Yellum Notnef

Tenspace has only been around for a week and he's already figured out how things work around here.

Theres nothing you can do about it,Tenspace. Either ignore it or learn some relaxation techniques. Blood pressure medication is also a wise idea.:banghead:

Goliath

Radorth,

How so?

Do you really need any citations about the sacking of the Great Library by xians, or are you just being obtuse?

Then you're saying that I know something about xianity that no xian knows?

Yes, to be perfect. This is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

When have I done otherwise in this thread?

Since this is a text-based medium of communication, I don't see how you would be able to detect sincerity at all.

Sincerely,

Goliath

lpetrich

Radorth:
I'm not making an argument for creation there. My stand has never changed. WE DON'T KNOW IN ANY PROVABLE WAY JUST HOW WE CAME TO BE. Creationists say they do know.

Then why quote approvingly various creationist falsehoods as if you believed them?

Also, I think that this claim of agnosticism is a posture, one for hiding creationist convinctions. This is because of a lack of parallel criticism of creationists.

Well let's summarize the "answers" to my questions so far, as I read them.

"Newton was interested in alchemy"
(Because he was a Christian apparently)

He was a heretic relative to Radorth's beliefs, however. Unless Radorth believes that the Trinity is pure fiction and that Jesus Christ had been subordinate to God the Father. And all of Newton's Biblical-prophecy-interpretation attempts.

"True, the greatest geniuses for centuries were Christians, but I assert they were still hindered by their beliefs."

Most of them in sects that Radorth considers heretical, like Catholicism and various mainline Protestant sects. Thus, Radorth considers Galileo to have been a legalistic idol worshipper, simply because Galileo had been a Catholic. And the same is true for every other Catholic scientist there ever was.

"A lot of fundies believe in the 7 day creation, therefore they are hindering science."

(So Pat Robertson is somehow hindering Stephan Hawking's work. Details to follow apparently).

It would be difficult for Stephen Hawking to get any work done if the Pat Robertsons of the world get what they want -- a fundie theocracy.

Edited to add:
Radorth's slams on Catholicism are in the middle of this page.

Radorth

That only answers one of the questions, and can hardly be called an answer because it is far too vague. Which sect of Christianity? Which Christian worldview? What is the Biblical worldview of Newtion or Faraday? Your answer only applies if you carefully define all the terms and we agree on them.

Rad

lpetrich

Tenspace:
1. Christianity will not accept as fact any scientific evidence unless it fits the worldview model described by the Bible. In Galileo's day, his discoveries challenged the infallibility of Genesis. Newton's discoveries regarding force and motion offered no challenge to the Bible. You can't accurately compare persecutions between the two

I think that the story is more complicated than that. Newtonianism was the ultimate vindication of the heliocentric heresy, even if heliocentrism turned out to be only approximate (the Sun is not exactly at the Solar System's barycenter).

And Newtonianism was indeed denounced as "atheistic" by some people, possibly because it implies that the planets do not move as a result of divine intervention or angels pushing them around.

But the reason that the theologians did not get as worked up over Newtonianism as by Copernicanism was that most of the theologians had given up the fight over astronomy in Newton's day.

Also, treating Xtianity as a single, unified belief system is folly -- there are a variety of degrees of cafeteria theology practiced, from the highly-literal to the highly-nonliteral. Unfortunately, the nonliteralists are unwilling to challenge the literalists, despite the literalists calling them fake Xtians and worse.

2. ... Heck, it's been said many times, by many leading geneticists, that molecular biology makes no sense without the framework of Darwinian evolution. Yet Christianity still believes that all living things are descended from a bunch of animals loaded into a boat five thousand years ago.

That's only true of the more fundie sects, but many non-fundies seem to be suspiciously unwilling to challenge fundie literalism.

Where are those who object that creationism is contrary to their understanding of God and the Bible?

Biff the unclean

In all fairness to the science minded Christians the Pope did eventually forgive Galileo and admit that his theories were correct.
And in a very strange coincidence the Pope (John Paul II) issued this Bull forgiving Galileo only three or four days before the Galileo spacecraft entered Jupiter's orbit.

Better late than never.

Hugo Holbling

*sigh*

I don't have time to argue with headbangers from either side. It's easy enough to make these empty assertions here, but in scholarly debate wherein statements and hermeneutics actually have to be backed up, this conflict idea is long dead, as are the simplistic readings of the Galileo and Great Library incidents. I gave plenty of references for anyone interested in studying the history of science, instead of making blanket dismissals.

Oh well. I'll waste your time no longer.

Hugo Holbling

(Double post. Sorry.)

Bede

Just for the record, this is rubbish. No academic historian I know of mentions this and Newton was extremely religious from the start of his life.

B

Goliath

Hugo Holbling,

Every source that I've read on the history of Mathematics points out that xians are responsible for the sacking of the Great Library. I have yet to see any conclusive evidence to the contrary.

Sincerely,

Goliath