Shooting at Quebec City mosque, multiple dead - Page 44
Page 44 of 67 FirstFirst ... 34424344454654 ... LastLast
Results 431 to 440 of 661

Thread: Shooting at Quebec City mosque, multiple dead

  1. #431
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    With Nellie
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by mordko View Post
    No you don't. For one thing there is no "plain teaching of the NT". NT is a bunch of different, often contradictory teachings. Same as any old religious text written and rewritten by a bunch of people.
    Yes, I actually do. And I don't have to resort to Google searches to copy and paste answers for what I'm talking about. Additionally, there is plain teaching in the NT. Granted, some parts are less clear, but there's nothing contradictory on doctrine. But I know we're not going to resolve that issue here.

    Quote Originally Posted by mordko View Post
    Also, the Second Vatican Council specifically stated that
    First, where does the Vatican II state that?

    Second, supersessionism doesn't espouse that the people of the God of Israel have "ceased to exist." Only that the national covenant which made them "God's people" as it were, is annulled. Ethnic Israelites still exist.


  2. #432
    Senior Member olivaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    2,099
    Mordko's fantasy history has exposed as nothing more than a snow job. He said that the Greeks had a working model of the solar system (wrong). He argued that Constantine burned his opponents (wrong). He said that Galileo was burned (wrong). He doesn't understand the relationship between science and technology. He said that science was surpressed (wrong). Then he said he meant only astronomy (also wrong). He said that Copernicus would have been persecuted (wrong, Copernicus was encourage by Rome and his work was taught in many catholic schools). At one point he linked Constantine to the Italian fascists of 1921 (????).

    Now he cuts and pastes names from a Google search. It's telling that the list included Bertrand Russell, an American 20th century philosopher, atheist, Vietnam war protestor, anti-nuclear proliferation activist and vocal atheist. Russell advocated pre-marital sex so he was denied a teaching role at the College of the City of New York in 1940. Mordko thinks that it,proves 1500 years of scientific suppression by the Catholic Church.
    If you have something to say - then say.

  3. #433
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    3,131
    Quote Originally Posted by olivaw View Post
    Mordko's fantasy history has exposed as nothing more than a snow job. He said that the Greeks had a working model of the solar system (wrong). He argued that Constantine burned his opponents (wrong). He said that Galileo was burned (wrong). He doesn't understand the relationship between science and technology. He said that science was surpressed (wrong). Then he said he meant only astronomy (also wrong). He said that Copernicus would have been persecuted (wrong, Copernicus was encourage by Rome and his work was taught in many catholic schools). At one point he linked Constantine to the Italian fascists of 1921 (????).

    Now he cuts and pastes names from a Google search. It's telling that the list included Bertrand Russell, an American 20th century philosopher, atheist, Vietnam war protestor, anti-nuclear proliferation activist and vocal atheist. Russell advocated pre-marital sex so he was denied a teaching role at the College of the City of New York in 1940. Mordko thinks that it,proves 1500 years of scientific suppression by the Catholic Church.
    A pack of lies:

    1. Ancient greeks most definitely did have a heliocentric system of the solar system, which was what I said. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristarchus_of_Samos

    2. I did not say that Constantine burned his opponents. He murdered them.

    3. At no point did I say that Galileo was burned. He was persecuted by the Church, which is what I said.

    4. Science was suppressed, books were burned, scientists were murdered. Only a complete ignoramus or a liar can deny that.

    5. I drew the parallel between totalitarian regimes which existed at different times and which made big impacts on history. That is the only bit that is true in the whole pack of Olivaw's lies.

    6. Benrard Russel was included because he was (successfully) persecuted by fundamentlist Christians and therefore belongs to the list. I did not say it's a list of suppression by the "Catholic Church" - that is another lie. Several of the others were persecuted by Christian churches other than the Catholic one, but an ignoramus wouldn't know that.

    Olivaw is such a blatant bearfaced liar, it's nothing short of stunning. It's like when he accused me of making a typo, made a typo in the very same sentence, corrected and then denied making the typo. Olivaw, admit it, are you 5 years old? Then everything is understandable, your brains are not fully formed.

    Otherwise, why don't you tell us where exactly I claimed that Galileo was burned, etc?

  4. Remove Advertisements
    CanadianMoneyForum.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #434
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by mordko View Post

    Otherwise, why don't you tell us where exactly I claimed that Galileo was burned, etc?
    Why don't you tell me why Butterfield is a propagandist in his history of science?
    We can not know things as they are in themselves, but only as they appear to us.

  6. #435
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    3,131
    ^ That's my opinion.

    What Olivaw is claiming relates to facts. He is denying the historic fact that Christian church suppressed science and persecuted scientists. He is lying by claiming that I said things about Galileo and Constantine which I didn't say.

    You are entitled to your own opinion but not to making up lies about facts.

  7. #436
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by mordko View Post
    The simple point you seem to be unable to grasp is that none of the scientific theories were suppressed before the Christian Church came along.
    I'm not convinced you know that. Dominant scientific models, and dominant world views, tend to suppress dissenters. I'm not convinced that ancient history is detailed enough to know if there was suppression or not. Followers of Plato might have suppressed followers of Democratus, for example.
    We can not know things as they are in themselves, but only as they appear to us.

  8. #437
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by mordko View Post
    ^ That's my opinion.

    You are entitled to your own opinion but not to making up lies about facts.
    Please tell me what formed your opinion.
    We can not know things as they are in themselves, but only as they appear to us.

  9. #438
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by mordko View Post
    The Church first created a list of forbidden books under Constantine. And of course the work by Copernicus got onto the list. He delayed publication of his book by 30 years - and dedicated it to the Pope because he was afraid. Justifiably, as others discovered a little later. He died almost immediately after the publication, which in a way was lucky. There is quite a long time span between Constantine's first ban and the eventual relaxation which started over 1000 years later. Still, persecutions didn't stop...

