favour of a Ptolemaic universe as an article of faith, optimistic commentators … could understand “formally heretical” to mean “provisionally not accepted”.’

    Heilbron supports this simply by documenting the general reactions by Galileo’s contemporaries and later astronomers, who:
    ‘appreciated that the reference to heresy in connection with Galileo or Copernicus had no general or theological significance’.

    Galileo also made a mistake of ignoring Kepler, as Arthur Koestler writes in The Sleepwalkers:

    ‘Judging by Galileo’s correspondence and other records of his opinion of himself he was fantastically selfish intellectually and almost unbelievably conceited. As an illustration of the former there is the now well-known fact that he refused to share with his colleagues or with acquaintances [such] as Kepler any of his own findings or insights; he actually claimed to be the only one who ever would make any new discovery! In writing to an acquaintance he expressed himself as follows: “You cannot help it, Mr. Sarsi, that it was granted to me alone to discover all the new phenomena in the sky and nothing to anybody else. This is the truth which neither malice nor envy can suppress”.’
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  10. #10
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,508
    Kepler, a devout Lutheran, saw no conflict between the Bible and Lutheran theology. He showed how Joshua 10:12 could be explained as phenomenological language, using Luther’s own principles of Biblical interpretation!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Which confirms that the teaching of the Copernican system was widespread (which denies your position that it was resisted in academia)
    It was taught by Jesuits, but resisted by the Aristotelians at the universities. Koestler writes:

    But there existed a powerful body of men whose hostility to Galileo never abated: the Aristotelians at the Universities … . Innovation is a twofold threat to academic mediocrities: it endangers their oracular authority, and it evokes the deeper fear that their whole laboriously constructed edifice might collapse. The academic backwoods-men have been the curse of genius … it was this threat—not Bishop Dantiscus or Pope Paul III—which had cowed Canon Koppernigk [i.e., Copernicus] into silence … .

    The first serious attack on religious grounds came also not from clerical quarters, but from a layman—none other than delle Colombe, the leader of the [ardent Aristotelian] league … .

    The earthly nature of the moon, the existence of sunspots meant the abandonment of the [pagan!] Aristotelian doctrines on the perfect and unchangeable nature of the celestial spheres.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    and that the church was mostly convinced of the system, when in 1633 they said explicitly it was against Holy Scripture.
    Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and Newton disagreed that it was against Scripture. They were all young-earth creationists. The church made the mistake of following the lead of the Aristotelians who convinced them that their cosmology was taught by Scripture.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  11. #11
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Schirrmacher studied theology from 1978 to 1982 at STH Basel and since 1983 Cultural Anthropology and Comparative Religions at Bonn State University.

    Studied but no mention of qualification...
    More of Rincy's low-context mind. Was there any need to mention them, given that they are prerequisites for doctoral studies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    I note too that in 1984 It was not called Theological University. It was called Theological College ("Theologische Hogeschool") until 1986.
    So what? QUT used to be called QIT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    and a Dr. theol. in Missiology and Ecumenics at Johannes Calvin Foundation (Kampen/Netherlands) in 1985,

    and again some more general preaching qualifications.
    Most likely church history as well in "ecumenics".

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    a Ph.D. in Cultural Anthropology at Pacific Western University in Los Angeles (CA) in 1989

    Pacific Western University is an non-accredited institution which is general regarded as a disreputable degree mill and it surprises me that anyone would list this on their CV.
    Me too, but that is hardly his only doctorate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    I also suspect this is Shirrmacher's claim to the prenominal of Doctor flows from this non-qualification.
    Crap; the Dr comes from the Th.D. and Dr. Theol.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    and a Th.D. in Ethics at Whitefield Theological Seminary in Lakeland (FL) in 1996.

    Another preaching degree.
    A genuine doctorate in ethics. A preaching degree would be called homiletics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    In summary even though he seems to have spent 20 years studying all he is qualified to do is be a protestant minister.
    He is rector of Martin Bucer Seminary in Bonn.

    [QUOTE=Rincewind]More random vanity press publications even less recognised than the first listed Hall of Lame.
    Sure, but lots of better known people seem to like being in these things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    So in short he has tried to exaggerate by using an anachronistic name of one institution (from College to University) and he also sports a doctorate from the unaccredited (and disreputable) PWU. He also boasts inclusion in several vanity press publications as if they are genuine accomplishments.
    In a fuller biography it's not too unreasonable. But they weren't mentioned in his bio at the bottom of his Galileo article.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Shirrmacher in nothing more than a village minister who seems to want to be an academic but lacks any credible academic qualifications.
    More crap. He is clearly widely studied in church history and ethics, and one doesn't become a seminary rector with bogus qualifications.

    So will Rincy finally play the board rather than the man (would make a change from his usual atheopathic tactic) and deal with the evidence in the article, regardless of how it upset the atheistic "science v religion" myth he loves?
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  12. #12
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    And I've pointed out that Heilbron wrote:

    ‘... Since, however, the church had never declared that the Biblical passages implying a moving sun had to be interpreted in favour of a Ptolemaic universe as an article of faith, optimistic commentators … could understand “formally heretical” to mean “provisionally not accepted”.’
    That misses the point that in the 1633 charge personally addressed to Galileo the charge was specifically...

