DrLao

Do you have a cite for that? I thought most of Christianity had accepted the round Earth when Aquinas married the Bible to the best known science of the time, Aristoltian cosmology.

lpetrich

I know of no evidence that Luther, Melancthon and Calvin had been flat-earthers.

However, they had been geocentrists, as the Vatican had been.

Coragyps

Thanks, Scigirl - well-written stuff! Here's one of my favorites along that vein, from a letter from Cardinal Bellarmine re the Galileo affair, dated 1615:
My experience to date with quoting this to YEC's, and pointing out the parallel to biology-denial, has been total silence.

Zadok001

This needs to be on Christian Forums STAT!

Scigirl, would you allow me to repost this with your name on their science forum?

scigirl

I was quoting from this book titled "Is it God's Word" written by Joseph Wheless. Unfortunately he does not cite his references very well.

Zadok001 - sure, use all you want! You may want to confirm the above question though before posting anything, in case Joseph was mistaken about Luther and the spherical earth thing.

scigirl

Godot

While I agree with what has been said above, we need to be careful to not look at history with our modern biases. I'm not trying to play the apologetics game, but theologians in the middle ages truly believed in the infallibility of scripture; any evidence to the contrary HAD to be incorrect. Given the contemporary views of the time, these were legitimate positions to take.
Totally full of it, certainly, but valid for the times.

Albert Cipriani

Dear Ipetrich,
You say: You forgot to mention 99% of all peoples including all scientists for the prior two millennium. Surely, this was an oversight and did not indicate any attempt to single out the Vatican and other Christians as being single-handedly responsible for this universal faux pas. – Doubtfully, Albert the Traditional Catholic

scigirl

But Albert,

Did the scientists attempt to suppress and destroy those who did not agree with them? Perhaps some did, but as an institution?

scigirl

Albert Cipriani

Sigh, Girl,
You ask, Of course scientists have always attempted to suppress those in their minority. Tectonic plate theory wasn’t accepted until the 1960’s well after the scientific community ridiculed, lambasted and destroyed the career of the genius who had the insight and audacity to propose the theory. It’s no secret that Einstein could not even get the scientific community he inhabited to publish his theory of relativity. For a more recent example look backwards no more that a few years to the late Dr. Atkins. His dietary unorthodoxy was roundly dismissed out of hand for 20 years by all respectable nutritionists.

But were these scientists destroyed? Of course not, only the state can legally murder its citizens. If their fellow scientists were empowered to do so, I have no doubt that they would have done so, for fallen human nature blighted with greed and jealousy, knows no boundaries.

There’s no perhaps about it. And it was not some but all. All scientists always have a record of always resisting tooth and nail the greatest advances. Why are you so blatantly attempting to cover up the historical record with rose petals?

The scientific community, like the vaunted “world community” is a community or an institution in name only, just as is the United Nation and other oxymorons. So, no, the scientific community as an institution never persecuted its own because as an institution it is non-existent! -- Albert the Traditional Catholic

Jan Haugland

What is written about flat earthism under point 1) is essentially bull. Otherwise, I can see nothing wrong with it, but given the authors bad knowledge of history, I'd not take anything at face value.


- Jan

...who rants and raves every day at Secular Blasphemy