9th January 2008

“The European Renaissance was based on the rediscovery of Greek and Roman learning, although the Christian hierarchy still tried to suppress new knowledge and understanding that didn't fit with their interpretation of the Bible.”

Colin Wilson

17 Responses to “9th January 2008”

  1. Terence Meaden Says:

    “The church was never at the forefront in the quest for knowledge. It held the rearguard, and fought to maintain the status quo that it had set itself.”

    Only when cornered, did it try to fit new discoveries into its framework.

  2. GJK Says:

    “Only when cornered, did it try to fit new discoveries into its framework.”

    As with Intelligent Design…

  3. Thunder Says:

    * As with Intelligent Design… *

    Intelligent design is not an infusion of scientific advancment. Intelligent design is a (psedo-) logical response to refute the establishment of evolution as nomnitive thought.

  4. Terence Meaden Says:

    Mr. Thunder
    Please answer the question: to what extent do you believe in creationism (define it as you wish) and intelligent design?

  5. Thunder Says:

    * to what extent do you believe in creationism *

    I did answer the question. I believe the scriptures. I don`t see the title creationism in the scriptures anywhere. My evasiveness is not of being understood: it is of being misunderstood.

    * intelligent design *

    That is an unscriptural title for an unscriptural manner of rebuttal. I believe the scriptures when they say we were wonderfully made. I agree with the inference that the design of those things issued from an intelligence far beyond our own. I don`t agree with renaming God ‘accident’. The big bang non-sense is insufficient to define the advent of the cosmos. It is a scientific principle that things in a closed system move to equlibrium and so the big bang can only occur when acted upon by an extraneous force. Existence is a paradox.

  6. Terence Meaden Says:

    That confirmation is helpful.
    We know where the starting line is now.
    In believing the Judaic and Christian scriptures, you believe quite fundamentally in the statements found in Genesis, including the Adam and Eve account and the six days of creation.

    You must be very proud of your Christian name.
    Do not hide it Mr. Thunder. Tell us what it is please.

  7. Thunder Says:

    * In believing the Judaic and Christian scriptures, you believe quite fundamentally in the statements found in Genesis, including the Adam and Eve account and the six days of creation. *

    Exactly what I will not tolerate! STOP Characterizing my positions! You are NOT qualified! It is NOT necessary to believe in a six day creation in order to believe scripture.

    * You must be very proud of your Christian name. *

    Now what are you pretending?

    * Do not hide it Mr. Thunder. Tell us what it is please. *

    For what reason?

  8. Terence Meaden Says:

    * Do not hide it Mr. Thunder. Tell us what it is please. *

    * * For what reason?

    Only that it is unfair when participating in dual dialogue for one person to hide behind a pseudonym.

  9. Terence Meaden Says:

    * * In believing the Judaic and Christian scriptures, you believe quite fundamentally in the statements found in Genesis, including the Adam and Eve account and the six days of creation. *

    * Exactly what I will not tolerate! STOP Characterizing my positions! You are NOT qualified! It is NOT necessary to believe in a six day creation in order to believe scripture.

    I did invite you to state your position on the creation of the world and of man (equals what I meant by creationism).
    You gave a specific answer: “I did answer the question. I believe the scriptures.”
    Are you saying that Genesis is not a valid part of Judaic/Christian scriptures?
    In that case, how do you define “scriptures”?

    To help, here is the definition from the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary:
    “The sacred writings of the Old or New Testament, or more usually both together; Holy Writ; the Bible. “

  10. Thunder Says:

    * Only that it is unfair when participating in dual dialogue for one person to hide behind a pseudonym. *

    I don`t think names are specifically reflective of character or persona.

  11. Thunder Says:

    * I did invite you to state your position on the creation of the world and of man (equals what I meant by creationism). *

    I wasn`t there and neither were you.

    * You gave a specific answer: “I did answer the question. I believe the scriptures.” *

    Yes, I did and yes I do. But I renew my objection that you suffer from a lack of intimate understanding of scripture.

    * Are you saying that Genesis is not a valid part of Judaic/Christian scriptures? *

    No. I`m saying that you only think you understand what genesis says and what it means.

    * In that case, how do you define “scriptures”? *

    ANYTHING valid is truth.

    * To help, here is the definition *

    Doesn`t matter. The actual meaning of scripture is ‘written truth’. Subsequent understanding of that word pertaining to religion in general (and judeo-christianity specifically) is written truth instigated by the will (inspiration) of God.

  12. Terence Meaden Says:

    ** Only that it is unfair when participating in dual dialogue for one person to hide behind a pseudonym. *

    *I don`t think names are specifically reflective of character or persona.

    My question was made in all innocence. I never had any intention of analysing names. One cannot. I only wanted to emphasise that it is not fair when someone hides behind a non-de-plume. So I thought that if you do not want to reveal your surname, then at least you can reveal your Christian name. You know my names. Out of courtesy you may wish to oblige in this small matter.
    If you

  13. Thunder Says:

    * My question was made in all innocence. *

    I give you the benefit of the doubt but your wording was suggestive.

    * I never had any intention of analysing names. One cannot. *

    You used the word hide. That is suggestive.

    * I only wanted to emphasise that it is not fair when someone hides behind a non-de-plume. *

    That is still suggestive. What more tactility would my name add to the discussion unless you are expressing some suspicion about something. It is irrelevant.

    * So I thought that if you do not want to reveal your surname, then at least you can reveal your Christian name. *

    You should not have thought I had a problem revealing my name.

    * You know my names. *

    Don`t take offense at this but I don`t pay a lot of attention to names on the board except when I sense a change in tenor that usually exists between different personas.

    * Out of courtesy you may wish to oblige in this small matter. *

    I never had a problem with it. All you had to do is ask. My Name is Robert.

  14. Terence Meaden Says:

    Thank you.

    Having a name is to be human.

    Without it and especially when concealing behind a pseudonym like ‘thunder’, it suggests a persona where the intention is to enunciate in loudly booming speech.

    If not, you may choose to tell us why you picked on ‘thunder’.

  15. Thunder Says:

    Thunder is short for thundershadow which is my online handle on the yahoo message boards.

  16. Terence Meaden Says:

    That’s fine, and clear to us now.

    The word ‘thunder’ can have particular associations, as known for some Bronze Age and Neolithic religions in which ‘thunder’ was the voice of the Storm God speaking and thundering from the storm cloud.
    The Storm God (like the Sun God) was but one aspect of the Sky God whose domain was the sky, sun and clouds, and who controlled the rain, wind, and sunshine—elements that assisted the crops to grow successfully in the soils of Mother Earth.
    A general version of the once-widespread idea of the Marriage of the Gods—which helped to explain the creation of the world and its annual rebirth at the winter solstice—is also common to Greek mythology, and known to students of Latin studying The Aeneid which involved the divinities Aeneas and Dido and their Sacred Marriage.

    The Storm God is what I think of when I see ‘Thunder’ used as an alias or sobriquet.

  17. Thunder Says:

    I chose thundershadow because all the other thunder (cool) words were taken.