Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on November 12, 2005 03:17 AM
Galileo certainly did make such claims about scientific theory in his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina. When Galileo claimed that, through science, man could know the structure of nature as deeply as God Himself, even if not so broadly, do you suppose that Galileo was speaking of anything but Truth with a capital "T"?
Are you talking about the quote "We conclude that God is known first through Nature, and then again, more particularly, by doctrine, by Nature in His works, and by doctrine in His revealed word."? If yes, you are misunderstaning this quote (by Tertullian, BTW). If not, where *exactly* is he saying that "man could know the structure of nature as deeply as God Himself"? I do not see that in this letter.
Besides, even if her had made such statement he would have been wrong. That, in turn, does not make your claims and justifications right. As any schoolkid knows, two wrongs do not make a right.
One can do this, and it is commonly done, but it leads to screwy thinking. It is better to consider that, until it is ruled out, a theory is a possible explanation of the observed data.
That screwy thinking is the basis of modern science. Besides, when science says that it considers a theory as true this *by definition* means until it is proven wrong (I was taught this in 7th grade).
Ignoring the anti-Catholic elements of your diatribe.
"Catholic" means universal/counciliar. I said nothing against the universe or councils, I spoke of the Papacy. By calling my post a "diatribe" you do not, however, "ignore" its anti-Papist nature<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
for I am both Christian and scientifically inclined.
Maybe. It just that neither of these features of yours are detectable in your posts...
Even though I am not angry with you personally, I am always outraged when the Papacy is confused with the Church even though the Papacy's doctrines would have been denounced by the Church Father as heresies. The Papacy gets away with these claims only thanks to the ignorance of modern society (which it helped create).
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
(failed) Attempts
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 12, 2005 03:17 AMAre you talking about the quote "We conclude that God is known first through Nature, and then again, more particularly, by doctrine, by Nature in His works, and by doctrine in His revealed word."? If yes, you are misunderstaning this quote (by Tertullian, BTW). If not, where *exactly* is he saying that "man could know the structure of nature as deeply as God Himself"? I do not see that in this letter.
Besides, even if her had made such statement he would have been wrong. That, in turn, does not make your claims and justifications right. As any schoolkid knows, two wrongs do not make a right.
One can do this, and it is commonly done, but it leads to screwy thinking. It is better to consider that, until it is ruled out, a theory is a possible explanation of the observed data.
That screwy thinking is the basis of modern science. Besides, when science says that it considers a theory as true this *by definition* means until it is proven wrong (I was taught this in 7th grade).
Ignoring the anti-Catholic elements of your diatribe.
"Catholic" means universal/counciliar. I said nothing against the universe or councils, I spoke of the Papacy. By calling my post a "diatribe" you do not, however, "ignore" its anti-Papist nature<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
for I am both Christian and scientifically inclined.
Maybe. It just that neither of these features of yours are detectable in your posts...
Even though I am not angry with you personally, I am always outraged when the Papacy is confused with the Church even though the Papacy's doctrines would have been denounced by the Church Father as heresies. The Papacy gets away with these claims only thanks to the ignorance of modern society (which it helped create).
#