(July 30, 2015 at 12:10 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote:(July 30, 2015 at 1:41 am)Arrogant Christian Wrote: The reason I included the relation to science in that century is that he may have pursued what objectively had the most basis for truth at the time. Deriding good work in retrospect is hardly useful.
Theology is not good work, especially when concocting one so odious as his.
Many famous scientists got key things wrong, but their task was and is more noble by far than any theology you care to mention, because they work to learn and then teach men ... not shackle them.
Its funny you mention shackle, since it is actually part of Christian theology to "be freed from the shackles of sin, and be put into the shackles of Christ" (paraphrase), but you'll find that any series of beliefs shackle the mind. I know someone will then respond with something like "better shackled to reality than a foolish myth," but that isn't entirely true. People that I have know to have "blind" faith in science very often responded with things like "that [idea] is impossible" and so on, and only a few years later the impossible happens. One thing I have learned in science is that almost nothing is impossible. Yet fully accepting science held back the minds of these people, since they were presupposed to disbelief. Christianity offers no scientific presupposition (excluding the midieval, catholic interpretation of genesis) , therefore it does not limit the scientific mind. Calvin worked to learn and teach men, same as others, in arguably what was better "science" at the time, however your mind appears to be shackled in a way that disqualifies you from considering that.
