You know I think I was taught in school that the church killed Galileo also. You know the schools I was in were supposed to be the best public schools around. They were considered better than the private schools. What an abomination.
If you get a chance read "Galileo's daughter"....it has actual letters between him and his daughter.....Blew my mind away...because of everything I was taught in school I thought he was tortured over his religious beliefs ect....but in fact, it really had nothing to do with it....He was under house arrest......In a castle like home and was allowed to rome free inside the city...In addition, the Pope at the time was a long time friend and ally of his who, due to political pressure, kind of had to backstab him to kow tow to other political pressures....great book read it.
Noshit jem, ya LEARNED it on the internet. !! Ok ,so you now know it's all a big conspiracy you can make progress jem, Apologies for delay in response..... rather busy at the moment. Also I didn't notice a thread with my lil ol name in it. As a very humble soul I find myself flattered You are asking me WHICH CHURCH??? ...seriously?? You want me to what ?? ... argue the validity of my claim that the (catholic) church's dogma and insistencies on the strict adherence to the word of scriptures (as the popes decreed them), were responsible for concepts of ridiculous geographical absurdities? Are you suggesting they weren't ? Are you going to argue about this as a theist might (in the manner of ....for , example ARogueTrader )and assert that Copernicus was a. wrong b. never lived c. or cannot be proven to have lived d. and Columbus really fell off the edge e. or Jesus Lives The popes knew well enough about the erroneous fatuities of the Bible by the 9th century. The Greeks new bloody well the earth wasn't flat 7 centuries earlier. So Copernicus lets the secret out and pisses off the catholic church for contradicting its all powerful words and dominance on everything and what...are you saying non of this is well grounded in logic or truth ? In the times of Copernicus and Columbus it was (still is!) the theological dogma of the church which hindered truth and understanding and workings of humankind, earth and the universe. Unless of course you want to re write history, as churches have often done and like to do, in order to perpetuate the utter rubbish contained within their so called sacred books.
Stu.....while acknowledging that there is some fluff and poetic license in some of the sacred books you ridicule, like the bible, I was wondering if you could give me a more comprehensive book of a non religious nature that has even 1/10th of the historical significance of the bible for man kind to use ?
Hi TM, First off, I don't ridicule. Please note, intolerant theists tend to accuse anyone who simply points out a complete lack of credibility within the bible, as ridiculing. I am only content to criticize such 'holy books' because as soon as you stop taking them at face value, they make no sense. Furthermore, no one as yet has produced even a half plausible explanation to just some of the nonsense they hold. But my saying that is not ridicule. Also, I wouldn't define a complete load of bollocks as 'fluff and poetic license'. Neither is that ridicule. I consider it as my version of poetic license... to explain a little vividly a point of view which holds the bible cannot be accurate. A more comprehensive book than the Bible? The Bible is comprehensive ?? The Bible is historical !!??. The Bible is full of 'historical significance'??? You mean more than Robin Hood or King Arthur of the Round Table are full of 'historical significance'?? A more useful book to mankind might be Hammurabi's Code of Law, established about 2,000 years BC. Carved in stone (ring any bells!?) The first bible texts I think were about 1400 BC. There is much historical evidence to show the early version of the Hebrew bible stole most of its ideas from Hammurabi and developed a lot of its mythical absurdity in order to supercede the existing 'historical significance' of Hammurabi for mankind to be mislead by. Such has been the tacticts of the 'christians' in that they messed about with what is now ' the bible' for hundreds of years after christ was supposed to have lived. Presumably developing the story itself that christ actually lived !! Hammurabi pronounced a complete set of laws, rules and standards by which, even today, many would be considered most worthy of living by. A more useful book for theists like ART would be a dictinary . He might then realize words have meanings and definitions. That the definitions his preacher tells him at bible class are not the ones generally recognized and understood and that his God cannot really be Absolute ,Omniscient, Omnipotent .
Stu, I thought you might say something like oh shit, I can not believe I got my facts wrong. Instead... some good ranting. What is the matter with admitting you got you facts wrong? And what was the crack about the internet. I was pointing out that I did a quick search and it looked like you were wrong. I was pointing out my source so as to not mislead anyone if you came back with a real answer. Finally, you called a conspiracy I call it an the board of education. Finally, when I reread your rant, I see you did not check my sources. At the time of Columbus the chruch was not saying the world was round. And the the major chruch theologians had accepted that the world was a sphere. Frist of all in Isaiah 40.22 we see that the earth is a circle. the hebrew word for circle can also mean sphere. And in Luke we see that the second coming will come when some are asleep at night and some are working in the field. An indication of a rotating earth no? "The myth that Christians in the Middle Ages thought the world was flat was given a massive boost by Andrew Dickson White's weighty tome The Warfare of Science with Theology. This book has become something of a running joke among historians of science and it is dutifully mentioned as a prime example of misinformation in the preface of most modern works on science and religion. The flat Earth is discussed in chapter 2 and one can almost sense White's confusion that hardly any of the sources support his hypothesis that Christians widely believed in it. He finds himself grudgingly admitting that Clement, Origene (my spell chechker ate this name) , Ambrose, Augustine, Isodore, Albertus Magnus and Aquinas all accepted the Earth was a globe - in other words none of the great doctors of the church had considered the matter in doubt. Although an analysis of what White actually says suggests he was aware that the flat Earth was largely a myth, he certainly gives an impression of ignorant Christians suppressing rational knowledge of its real shape"
Hey stu... long time no read! How ya been? I bet it has been at least a year since me and you and doubter and Daniel_M went round and round with this stuff. Remember that? Well, that's all I wanted to say. I hope your trading is going well, and your Excel programming too. <inside joke> Anyway, I appreciate what you do in threads of this type because it causes people to express their faith in the Lord and become even more steadfast. And that's a good thing. PS: Did you ever see the Bugs Bunny cartoon where Bugs dupes the Sheriff of Nottingham into building his home in the Royal Garden? "You mean to tell me dat dis ground over here is better than dat ground over there?" I love that one. And Errol Flynn as Robin Hood comes swinging in at the end, "Welcome to Sherwood".
Though in all seriousness, and in reference to the flat earth thing, in Proverbs or Ecclesiastes Solomon speaks of the sun circling around the earth. I'll find that verse and post it. I have thought that interesting.
Here it is: Ecclesiastes 1:5 Also the sun rises and the sun sets; and hastening to its place it rises there again. I can only interpret this to mean that in Solomon' day, it was presumed that the sun moved around the earth. This is not to say that the earth was thought to be round or flat.