M
manualman
Guest
Check the thread title then.I am not critiquing the book’s thoughts; I am critiquing your thoughts.
P.S. My name isn’t Woods.
- Status
P.S. My name isn’t Woods.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Yes, exactly.Check the thread title then.
P.S. My name isn’t Woods.
Your thoughts, on the thread title, is my point.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
The problem with Galileo was his overstepping his jurisdiction with theology?
Because he believed a literal interpretation of Genesis was untenable is overstepping?
The problem for Galileo - not with Galileo - was a Church overstepping Its jurisdiction into science, and an unwillingness, by the same Church, to permit differing interpretations of Scripture, by penalty of imprisonment should one do so.
Fortunately, despite Church dogma, the truth is exposed.
R
Rascalking
Guest
Why do you start post with these red letters? I’m just curious!The problem with Galileo was his overstepping his jurisdiction with theology?
Because he believed a literal interpretation of Genesis was untenable is overstepping?
The problem for Galileo - not with Galileo - was a Church overstepping Its jurisdiction into science, and an unwillingness, by the same Church, to permit differing interpretations of Scripture, by penalty of imprisonment should one do so.
Fortunately, despite Church dogma, the truth is exposed.
J
jam070406
Guest
Truth is a person! (and it’s not Galileo)The problem with Galileo was his overstepping his jurisdiction with theology?
Because he believed a literal interpretation of Genesis was untenable is overstepping?
The problem for Galileo - not with Galileo - was a Church overstepping Its jurisdiction into science, and an unwillingness, by the same Church, to permit differing interpretations of Scripture, by penalty of imprisonment should one do so.
Fortunately, despite Church dogma, the truth is exposed.
J
John21652
Guest
Well, that’s a non-answer if ever I read one.Wrong, for you, is right.
So, I’ll repeat what I wrote the first time -
I should admit, I left out a fellow by the name of Aquinas, who had a massive influence on western thought. he was Catholic too. After the reformation I could throw in the name of Grotius, who wasn’t a Catholic, but may as well have been one, considering his thinking. The one single piece of this 'bedrock I forgot to mention is the Bible. Take that away and there isn’t much of the bedrock left at all!
Now, put your thinking cap on and have a crack at it.
M
manualman
Guest
For those unfamiliar with the tale: catholic.com/tracts/the-galileo-controversy
Seed seems unfamiliar with the concept of the Black Legend. Virtually all English speaking countries have a legacy of bias and bigotry towards catholicism that must be re-evaluated periodically. Not surprising given the history of England and Rome since the protestant revolt. The result is that, even today, scholar primarily relying on historical English language sources don’t recognize the amount of bias built into their bibliography.
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Genesis draws on the myths of peoples in those times to answer questions of who they are, where they came from, and where they are going…
There is a mystical concept of first man and woman who walked the Garden of Eden with God…and there is another issue of the world being created in 7 days…I think the Church’s scholastic work has been more on the side of science.
Read history…not anti-Catholic sources.
There is a mystical concept of first man and woman who walked the Garden of Eden with God…and there is another issue of the world being created in 7 days…I think the Church’s scholastic work has been more on the side of science.
Read history…not anti-Catholic sources.
M
MartyrForJesus
Guest
You don’t seem to want to discuss anything. Galileo overstepped his authority, even though he could not prove his theory over the mainstream views of the time.The problem with Galileo was his overstepping his jurisdiction with theology?
Because he believed a literal interpretation of Genesis was untenable is overstepping?
The problem for Galileo - not with Galileo - was a Church overstepping Its jurisdiction into science, and an unwillingness, by the same Church, to permit differing interpretations of Scripture, by penalty of imprisonment should one do so.
Fortunately, despite Church dogma, the truth is exposed.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Did I lead you to believe Galileo is the truth?Truth is a person! (and it’s not Galileo)
Did I lead you to believe Christ is not?
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
V
VeritasLuxMea
Guest
Thomas E. Woods was one of my college professors, believe it or not! I took a couple Western Civ classes with him, but didn’t know about any of his books until I graduated.
In real life, he is one of the coolest, funniest and classiest guys I’ve ever met and he has the best history anecdotes. Furthermore, he was the inspiration for me to become a teacher!
