« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Thomas Aquinas, Roman church, Science***

By: faul in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Wed, 30 Apr 14 12:20 PM | 85 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix
Msg. 15446 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 15443 by Cactus Flower)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

The perceived Scientific wisdom at the time,1927,&
confirmed by Einstein & his Theory Of Relativity was
the Universe is Infinite,Eternal & Static...there
was no role for a creator God.

Lemaitre using the Same Einstein equations proved
mathematically the Universe was Finite & Expanding,
to which Einstein replied..."Your calculations are correct, but your grasp of physics is abominable."

Neither the Expanding universe nor Static universe
theories were based on Observation(science),both
were based on Einstein's same theoretical mathematics that included his Fudge Factor called the Cosmological Constant.

6 years later in 1933 Einstein changed his mind & declared...."This is the most beautiful and
satisfactory explanation of creation to which I
have ever listened."Remember 6 years earlier he
listened to the same theory & called it abominable.

As Lemaitre said..."It leaves the materialist free to deny any transcendental Being… For the believer, it removes any attempt at familiarity with God… It is consonant with Isaiah speaking of the hidden God, hidden even in the beginning of the universe.�

So a theory that is a win win for Science & Religion,
which after all was THE WHOLE POINT ....design a theory to find a way for both to coexist!!

Note the "Hidden God" Lemaitre speaks of is none
other than the God of Egypt,Israel & Christianity
RA Amon (the Hidden God).

So what changed the minds of scientists from a
Static non creator universe to an expanding one
where a God could play a role?

At first it was the so called discovery of Hubble's
Red Shift & later on the discovery & measurement of
the Cosmological background radiation....

Only problem is BOTH have since been proven FALSE....

Now,in your naivete you may want to believe that
Lemaitre being a Catholic priest,had no bearing on
his theory,that brought back the role for a Creator god into the Universe.......but that's just childish thinking.


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Thomas Aquinas, Roman church, Science***
By: Cactus Flower
in ALEA
Tue, 29 Apr 14 6:33 PM
Msg. 15443 of 54959

I know who Lemaitre is. To say he is Catholic doesn't make the theory Catholic. It is a scientific hypothesis which happened to originate with a Catholic astrophysicist. In those terms, his catholicism is irrelevant.

The reason the theory of catholic foreknowledge is piffle is because you imply a continuity of unchanging belief within the Church that betrays your ignorance of medieval astronomy and theology.

Let me guess the process. Someone found a single quote from Aquinas and reshaped it for a modern argument, knowing nothing else about him or medieval church orthodoxy. You picked up on it and served it as written.

The Church's position on the universe changed dramatically during the centuries after the renaissance.

Prior to this, medieval astronomers learnt their craft through the trivium and quadrivium that was passed to them from antiquity, featuring important guidance from the book of Genesis. Creation out of something or nothing ("without form and void" versus "clay" - there was an argument even in the two Hebrew creation myths) in seven days by a creator God. Christianity made a structure with the earth as its centre, mankind as its purpose, Jerusalem as its heart and the church as its organising principle. Paradise was around the edge of the world, separated from us by a wall of fire, just as Adam and Eve experienced things once they were expelled from the Garden of Eden: "So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life." The medieval cartographers even made maps of the earth that show us how they thought things were arranged. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mappa_mundi_Hereford_1300_explained.png

The late medieval/scholastic Catholic position on the shape of the universe, as represented by folks like Aquinas, was less flat and more three dimensional. Derived from Arabic libraries filled with Ancient Greek thought, it used Ptolemy's model - sitting atop the Biblical origin stories with which it conformed reasonably neatly. A Russian doll set of concentric spheres made using perfect circular geometry. The earth was the centre of Ptolemy's universe. The stars were fixed upon one of these spheres, beyond which was the realm of heaven, inhabited by God, angels and the souls of the righteous.

Aquinas preferred the Greek/ St John's Gospel/ Augustinian/ Moslem tradition of creation out of nothing over the materialist model. In the beginning was the Word. But creation out of nothing did not imply a big bang. Instead, God created the finished world out of nothing: a perfectly designed place, fixed in space and harmonious, that was stained by the sins of mankind. Astronomy reinforced the Augustinian belief that the key truth of man's inheritance is original sin. Jesus (and his representative church on earth) intercedes between the terrestrial world and the divine domain up above.

This is the catholic world architecture up to the dawn of the renaissance.

That is, until Galileo and Kepler forced heliocentrism and elliptical orbits upon the world and thus exploded the medieval theo-astronomical consensus.

The Catholic Church tried desperately to preserve the medieval model. It was a world created around mankind which preserved divine perfection in the principles of its construction. It was a holistic theory which justified Papal power and the income derived from it. Catholic inquisitors burned heretics like Bruni for believing stars were distant suns. They suffered Copernicus because his model was submitted as a hypothetical rather than a tangible construct and because he published his work from his deathbed. They silenced Galileo who wrote that the laws of nature had equal value with the text of the Bible.

To believe in a Big Bang requires a gigantic universe with an unstable, non-earth-centric structure. No one believed this in the medieval period. The Bible said the sun revolves around the earth and so they believed it was so. They thought a spinning earth absurd. They assumed it would necessitate a great wind and folks thrown into the sky like ants from a top. That is, until Newton explained why it is we stick to our planet.

A universe with a fixed and central earth was Aquinas' belief. It was Catholic doctrine. Only the bravest souls dared challenge it. It was these heretical heroes of Western civilisation who gave us the freedom to think beyond religious orthodoxy. In the end, the Catholic church submitted to science. But it took centuries. Now, of course, the Popes even accept Darwin.

It is absurd to rewrite history in order to conform with a modern conspiracy theory of secret catholic knowledge for which there is precisely zero evidence. The freedom to think about the universe independent of religion was won in spite of the Church's opposition. The fact of Lemaitre's catholicism is merely ironical.

Whoops. Self-starred by accident.


« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next