Design your own hell

[Ben Kenobi]

Neither am I.

But it gets us nowhere, and we can call *** for tat all day long.

I don't want to go down this road, and neither do you.

[alva]

bishoperics

bishoprics, but please continue, Mr. Fun.

You're kidding me, right? This is to good to be true.

* chuckles *

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by MrFun
molly bloom -- I don't think Bennie is arguing that we should deny those horrendous crimes.

I know I'm not.

The problem with the religionistas is that they say, 'ah. but the Reign of Terror! or Stalin!' as if that's supposed to make non-religionistas roll over and sh!t Mars Bars.

If we're going to condemn secular humanism or any other kind of thought that does not depend on the invention of a Great Walrus of Love divinity, or the Holy Flaming Carrot for its existence, based on the actions of Robespierre or Lavrenti Beria, then I'd say using a similar tactic, Islam and Christianity and Judaism- done and dusted, consign them to the dustbin of history. I fail to see how killing for a particular political belief in Revolutionary France or Stalinist Russia invalidates all non-religious belief. I'm sure Xenophanes must have cheered mightily in his grave at the actions of the Mob in France. Not.

I hadn't noticed that it was a tenet of my personal beliefs that I kill people who disagree with me, even the ones like Elok, who call me a chick and an Aussie, and imagine they can lecture me about the English language and C.S. Lewis.

Let's be charitable and ascribe that to alcohol, youth and inexperience- and of course the pernicious influence of religionism.

[MrFun]

Geez, atheists and religionists can go on forever "condemning" one another, but it gets no one anywhere.

[Ben Kenobi]

I fail to see how killing for a particular political belief in Revolutionary France or Stalinist Russia invalidates all non-religious belief.

Precisely. The same is for religion. Now, can we move on?

[Ben Kenobi]

[quote]
I hadn't noticed that it was a tenet of my personal beliefs that I kill people who disagree with me,
[/quote

Interesting. Though you would have us gage you by your own beliefs, you would not bear us the same courtesy. Surely, you do not insist, that myself, or Mr. Fun want to kill people who disagree with us.

Rather the opposite. If I am confident in my beliefs, I do not shy away from those who differ, but rather, I encourage them to speak. This is the same attitude that fosters scientific endeavours and developments in Europe.

[Elok]

Er, come to think of it, you brought up a very obvious example for religion in general, Ben. The muslim world practically invented science. Algebra, astronomy, the preservation of all the old traditions that jump-started the renaissance...let's not forget Mother Teresa, or MLK Jr., or Gandhi, or all those nuns running orphanages.

Not that it really matters. If we were to judge things based on how easily they were corrupted or perverted, we'd all have to cave to Che and Tass, 'cause there's no tradition that's been abused to cause misery and delay social progress more than laissez-faire capitalism. Which is why we look at an ideal's message itself, not at all the ways people have managed to screw it up.

[Ben Kenobi]

Very true, but I want to argue in favour for Christianity. Islam may have preserved the science, but it took the Christians to really innovate, and build onto the older ideas. There are many contributions that Islam made to the Greek traditions, particularly in mathematics and astronomy, but then you have to compare them with Kepler, Tycho and Copernicus. Tycho's an interesting case, as we see how the state supports his endeavours, in Denmark to build his massive observatories.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by MrFun
Geez, atheists and religionists can go on forever "condemning" one another, but it gets no one anywhere.

Unfortunately the condemnation of religionistas usually comes packaged with a variety of interesting ways to die- stoning, beheading, immuring, burning at the stake, hanging, drawing and quartering, being pressed to death under a door, drowning in a pond in a ducking stool, being roped together and drowned en masse, et cetera, et cetera.

As for Elok's bizarre notion that the Muslim world 'invented' science, one can only hope he bothers to read about the history of science rather than rely on wishful thinking, and do some basic reading on Hellenistic achievements.

I'm quite happy for you to entertain religious beliefs- people can believe in the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus, I don't care- it's only when people's religious beliefs are used to limit the freedoms of others that I object. It is not your belief in a god or supernatural beings I object to- it is the uses that such a belief is put to that I find objectionable, and the idea that 'our way' is 'the only way'.

I'm not the one being discourteous- a brief glance at Elok's insult ridden posts should clarify that, and you Mr. Kenobi, have been known to resort to the cheap personal invective yourself- or do I need to remind you about your presumption of my Australian nationality (and the remarks based on that), and the idea that I let the Sceptics' Bible do my thinking for me?

