Freethought & Rationalism Archive

09-16-2006, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Around half the posts in this thread are invisible to me, I should add.

Wow! What a marvellous facility. Malachi has completely disappeared. Now the world seems just a bit brighter than it did a moment ago.

Thanks for the tip. I thought 'ignore list' was just a metaphor!

Best wishes

Bede

Malachi151 · 09-16-2006, 10:30 AM

How about some more:

Quote:

These are not the doctrines of the Apostles; Marcion and Valentius have newly invented them. Let us then flee them, beloved, for a pure life profits nothing when doctrines are corrupt; as on the other hand neither do sound doctrines, if the life be corrupt. The heathen were the parents of these notions, and those heretics reared them, having received them from Gentile philosophers, asserting that matter is uncreated, and many such like things. As then they asserted that there could be no Artificer unless there were some uncreated subject matter, so also they disallowed the Resurrection. But let us not heed them, as knowing that the power of God is all sufficient. Let us not heed them. To you I say this; for we will not decline the battle with them. But the man who is unarmed and naked, though he fall among the weak, though he be the stronger, will easily be vanquished. Had you given heed to the Scriptures, had you sharpened yourselves each day, I would not have advised you to flee the combat with them, but would have counseled you to grapple with them; for strong is truth. But since you know not how to use the Scriptures, I fear the struggle, lest they take you unarmed and cast you down. For there is nothing, there is nothing weaker than those who are bereft of the aid of the Spirit. If these heretics employ the wisdom of the Gentiles, we must not admire, but laugh at them, because they employ foolish teachers. For those men were not able to find out anything sound, either concerning God or the creation, and things which the widow among us is acquainted with, Pythagoras did not yet know, but said that the soul becomes a bush, or a fish, or a dog. To these, tell me, ought you to give heed? And how could it be reasonable to do so? They are great men in their district, grow beautiful curls, and are enfolded in cloaks; thus far goes their philosophy; but if you look within there is dust and ashes and nothing sound, but "their throat is an open sepulcher" (Ps. v. 9), having all things full of impurity and corruption, and all their doctrines (full) of worms. For instance, the first of them said that water was God, his successor fire, another one air, and they descended to things corporeal; ought we then, tell me, to admire these, who never even had the thought of the incorporeal God? and if they did ever gain it afterwards, it was after conversing in Egypt with our people. But, that we bring not upon you much confusion, let us here close our discourse. For should we begin to set before you their doctrine, and what they have said about God, what about matter, what about the soul, what about the body, much ridicule will follow. And they will not even require to be accused by us, for they have attacked each other; and he who wrote against us the book concerning matter, made away with himself. Therefore that we may not vainly delay you, nor wind together a labyrinth of words, leaving these things we will bid you keep fast hold of the listening to the Holy Scriptures, and not fight with words to no purpose; as also Paul exhorteth Timothy (2 Tim. 2, 14), filled though he was with much wisdom, and possessing the power of miracles. Let us now obey him, and leaving trifling let us hold fast to real works, I mean to brotherly-kindness and hospitality; and let us make much account of alms-giving, that we may obtain the promised good things, through the grace and lovingkindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for endless ages. Amen.

A famously quotes sermon by Saint John Chrysostom, 4th century. Of course he puts forward absurd doctraines in the mouths of the Greeks philosophers, but that's what propaganda is all about. And, of course, he admonished his congregation to stop listening to the heathens, who are all fools of course, and "just believe in the power of Christ".

Which get's back to Bede's point. If the average folk were SO destitute of learning and knowledge of the philsophers, as he says, then why did the Christian leaders keep telling them not to pay attention to the philosophers? They wouldn't have need to tell them this if they weren't exposed to those ideas to some degree in the first place.

And of course, like any good Christian, when Bede and Roger can longer stand reality, they retreat to their own fantasy land and stop addressing the facts.

Glad you brought forward so much "evidence" Bede......

andrewcriddle · 09-16-2006, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Not only what Clivedurdle said, but these were not Christians that were accepted in the Greek and Latin speaking world for the most part also, which is why they were in an Arabic region.