I was pleasantly surprised when I ran into one of his books… they are good, too.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Galileo was “allowed.”1633
Galileo is found guilty of violating the condition of 1616, by supporting Copernicus, and he is condemned [not just in trouble] to lifelong imprisonment, by the Roman Catholic Church.
Galileo was sentenced to prison and his book was banned. He was allowed to serve his time in house arrest, where he remained until his death in 1641. Keyfigures to Galileo commentary also says he was allowed to go home shortly after his trial.
That certainly says it precisely.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Manual seems unfamiliar with the bias and bigotry within catholicism that must be re-evaluated periodically.
V
VeritasLuxMea
Guest
Haven’t read this particular Woods book, but did read the pro-Catholic tract. Still doesn’t make any sense to me.
What exactly was Galileo imprisoned for? If it was “overstepping” and delving into the faith, then the question I have is: either geocentrism was doctrine or not. If it was doctrine, then the Church was flat out wrong on the subject. If it wasn’t, then why imprison Galileo???
What exactly was Galileo imprisoned for? If it was “overstepping” and delving into the faith, then the question I have is: either geocentrism was doctrine or not. If it was doctrine, then the Church was flat out wrong on the subject. If it wasn’t, then why imprison Galileo???
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Not accepting my views is no reason to say I am not discussing; repeating your own views is not a reason to think you are.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Galileo was imprisoned for violatiing his sentence on him by the Roman Catholic Church in 1616.
He was prohibited from supporting Copernicus.
Copernicus, as you know, showed that Aristotle is wrong.
The Church preferred to believe what is wrong and prohibited Galileo from publishing what is correct.
In 1616, he could not prove mathematically his Copernican assertions (but, Aristotle did not either, though because of it being geo-centric, the Church accepted it).
Later, Galileo was invited to explain himself again. Armed with Kepler’s math, and a new Pope, he agreed.
He failed to present the math properly and was charged for his continued support of Copernicus.
He was sentenced to prison, for life, by the Church.
V
VeritasLuxMea
Guest
Having read the various pro-Catholic explanations, I have to say… yours makes a heck of a lot more sense.Galileo was imprisoned for violatiing his sentence on him by the Roman Catholic Church in 1616.
He was prohibited from supporting Copernicus.
Copernicus, as you know, showed that Aristotle is wrong.
The Church preferred to believe what is wrong and prohibited Galileo from publishing what is correct.
In 1616, he could not prove mathematically his Copernican assertions (but, Aristotle did not either, though because of it being geo-centric, the Church accepted it).
Later, Galileo was invited to explain himself again. Armed with Kepler’s math, and a new Pope, he agreed.
He failed to present the math properly and was charged for his continued support of Copernicus.
He was sentenced to prison, for life, by the Church.
I have no intention to disbelieve the Church but I have a real problem understanding their reasoning here… it was a crime to defy geocentrism just because he didn’t have absolute proof? I don’t understand. If it wasn’t doctrine, who the flip cares whether he disbelieved it??? It’s as if they were treating geocentrism as doctrine…
J
John21652
Guest
Telling you that you gave a non-answer is rude?!No need to be rude. We clearly don’t agree with each other.
My, such a sensitive soul, aren’t we?
You originally wrote about Galileo and his trials and from that you seemed to conclude this -
To which I replied -Please, the influence of the Roman Empire and Greek Thinking is the bedrock of Western Civilization, not the Roman Catholic Church - and that influence is still durable, to this day - unlike that, of the Roman Catholic Church.
The thing is, you respond with curt one liners that do not even vaguely answer the genuine posts of others and then have the gall to say “we clearly don’t agree…”.
the thing is, despite your one line responses, I don’t know what it is you even think, because your first response was only saying my right was wrong.
C’mon, if you are brave enough to tell someone they are wrong, surely you can be brave enough to elaborate your argument and show why they are wrong?
M
moncler_kids
Guest
It`s very difficult to meet a man who can be strong and mild, witty and gentle at the same time-and such man
monclerjakkersalg.net/moncler-hoody-kvinder-c-21.html
kvindercanadagoose.com/canada-goose-parka-c-28.html
monclerjakkersalg.net/moncler-hoody-kvinder-c-21.html
kvindercanadagoose.com/canada-goose-parka-c-28.html
- Status