[Elok]

United we stand, Ben. They're attacking the idea of religion in general; we need to show that religion in general, as well as in specific, is not intrinsically opposed to the advancement of the human race. The muslim world has just been working very hard recently to shake that "cultured, intelligent, and reasonable" image it acquired over the course of 700 years or so.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Very true, but I want to argue in favour for Christianity. Islam may have preserved the science, but it took the Christians to really innovate, and build onto the older ideas. There are many contributions that Islam made to the Greek traditions, particularly in mathematics and astronomy, but then you have to compare them with Kepler, Tycho and Copernicus. Tycho's an interesting case, as we see how the state supports his endeavours, in Denmark to build his massive observatories.

'Johannes Kepler was born at 2:30 PM on December 27, 1571, in Weil der Stadt, Württemburg, in the Holy Roman Empire of German Nationality. He was a sickly child and his parents were poor. But his evident intelligence earned him a scholarship to the University of Tübingen to study for the Lutheran ministry. There he was introduced to the ideas of Copernicus and delighted in them. In 1596, while a mathematics teacher in Graz, he wrote the first outspoken defense of the Copernican system, the 'Mysterium Cosmographicum'.

Kepler's family was Lutheran and he adhered to the Augsburg Confession, a defining document for Lutheranism. However, he did not adhere to the Lutheran position on the real presence and refused to sign the Formula of Concord. Because of his refusal he was excluded from the sacrament in the Lutheran church. This and his refusal to convert to Catholicism left him alienated by both the Lutherans and the Catholics. Thus he had no refuge during the Thirty-Years War.

Kepler was forced to leave his teaching post at Graz due to the counter Reformation because he was Lutheran and moved to Prague to work with the renowned Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe. '

http://www.kepler.arc.nasa.gov/johannes.html

Yes, we can see two branches of Christianity offering a lot of support to science there.

Copernicus on his would be detractors:

In the intended Preface of De revolutionibus orbium coelestium Copernicus showed that he was fully aware of the criticisms that his work would attract:-

'Perhaps there will be babblers who, although completely ignorant of mathematics, nevertheless take it upon themselves to pass judgement on mathematical questions and, badly distorting some passages of Scripture to their purpose, will dare find fault with my undertaking and censure it. I disregard them even to the extent as despising their criticism as unfounded. '

I wonder which 'scripture' he had in mind, and who might be likely to be quoting from it?

'There was another problem. A stationary Sun and moving Earth also clashed with many biblical passages. Protestants and Catholics alike often dismissed heliocentrism on these grounds. Martin Luther did so in one of his "table talks" in 1539, before De Revolutionibus had appeared. (Preliminary sketches had circulated in manuscript form.) In the long run, Protestants, who had some freedom to interpret the bible personally, accepted heliocentrism somewhat more quickly. Catholics, especially in Spain and Italy, had to be more cautious in the religious climate of the Counter Reformation, as the case of Galileo clearly demonstrates. Christoph Clavius, the leading Jesuit mathematician from about 1570 to his death in 1612, used biblical arguments against heliocentrism in his astronomical textbook.'

http://es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Galileo/Things/copernican_system.html

Well, guess we know now, eh?

Galilieo's struggles:

'All of these discoveries -- and others -- posed yet more direct challenges to Aristotle's idea of the perfection of the heavens -- some Aristotelian astronomers refused to look through Galileo's telescope, others tried to deny what he had seen. The Roman Catholic Church, however, was becoming increasingly concerned -- and a young Dominican, Tommaso Caccini, was the first to denounce Galileo officially and the Copernican theory his observations seemed to support -- from the pulpit during a sermon in the Duomo -- or Cathedral -- of Florence.

A few years later, as concerns mounted, Galileo was officially advised by Cardinal Bellarmino on the Pope's behalf to proceed cautiously and speak only hypothetically about the Copernican theory, but not as if it were actually real.

Galileo returned to Florence and continued work on his book, but now he gave more emphasis to mathematical arguments rather than to experimental or physical arguments- as the Pope wished. But when the book finally appeared in 1632, it raised an immediate storm of protest leading immediately to Galileo's arrest and famous trial by the Inquisition in Rome which found him guilty of having published an heretical book. In the end, Galileo had no choice but to repent and confess that he had gone to far.