They were (generally) in an Arab region simply because of the vast Arab conquests of the 7th and 8th century.

Many of the regions conquered had a Christian population mostly unorthodox by Byzantine standards but that is another matter.

Andrew Criddle

Malachi151 · 09-16-2006, 10:42 AM

Oh, and one more example, to drive the point home. Bebe (if you are still there) what you are trying to claim is like saying that the Nazis were nto anti-Semitic or the cause of Jewish persecution in Germany in the 1930s because of the fact that some Germans who supported the Nazis or who went by the name Nazis, whatever, hid Jews in their homes to hide them, or because you find a letter from a guy in the Germany army that saying "Oh, the reatment of the Jews is aweful.", etc.

There are always going to be some people who are outside the mainstrea, who don't go along wiht every policy and procedure and idea. That there were people living in Christian dominated times who didn't buy into the official positions and who still persued philosphical and scientifc interests is no surprize, but we are talking about instutions here, the trends, the mainstream, the factors that moved the soceity.

There are definately a mainstream trend away from earlier Greek learning, from the embrace of the instutitons that made ancient Greece a place for the development of many ideas, and a deamonization of many of the ideas that had been developed by the Greeks, most notibly the ideas of the materialists and atomists, which, as I said, were really the most important ideas anyway, as they are the ideas that we now know were closest to being a correct view of the world, yet these were the ideas that were EXPLICITY, called heretical and unthinkable by the Christians.

andrewcriddle · 09-16-2006, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Thanks for proving my point. First of all, the copying of a text a time or two does not imply that the Christian embraced the ideas. I think its pretty easy to show, from the quotes I have already provided, but more can be supplied, that Christians were in opposition to pretty much every idea present in Lucretius' work. Secondly, why wasn't the text maintained?....... Presumably because it was of little interest of because it was heresy.

I agree that some of Lucretius' ideas are at the very least difficult to reconcile with orthodox Christianity.

The fact that late-antique and medieval Christians regarded some non-Christian works as closer to the truth than others is hardly surprising.

I thought you were claiming that Christians only copied works they more-or-less approved of.

If you were just saying that Christians were, on the whole, other things being equal, more likely to copy works which they regarded as containing valuable material, then I agree.

Andrew Criddle

Malachi151 · 09-16-2006, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

They were (generally) in an Arab region simply because of the vast Arab conquests of the 7th and 8th century.

Many of the regions conquered had a Christian population mostly unorthodox by Byzantine standards but that is another matter.

Andrew Criddle

Its a combination. But the point is that the book is titled "The Closing of the Wesern Mind", and if you have to point to areas outside the control of the Catholic Curch to try and find evidence of "Christian use of classical works", then this prety much defeates your whole point.

And one more example, to drive the point home. Bebe (if you are still there) what you are trying to claim is like saying that the Nazis were not the cause of Jewish persecution in Germany in the 1930s because of the fact that some Germans who supported the Nazis or who went by the name Nazis, whatever, hid Jews in their homes to protect them, or because you find a letter from a guy in the Germany army that says "Oh, the reatment of the Jews is aweful.", etc.

Can we find such examples of Germans who supported Hitler and also helped Jews? Yes we can. Does that refute the fact that Nazism was the leading cause of Jewish persecution in Germany in the 1930s? Of course not.

There are always going to be some people who are outside the mainstream, who don't go along with every policy and procedure and idea. That there were people living in Christian dominated times who didn't buy into the official positions and who still persued philosphical and scientifc interests is no surprize, but we are talking about instutions here, the trends, the mainstream, the factors that moved the society.

There was definately a mainstream trend away from earlier Greek learning, from the embrace of the instutitons that made ancient Greece a place for the development of many ideas, and a demonization of many of the ideas that had been developed by the Greeks, most notibly the ideas of the materialists and atomists, which, as I said, were really the most important ideas anyway, as they are the ideas that we now know were closest to being a correct view of the world, yet these were the ideas that were EXPLICITY, called heretical and unthinkable by the Christians.

