I found an interesting exchange between some New atheists and Historian from Cambridge who is a Christian James Hannam., Hannam wrote Genesis of Science (God's Scientists in UK, same book). The exchange is not intellectually interesting but it showed the depth brain washing among New atheism, this known nothing arguing with a real historian, The blog is that of I am Skeptical who argued with me on this blog as few weeks ago. He starts out criticizing VictoryReppert (philosopher) for lauding Hannam's book.
It is amusing to see Christian apologists like Victor Reppert seize upon any any article they find on the internet that appeals to their confirmation bias. One topic that Christians have been touchy about is the idea that the church played a large role in the suppression if intellectual pursuit during the historical period known as the Dark Ages. If you're a Christian apologist, you'd rather believe that there was no such thing as the Dark Ages. You'd rather believe that intellectual endeavors flourished under the benevolent leadership of the church, and life for the average citizen was just peachy. There is no shortage of revisionist literature that supports this. In his customary manner, Victor has uncritically latched onto a review of James Hannam's book God's Philosophers that supports this notion.I told Hannam about it and he commented.
Hannam hasn't responded yet. I'll venture my own answer. First of all IM
S is quoting Wikipedia in talking about a list of banned books by the catholic church. Of Course Giadoreno Bruno is on it. So is John Locke and a lot of other famous people. Wiki is not a scholarly source and quoting that article against a real historian is just stupid. But even so the fact that famous people like Locke are on the list shows how ineffective it was. It didn't really lead to keeping these ideas down it just means the church didn't like them. I could also play the Protestant card and say hey that mean old Catholic church,. I[m not a Catholic so my guys are not to blame. Neither side has a monopoly on jerks. I don't thinks it's taking way from the truth of the Gospel to admit that there have been Christians who were oppressive and stupid.
I am betting James answer by saying that that list falls far short of being what he demanded which is list of would be scientists persecuted by Christians for doing science. The sources quoted by IMS and his friends are not very good. He is decades behind understanding where modern historians currently are in thinking ab out this rise of science and it's relationship with Christianity. Historians don't think in terms of periods as much, They don't think of the Renaissance as a period but as movement, They don['t guy into the atheist narrative of Renaissance as be awaking the evil dark age of religion.
To pick up a couple of Points James did not address:
"some role..." it had a huge role. I wrote two papers on it. - Yes, the main role played by the church was to suppress it. This tradition goes all the way back to Tertullian, whose ban on anatomical investigations lasted for a millennium.That's begging the question since Hannam's entire book is arguing they did not,. Terullian was not a ruler. His reasons for opposing anatomical research was not to stop science. How many people doing it then understand why they were doing it?
That nonsense. The major one's he thinks were not devout were. Newton was extremely devout. this guy has not read his privates papers and I have. I doubt that he's read a biography. Newton was major part of my dissertation I know well he was devout. Being Aryan doesn't change that. no reason why Aryans could not be devout. They still believed in God so they could be. Newton should be an embarrassment to atheists except atheists are just anti-Christian.
The major scientists were devout. Newton and Boyle were highly committed with strong spiritual tendencies in their private lives,.
- Some of them were openly devout (as everyone was required to be) but privately non-religious, or at least much less devout than they appeared. Newton was an Arian heretic, by the way.
Copernicus and Galileo were not at Charter which is in France not Italy, .James answered those two. your ignorance about Chartres (not Charter) is so telling. It was a cathedral; it was also a major center of scientific alarming.
when was that? who in particular and what church dogma? Let's see you substantiate that. what dogma was challenged at Chartre? That was one of the centers of scientific learning
- Come on, Joe. Copernicus and Galileo challenged the dogma of geocentrism, and their works were banned by the church. But they (and others like them) opened the door for real science to proceed. At Chartre, people learned scholasticism and Aristotelian natural philosophy. I'm not aware of any significant scientific advances that came from there.
No they did not, that is extremely ignorant. They lost it. they feel; by the time they fell they were Christian. Remember Constantine?
You don't know history, Christianity built western civilization. Political institution, moral values, science philosophy the whole of the church is rooted in Christian thought,
- The Romans built western civilization. The Christians presided over its ruin.
wrong I'm discussion what I learned in in graduate school a secular ,a secular program taught atheist professors. some of them were.
that's the party line, show me names, dates, events, break it down prove your bull shit. you are just regurgitating what atheist socialization has brain washed you to think
- You are regurgitating your own party line, Joe.Delete
A couple of book I recommend:
Peter Burke, The Renaissance. New York: McMillian, secon d ed. 1997 (first puboished1964).
David C. Lindberg and Ronald Numbers, God and Nature: Historical Essays On they Encounter Between Christianity and Science.University of California Press; Early Printing edition (April 29, 1986)
James Hannam, Genesis of Science: How The Christian Middle Ages Launched The Scientific Revolution, Regnery Publishing; 1st edition (March 22, 2011)
Of course he is not a historian. I'll be dealing with this more in depth next week on Metacrock's blog.
I'll also keep you posted on Hannam's answers.