We all know the story of Galileo. Galileo is famous for trying to popularize Copernicus’s theory that the Earth revolves around the Sun and not the Sun around the Earth. The sinfully short version of his story is that since his Copernican model contradicted the bible, he was told by the Catholic Church not to speak of it. When Galileo could not keep this promise, he was held before the Inquisition in 1633, declared a heretic, and sentenced to spend the rest of his days in house arrest.
Galileo is remembered for his discoveries in mathematics and astronomy, if not for his heresy and punishment. Meanwhile, the Catholic Church, in this instance at least, is remembered as the mistaken, cartoonish villain who punished Galileo for something that we now know—the religious and nonreligious of us—to be essentially proven absolutely true. When you bring this up with a Catholic, however, they’re likely to say, “We’ve all made mistakes. How were they to know they were in the wrong? Heliocentrism contradicted their interpretation of Scripture at the time. We’ve since adjusted our interpretations to account for it.”
In other words, Catholics no longer hold to geocentrism, thanks to Galileo and the astronomers before him. The two have since reconciled; the Catholic Church cleared Galileo’s name of wrongdoing in 1992. Did you read that right? Yes, 1992. I doubt that it consoled Galileo much to be forgiven 350 years after his death.
The incident with Galileo and the Catholic Church is one famous example of a timeless and devastating phenomenon that fundamentally follows from the way that science and religion operate. I knew that religion tends to suppress questions that lead to change from orthodoxy, and science tends to encourage new and different ideas, no matter how strange. When reading Cosmos, I had the epiphany that these contrasting methods have affected whole societies and the advance of science for millennia. Carl Sagan is not a raging atheist by any stretch of the imagination, but rather an honest historian of science. He shares with readers the lives and deaths of societies that celebrated science and produced some of the greatest scientists who have had the privilege and money to become famous.
There is something odd here, though. Take a look at these two timelines; the one on the left reaches from 600 B.C.E. to 2000 A.D., and it includes an overlapping but slightly different crew than the one on the right, which reaches from 600 B.C.E. to 500 A.D. You can tell from the one on the left why Sagan chose to end the one on the right with the death of Hypatia: in a way, centuries of scientific innovations died with her. Those great discoveries would not resurface for 1,000 years.
Why is that? Our greatest clue in these two timelines is the note that in the 5th century A.D. came the onset of the “Dark Ages”. If you’ve spent a lot of time around atheists like I have, then you have probably heard some variation of, “The last time that the Church ruled the state, we called it the Dark Ages! Hahaha!” In fact, it wasn’t necessarily called The Dark Ages simply because religion was just awful, but I’d venture to say that the Catholic Church did heavily affect and slow scientific progress.
After the fall of the Roman Empire, Europe was taken over by the Catholic Church. This makes sense so far (at least to me), knowing that it was Catholic mobs who, err, “dragged [Hypatia of the Alexandrian Library] from her chariot, tore off her clothes, and, armed with abalone shells, flayed her flesh from her bones” (p. 336) in 415 A.D. thanks to their association of science and learning with the demonized concept of paganism. It’s worth noting that the Catholic archbishop responsible for this was made a saint.
Just because the Catholic Church’s reign viciously ended the marketplace of ideas that was the Alexandrian Library, no great scientific discoveries were made in Europe for 1,000 years, and scientists were declared heretics, doesn’t mean that religion always resists scientific progress. After all, the whole “Dark Ages” fiasco is just an isolated incident, and besides, correlation doesn’t equal causation. Let’s instead turn our attention to what societies might look like if they aren’t under a great religious influence.
Ionia
Thanks to Carl Sagan, I am now a huge fan of the spirit of discovery in Ionian Greece from 600 to 400 B.C. Before Cosmos, I had never even heard of it. According to Sagan, the Ionians were watching as their Eastern Mediterranean neighbors argued over the attributes of gods like Zeus and Marduk when they themselves wondered, “If one of them must have been made up by priests, then why not both?” And they pondered what was instead causing the great regularities of nature if not gods. Unlike the priests and scribes, many of these Ionian thinkers were the sons of sailors, farmers, and weavers (p. 176) who worked hands-on, which led them to be inclined to do their own experiments. Here are some of the greatest Ionian or Ionian-inspired scientists introduced to me by Carl Sagan in “The Backbone of Night”:
• Thales of Miletus – A geometer. Influenced Euclid and Newton. Retold a Babylonian story about dry land emerging from water, typically said to be the work of the god Marduk, but “left Marduk out.”
• Anaximander of Miletus – Calculated the length of the year and seasons using a stick. Believed that the Earth was not suspended from the heavens (although it was still at the center of the universe). Had a pretty accurate idea of evolution and infinite worlds (planets), and did not attribute the cause of anything to a divine mind. Was complained about by St. Augustine.
• Theodorus of Cyrene – Invented the key, the ruler, the carpenter’s square, the level, the lathe, bronze casting, and central heating.
• Hippocrates of Cos – Established a famous medical tradition. Said, “Men think epilepsy divine, merely because they do not understand it. But if they called everything divine which they do not understand, why, there would be no end of divine things.”
• Empedocles of Akragas – Had an idea that light travels at a (not infinite but very) fast speed. Had some Darwin-esque ideas of extinction and evolution. Oh yeah, and he discovered air.
• Anaxagorus of Athens – Said the moon shines by reflected light, and came up with phases of the moon using geometry of the Earth, Moon, and Sun. Became friends with Pericles, the leader of Athens, but Pericles’ political rivals took out their anger on Anaxagorus and convicted and imprisoned him because of religious impiety.
• Democritus of Abdera – Pretty accurately predicted a lot of facts about astronomy. Realized that perception is due to matter and not the gods. Invented the word “atom”. Thought religion was evil and immortal souls and god do not exist. Said, “Nothing exists, but atoms and the void.” He wasn’t persecuted, but his books were later burned, as was urged by Plato.
• Aristarchus of Samos – Proposed heliocentrism. Inspired Copernicus, who popularized the idea 1800 years later. People called for him to be condemned.
Whether these men were true atheists or not is debatable, but they were certainly all materialists, and many of them were at odds with religion—especially the use of religion to explain phenomena that could be explained naturally. On the other hand, in the interest of being honest and not just a mean God-hater, I should probably disclose some other issues that came into play as to why the Ionian tradition was lost for so long. Yes, I truly believe that religion played a role, but so did slavery and a superstitious cult.
The leader of Ionia in 540 B.C.E. was named Polycrates. At first glance, it may sound like he was a hero for science, being “a generous patron of the arts, sciences, and engineering” (p. 178). That’s not the whole story, though. He “oppressed his own people” and had a wall built to keep out his neighbors, whom he feared would invade after he had made war with them. This wall, you’ve probably guessed, was made by slaves. The Ionian tradition would end 125 years after the wall was finished, so it doesn’t seem like it was directly tied to its downfall.
However, it seems likely that this hands-on mercantile approach that gave rise to the thinkers of Ionia also made their economy soar—on the backs of slaves. It became understood that manual labor was undignified and suited only for slaves, but the death knell for Ionian science plays when one remembers that many experiments fall under the category of “manual labor” in their requirement to get one’s hands dirty and not sit back and philosophize. The slaves were not free to do science. The scientists were “too dignified” to do the dirty work. There was no one left to actually do the science, because those who could, had spent too much time looking up at the stars to see all the suffering that was around them. In the end, it was their ideas that suffered as well, being lost forever.
One mathematician who comes to mind here is Pythagoras. You’ve heard of him and his theorem in geometry class. We can thank him for that, but he arguably did more harm than good. He took math and essentially made a mysterious cult out of it, in which he urged his disciples not to perform experiments. Even worse was the non-self-correcting nature of his work. He believed math to be perfect and rational (and given to us from the gods), but on discovering the square root of two (at which time he came up with the word “irrational”), he panicked and hid its existence from the masses, making mathematics an exclusive endeavor for him and his followers. He removed the freedom of thought and the democracy from math.
Alexandria
Likewise, this issue with slavery and an unwillingness to address the society from which discovery springs also affected the city of Alexandria from 336 B.C.E. to 415 A.D. This city was founded on some strikingly humanist values: “Alexander encouraged respect for alien cultures and the open-minded pursuit of knowledge” (p. 18). What’s more, Alexandria was home to an incredibly diverse population of various races and religions. If we think of it only in terms of short-lived scientific successes, we’d be thrilled. Here are some notable figures as told on page 19 of Cosmos:
• Eratosthenes – Determined the circumference of the earth using sticks.
