Originally posted by Tassman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Rush Limbaugh: Hurricanes are a liberal conspiracy for promoting climate change
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postso? your claim was that it was a religious view. It was a scientific view that as you said everyone believed. same as heliocentricity is today."Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postyes. your argument was stupid.
It would be interesting if you could prove him wrong."Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostHe was pointing to a fact: "It is a fact the Martin Luther and many if not most Christians believed it, as well as a literal Genesis Creation relying on the testimony of the Church Fathers."
It would be interesting if you could prove him wrong.
let me summarise:
Tassman said people should not question the scientific consensus on AGW.
I said that I guess copernicus should not have questioned the scientific consensus of his day: geocentrism.
Tassman claimed it wasnt a scientific view but a religious view
I said it was a scientific view started long before Christianity by Greek astronomers
Shuny said that it was religious because Christians like Martin Luther believed it.
I said that means that heliocentrism must be a religious view then because Christians believe it today.
Now you are all caught up. You're welcome.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postit would be interesting if you actually followed the conversation from the beginning instead of jumping in the middle and sticking your nose in with out of context comments.
let me summarise:
Tassman said people should not question the scientific consensus on AGW.
I said that I guess copernicus should not have questioned the scientific consensus of his day: geocentrism.
Tassman claimed it wasnt a scientific view but a religious view
I said it was a scientific view started long before Christianity by Greek astronomers
Shuny said that it was religious because Christians like Martin Luther believed it.
I said that means that heliocentrism must be a religious view then because Christians believe it today.
Now you are all caught up. You're welcome.
What Shunny pointed to was the well known fact that many people held and defended the view based on the testimony of the Church Fathers. He did not claim that the view in itself in all understandings of it would have to be religious but pointed to a fact that you are yet to adress, namely that many people held to this view and defended it because of the testimony of the Church Fathers.Last edited by Charles; 09-23-2017, 01:01 PM."Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostYou still haven't read the article, have you?
"...the Galileo affair was mainly an intra-Catholic and intra-ltalian problem, and not a gigantic battle between Christianity as such and science as such. The Court of Inquisition did not accuse Galileo of teaching against the Bible, but of disobeying a papal decree ... The pope initiated the trial for personal reasons, while the Inquisitors were quite lax. Some of the ten judges seem to have been mainly interested in their own forthcoming, while others applied the brakes. In the end, the final decision lacked three signatures, at least two of them out of protest. The only cardinal who zealously pushed the trial forward was the pope’s brother ... There is little doubt that the decision to instigate proceedings was Urban VIII’s, who felt that Galileo had played a confidence trick on him."
https://answersingenesis.org/creatio...c-hagiography/
As much as a simpleton like you wants to believe it, this wasn't a war of science versus religion. On the contrary, "One must not forget that the Copernican hypothesis itself was never denied by the Inquisition, but only that it was not allowed to be presented as a scientifically proven theory or as a truth," which was a perfectly sensible position to take at the time.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThats what we would call "fake news" today MM. Answersingenesis is an apologetics site, in other words its a christian spin machine.
I'll not bother waiting for your buddy Starlight to call out your snarky one-liner.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
AGW is not like the belief in heliocentralism though. The point was at some point people thought this was the case, now we know better. AGW isn't really on the same level as we now know it is the case.
People discuss the specific amount of AGW and it's effects- but not the fact that it's happening. Same with an old earth- the discussion is maybe regarding how old it is exactly, but not that it's old.
The whole thing is a false equivalence, so I don't see the need to discuss what the church fathers thought about it- it's irrelevant.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostHe was pointing to a fact: "It is a fact the Martin Luther and many if not most Christians believed it, as well as a literal Genesis Creation relying on the testimony of the Church Fathers."
It would be interesting if you could prove him wrong.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostThis is what we would call summary dismissal without bothering to actually evaluate. You should be aware that essentially all sources spin to some extent. Even highly biased sources, when the bias is noted, can contain useful information.
I'll not bother waiting for your buddy Starlight to call out your snarky one-liner.
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostLet's pretend you didn't notice my calling out Tassman's "fact"."Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EvoUK View PostI'm sure there's some interesting titbits in AiG, but it's premise in a young earth is obviously false, and has been shown to be false on multiple occasions. Having to go through an re-disprove them is basically a waste. If AiG and it's ilk can't be discounted on the age of the earth, Noah's ark etc, then I don't know what can.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostI did read it. I fail to see how it makes the case that Luther did not hold and defend his view based on his reading of the Bible. The fact that the Bible could be read differently does nothing to prove that wrong.Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom
Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostSurely there are significant aspects of an article on Galileo which are not related to the age of the earth.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostAllow me to quote some lines from the Papal Condemnation (Sentence) of Galileo:
Earlier on it is said in a more simple form:
(Emphasis is mine)
Read the entire text: http://www.famous-trials.com/galileo...2-condemnation
The primary issue was that Galileo was asked to refrain from treating an unproven hypothesis as if it was true. In Galileo's own words, "Lord Cardinal Bellarmine told me that Copernicus's opinion could be held suppositionally, as Copernicus himself had held it."
Then there's the following illustrating just how personal and politically motivated the charges against Galileo really were:
It continues:
Galileo eventually published his book after some political maneuvering; however:
Then the trial began:
So like I've been saying, this wasn't a case of science versus religion but a political exercise by Galileo's enemies. The fact that some of the judges were in favor of the book's continued publication is proof enough of that. The changes they wanted, and which were earlier requested by Urban, were to present the heliocentric hypothesis as more speculative whereas Galileo presented it as a proven theory despite his lack of proofs.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
16 responses
127 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
Today, 11:55 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
53 responses
328 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 11:32 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
112 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
197 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
84 responses
361 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
Today, 11:08 AM
|
Comment