S
StAnastasia
Guest
Do you have any historical evidence suggesting that Calvin would have burned Copernicus for a scientific theory?
- Status
P
PerryJ
Guest
65% of the degrees were with papal support. The only universal degrees were from the Pope. The other degress were local. I can find stats from earlier periods and the number of Catholic to total universities would increase.
Interesting I post sources; yet, you appear to post opinions.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
So, in conclusion, the degrees in non-Catholic countries were issued without papal support.
StAnastasia
P
PerryJ
Guest
You are not understanding the scope. This was not a scientific issue with Luther and Calvin. It was a refutation of the Bible and blasphemy. Calvin executed Servetus for refuting the Trinity. Is it speculation yes. I would think solid speculation as he banished of executed all that disagreed with him. Here are just a few examples.
The Reformation Diarmaid MacCulloch – Page 238
“Calvin was as clear as the Roman Catholic inquisition in Lyons or papal Antichrist in Rome that Servetus must die although Calvin would have preferred a more merciful summary method of execution; he did not oppose the burning on Oct 27, 1553… To show mercy would be to show weakness and that would encourage his enemies.”
Page 239 – “Calvin gleefully seized on this attempted coup d etat. Four of his chief opponents were beheaded and their defeat, Calvin’s triumph, was represented as Gods triumph. Over the severed victim’s head was coldly in scribed.
For having fallen into misfortune, of loving man more than God, Claude de Geneva has his head nailed up in this place.” (I did not post the details; however, this act of desecration is much worse than what I have posted)
The Concise History of the Catholic Church Thomas Bokenkotter – Page 229
“Crossing swords with the Pope of Geneva was a dangerous pastime and the vanquished often paid for it dearly. Jacques Gruett…who bitterly resented the life style imposed by Calvin… Gruett was arrested, tortured in the manner of his age, and when evidence was found convicting him of blasphemy beheaded.”
229 “Michael Servetus…at the behest of Calvin was arrested and after trial burned at the stake”
P
PerryJ
Guest
After the reformation; which, was very recent. Your conclusion is attempting to use a couple of decades to refute centuries of the Catholic Church being the guiding force to higher learning.
Again only papal degrees were universal.
Interesting I see me presenting evidence. I see you presenting personal opinion.
P
PerryJ
Guest
Of course, the Spanish Monarchy was very strong and actually forced the Pope into creating the Spanish Inquistion; which, the monarchy used to torture and execute Jews. Your statement does not take the timeline and context of the world into account.
I think you know by now I can provide documentation for my statements. If you refute please provide some documentation.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
You said (post #33) “He probably would have also burned him at the stake for his theory.” I merely wondered whether there is any evidence supporting the claim that Calvin would have executed someone for a scientific theory.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
I said that few extant copies of Copernicus’ De revolutionibus were censored as demanded by the Inquisition and Index, and the degree to which the order to censor the book was obeyed was in inverse proportion to the distance from Rome.
P
PerryJ
Guest
Do you not believe that it was monarchal power and the threat of Islamic invasion that drove obediance or the lack of obediance to Rome?
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Can’t say. Possibly. Perhaps a bit of “out of sight, out of mind.”
C
cyberwolf001
Guest
I know I am about two or three days late but here is a link about Geocentricism from scripture Catholic one of the most often listed Catholic Apologetics sites.
I is a linky!
The Dogma is supposedly from Trent and Vatican 1 which states we can not go against the Church fathers agreed 100% on an interpretation.
Also Pope Alexander VII declared in a Papal Bull that “the Pythagorean doctrine concerning the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun is false and altogether incompatible with divine Scripture” and the principles advocated by Copernicus on the position and movement of the earth to be “repugnant to Scripture and to its true and Catholic interpretation"
It certainly looks like there is nothing to do but say the Church was wrong on this. Instead of saying “No we weren’t you just read it wrong.”
I is a linky!
The Dogma is supposedly from Trent and Vatican 1 which states we can not go against the Church fathers agreed 100% on an interpretation.
Also Pope Alexander VII declared in a Papal Bull that “the Pythagorean doctrine concerning the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun is false and altogether incompatible with divine Scripture” and the principles advocated by Copernicus on the position and movement of the earth to be “repugnant to Scripture and to its true and Catholic interpretation"
It certainly looks like there is nothing to do but say the Church was wrong on this. Instead of saying “No we weren’t you just read it wrong.”
P
PerryJ
Guest
Did you read all of the posts? The Church was not wrong. Galileo was proven wrong by Kepler. Kepler was assisted by the Chatolic Church in finding the truth.
R
ROBAUTEN
Guest
The Geocentrism controversy seems very similar to the Evolution debate. Being a biologist myself, I am aware that microevolution or speciation (change withing a genus or species) can be well demonstrated but the overall theory of molecule to man is highly speculative and unprovable and unfalsifiable. Personally I can still consider you to be an intelligent and honest Christian whether or not you are a Theistic evolutionist or a fiat creationist. Nobody really knows one way or the other.
I sense the same thing about the earth moving or not moving argument. As I understand it, since Newton demonstrated that larger objects attract smaller ones, and no other smaller planet has been observed to have a larger body revolving around it…then the only possible way that the earth could have the sun revolving around it, is if the earth is in the center of mass of the entire universe (taking all of the planets and galexies into consideration - and not just the center of our solar system - which it obviously is not) …which possibility is unprovable and seemingly unable to be disproved, but it seems to be the position of scripture and at least a good possibility for that reason.
Anyway, untill recently when I started thinking about this possibility, I comforted myself with the thought that “Man & Earth were the “theological” if not the geometric center of God’s universe.” That made sense enough. If Earth is the geographical center…it just makes even more sense. That the scientific consensus concludes otherwise and resorts to ridiculing the geocentric (or creationist) viewpoint does not surprise me at all having been educated by these same scientists. Those who do not believe have a vested interest in Kepler and Einstein and Darwin being right in everything they speculated about.
Why do we have to belittle those who hold other opinions on things that cannot be proven or disproven?
I sense the same thing about the earth moving or not moving argument. As I understand it, since Newton demonstrated that larger objects attract smaller ones, and no other smaller planet has been observed to have a larger body revolving around it…then the only possible way that the earth could have the sun revolving around it, is if the earth is in the center of mass of the entire universe (taking all of the planets and galexies into consideration - and not just the center of our solar system - which it obviously is not) …which possibility is unprovable and seemingly unable to be disproved, but it seems to be the position of scripture and at least a good possibility for that reason.
Anyway, untill recently when I started thinking about this possibility, I comforted myself with the thought that “Man & Earth were the “theological” if not the geometric center of God’s universe.” That made sense enough. If Earth is the geographical center…it just makes even more sense. That the scientific consensus concludes otherwise and resorts to ridiculing the geocentric (or creationist) viewpoint does not surprise me at all having been educated by these same scientists. Those who do not believe have a vested interest in Kepler and Einstein and Darwin being right in everything they speculated about.
Why do we have to belittle those who hold other opinions on things that cannot be proven or disproven?
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Who is belittling whom?
S
Slayer
Guest
When I read threads like these it makes me want to read the books I have obtained called, “Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right
Volume I : The Scientific Case for Geocentrism” and "Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right Volume II : The Historical Case for Geocentrism"
Heliocentrism was never proven, and Galileo retracted his belief before he died. It is possible the Church was right the whole time.
Check it out: catholicintl.com/products/books/gwwprint.htm
Volume I : The Scientific Case for Geocentrism” and "Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right Volume II : The Historical Case for Geocentrism"
Heliocentrism was never proven, and Galileo retracted his belief before he died. It is possible the Church was right the whole time.
Check it out: catholicintl.com/products/books/gwwprint.htm
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Slayer, if you are right, the Holy Spirit will no doubt guide people’s minds to the truth. Would you consider submitting a proposal for a paper on geocentrism to be read at the February meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science? If you are right that Copernicus was mistaken, the Holy Spirit will ensure that your paper is accepted.
StAnastasia
B
buffalo
Guest
Places where man is at the center:
In the middle of the largest and smallest distances.
God spent more time creating the earth than the other stars and planets
Animals created for the benefit of man
Anthropic coincidences
Made in the image and likeness of God
Earth enjoys a fantastic vantage point to view the rest of the Universe.
Man is the highest creature on earth
He planted the Garden of Eden for man
Just a few I can think of.
In the middle of the largest and smallest distances.
God spent more time creating the earth than the other stars and planets
Animals created for the benefit of man
Anthropic coincidences
Made in the image and likeness of God
Earth enjoys a fantastic vantage point to view the rest of the Universe.
Man is the highest creature on earth
He planted the Garden of Eden for man
Just a few I can think of.
B
buffalo
Guest
No it wouldn’t.
And by the same argument the Holy Spirit has protected the constant teaching of the Catholic Church in regards to mans origins, or not?
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Buffalo, I like most of these. However,
(1) God spent about eight billion years creating the fist and second generation stars in the universe’s galaxies, and then only a few hundred million coalescing the interstellar dust and gas nebulae into an accretion disc from which the sun and our solar system were formed.
(2) And the earthworms in the world’s cemeteries would beg to differ with you on who was created for whose benefit!
StAnastasia
S
Slayer
Guest
I have not read those books yet, and I am not knowledgeable on the subject enough nor am I qualified to write a paper for it. If anyone were to do it, then I think Robert A. Sungenis would fit the bill. I believe he even wrote a thesis on Geocentrism while he was attending university. Not to mention those two books he wrote…
- Status