    A very short selection of scientists, writers and philosophers persecuted by the Church :

    - Isaac Newton (hope you've heard of him) - was forced to hide his religion until deathbed

    Claiming that the church hasn't engaged in persecution of science is impressively ignorant.
    1. About Copernicus: a) so we have a monk apparently writing to Copernicus in a open welcoming way as Olivaw has claimed. Then b) we have Constantine banning Copernicus' writing.

    You value b) more highly than a) according to your personal worldview. So your facts are not free of values.
    olivaw values a), apparently a fact that does not support your (religious) worldview.

    I'm interestind in a theory that incorporates a) and b), whereas you seem to only be interested in a theory that incorporates b). In other words, you back a theory, or view of history, that can not account for the fact that belief in God is not inherently anti scientific.

    I might add that your intese devaluing of what the monk did in writing to Copernicus, has an idiological bent to it.

    2. About Newton: He makes numerous references to God in his Principia, for example. He was a God believer and it didn't stop him from advancing science. He wouldn't be welcome to do that these days due to bigotry toward believers in God.
    The conflict I am aware of that he got into with some chruch was that he did not believe in the Trinity, wheras the dominant paradigm in Christianity at the time backed the Trinity. Apparently he had conflict over that, but not, as far as I know, over what was important to natural science. Anyway, according to what he wrote in Pricipia about God, it looks to me, he didn't hide his faith.

    Science doesn't need athiesm to understand and explain natural phenomena.
    Last edited by Pluto; 2017-02-17 at 11:42 AM.
    We can not know things as they are in themselves, but only as they appear to us.

  10. #439
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    3,131
    My point isn't that scientists didn't believe in god - many did; in those times it was hard to explain basic natural events without a supernatural belief.

    My point is that totalitarian regimes attempt to control thoughts. Constantine attempted to enforce Christian dogma and the system lasted for many centuries. Scientists, philosophers, writers think for themselves and don't follow dogma. For this reason totalitarian regimes have suppressed science, whether it's medieval Christian regimes, Islamic regimes, communist regimes or fascist regimes.

  11. #440
    Senior Member olivaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    2,099
    Quote Originally Posted by mordko View Post
    A pack of lies:

    1. Ancient greeks most definitely did have a heliocentric system of the solar system, which was what I said. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristarchus_of_Samos
    Wrong - the exchange was:
    Post 340: Mordko And yet the pagans knew that the earth was round, that it spins around the sun and measured the distance from earth to the moon and to the sun. And Christianity suppressed all this for many, many centuries.
    Post 365: Olivaw Ancient greeks hypothesized a number of correct ideas, including a round earth b
    Post 359: Mordko The Ancient Greeks may have guessed the atom structure but their model of the solar system was not just a hypothesis.

    Mordko's own link proves that Aristarchus work was hypothesis.
    [Aristarchus of Samos] astronomical ideas were often rejected in favor of the geocentric theories of Aristotle and Ptolemy, which are now known to be incorrect. Nicolaus Copernicus had attributed the heliocentric theory to Aristarchus.[2]
    The prevalent theory in Ancient Greek was the geocentric (Earth centric) model of the Universe. The model was later embraced by Roman scholars. The heliocentric (Sun centric) model was not seriously considered until Copernicus. As I have demonstrated, repeatedly, Copernicus' hypothesis was embraced by the Catholic Church.
    By mid-decade, Copernicus received a Frombork canon cathedral appointment, holding onto the job for the rest of his life. It was a fortunate stroke: The canon's position afforded him the opportunity to fund the continuation of his studies for as long as he liked. Still, the job demanded much of his schedule; he was only able to pursue his academic interests intermittently, during his free time. http://www.biography.com/people/nico...56984#synopsis
    Copernicus published his work in 1543. It was initially celebrated and taught in many Catholic universities. It was banned in 1616.

    Copernicus gained ridicule from poets and Protestants, who condemned it as heresy. While the Catholic Church initially accepted heliocentricity, Catholics eventually joined the wave of Protestant opposition and banned the book in 1616. The Protestant churches accepted Copernicus’ findings after more evidence emerged to support it. The Catholic Church, however, remained ground in its anti-Copernican beliefs until the 19th century. The ban on Copernicus's views was lifted in 1822, and the ban on his book until 1835.
    The flat-earth belief, mentioned in post 340 was not advanced by the Catholic church.

    Mordko's argument fails on the evidence. He has tried to promote the idea that the Church not only refused to allow scientific research but that it actively suppressed it. As evidence, he suggests that the ancient Greeks adopted a working sun-centric model of the solar system and that the Church later suppressed it. That is factually incorrect.

    ----

    Many have correctly pointed out in this thread that much good and much evil was done in the name of the Church. Mordko would have us believe that only evil was done. This, despite the evidence that the Church was the primary benefactor of the sciences for centuries .

    The logical weakness of Mordko's position becomes clear upon momentary reflection. Misdeeds have been done by every nation. During its brief history, America engaged in slavery, internment, McCarthyism, support for dictators and the killing of roughly a million Iraqis. America also funded the rebuilding of Europe after the war, put a man on the moon, gave the world the Internet, contributed medical advances and promoted the democratic ideal. One cannot gain a complete picture of America unless one examines both the good and the bad done in her name. Similarly, once cannot fully appreciate 1,500 years of the Catholic church without examining both the good and the bad done in its name.

    Last edited by olivaw; 2017-02-17 at 01:22 PM.
    If you have something to say - then say.

Page 44 of 67 FirstFirst ... 34424344454654 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •