lancia

  • ****
  • 5840 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #15 on: July 27, 2020, 11:08:17 am »
(4) is not an historic event.

Rofl.

I know, using "an" before "historic"!

That's a extraordinary observation.

1

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23840 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #16 on: July 27, 2020, 11:53:40 am »
Reproducing the series of events you're referring to doesn't help me see how they're miraculous in anything more than a fairly mundane sense.

I find that shocking. Heck, even Wonderer is looking for his rosary right now.

Quote from: Lucian
I'm mot too sure what you mean by 'explode'. Scientific discussion was already well underway long before then in Greece.

I'm not referring to the feathers in the cap since that by itself doesn't produce modern science. The key achievement of Western Christian Europe was their approach to scientific issues. For example:

Quote
Thus medieval natural philosophers sought to investigate the "common course of nature," not its uncommon, or miraculous, path. They characterized this approach admirably by the phrase "speaking naturally" (loquendo naturaliter) -- that is, speaking in terms of natural science, and not in terms of faith or theology. . . The widespread assumption of "natural impossibilities," or counterfactuals, or, as they are sometimes called, "thought experiments," . . was a significant aspect of medieval methodology. . . In the Middle Ages, such thinking resulted in conclusions that challenged aspects of Aristotle's physics.  [Edward Grant, "The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages," pp. 195-196

Much of what drove science stemmed from Christian theology. For example, Jesus having a separation between Church and State ("give unto the things that are Ceasar's...") had a huge impact on the freedom of science. The Church looked upon the learning of natural knowledge as outside of ecclesial control which let modern science to develop. Other important Christian principles was the belief in a beginning which contradicted Aristotle. Hence, it was considered essential to be skeptical about Aristotle's claims. The New Testament also states "to prove all things" which became part of their methodology. Truth was looked upon as something that "would set you free," which also opened up an honest assessment. Another important factor is that Christianity was an evangelical religion that took evidence and convincing arguments as key to the religion's success. All of these factors became part of scientific methodology. It's inconceivable to think of modern science without seeing Christianity's fingerprints all over it.

When we look at how unlikely the survival of the Christian faith was, and the unique attributes that Christian theology brought into the discovery process, the scientific age is itself a miraculous development that ultimately depended on Christianity. 


2

Mammal

  • ***
  • 4486 Posts
  • De facto
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #17 on: July 27, 2020, 12:55:25 pm »
^ Come on, spare us the fake historical narrative.

Greek science, Eastern science, Islam science during their own renaissance predated Western science by centuries..why?..because Western science was held back by Galileo affairs and church inquisitions and burning of libraries filled with knowledge..

Just how many times did religion legally challenge the teaching of evolution, exactly what is the Christian stance on climate change? Same old, same old..

And you were saying..??
Fact, Fiction or Superstition?
Thank God For Evolution
The Evolution Of God

3

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23840 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #18 on: July 27, 2020, 01:07:55 pm »
^ Come on, spare us the fake historical narrative.

Just for that you have to pay a residual to Christian organizations for every Wired! article you read. 🤣 [Don't feel bad, imagine how much Kurros has to pay.]

Quote from: Mammal
Greek science, Eastern science, Islam science during their own tenaissance predated Western science by centuries..why?..because Western science was held back by Galileo affairs and church inquisitions and burning of libraries filled with knowledge..

I never said the Pope is infallible. In any case, look what happened to Boltzmann. He killed himself because of harsh criticism.

Btw, I already qualified what progress I was referring to. It's silly to compare sixteenth century science in Europe with these other eras. There's no comparison.

Quote from: Mammal
Just how many times did religion legally challenge the teaching of evolution, exactly what is the Christian stance on climate change? Same old, same old..

And you were saying..??

A Christian was the first person to introduce evolution by natural selection (and it wasn't Darwin, it was Maupertius around 80 years prior to Darwin).

4

shoyt

  • **
  • 282 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #19 on: July 27, 2020, 01:10:31 pm »

Much of what drove science stemmed from Christian theology.


It seems to me you're not a student of either global religion or history.

No, Islam has had the largest impact on science than most any other religion. Much of Aquinas' thinking is merely an extension of Ibn Rushd's natural theology. Maybe sometime have a look at what the Islamic community has done in the advance of science.

Your awareness of a world outside of your credulous Christian bubble is appallingly thin.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2020, 10:05:58 am by shoyt »

5

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23840 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #20 on: July 27, 2020, 01:48:42 pm »
Sorry, I saw your treatment of Belorg and Grig so I think I'll pass.

6

shoyt

  • **
  • 282 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #21 on: July 27, 2020, 04:00:31 pm »
Sorry, I saw your treatment of Belorg and Grig so I think I'll pass.

Bubble.

7

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23840 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #22 on: July 27, 2020, 04:26:26 pm »
Just address the issues. If you're willing to sincerely apologize to Belorg and Grig, then because you're a new guy I'll cut you a break. But, the apology should be public and sincere. Then let's discuss what's on your mind. (Of course, I ask that you stay polite-ish in the discussion.)

8

shoyt

  • **
  • 282 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #23 on: July 27, 2020, 09:33:40 pm »
Just address the issues. If you're willing to sincerely apologize to Belorg and Grig, then because you're a new guy I'll cut you a break. But, the apology should be public and sincere. Then let's discuss what's on your mind. (Of course, I ask that you stay polite-ish in the discussion.)

You seriously need to grow up.

9

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23840 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #24 on: July 27, 2020, 10:11:27 pm »
You seriously need to grow up.