He was sentenced to life imprisonment, which he spent, for the most part at his own villa at Arcetri near Florence, under the surveillance of the Inquisition.

Even so, Galileo, in his last years, now undertook his last and perhaps greatest work, his 'Discourses on the Two New Sciences', which has been described as "the cornerstone of modern physics." It was smuggled out of Italy to France, and published in Leyden in 1638.

In this book, Galileo presented the true laws of accelerated motion and falling bodies, as well as the fundamental theory of projectile motion and important applications of mathematics to a host of physical problems.

When Galileo died in 1642, totally blind and almost 78 years old, Pope Urban VIII refused to forget his feud with Galileo, and refused to permit his burial with a suitable monument -- instead, Galileo was buried unceremoniously in the Church of Santo Croce, in Florence. Only a few hundred years later were his remains moved to their present magnificent tomb, opposite that of Michelangelo near the entrance to the church.'

Of course, it took the Catholic Church only 300 years to admit that Galileo might just have been on to a good thing, but what's a little papal infallibility amongst friends?

I wasn't aware, by the way, that 'the state' was Christianity- in fact, looking at the course of European history, the power of the nation state grew from the struggle between the secular authority and Church- between people like Henry VIII, Philip Augustus and various German electors, for instance, and the then popes.

[Ben Kenobi]

when people's religious beliefs are used to limit the freedoms of others that I object. It is not your belief in a god or supernatural beings I object to- it is the uses that such a belief is put to that I find objectionable, and the idea that 'our way' is 'the only way'.

And your argument fails to make the leap from the assertion, that our way is the only way, to the belief that others must be forced, or coerced to believe in what we do.

I argue that yes, our way is the best, but that others must come to agreement not through coercion but convincing, not through force, but through friendship.

presumption of my Australian nationality

You have, on occasion, asserted your residence in the beautful, and cosmopolitan city of Sydney.

Secondly, presumption of Australian nationality is only a slur, if one presumes that it is shameful to be Australian.
I do not believe you harbour such shame.

the idea that I let the Sceptics' Bible do my thinking for me?

If that is the worst thing you can say about me, than that is a pretty mild shot.

[Ben Kenobi]

But his evident intelligence earned him a scholarship to the University of Tübingen to study for the Lutheran ministry. There he was introduced to the ideas of Copernicus and delighted in them.

So religion clearly assisted him in his scientific discoveries.

'Perhaps there will be babblers who, although completely ignorant of mathematics, nevertheless take it upon themselves to pass judgement on mathematical questions and, by distorting some passages of Scripture to their purpose, will dare find fault with my undertaking and censure it. I disregard them even to the extent as despising their criticism as unfounded.

Now, Galileo does not make the argument that to be Christian hinders his scientific discoveries, but rather, that his detractors are not adhering to the faith they profess! A stunning rebuttal to both them, and to you.

In the long run, Protestants, who had some freedom to interpret the bible personally, accepted heliocentrism somewhat more quickly.

A reformation sought to renew the Christian faith, back to the roots of their religion, to restore what had been lost. So, proper Christianity proves beneficial to scientific endeavours.

I wasn't aware, by the way, that 'the state' was Christianity- in fact, looking at the course of European history, the power of the nation state grew from the struggle between the secular authority and Church

Then you need to do more reading. The very fact that the pope had temporal power testifies to the concept of Christendom, and the linkages between the church and state.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by molly bloom

I'm quite happy for you to entertain religious beliefs- people can believe in the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus, I don't care- it's only when people's religious beliefs are used to limit the freedoms of others that I object. It is not your belief in a god or supernatural beings I object to- it is the uses that such a belief is put to that I find objectionable, and the idea that 'our way' is 'the only way'.

I'm not the one being discourteous- a brief glance at Elok's insult ridden posts should clarify that, and you Mr. Kenobi, have been known to resort to the cheap personal invective yourself- or do I need to remind you about your presumption of my Australian nationality (and the remarks based on that), and the idea that I let the Sceptics' Bible do my thinking for me?

First off, your protests against the abuses of religion in terms of violence in the name of God is anachronistic. Did you know that today, the vast majority of Christians no longer advocate violenct slaughter in the name of God?


And as for your complaint about insult ridden posts -- you sometimes do that with your statements, such as "you can believe in anything, even Santa Clause . . ." as if to belittle our belief in something much more significant and meaningful -- God.

[Elok]

Hey, I put her on my ignore list for a reason; less quoting, please.