• Hipparchus – Mapped constellations.
• Euclid – Systematized geometry.
• Dionysius – Defined the parts of speech, “did for the study of language what Euclid did for geometry.”
• Herophilus – Established that the brain, not the heart, is the seat of intelligence.
• Heron of Alexandria – Invented trains, wrote the first book about robotics.
• Apollonius of Perga – Demonstrated the forms of the conic sections (ellipse, parabola, and hyperbola) which are the curves that planets, comets, and stars follow in their orbits.
• Archimedes – Mechanical genius.
• Ptolemy – Astronomer, geographer, and astrologer.
• Hypatia of Alexandria – Mathematician, astronomer, and the last scientist to work in the Alexandrian library.
Of course, I wouldn’t want to forget the most famous of them all, Plato. Or do I? You may know that Plato was a great influence on Christianity, but did you know that he was a follower of the superstitious Pythagorus? Plato followed in Pythagorus’s footsteps in matters of rejection of materialism, suppression of scientific ideas, and comfort in a slave society. Plato and Aristotle “offered justifications for oppression. They served tyrants. . . . Plato . . . actually used the metaphor of slavery to connect his politics with his cosmology” (p. 188). Thanks to the elitism of science in Alexandria, “Science never captured the imagination of the multitude. There was no counterbalance to stagnation, to pessimism, to the most abject surrenders to mysticism. When, at long last, the mob came to burn the Library down, there was nobody to stop them” (p. 335).
Is Religion the Enemy of Science?
I set out to write this post after realizing that when we atheists blame religion for the downfall of various scientific civilizations, we might actually be onto something. I thought about it and researched, and I found that religion is often to blame, but it doesn’t usually do everything on its own. It seems that scientists tend to get too confident, as if their enterprises are immortal, and forget that as soon as people stop trusting them, they could turn to the easy comforts of religion instead. We must not let superstition run unchecked, and we must be wary of tyrants—religious or not.
Work cited:
Sagan, Carl. Cosmos. 1st ed. New York, New York: Carl Sagan Productions, 1980.
Note: It was brought to my attention months after writing this post that some of the details about ancient Greece in Cosmos (my source) were wrong, specifically in regards to Hypatia and the Library of Alexandria. I haven’t yet edited this post to reflect them, but I highly suggest you check out this post for greater detail on what is and what is not true about these topics.
Interesting question
However, I’m not sure if I understood the answer in your opinion!
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Interesting question
However, I’m not sure if I understood the answer in your opinion!”
Is religion the enemy of science?
In my opinion, yes.
The question is Rebekah’s and the subject of the blog. Yes. Religion is the enemy of science. And vice versa. The conflict between science and religion, between facts and supposition. I apologize for not making a more clear argument.
“Everything has a natural explanation. The moon is not a god but a great rock and the sun a hot rock.”
Anaxagoras 500 BCE – 428 BCE
This is the argument between humanists and theists in that age. Today, it could be a cartoon caption.
Democritus explained that everything that existed was formed by atoms. Some of the ancient Greek philosophers believed that the gods lived in the clouds. I point this out to show that the beginnings of both science and religion had their foundation in very elementary terms.
(Democritus had a disciple named Lucretius, who expanded on the “Nature of Things” and explained “The Swerve” is worth reading.) The Swerve, excellent book by Stephen Greenblatt. Try it.
The freethinking of one age is the common sense of the next.
Matthew Arnold
Hypathia was murdered by Christians. The library of Alexander was burned. The Christians were trying, at the same time, to create their New Testament so they eliminated all the competition they could. The greatest library at that time, about 300AD, destroyed because Christianity could not stand up against competing religions nor the facts of scientific research. Is this an act of tolerance?
The decree of Justinian shut down all ‘pagan’ schools. Pagan means anything not Christian. Cannot stand to be compared.
“Ethical teaching is weakened if it is tied up with dogmas that will not bear examination.”
—Margaret Kennedy Knight, “Morals Without Religion” (1955)
https://www.thefinertimes.com/education-in-the-middle-ages#:~:text=Education%20in%20the%20Middle%20Ages%20May%2023%2C%202012,concern%20anymore%20and%20fighting%20skills%20became%20more%20important
Education was always restricted to royalty and the wealthy. It was simply too exclusive and expensive for the masses. What education did take place was through the monasteries of Europe. So, education was for a long time, dependant on the religious entities. That does not mean religion is not the enemy of science. The papist determined what would be taught. The fact that Christianity had to be promoted by the edge of a sword, the end of a cudgel, or the burning stake, does not speak of a religion confident in it’s standing. Those people who were killed died because they taught or held beliefs contrary to the Cross. Oppressive, regressive, and intolerant.
Even when public education began in the colonies, it was mostly done in churches.
Education was heavy on religious dogma with reading, writing, and arithmetic taught at very elementary levels. Higher education was still the privilege of the aristocrats and clerics.
Rev. Jonathan Dickinson, the first president of Princeton:
“Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ.”
Now there is an encouraging sentiment. Only Christian dogma was acceptable. If Christianity were in charge of education, would we have engineers, scientists, and astronomists plotting a trip to Mars?
Today we have those Christian Nationalists who are trying to get science and evolution out of the public schools, working with the Texas State Board of Education to remove historical facts and replace them with their views of a nation ‘founded on Christianity’, which it is not. There cannot be a reading of the constitution, the Federalist Papers, or our nation’s history that reaches any such conclusion. Religion, Christianity in our case, struggles with its credibility and continues to try to eliminate every contrary idea.
“Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived.”
-Oscar Fingal O’Flahertie Wills Wilde
No man has ever heard the voice of God nor seen anything he wrote. God can never be ahead of the men who create him/her/it.
Christianity, like all religions, evolves as necessary to satisfy a changing society., yet it maintains its secrecy, magic, and myth. Science, in the same time periods, has moved forward. From Anaxagoras’ explanation of the moon and the sun to our two intrepid Voyager I and Voyager II explorers, now sailing outside the solar system but still communicating with earth’s scientists. The sad thing is that religion still denies science and evolution.
God always complies with the narrative men create for Her/It/Him.
“Demagogues promoting creationism and a Christian Nationalist version of American history continue to exert influence over social studies and science standards in textbooks used in public schools as well as some publicly funded charter schools.”
Stewart, Katherine. The Good News Club. PublicAffairs. Kindle Edition.
“Ethical teaching is weakened if it is tied up with dogmas that will not bear examination.”
—Margaret Kennedy Knight, “Morals Without Religion” (1955)
“In a report calling for a “restoration of education in America,” the CNP advocated the elimination of the Department of Education, the regrounding of public education on “Judeo-Christian principles,” and public subsidies for religious schools and homeschooling.”
(Council for National Policy – an ultra-conservative group working to do away with public education.)
Stewart, Katherine. The Good News Club. PublicAffairs. Kindle Edition.
Project Blitz is a long-range plan to bring about a Theocracy in our time.
This may be the scariest thing you see or hear about from the White-Right-Christian-Nationalist.
https://www.au.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/Project%20Blitz%20Playbook%202018-19.pdf
Katherine Stewart also has a relative book, “The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous World of Religious Nationalism”. Christians should examine the agenda of their leaders. Thanks, Rebekah, a very good book, very important reading.
There is no more evidence for the Christian God than for any of the Gods they condemn. By what form of reason do Christians assume the mantle of “the most high God?”
LikeLiked by 1 person
My opinion is that religion is the enemy of science.
Religion is a creation of the mind of men in the early development of Homosaphiens. All the evidence offered for ‘proof’ of the existence of the various gods comes from the same source, Imagination. The various gods created by various civilizations should be sufficient evidence of their invalidity.
Science is based on empirical knowledge we have gained down through the development of mankind in the same time periods as religion. However, when science has the audacity to provide facts contrary to fiction, religion becomes defensive and try to prove their gods through their magic.
Religion is the enemy of science. Science is the enemy of religion. If theory and reasoning cannot stand up to facts, then they need to be reviewed.
Nobody anywhere at any time has ever heard the voice of God, nor have they seen anything written by God, by god.
The argument so far seems to be centered on events of the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages ended when the manuscripts of Titus Lucretius Caras was discovered by Poggio Bracciolini. “On The Nature of Things.” One of the things he taught in De Rerum nature was that “nothing comes from nothing.” The earth and the universe were not created from nothing. No immaterial being created all the physical material that makes up the universe and everything in it.
Game on. The Dark Ages created by the church shutting down all critical thinking was suddenly ruptured by the Enlightenment. The church lost ground in the same strides that The Enlightenment strode into prominence produced by that one mss. Everybody should read Stephen Greenblatt’s “The Swerve.”
That brings us closer to today. The church is using the government and its wealthy sponsorers in capitalism to return us to a time when the government and the church, controlled by capitalism rule society by the laws of god, which they make up on the fly.
“In a report calling for a “restoration of education in America,” the CNP advocated the elimination of the Department of Education, the regrounding of public education on “Judeo-Christian principles,” and public subsidies for religious schools and homeschooling.”
(Council for National Policy – an ultra-conservative group working to do away with public education.)
Stewart, Katherine. The Good News Club. PublicAffairs. Kindle Edition.
Today we have those Christian Nationalists who are trying to get science and evolution out of the public schools, working with the Texas State Board of Education to remove historical facts from textbooks and replace them with their views of a nation ‘founded on Christianity’, which it is not. They want to remove historically significant people and replace them with persons with Christian credentials. They want to portray slavery, which the church promoted, as an ‘economical immigration.’
There cannot be a reading of the constitution, the Federalist Papers, or our nation’s history that reaches any such conclusion. Religion, Christianity in our case, struggles with its credibility and continues to try to eliminate every contrary idea.
Project Blitz is a long-range plan to bring about a Theocracy in our time.
This may be the scariest thing you see or hear about from the White-Right-Christian-Nationalist.
https://www.au.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/Project%20Blitz%20Playbook%202018-19.pdf
Can you imagine the book burnings if they are successful?
Katherine Stewart also has a relative book, “The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous World of Religious Nationalism”. Christians should examine the agenda of their leaders. (Thanks Rebekah.)
There is no more evidence for the Christian God than for any of the Gods they condemn. They have no authority to force the ‘laws of God’ onto the world. But they will if we allow it.
LikeLike
No Religion is not the enemy of science for me they are the brothers the problems become for interpretatation
LikeLike
The death of Hypatia; the beginning of the dark ages.
Hypatia was murdered by Christians. The library of Alexander was burned. The Christians were trying, at the same time, to create their New Testament and there was just too much contrary knowledge to allow it to compete.
Rev. Jonathan Dickinson, the first president of Princeton:
“Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ.”
But since the devil’s bride, Reason, that pretty whore,
comes in and thinks she’s wise,
and what she says, what she thinks, is from the Holy Spirit,
who can help us, then?
Not judges, not doctors, no king or emperor,
because [reason] is the Devil’s greatest whore.
— Martin Luther
baron d’ Paul Henri Thiry Holbach. Superstition In All Ages (1732) / Common Sense
The devils bride is reason. Reason is the Devil’s greatest whore. Fear of reason.
Reason. Thinking. Curiosity. Science. Evolution. Anything that is contrary to church doctrine is of the Devil.
I think the question was “Is the Religion the enemy of Science?”
I think the answer is yes, with qualifications. I’ll get to that shortly. Just one more cry for the destruction of knowledge.
“First, their synagogues should be set on fire.” Jewish prayer books should be destroyed, and rabbis forbidden to preach. The homes of Jews should likewise be “smashed and destroyed” and their residents “put under one roof or in a stable like gypsies, to teach them they are not master in our land….These poisonous envenomed worms should be drafted into forced labor. The young and strong Jews and Jewesses should be given the flail, the ax, the hoe, the spade, the distaff, and the spindle and let them earn their bread by the sweat of their noses.”
Martin Luther “On The Jews And Their Lies”
“Oh, the deep, deep love of Jesus” (An old Christian hymn.)
Religion and science have little in common. The most glaring of course is Evolution vs Creation. Sometimes the church has been the only source of education. Mostly it was outlawed for the masses. Why? Because the church and the monarchs needed the population to be ignorant, poor, and hungry. The church always sides with the oppressor.