    ...following the hypothesis of Copernicus, which are contrary to the true sense and authority of Holy Scripture

    This sent a clear message to everyone that although not a Papal edict heliocentrism was sufficient charge for the Inquisition to come pay a visit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Heilbron supports this simply by documenting the general reactions by Galileo’s contemporaries and later astronomers, who:
    ‘appreciated that the reference to heresy in connection with Galileo or Copernicus had no general or theological significance’.
    It certainly was of specific theological significance as far as Galileo was concerned as evidenced by the charge in the 1633 letter from the Pope.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  13. #13
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Kepler, a devout Lutheran, saw no conflict between the Bible and Lutheran theology. He showed how Joshua 10:12 could be explained as phenomenological language, using Luther’s own principles of Biblical interpretation!
    That's ironic since Luther himself said...

    "People gave ear to an upstart astrologer who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth."

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    It was taught by Jesuits, but resisted by the Aristotelians at the universities. Koestler writes:

    But there existed a powerful body of men whose hostility to Galileo never abated: the Aristotelians at the Universities … . Innovation is a twofold threat to academic mediocrities: it endangers their oracular authority, and it evokes the deeper fear that their whole laboriously constructed edifice might collapse. The academic backwoods-men have been the curse of genius … it was this threat—not Bishop Dantiscus or Pope Paul III—which had cowed Canon Koppernigk [i.e., Copernicus] into silence … .

    The first serious attack on religious grounds came also not from clerical quarters, but from a layman—none other than delle Colombe, the leader of the [ardent Aristotelian] league … .

    The earthly nature of the moon, the existence of sunspots meant the abandonment of the [pagan!] Aristotelian doctrines on the perfect and unchangeable nature of the celestial spheres.
    I don;t believ it. You're actually quoting Koestler at me!!! And you call me a post modernist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and Newton disagreed that it was against Scripture. They were all young-earth creationists. The church made the mistake of following the lead of the Aristotelians who convinced them that their cosmology was taught by Scripture.
    Yep, Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and Newton were academics. You need to find churchmen who thought it wasn't. Don't try and change horses mid-stream.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  14. #14
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    That's ironic since Luther himself said...

    "People gave ear to an upstart astrologer who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth."
    Luther’s only recorded comment on the issue is the above single off-hand remark (hardly a concerted campaign), during a ‘table talk’ in 1539 (four years before the publication of Copernicus’ book). The Table Talk was based on notes taken by Luther’s students, which were later compiled and published in 1566―twenty years after Luther’s death.

    But the words I've bolded show that a major reason for Luther’s objection was Copernicus’ challenging the establishment and common sense for its own sake (as Luther saw it). At the time, there was no hard evidence for geokineticism. And Kepler, a devout Lutheran, saw no conflict between the Bible and Lutheran theology. He showed how Joshua 10:12 could be explained as phenomenological language, using Luther’s own principles of Biblical interpretation!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    I don;t believ it. You're actually quoting Koestler at me!!! And you call me a post modernist.
    So do you have any arguments against his arguments here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    Yep, Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and Newton were academics. You need to find churchmen who thought it wasn't. Don't try and change horses mid-stream.
    What are you on about? The opposition to geokineticism first came from the Aristotelians at the universities. Contrast this with Cardinal Bellarmine who said it was ‘excellent good sense’ to claim that Galileo’s model was mathematically simpler. And he said:

    If there were a real proof that the Sun is in the centre of the universe, that the Earth is in the third sphere, and that the Sun does not go round the Earth but the Earth round the Sun, then we should have to proceed with great circumspection in explaining passages of Scripture which appear to teach the contrary, and we should rather have to say that we did not understand them than declare an opinion false which has been proved to be true. But I do not think there is any such proof since none has been shown to me.
    Galileo's own arrogance was his downfall here, rejecting Kepler's ideas and proposing a "proof" in the tides that was nonsense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind
    It certainly was of specific theological significance as far as Galileo was concerned as evidenced by the charge in the 1633 letter from the Pope.
    Argue with Heilbron then. The letter from the Pope, Galileo's former close friend, is a matter of personal politics not church dogma.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  15. #15
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,234
    I was quite disappointed when seeing "the opera Galileo" or some story about him at the Opera House that only used the texts of the threats made by the Church about him - about showing him the tools. At least they could have used shadows of Inquisition torture instruments if not replicas or a few good screams that opera is all about and famous for, and not for much else mind you.

    I felt like GW Bush and yelling out "Bring it on!"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Does God Exist?
    By Paul S in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 5602
    Last Post: 18-07-2018, 09:19 PM
  2. Replies: 242
    Last Post: 08-03-2017, 10:16 PM
  3. Galileo fan club (Mr.G)
    By Sinister in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 27-11-2008, 04:11 PM
  4. picking your nose
    By chesslover in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-04-2004, 10:44 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •