Dogma of the Earth as center of the universe

[John_oxios]

There was nothing to admit, as Luther died eighteen years before Galileo was born, so he cannot have opposed him.

Hello St. Anastasia,

C’mon that’s a copout!! What about Copernicus?? Same teaching Same idea

You try to say, Luther could not have made that statement, however my mistake was he didn’t state who he was speaking about.
I corrected my statement and then you fell silent, on Luthers’ teaching against Copernicus because it contradicted Scripture.

Fess up already,

God bless,
Johnnie o

 

[John_oxios]

What do you mean by “we”?

Hello,
Pardon my lack of the specific pronoun ‘You’ Are you all in or do you have reservations concerning RCC teachings in matters of Faith. Don’t hold back now!

God bless,
Johnnie o

 

[StAnastasia]

Hello,
Pardon my lack of the specific pronoun ‘You’ Are you all in or do you have reservations concerning RCC teachings in matters of Faith. Don’t hold back now!

God bless,
Johnnie o

Generally I don’t submit to inquisitions on this or other fora. However, for the record I am in accord with Roman Catholic teaching on matters of faith.

 

[StAnastasia]

You try to say, Luther could not have made that statement, however my mistake was he didn’t state who he was speaking about. I corrected my statement and then you fell silent, on Luthers’ teaching against Copernicus because it contradicted Scripture.s:

We can identify only ten Copernicans between 1543 and 1600, of whom seven were Protestant and three Catholic. After 1600 the pace of conversion to the heliocentric model quickened, until science was clamped down upon in Catholic countries as a result of the Galileo affair. That’s essentially why the center of gravity in the scientific revolution shifted from Catholic to Protestant Europe in the seventeenth century.

StAnastasia

 

[cassini]

How can this be, and why don’t more astronomers share your wisdom?

I knew it, I knew it, heliocentric blinkerdness.

Here then is a lesson for you StAnastasia and all other Copernicans or heliocentricists who might be reading this thread. To understand RELATIVITY properly (and I do not speak of Einstein’s SPECIAL theory of relativity - which I can also explain if need be) but the SIMPLE relativity existing because of the nature of space, that relativity I believe Galileo recognised,

Before I go on, if you are serious in your attempt to understand geocentricism, and not still full of prejudice and bias, unwilling even to set your brain at NEUTRAL, then you just might comprehend what I am about to tell you. However, experience has shown me that heliocentrism is a MAGIC that leaves the brain unable to think properly, just as drugs cause the same effect in drug addicts.

OK. Relativity exists. Therefore the G order of the universe and the H order of the universe are indistinguishable. In other words, BOTH can be made explain every phenemonen to be found in the universe’s activity.

Now, parallax etc., exist. Therefore there MUST be two explanations for it/them, one H, one G. Now here is the bit few are able to comprehend because of the H drug. Simply REVERSE the order. In the case of H parallax the stars are viewed from the concept of an orbiting earth. In the G parallax, the stars and sun orbit together. You will get the exact same view from earth under both actions.

 

[cassini]

Cassini, if the Holy Spirit has any interest in the truth, and if your theory that the earth is the center of the universe is true, I’m sure that truth will prevail in short order. Surely the Holy Spirit is not impotent against the heresies propounded by the American Astronomical Society. I’m only a theologian, so I can’t pretend to know the inner workings of the Society, but do propose your paper!

StAnastasia

I’ve just read your CV above StA, it is impressive. you are indeed a worthy person to debate with.

Alas StA, I fear the truth will out in this case only on the last day, for it is up against forces far greater that anyone can imagine, both Churchmen and State. I will tell you why. Jesus called the Devil the Father of Lies. Given He called the First Person of the Trinity Father, we cannot underestimate just how good a liar Satan is. Nothing in history has done more damage to the Church’s reputation that the question of whether H or G. Thus it has to be Satan’s BIGGEST victory.
Elsewhere I traced heliocentricism back into history right to the Flood. Just as with the lineage of Adam and Eve, that of Noah and his wife also split into TWO lines, one faithful to the true God, the other against the true God (Satan’s second temptation). So, who, or what took the place of the true God down that line? The Bible tells us of false gods galore, but explicitly about a ‘heliocentric’ god. This god reigned supreme inmany countries but especially in Egypt, whose great prophet was Hermes. With the demise of this Egypt ‘heliocentricism’ was placed into a religious form and placed into books and kept safe by secret societies where it remained dormant until the 15th century when they reemerged in Florence. Two smitten by this religion were Copernicus and Bruno. In the case of Copernicus, well he transfered it into its astronomical form, but not for science’s sake, but for its hermetic influence on the mind.

The rest is distorted history - unless you know how to read it properly, like a true faithful Catholic first, not as a prideful intellectual who thinks he or she knows better than the word of God.

Now John O above asks me —'Show me where the Church has amended their history?
If they had why would John Paul or the Church bother to bring it up two hundred fifty yrs later?

The answer to this quest also answers why this matter of G or H will only be resolved on the last day when God will tell it without interruprtion or censorship by any religious or scientific institution.
John O. You would not believe the full story of Churchmen’s capitulation to Copernicanism. Note I say Churchmen, not the CHURCH. There is a difference, and if you do not know that then you have no hope of understanding the truth. Ratzinger, JPII or BXVI are not the Church when offering opinions or reading out the findings of the Galileo commission’s findings. They are the Church only when they define or declare something must be accepted by Catholics as a matter of Faith. JPII did this only ONCE, on women priests. Ben XVI has not done it ONCE yet.

So, in good faith, in believing the CHURCH needed saving by them (the CHURCH doesn’t need saving - the Church is Christ) Churchmen from 1634 began to pervert the 1616 decree.

Finally, the CHURCH has never abrogated the 1616 decree. CHURCHMEN simply hid it under their beds worldwide like one would a bad dream. The Church still says H is heresy, Churchmen say it is not. You choose sides, I already have. I’m with the Church.

 

[StAnastasia]

The Church still says H is heresy, Churchmen say it is not. You choose sides, I already have. I’m with the Church.

Cassini, I’m with the Church on this one, including her brilliant scientists at the Vatican Observatory, who are descendants of Copernicus. You may be right that at the last judgment Christ will cast heliocentrists into the lake of everlasting fire, while he says to the geocentrists “Well done, good and faithful servants.”

A few of you may be plucking grapes in cool gardens while billions of us roast in unquenchable flames. That’s a risk I’m willing to take, along with everyone I love and care about. I’d rather be roasting in communion with them than plucking grapes alone!

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

I knew it, I knew it, heliocentric blinkerdness.

Before I go on, if you are serious in your attempt to understand geocentricism, and not still full of prejudice and bias, unwilling even to set your brain at NEUTRAL, then you just might comprehend what I am about to tell you. However, experience has shown me that heliocentrism is a MAGIC that leaves the brain unable to think properly, just as drugs cause the same effect in drug addicts…

Cassini, we are all affected by prejudice and bias – all facts are theory laden. It’s basically a question of which theory makes most sense of the facts, and I and the Vatican scientists believe heliocentrism best explains the astronomical facts.

StAnastasia

 

[cassini]

Cassini, I’m with the Church on this one, including her brilliant scientists at the Vatican Observatory, who are descendants of Copernicus. You may be right that at the last judgment Christ will cast heliocentrists into the lake of everlasting fire, while he says to the geocentrists “Well done, good and faithful servants.”

A few of you may be plucking grapes in cool gardens while billions of us roast in unquenchable flames. That’s a risk I’m willing to take, along with everyone I love and care about. I’d rather be roasting in communion with them than plucking grapes alone!

StAnastasia

Relax StA, indulging in the H heresy will not book you a place in the fire. The reason is because the vast majority of Copernicans accepted the heresy as an indidsputable proof of science and by doing so rendered their heresy MATERIAL, without any deliberate rejection of Church teaching or culpability. Such Material heresy carries NO guilt or punishment. You as a theologian will understand this. Only those who deliberately refused to obey the 1616 decree at the time and thereafter until 1820 might have a problem. That we must leave God to judge.

But what of Galileo himself? You recall he DENIED under oath a belief in H as a truth, only as means for astronomical calculation. Historians thereafter however, fully credit him with an absolute unshakable belief in H all his life to his dieing day. Thus historians, and this includes Catholics, credit Galileo as being the most deliberate PERJURER of all time. But have you ever seen him being accused of this? No you haven’t, and this teaches us a huge lesson. It teaches us that Satan’s victory was not intended to encourage more heretics, but to damage the authority and integrity of Church teaching. In other words, and I hope I have not gone too deep into the ways of Satan that are beyond the simple Catholic’s needs, ‘science’ became more IMPORTANT than obedience to Church teaching. There lies the real damage of the Galileo case.