You can't refute 50 quotes of people saying "Don't trust the philsophers, have faith in Christ alone", "The ideas of the Greeks, such as gravity, atoms, etc., are all absurd and forbidden!" with a quote here and there by an insular intellectual who was both a Christian and also engaged in classical scholarship, or who said "well, some of the ideas of the Greek philophers were okay, as long as they agree with scripture", which is basically what you are doing.

mirage · 09-16-2006, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

I disagree with this completely, but only because it was the Greek works that showed to the Christians that there were other ways to look at the world. It is well know that most of the ideas of the Enlightenment are simply built on the older Greek ideas.

I have already pointed out that this hardly implies that progress would not have been made without them. Those works were around for ages. There must have been something causing or enabling the renaissance other than the mere presence of these works. People had to want to read them and consider new(old) ideas, for a start.

Quote:

It it were so easy to just come up with modern civilization and knowledge then a lot of other cultures would have done it.

Incorrect. Firstly, as soon as one culture industrialises, it is very likely that they will spread this technology rather than it develop independently elsewhere.

Secondly, modern civilisation requires considerable economic surplus. I did not say this was "so easy" but that it didn't necessarily depend on transmission of classical ideas.

Quote:

The Greek did all of the heavy lifting over a 500-800 year period of time, which built the intellectual fraemwork that modern society is founded on. This was ONLY able to happen BECAUSE OF the openness of the society, the focus on philosophy by at least some class of soceity, and the lack of DOGMA.

I dispute that such a foundation could not have been built in any large rich society without particularly oppressive intellectual control. It is certainly remarkable that these ideas developed in such a tiny ancient society, but that doesn't mean that it was a one off miracle.

Quote:

If you started with Christianity, and DIDN'T have these other pre-Chirstian ideas to counter against it, its doubtful that any advance would ever happen,

That's a pretty strong claim. I don't know how you could justify it.

Quote:

the ideas of the Greeks woudl never develop on their own in a Christian world, its only their pre-existance that made an eventual breakdown of the Christian theory possible, and as evidence fo this we can simply look at other cultures, who remained stagnant in their worldviews basically forever, until they met with the West.

Er.. you don't think that exchange of intellectual material didn't happen both ways? What you are really talking about is the first region to industrialise, which will clearly be a threshold effect with positive feedback.

Johann_Kaspar · 09-16-2006, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bede

... Besides, you misread the texts - it is the atheism of the atomists that they object to, not atomism per se.

The atomists were atheists? Please, give me any references in support of this statement.

Apparently you do not know who were the first atheists... "Misreading the texts" or not reading them?

Malachi151 · 09-16-2006, 11:14 AM

andrewcriddle: No, I am saying that if we look at what works made it and what works didn't make it, we can see that we have a lot more of the works that agree to at least some extent with Christian ideas, than ones that don't.

This isn't a big suprise.

What does this mean? It measn that we know that Christians played a role in determining what made it and what didn't.

Is it a case of 100% of everything that didn't fit with Christianty was gone? No, of course not, but the vast majory didn't make it. We have the odd example here adn there of a work like On the Nature of Things of a book that survived based on one or two copies that had been lost for hundreds of years, which were nevertheless copied at some point "during the time of Christian rule".

So, what this shows is two things:

#1) That Christianity played a big role in determining what made it and what didn't.
#2) Just because a work "has made it", however, does not necessarily mean that the work was embraced by "Christianity", either as an institution, or even necessarily by the Christians who made copies of it, if indeed Christians did make copies of it.

This came up in relation to Galen. Yes, the Christians did copy many of this works, but most of his works were either maintained by the Arabs, or were lost for a long time and resdiscovered in the 14th century.

So the fact that we have a lot of works of Galen today does not show that "Christians" were embracing Greek "science and philosophy".