They also were leaders in science and mathematics. But any knowledge conflicting with church dogma, was never to see the light of day. When men, whether in the church or not, made discoveries or taught anything not dogma was shut down. Some people complied with church authority. Some defied the church and went public. They were hauled before the church authorities and tried cause. Either they recanted and made a public confession or they were imprisoned, or beheaded, or burned alive, just like their books.
Science is the enemy of religion. There is nothing to give substance to the claims made by religion. Science proves in every case that no supernatural entity has ever intervened in the course of nature or the Cosmos. Only in the minds of mankind does God exist. The fact that there are centuries of superstitious teaching does not give it any authenticity. If theist had confidence in the existence of their gods, they should not fear Science.
The Renaissance. The Dark Ages ended when in 1417 a man named Poggio Bracciolini discovered the manuscripts of Lucretius Carus’ On The Nature Of Things, De Rerum Natura. Stephen Greenblatt’s The Swerve is a worthwhile read. On the front flap, this paragraph concerning the poem reads:
“It was a beautiful poem of the most dangerous ideas: that the universe functions without the aid of gods, that religious fear is damaging to human life, that pleasure and virtue are not opposites but intertwined, and that matter is made up of very small particles in eternal motion, randomly colliding and swerving in new directions.”
The first principle of our study we will derive from this, that no thing is ever by divine power produced from nothing. Lucretius The Nature of Things Bk. 1 line 149-150
Nothing can be more contrary to religion and the clergy than reason and common sense. Baron Paul-Henri Thiry d’Holbach 1723-1789 Paris
This argument has gone on since man invented god.
I apologize for some of the pronouns/nouns. I’m long-winded and I apologize.
If it is too long, reject it and Ill redo.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Religion is not about love, truth & understanding. It’s about having the power to control societies through the suppression of knowledge. It’s telling that the bible opens with a story where the two leads (and all of their descendants) are dealt the most vicious set of punishments by the character of god. Why? Because they ‘ate from the tree of knowledge’. No wonder religion has so often been at odds with scientists, whose objective is (almost always) to try and increase human knowledge of the world in which we live.
We promote free-thinking, and the acquisition of knowledge, to combat the indoctrination of religion, and it usually leads to an understanding that religion is a concept invented to keep us, the ordinary people, under the thumb. Take away the mindless acceptance of religion’s lies, and their power evaporates. They don’t much like that!
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Scientific Revolution was started by Christians who were excited to discover the “mind of God in His creation.” Christianity is definitely NOT the enemy of science. I hope you will read this piece on how science advanced as a result of Christianity.
https://thefaithfulchurch.com/2017/11/28/the-faithful-church-began-the-scientific-revolution/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hey I am glad you commented, and there is a lot I could say in response to your claim. But as you have commented on my post I want to be sure that you read it all the way through before commenting. Did you?
LikeLike
Yes. And I was impressed by all the effort and work you put into your post. I just know that it’s popular to believe that there has been a conflict between science and Christianity, but that isn’t so.
LikeLike
I think you are both right to an extent, in that Christianity isn’t really anything without Christians interpreting it and living it out. There have been Christians who have used their faith to justify advances in science and there have been Christians who have used it to condemn scientific advancements. To observe it used one way does not mean that others have not used it otherwise.
My impression is that Christianity is not something that is leading these broad movements in history, but is rather a weather-vane to the winds of the zeitgeist. It is interpreted by each generation to help explain and justify inclinations already present.
LikeLiked by 1 person
<url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_Trial>The Scopes Trial is the example that comes immediately to mind.
LikeLike
I’m sorry. You refer us to your report on the RCC attempt to re-write history. Maybe before you hang all your credibility on Galileo you should read some church history to see how many besides Galileo suffered the threat of ex-communication and death to stop their teaching or publishing anything not approved by the church. But, even this new rendering still shows the church enmity to science. To all learning not from church dogma, but especially science.
I would like you to explain what branch of science Christians used to ‘discover’ the “mind of God in His creation.”
Like all religions, Christianity is a psychogenic creation of man and it only exists in the mind of people who want to, or need to, continue to promote it.
The Texas Board of Education is constantly trying to re-write textbooks for elementary and high school classrooms to remove science and evolution from them, along with removing historical figures who were or are not heroes of religion. And of course, knowing the history of the church and slavery they now want to depict Negro slaves in America as an ‘economic immigration.’
