Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-apple!arndt From: arndt@apple.DEC Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! Message-ID: <202@decwrl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 14-Jan-85 07:42:27 EST Article-I.D.: decwrl.202 Posted: Mon Jan 14 07:42:27 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 17-Jan-85 03:10:56 EST Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP Organization: DEC Engineering Network Lines: 37 I'm so mad I could spit! If I hear one more turtle egg stink up the net with a mention of how Christians held back science by bringing charges against Galileo I'll . . . I'll . . . , well I'll do SOMETHING. And it won't be pretty! ALL scholars in the West at that time were Christians. Members of the Church. Those in power in the Church used their office to uphold THEIR view of astronomy. They were eventually (in light of the evidence) forced to give up their position but AT THE TIME it was not at all clear to most thinking 'scientists' whether the Ptolemaic or the Copernican system was going to be the accepted one. These men, in the Church, did nothing more or less than members of scientific bodies have done many times in the course of history and will likely do into the future. Argue and make pronouncements and enforce, by the rules of the society, THEIR viewpoint. It was a HUMAN thing they did to Galileo! Not a Christian thing, however much they couched their condemnation in terms of their authority as Churchmen as well as 'scientists'. It has long since been shown by biblical scholars of many stripes that the Bible does NOT hold to a Ptolemaic view of the universe. It simply uses figurative language to explain in a simple way wah what APPEARS to be happening when one looks at the heavens. Just like the ole weatherman who says, "The sun will rise . . . ." The Bible does not claim to be a science textbook. It couldn't be as I have previously pointed out. If it were exactly true, who could understand it? We hardly believe we (in the 20th or think we will in the 21st for that matter) have an exact model of the universe now. So how could we recognize the 'real' one? [That's 20th century above, of course - sorry flying fingers outpace brain, or visa versa - (run with it Rosen)] But go ahead, use the cant in lieu of thinking and investigating. Signing off, Ken Arndt