In addition to that, much of Galen's work was highly compatable with Christianity anyway, since he was essentially monotheistic, believed that the body was a vessle for the soul, and named spiritual elements as one of the components of the huuman being.

Nevertheless, the Christian USE of Galens work WAS still highly selective.

Though some works were copied in full for archive purposes, these full works were not used for educational purposes or for practice. Instead selected works were sued for that, which took only the parts that didn't challenge Christian ideology, so again, the fact that we have a text, does not mean that Christians embraced the ideas.

Johann_Kaspar · 09-16-2006, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bede

Geoff/Malachi,

You are making yourself look very bad here. You just make allegation after allegation without ever backing them up. Please provide some references for your previous claims before making anymore. Honestly, it is bad for atheism that it is represented by people like you who refuse to justify what they say, just like the worst fundamentalist.

Is name calling an argument now

You seem to be very proud of such "arguments".

You provided nothing but unsubstantiated claims. I am even very surprised you are treated here so well for all the nonsense you presented here.

Reading Karl-Heinz Deschner, Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums, one will have - with all the necessary references - the evidence that xians did efficiently close the western mind from the 3rd century onward.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-16-2006, 10:42 AM	#74
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Oh, and one more example, to drive the point home. Bebe (if you are still there) what you are trying to claim is like saying that the Nazis were nto anti-Semitic or the cause of Jewish persecution in Germany in the 1930s because of the fact that some Germans who supported the Nazis or who went by the name Nazis, whatever, hid Jews in their homes to hide them, or because you find a letter from a guy in the Germany army that saying "Oh, the reatment of the Jews is aweful.", etc. There are always going to be some people who are outside the mainstrea, who don't go along wiht every policy and procedure and idea. That there were people living in Christian dominated times who didn't buy into the official positions and who still persued philosphical and scientifc interests is no surprize, but we are talking about instutions here, the trends, the mainstream, the factors that moved the soceity. There are definately a mainstream trend away from earlier Greek learning, from the embrace of the instutitons that made ancient Greece a place for the development of many ideas, and a deamonization of many of the ideas that had been developed by the Greeks, most notibly the ideas of the materialists and atomists, which, as I said, were really the most important ideas anyway, as they are the ideas that we now know were closest to being a correct view of the world, yet these were the ideas that were EXPLICITY, called heretical and unthinkable by the Christians.

09-16-2006, 11:14 AM	#79
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	andrewcriddle: No, I am saying that if we look at what works made it and what works didn't make it, we can see that we have a lot more of the works that agree to at least some extent with Christian ideas, than ones that don't. This isn't a big suprise. What does this mean? It measn that we know that Christians played a role in determining what made it and what didn't. Is it a case of 100% of everything that didn't fit with Christianty was gone? No, of course not, but the vast majory didn't make it. We have the odd example here adn there of a work like On the Nature of Things of a book that survived based on one or two copies that had been lost for hundreds of years, which were nevertheless copied at some point "during the time of Christian rule". So, what this shows is two things: #1) That Christianity played a big role in determining what made it and what didn't. #2) Just because a work "has made it", however, does not necessarily mean that the work was embraced by "Christianity", either as an institution, or even necessarily by the Christians who made copies of it, if indeed Christians did make copies of it. This came up in relation to Galen. Yes, the Christians did copy many of this works, but most of his works were either maintained by the Arabs, or were lost for a long time and resdiscovered in the 14th century. So the fact that we have a lot of works of Galen today does not show that "Christians" were embracing Greek "science and philosophy". In addition to that, much of Galen's work was highly compatable with Christianity anyway, since he was essentially monotheistic, believed that the body was a vessle for the soul, and named spiritual elements as one of the components of the huuman being. Nevertheless, the Christian USE of Galens work WAS still highly selective. Though some works were copied in full for archive purposes, these full works were not used for educational purposes or for practice. Instead selected works were sued for that, which took only the parts that didn't challenge Christian ideology, so again, the fact that we have a text, does not mean that Christians embraced the ideas.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.