Posted on 04/15/2017 8:48:53 AM PDT by Kaslin
“Your argument seems to be that Descartes was persecuted by the Church, therefore he was not a product of Christian culture and cannot be said to have been produced by Christian culture.”
The author premises that the Christian Doctrine is what promoted our science. He then lists first Descartes as an example.
WTH! Descartes was the antithesis of the Christian Doctrine that banned his works!
“This article is complete and utter garbage designed to make Christians feel good about themselves.”
Poster should have put it under religion.
Fear of persecution by the Christian church is always remediable by finding refuge in the Christian God.
“That is the counter argument. Science sprang from Christianity, and not from other religions. The persecutions of the Church were relatively feeble attempts that did not stop the development of science.”
Burning people at the stake is a feeble attempt?
“In fact, the Church did numerous things to promote science. The pope funded Galileo, as noted above, as it did many early scientists.”
In 1979 the church set up an academy to investigate Galileo. After 12 years of study they finally concluded that Galileo was right and the Church was wrong!
“Fear of persecution by the Christian church is always remediable by finding refuge in the Christian God.”
?
That is all I am saying.
“Because their basic philosophies were not compatible with scientific inquiry and the search for truth.”
“Bruno’s pantheism was also a matter of grave concern.[4] The Inquisition found him guilty, and he was burned at the stake in Rome’s Campo de’ Fiori in 1600.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno
It's hard to publish under those conditions. He was ill, not dead.
afraid of the Christian Church
Not sure what that means. It was a novel theory. Not just the Church found it extraordinary, but everyone--starting with other scientists. But as I say, the Pope of that time was very interested in his work, and his own bishop insisted he publish everything he had.
Galileo showed that the planets orbited the sun by documenting the phases of Venus
. . . but nothing could be proven because there were no telescopes with fine enough resolution until the 19th century. Showing isn't proving.
LOL!
? Not sure what you mean.
” But as I say, the Pope of that time was very interested in his work, and his own bishop insisted he publish everything he had.”
Actually no.
“? Not sure what you mean.”
You don’t understand what it means when someone laughs at you?
“but nothing could be proven because there were no telescopes with fine enough resolution until the 19th century. Showing isn’t proving. “
OK. Galileo showed that Venus did not orbit the earth proving that the earth was not the center of the universe ...
The author premises that the Christian Doctrine is what promoted our science. He then lists first Descartes as an example.
They are:
Linear time and a non-cyclical view of the universe.
A belief that the world follows specific, rational, rules
In addition, Christianity believed in truth, and that studying nature was another way to discover truth.
You are not addressing the claims of the author.
“You are not addressing the claims of the author.”
I am addressing his use of Descartes as an example of his misunderstanding history.
“Linear time and a non-cyclical view of the universe.”
Which may be proven to be wrong.
Oh, I do.
Open a book, or go online. Look up "Copernicus." I gather you can read, so take it from there.
Then get back to me and tell me about Copernicus and why he published his theories of planetary motion. I'll be here.
“Open a book, or go online. Look up “Copernicus.” I gather you can read, so take it from there.
Then get back to me and tell me about Copernicus and why he published his theories of planetary motion.”
If he had the support of the church, then why was it banned by the church?
In 1539 Georg Joachim Rheticus, a young mathematician from Wittenberg, arrived in Frauenburg (Frombork) to study with him. Rheticus read Copernicus’ manuscript and immediately wrote a non-technical summary of its main theories in the form of an open letter addressed to Schöner, his astrology teacher in Nürnberg; he published this letter as the Narratio Prima in Danzig in 1540. Rheticus’ friend and mentor Achilles Gasser published a second edition of the Narratio in Basel in 1541. Due to its friendly reception, Copernicus finally agreed to publication of more of his main work—in 1542, a treatise on trigonometry, which was taken from the second book of the still unpublished De revolutionibus. Rheticus published it in Copernicus’ name.
Under strong pressure from Rheticus, and having seen that the first general reception of his work had not been unfavorable, Copernicus finally agreed to give the book to his close friend, Bishop Tiedemann Giese, to be delivered to Rheticus in Wittenberg for printing by Johannes Petreius at Nürnberg (Nuremberg). It was published just before Copernicus’ death, in 1543.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_revolutionibus_orbium_coelestium
“In addition, Christianity believed in truth, “
Then why did they burn people at the stake for exposing new ideas?
“In addition, Christianity believed in truth, “
Then why did they burn people at the stake for exposing new ideas?
Straw man argument. Believing in truth as a concept is separate from penalties for “exposing new ideas”.
Yes, Bruno was burned at the stake. He was also shielded and protected by protestant Christians and Henry III. He was arrested after he returned to Italy, and executed seven years later.
It is not hard to find examples of injustice. It is hard to find examples of other civilizations that believed in a rational universe, the existence of truth, and linear time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.