Finally StA, I fear you have learned little from me when after all I have told you you come up with your dogma: ‘I’m with the Church on this one, including her brilliant scientists at the Vatican Observatory, who are descendants of Copernicus.’

Tell me something Catholic that you have learned from the Church’s brilliant scientists? They are all evolutionists to the core and have put out press releases that could lead Catholics into believing little green me exist ‘out there’. They are all Copernicans who will tell us that the Church of 1616 was PROVEN wrong. God have you learned nothing.

 

[Ignatius]

I I was watching a program about Galileo and it said that the Catholic Church had a dogma that the Earth was the center of the universe!

Nope, there has never been any such Dogma. Further, there has never been any doctrine about this. There has never been any doctrine, much less a Dogma, about any scientific theory. The Catholic Church is about saving souls for Christ, not doing scientific research. She has funded individual scholarship, for example the work of Nicholas Copernicus in the discovery of the Solar System, or Gregor Mendel, the father of Genetics, were fully funded by The Church. In fact, the very principals of science the scientific method were developed by Churchmen with the sponsorship of The Church.

 

[StAnastasia]

Tell me something Catholic that you have learned from the Church’s brilliant scientists? They are all evolutionists to the core and have put out press releases that could lead Catholics into believing little green me exist ‘out there’. They are all Copernicans who will tell us that the Church of 1616 was PROVEN wrong. God have you learned nothing.

Thank goodness they are all evolutionists, as am I! And while I doubt that green pigmentation necessarily carries much survival value, I join the Vatican scientists in expecting that under the right biochemical circumstances, intelligent life has evolved countless times in this vast universe!

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

She has funded individual scholarship, for example the work of Nicholas Copernicus in the discovery of the Solar System, or Gregor Mendel, the father of Genetics, were fully funded by The Church. In fact, the very principals of science the scientific method were developed by Churchmen with the sponsorship of The Church.

Ignatius, are you using “funding” in a different sense than we understand it? I am not aware of any scientific granting structure within the Church during the times of Copernicus and Mendel.

StAnastasia

 

[cassini]

Cassini, we are all affected by prejudice and bias – all facts are theory laden. It’s basically a question of which theory makes most sense of the facts, and I and the Vatican scientists believe heliocentrism best explains the astronomical facts.

StAnastasia

StA, I am getting angry with you lack of knowledge in this subject. I thought you were learning, but I see you are now going back into the safety of the consensus, that the Church of 1616 made a joke of Catholicism.

If you are talking about TRUE SCIENCE, then NO there is NOT supposed to be prejudice and bias. Only FALSE science has prejudice and bias If you are talking about THEORY, then do not include GEOCENTRICISM in this category. G belongs now to FAITH, CATHOLIC faith, and Catholic faith, like true science, is not associated with prejudice and bias, it is based on revelation and its resulting DOGMA.

So, you have rejected G as a matter of faith. You consider it a theory (even that’s an advance on the majority, so maybe you are making progress) You consider it a matter which makes the most ‘sense’ to you. Well let us test your position. Are you aware that even in your category the G ‘theory’ has MORE of the facts than the H theory. Empirical science has TWICE undermined the H theory. The Airy experiment and the M&M experiment both resulted in the evidence showing a G universe. So in fact the G theory makes more sense of the facts.

I say again, here we have the perfect example of Satan’s power over the intellect of Catholics, let alone atheists. ‘More sense’ is intellectual pride. So too does a ‘Big Bang’ make more sense than a six day creation. So too does a local flood make more ‘sense’ that a global flood. ‘Natural’ explanations always make more sense than miracles as revealed in the Scriptures. Holy Communion as bread symbolically representing Christs body, soul and divinity makes more ‘sense’ that its actual being the body, soul and divinity of Christ.

That is the heliocentric heresy for you, the same heresy Pope Urban VIII said would ‘put Catholicism in great danger.’

 

[cassini]

Thank goodness they are all evolutionists, as am I! And while I doubt that green pigmentation necessarily carries much survival value, I join the Vatican scientists in expecting that under the right biochemical circumstances, intelligent life has evolved countless times in this vast universe!

