“Mention has been made of some new astrologer, who wanted to prove that the Earth moves and goes around, and not the firmament or heavens, the Sun and the Moon… . This Fool wants to turn the entire art of astronomy upside down! But as the Holy Scriptures show, Joshua ordered the Sun, and not the Earth, to halt!” Martin Luther talking about Nicolaus Copernicus (who used science to prove his observations) I remind you that after Luther a whole new brand of Christianity was started. Is this what religion has to offer when it comes to science?
2006-12-14
14:56:16
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Maritn Luther was a good example to Christians in his own area of expertise. He saw the heresy of Catholicism and led Christians out of it. However he was a terrible anti-semite, and hated the Jews, and I sure he had some other problems.
Let people work in their own area of training and knowledge and learn from them, you don't have to swallow everything they say. It is also bad to be against some one before you listen to what they say. Read Joshua 10 carefully and you will see Joshua did nt order the sun "to halt."
2006-12-14 15:07:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by oldguy63 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair
"In 1611 Galileo visited the Collegium Romanum in Rome, where the Jesuit astronomers by that time had repeated his observations and treated him with respect."
Using ad hominem attacks to discredit all the contributions of an individual is deceptive.
The real lesson to be learned in all of this is that political correctness has existed in the past as well as in our present society.
Many christian people have contributed greatly to science!!!
Most often, it is people who have political ambitions that interfere.
Politics is the problem. not religion. I'm not sure who Martin Luther would have been influenced by. However, he did make great contributions to society in non-science aspects.
Much of the trouble caused to many people who have a different opionion from the mainstream come from those who are most threatened by the changes the different ideas would cause, since they have something to personally lose.
Science should be less susceptible to political correctness, however, there are times when even science is affected.
Believe it! This comes from someone with a degree in science.
2006-12-14 23:53:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by Jimmy Dean 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Seems to me that you wish to look at mistakes that people make , rather than the good that they do.
Personally you would not like this method to be used in your own life no more than I would want it used in mine.
Martin Luther read the book of Romans and realized that they Religion that he had been following was not grounded in the word of God, but had become grounded in the word of Man.
THis act alone could not have spawned the movement that followed, but many others were just as frustrated by the Roman Catholic Church and its man made extras and rules, so they were already looking for a way to get back to Gods word and away from mans rules.
We all make mistakes, we all do some sort of good. One mistake or even a handful of mistakes do not take away from truth and goodness.
2006-12-14 23:07:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by cindy 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I would say that Martin Luther should be commended for trying to correct some of the corruption within the Church. Unfortunately, when the Church accepted half of his proposals and rejected the ones that went against dogma, he was persistent thus causing a whole movement against the Church. So I suppose I'm in the middle.
2006-12-14 23:00:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by gnighm 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Great answer Cindy.
Great answer Oldguy63.
Luther was a man of incredible courage and divinely-given spiritual insight, who stood up to the entire Roman Catholic Church of his day, against its corruption and perversions of the truth of the Bible.
What does Christianity have to offer science? A way out of the prison of having to believe that death ends all and some potent information about the meaning of life and why we are all here. To mention a couple of things.
2006-12-14 23:20:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bill 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Luther is a great example. He was a man of his age who did not pretend to be on some grand future watermark of history. He made some mistakes - real doozies such as the Peasant Revolt.
Yet in spite of his limitations and in some fields like science, he stuck fanatically to the truth which was given to him: Saved by Grace through Faith in Jesus. Few heroes in science, politics, marriage, or theology are perfect. Their steadfastness and ability to admit to humanity is what makes them good examples.
See also the Colonial fathers on slavery; the African chieftans selling their people into slavery and the like.
2006-12-14 23:02:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Joe Cool 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Nothing clouds the truth like overgeneralizations, eh? I mean, you take an embarassing statement of a Christian Reformer and imply that all of the results of Luther's work should be considered in light of that one statement? Let's be a little more responsible with our God-given logic; shall we?
2006-12-14 23:01:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by chdoctor 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well he did a lot for civil rights at least
2006-12-14 23:01:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