Yes, religion, specifically Christianity, is the enemy of science. They (CNP) make public declarations that secular education produces Lesbians, Homosexuals, and Atheists. Democratic government is described as anti-Christian and the tool of Satan. Come to think of it, Christianity is against everything not Christian.
It seems that Christians can only tolerate power, greed, and lying.
LikeLike
Just a note that may have some interest outside the question at hand, it looks very much like Christianity, among other religions, stands against, is contrary to, and wants to disenfranchise everyone who does not bend the knee to the great one.
The FFRF writes to the Secretary of Agriculture opposing new rules allowing discrimination on the grounds of religious beliefs.
If you’re not interested, OK.
LikeLike
What RCC report? I’m very critical of the Catholic Church in the linked article.
The RCC allowed Aristotelian “natural” philosophy to become part of church dogma. This was what Galileo was arguing against. A lot of Christians (including Galileo) were persecuted by the RCC during the Inquisition.
All branches of science were influenced by their faith in God. They believed there was an intelligent designer and they wanted to understand how its mind worked. Newton, Copernicus, Boyle, and most of those who had breakthroughs during the Scientific Revolution were seeking to understand how God’s mind worked when he created the universe.
This burst of curiosity came after the Protestants broke away from the RCC. They were finally free to think and not be accused of being a heretic!
Knowing Jesus doesn’t make a person stupid. It makes them even more curious so they can glorify God.
Blessings during this holiday season.
LikeLike
Facts, which science tends to deal with, are the enemy of religion.
Religion had it pretty good until them damn scientists started meticulously observing and studying everything. As religion cannot work with the facts, they are left with obfuscation and lies. Much like the administration of our orange idiot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is religion the enemy of science?
I think that St. Augustine stated that curiosity was a sin. In medieval Europe, the church quickly shut down any science that was not church approved. It is obvious that they had to shut down science and education in general. Education is the enemy of religion.
I will just quote a couple of my favorites. You stated before, in this or another post, that the apologist continually repeat their arguments, re-arrange them and repeat them again. (Or words to that effect.) By the nature of their god they have no facts to argue.
“The civilization of man has increased just to the same extent that religious power has decreased. The intellectual advancement of man depends upon how often he can exchange an old superstition for a new truth.”
Robert Green Ingersoll. The Gods / From ‘The Gods and Other Lectures’
“Religious fanatics want people to switch off their own minds, ignore the evidence, and blindly follow a holy book based upon private ‘revelation’. ”
Richard Dawkins
LikeLiked by 4 people
Very interesting, I have heard justifications showing that it was Christians who contributed to the growth of science more so than non Christians. Now you have my interest peaked, will put that on my list of things to study. The problem with many of those with me in the Christian camp is that they are afraid to follow the truth where it leads. The truth is what it is, and should be pursued. I am afraid their is clouded judgement on both sides of the aisle though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You may want to follow Spenser Alexander McDaniel on his blog, http://talesoftimesforgotten.com, because Professor Sagan got more than a few things wrong about ancient history, Hypatia being one of those. (Search his site for references to Sagan and you will see this.) He, like you, is young and he writes beautifully and is more than a little erudite. I think you will enjoy his perspectives as he backs them up with a great deal of good evidence.
Your statement “When you bring this up with a Catholic, however, they’re likely to say, ‘We’ve all made mistakes. How were they to know they were in the wrong? Heliocentrism contradicted their interpretation of Scripture at the time. We’ve since adjusted our interpretations to account for it.’” sounds like you made it up, but if it is real, it is troublesome. The Catholic Church bills itself as the One True Church™ as do many other churches but they have the history to back it up, to some extent. And part of the basis of that claim is they are the only source of true (even infallible) interpretations of scripture. And to say “We’ve since adjusted our interpretations to account for it.” is typical. They won’t actually say their interpretation was wrong (because it wasn’t) because of their own egos, and they won’t say that scripture was wrong (it was), so they say something mealy-mouthed like we have adjusted our interpretation, implying their interpretation was correct, it just needed a bit of adjustment.Of course, it didn’t need adjustment, it needed to be put on a list of mistakes made in the Bible. Actually I find individual Catholics more ready to admit such things (collectively they are very hesitant, but individually not) that are the rock-ribbed fundamentalists/evangelicals of the U.S.
LikeLiked by 1 person