StAnastasia

Tell you what StA, did your brilliant scientists tell you HOW LIFE BEGAN. Without this ‘science’ then the whole theory of evolution cannot even begin. Did you know even Dawkins has begun to change his mind based on this fact alone. What worth a million ‘theories’ as to how a lump of jelly managed to acquire a digestive system, organs, limbs etc, if you cannot even CONCEIVE of an evolutionary start. Oh Yes, I forgot, you THEISTIC-evolutionists do have a use for God. HE fills in the gaps when you NEED Him. God you are all so pathetic. Protestantism has more scholarship than the whole Catholic institution today. And i do not like having to admit that.

 

[StAnastasia]

I say again, here we have the perfect example of Satan’s power over the intellect of Catholics, let alone atheists. ‘More sense’ is intellectual pride. So too does a ‘Big Bang’ make more sense than a six day creation. So too does a local flood make more ‘sense’ that a global flood. ‘Natural’ explanations always make more sense than miracles as revealed in the Scriptures. Holy Communion as bread symbolically representing Christs body, soul and divinity makes more ‘sense’ that its actual being the body, soul and divinity of Christ.’

Yes, Big Bang is a more coherent theory than hexaemeral creation. Local Black Sea flood is credible; global flood is impossible (hydrology, genetics, paleontology and biogeography issues, etc.) The Vatican scientists and I are one on these matters. Eucharistic theology is not subject to scientific explanation, so no threat there.

StAnastasia

 

[Orogeny]

Tell you what StA, did your brilliant scientists tell you HOW LIFE BEGAN. Without this ‘science’ then the whole theory of evolution cannot even begin.

Nor can the “science” of biology. Is biology a science cassini?

Peace

Tim

 

[StAnastasia]

Tell you what StA, did your brilliant scientists tell you HOW LIFE BEGAN… Oh Yes, I forgot, you THEISTIC-evolutionists do have a use for God. HE fills in the gaps when you NEED Him. God you are all so pathetic. Protestantism has more scholarship than the whole Catholic institution today. And i do not like having to admit that.

(1) Evolution is not concerned with the origin of life; that’s a separate question.

(2) Theistic evolution is not a God-of-the-gaps theology.

(3) Catholic scholarship in the interface between religion and science is at least as prolific as Protestant.

StAnastasia

 

[cassini]

Yes, Big Bang is a more coherent theory than hexaemeral creation. Local Black Sea flood is credible; global flood is impossible (hydrology, genetics, paleontology and biogeography issues, etc.) The Vatican scientists and I are one on these matters. Eucharistic theology is not subject to scientific explanation, so no threat there.

StAnastasia

Again, ‘SCIENCE’ is placed before faith. NOTHING is impossible to God.

 

[cassini]

(1) Evolution is not concerned with the origin of life; that’s a separate question.

(2) Theistic evolution is not a God-of-the-gaps theology.

(3) Catholic scholarship in the interface between religion and science is at least as prolific as Protestant.

StAnastasia

How convenient, evolution and a natural explanation for the beginning of life are separate questions. Did you just make this up or is that Catholic policy.

(3) Sorry, Catholic scholarship (the PAOS) etc, are all Copernicans and Evolutionists, HELL bent on indoctrinating the flock with this dangerous nonsense when the Church should be about protecting the flock from false philosophy. There are a few Catholic creationists but do only a fraction of the scientific investigation done by Protestants.

And that StA is my last word on evolutionism. I do not consider it worthy of debate.

 

[StAnastasia]

How convenient, evolution and a natural explanation for the beginning of life are separate questions. Did you just make this up or is that Catholic policy.

Sorry, Catholic scholarship (the PAOS) etc, are all Copernicans and Evolutionists, HELL bent on indoctrinating the flock with this dangerous nonsense when the Church should be about protecting the flock from false philosophy. There are a few Catholic creationists but do only a fraction of the scientific investigation done by Protestants.

And that StA is my last word on evolutionism. I do not consider it worthy of debate.

(1) Evolution explains the diversification of speices, not the origin of life. They are different, if related, questions.

(2) The Vatican Observatory and its Catholic scientists join with their Protestant, Jewish, Islamic, Hindu and Buddhist brethren to protect humanity from scientific ignorance.

(3) Catholic “creationism” is not even a science, as it has nothing to investigate. Creationism is a theological viewpoint, not a scientific theory.

(4) While there is nothing to debate between evolution and creationism – they are in fact orthogonal to each other – I do find the psychology of evolution denial to be a fascinating issue. Evolution deniers are often global warming deniers, plate tectonics deniers, and deniers of other scientific theories.

StAnastasia