I didn't think you were the type of person to do the right thing.

10

shoyt

  • **
  • 282 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #25 on: July 27, 2020, 10:44:50 pm »
You seriously need to grow up.

I didn't think you were the type of person to do the right thing.

I guess you're just going to keep trolling?

11

Lucian

  • ***
  • 2552 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #26 on: July 28, 2020, 06:00:48 am »
Reproducing the series of events you're referring to doesn't help me see how they're miraculous in anything more than a fairly mundane sense.

I find that shocking.

Why? It's only shocking if you're unaware that people who aren't Christians exist.


I'm not referring to the feathers in the cap since that by itself doesn't produce modern science. The key achievement of Western Christian Europe was their approach to scientific issues. For example:

Quote
Thus medieval natural philosophers sought to investigate the "common course of nature," not its uncommon, or miraculous, path. They characterized this approach admirably by the phrase "speaking naturally" (loquendo naturaliter) -- that is, speaking in terms of natural science, and not in terms of faith or theology. . . The widespread assumption of "natural impossibilities," or counterfactuals, or, as they are sometimes called, "thought experiments," . . was a significant aspect of medieval methodology. . . In the Middle Ages, such thinking resulted in conclusions that challenged aspects of Aristotle's physics.  [Edward Grant, "The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages," pp. 195-196

Much of what drove science stemmed from Christian theology. For example, Jesus having a separation between Church and State ("give unto the things that are Ceasar's...") had a huge impact on the freedom of science. The Church looked upon the learning of natural knowledge as outside of ecclesial control which let modern science to develop. Other important Christian principles was the belief in a beginning which contradicted Aristotle. Hence, it was considered essential to be skeptical about Aristotle's claims. The New Testament also states "to prove all things" which became part of their methodology. Truth was looked upon as something that "would set you free," which also opened up an honest assessment. Another important factor is that Christianity was an evangelical religion that took evidence and convincing arguments as key to the religion's success. All of these factors became part of scientific methodology. It's inconceivable to think of modern science without seeing Christianity's fingerprints all over it.

When we look at how unlikely the survival of the Christian faith was, and the unique attributes that Christian theology brought into the discovery process, the scientific age is itself a miraculous development that ultimately depended on Christianity.

I'm not denying that Christianity and Christians had a significant role to play in the emergence of what we now call science. My point is simply that there existed a rich scientific heritage long before Christianity's emergence or impact. You've referred already to Aristotle, but he was hardly alone.

12

Harvey

  • *****
  • 23840 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #27 on: July 28, 2020, 07:06:00 am »
I'm not denying that Christianity and Christians had a significant role to play in the emergence of what we now call science. My point is simply that there existed a rich scientific heritage long before Christianity's emergence or impact. You've referred already to Aristotle, but he was hardly alone.

The thing is that when you consider the extreme unlikeliness of the survival of the Christian religion (I cited 11 miraculous events not even counting post-Roman events), the extreme unlikeliness of the Jews surviving, and then consider the impact that Christianity had on modern science (and let's not even talk about Jewish impact on science) then I think it is quite obvious that we're only an advanced scientific society as a result of miraculous events. Atheists have already used up their Wyatt Earp objection to account for fine-tuning of the physical constants, so that explanation has gotten old.

Quote from: Lucian
It's only shocking if you're unaware that people who aren't Christians exist.

But if being an advanced scientific culture is miraculously due to the survival of the Christian religion, then it seems one ought to believe in Christianity given that miraculous result. Even if Christianity provided very little input to our being an advanced scientific age, the fact remains that many persecutions ended quickly because the persecutor died, or was captured, or taken ill, or converted to the religion. If it happened a few times I could see why that's not a big issue. But for it to happen so many times in such dramatic fashion requires belief on the part of the skeptic.

13

shoyt

  • **
  • 282 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #28 on: July 28, 2020, 07:39:52 am »
You citing rather uninteresting things neither makes them interesting nor miraculous.

Christianity did not produce modern science. Quite the opposite. Despite Christianity, Science persisted. Today even, American Christians largely think evolution is false, Genesis is a literal account of creation, that transubstantiation is true, that dead people come back to life, that people can walk on water, global warming is a hoax, that there are angels and demons, and so on.

There are entire books written on Christianity's place in history. Buy one written by an objective historian. Read it. Read about the development of Science. You're so eager to say Christianity is true and good you ignore the fact it's no different from any other human enterprise.

This is why I continue to use terms like 'credulous' in describing your association with Christianity.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2020, 10:08:13 am by shoyt »

14

Mammal

  • ***
  • 4486 Posts
  • De facto
    • View Profile
Re: The miracle case for Christianity survival
« Reply #29 on: July 28, 2020, 08:15:03 am »
I never said the Pope is infallible. In any case, look what happened to Boltzmann. He killed himself because of harsh criticism.
Btw, I already qualified what progress I was referring to. It's silly to compare sixteenth century science in Europe with these other eras. There's no comparison.
..
A Christian was the first person to introduce evolution by natural selection (and it wasn't Darwin, it was Maupertius around 80 years prior to Darwin).
No, you can't hop around like that. The RCC represents Christianity as much as Protestantism, their actions in curtailing scientific advancement as mush as those of the Protestants. Whoever introduced evolution did not so on behalf of Christianity, that much is blatantly obvious. And scientific advancement in the East and under Islam renaissance, while it was suppressed under Christian rulers, is very relevant in order to prove your assertions wrong.
Fact, Fiction or Superstition?
Thank God For Evolution
The Evolution Of God