The Reformation and the Church-State divide

[Kenite]

[QUOTE=keith]

Ok. You had me fooled. But you might have been a tester for cough medicine! Stranger things happen.

[spl_cadet]

Below is the list of scientific discoveries made between Constantine and the Reformation.

Just curious: When did the Reformation start and when was the printing press invented?

[Kenite]

Just curious: When did the Reformation start and when was the printing press invented?

http://www.answers.com/

[kommandermatt]

Below is the list of scientific discoveries made between Constantine and the Reformation.






.

Y'know, it takes five seconds to look this up on Google. Less, if you type fast and have the Google toolbar.

Some inventions:
Percussion drilling (by Monks, no less), the heavy plow, the horizontal loom, glass mirrors, modern soap, spectacles, windmills,, the horse collar and whippletree, the compass, astrolabe, and other important tools of navigation which gave Europe the maritime ability to dominate the rest of the world for centuries, cannon, modern paper (this was after China, but independently) the blast furnace, the wheelbarrow and, most important of all, hops brewing.

The printing press was invented in 1450 by a Roman Catholic, and Luther sparked the reformation in 1516. However, this was really just the most sophisticated yet built. The real credit for movable type in the west goes to Muslims in Spain.

[Kenite]

[QUOTE=kommandermatt][QUOTE]

Luther sparked the reformation in 1516.

Garbage. Look up 'Morning Star of the Reformation'.

[kommandermatt]

[QUOTE=Kenite][QUOTE=kommandermatt]

Garbage. Look up 'Morning Star of the Reformation'.

Right, and we know how everything just took off after Wycliffe. Saying the Reformation bagan with Wycliffe is true the way saying the Roman Empire started with Romulus is true: technically but not truly.

I couldn't help but notice that you skirted the meat of my post btw; that's cool though, you scuttle back to the safety of your substance-free one-liners.

[Kenite]

[QUOTE=kommandermatt]

Saying the Reformation bagan with Wycliffe is true the way saying the Roman Empire started with Romulus is true: technically but not truly.

Not even technically correct.

I couldn't help but notice that you skirted the meat of my post btw

Meat? More garbage! Even before correction of your date!

[kommandermatt]

Meat? More garbage! Even before correction of your date!

NO! The compass and percussion drilling were NOT invented before the reformation! LIES! ALL OF IT LIES! LALALALALALALALALA!

Google searches are of the devil! Only Lycos bears the torch of Holy Wisdom!

[spl_cadet]

Given that there was a century and a half between Wycliffe and anything actually happening, how can you say that the Reformation started with him?

[Kenite]

[QUOTE=spl_cadet]

Given that there was a century and a half between Wycliffe and anything actually happening

Hah!

[kommandermatt]

Kenite Conceeds!

[Kenite]

Kenite Conceeds!

You can dream. I suggest you both read more.

[kommandermatt]

But there's nothing to read. The sum total of your refutation of my points has been to dismiss them as "garbage" without giving anyone the slightest reason to do so. You didn't even give a bad reason.

Summary:
You say that there were no scientific discoveries during the Middle Ages.

I reply that there were, and cite things like advances in optics (glasses, which are the direct predessors of Galileo's telescope) and navigation (the compass), not to mention the very important advances in things like beerology.

You say they're garbage, and refuse to elaborate.

It doesn't matter either way, because you're just wrong. The technological advances that took place during the Middle Ages aren't ideologically charged opinions, they just are, and no amount of smug self-satisfaction on your part is going to change that.

You displayed ignorance that anyone could refute with google and fifteen seconds on the internet, and you display your arrogance now by refusing to aknowledge it.

[Kenite]

[QUOTE=kommandermatt]

But there's nothing to read.

Quite. 'Cos there's nothing of yours worth reading. If anyone but you thinks there is, they can say so.

[James Peter]

Ok just to weigh in on two points.

Firstly in the initial post point #3 is completely off the mark. Luther argued that the state had a duty to reform the church - thats not a seperation of church and state. He wanted reform of the Church (like many before him) and when the Church refused to reform itself he turned to secular powers are urged them to realise their political ambitions and what he believed was their solemn duty.

Secondly on Wycliffe starting the Reformation... Thats really just a load of rubbish. Did Wycliff have many of the same ideas as the later Reformers? Yes. Did he cause Lollardy and an attempt at reforming the Church? Yes. Did he suceed? No, the revolution failed and was forced underground. To argue that it was the start of the Reformation is really not accurate. Luther did a similar thing to Wycliffe, he was just more successful politically (because of a number of factors). Throughout the late medieval period there was a growing desire for reform from many within the Church but that doesn't mean that they were the start of 'the Reformation'. At most they foreshadowed it and then aided it briefly...