Thought police slapped down.

"If god exists"?
Having doubts? ;-)
Of course. Even the most faithful have doubts sometimes, and there are many saints, especially among the mystics, who experienced the 'Dark Night of the Soul' - a period of emptiness, depression and absence of God prior to their mystical experience.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Except it hasn't. One can't 'contest science', as if it was some homogenous authority. One can contest an individual hypothesis, a theory or method, an interpretation or whatever - that's precisely what scientists should be doing. Was the scientific community backward or stupid because it initially ridiculed Darwin's theory of evolution?
Punishment for 'heresy' (i.e. challenging what the Church asserts as immutable) has ranged from excommunication to execution.

Whether the scientific community has argued and continues to argue among itself is a moot point. Challenge is good and it forces that community to evolve from within. It doesn't change the fact - fact, mind - that the Church has made an industry over centuries of dismissing facts and punishing those who question blind faith.

If you look at such as Intelligent Design, and the teaching of Bible scripture in science classes in some US states, you can see that it's still doing so now.

In short, you're wrong. @HE117 puts it very eloquently above.
 
Of course. Even the most faithful have doubts sometimes, and there are many saints, especially among the mystics, who experienced the 'Dark Night of the Soul' - a period of emptiness, depression and absence of God prior to their mystical experience.
I preferred the dark teatime of the soul myself.
 
Punishment for 'heresy' (i.e. challenging what the Church asserts as immutable) has ranged from excommunication to execution.

Whether the scientific community has argued and continues to argue among itself is a moot point. Challenge is good and it forces that community to evolve from within. It doesn't change the fact - fact, mind - that the Church has made an industry over centuries of dismissing facts and punishing those who question blind faith.

If you look at such as Intelligent Design, and the teaching of Bible scripture in science classes in some US states, you can see that it's still doing so now.

In short, you're wrong. @HE117 puts it very eloquently above.
Oh, I just remembered this is a thread about today's thought policing, which involves police visiting the homes of people who express barely controversial opinions about people who struggle to accept the most basic facts of biology. My, how far we've come!
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Oh, I just remembered this is a thread about today's thought policing, which involves police visiting the homes of people who express barely controversial opinions about people who struggle to accept the most basic facts of biology. My, how far we've come!
...which you're attempting to do.

I made the point that we've developed to where we are with the Church's influence. That is potentially both good and bad. We could - see my earlier post - have developed in better and worse directions if a different set of influences had been in place. That's a reasonable, even-handed observation that doesn't set out to assert.

I also made the point that the Church has set out to control/dismiss science's influence. There's a wealth of evidence for that.

The person trying to dominate and control here is you.
 
...which you're attempting to do.

I made the point that we've developed to where we are with the Church's influence. That is potentially both good and bad. We could - see my earlier post - have developed in better and worse directions if a different set of influences had been in place. That's a reasonable, even-handed observation that doesn't set out to assert.

I also made the point that the Church has set out to control/dismiss science's influence. There's a wealth of evidence for that.

The person trying to dominate and control here is you.
Sorry. I wasn't aware that you experience debate as thought policing and oppression. I feel remorse for conspiring to control what people can and can't say.
 

Awol

LE
Your appreciation of history and culture is astounding.

Can you imagine what it would mean for mankind if God exists, and really did manifest in human form at precisely the right time and place in human history?
If God existed, children wouldn't die of cancer.

End.
 
You weren't debating, you were asserting.
I'm contending for the faith, using the wisdom of the Holy Spirit, so that others would see they're in error and in slavery to sin, and they'd come home to the One True Church. Is that too much to ask?

If God existed, children wouldn't die of cancer.

End.
Why is that? Do you think we'd be living in a dead, static, unchanging and lifeless Universe instead?
 

Tyk

LE
Sorry. I wasn't aware that you experience debate as thought policing and oppression. I feel remorse for conspiring to control what people can and can't say.
Which is why I raised the point about your religious convictions you've professed in other threads, for many centuries until the church lost its overpowering influence on the whole of society it exercised (and exorcised) its own form of thought policing, overwhelmingly with terminal effect brought about in inventively nasty ways.
For that matter with a light grasp on history it's quite possible to argue that the Dark Age was perpetuated and extended by the church with their active repression of science, medicine and philosophy, much of which had been gained in the Classical era before Rome was founded. Without the church's repressions of thought it's not unreasonable to assume the human race would be at least 500 years ahead of where it is now.

Repression of thought has happened before and what we're seeing now is something we should be avoiding, if for no other reason than learning the lessons of history.
 
Which is why I raised the point about your religious convictions you've professed in other threads, for many centuries until the church lost its overpowering influence on the whole of society it exercised (and exorcised) its own form of thought policing, overwhelmingly with terminal effect brought about in inventively nasty ways.
For that matter with a light grasp on history it's quite possible to argue that the Dark Age was perpetuated and extended by the church with their active repression of science, medicine and philosophy, much of which had been gained in the Classical era before Rome was founded. Without the church's repressions of thought it's not unreasonable to assume the human race would be at least 500 years ahead of where it is now.

Repression of thought has happened before and what we're seeing now is something we should be avoiding, if for no other reason than learning the lessons of history.
The first answer to that is that every society would reach a state where thought is repressed. This is certainly not intrinsic to the Church, or even religion. These days the limits of free expression are determined not by laws or constitutions, but instead the 'community guidelines' of corporations who are in a more insidious position to screw with our lives.

Second answer is the knowledge and philosophy of the classical world survived largely because the writings were copied in monasteries.
 
Bring back the real Gods
1581945153917.png
 

Tyk

LE
The first answer to that is that every society would reach a state where thought is repressed. This is certainly not intrinsic to the Church, or even religion. These days the limits of free expression are determined not by laws or constitutions, but instead the 'community guidelines' of corporations who are in a more insidious position to screw with our lives.

Second answer is the knowledge and philosophy of the classical world survived largely because the writings were copied in monasteries.
Actually to be literal it was the Jews and the other Semetic people (now called Arabs and Persians) that preserved most of the scientific and medical knowledge from the classical era and also developed on it, many of them were burned as witches for having their knowledge. Oh and they were persecuted to death for centuries in Catholic Europe especially, but let's not let inconvenient facts get in the way shall we?
I'm sorry, but the current wave of thought policing, wokeness and climate change activism bear all the hallmarks of religion, free thought is the enemy of religions and repression is a symptom of religions.
 
I'm contending for the faith, using the wisdom of the Holy Spirit, so that others would see they're in error and in slavery to sin, and they'd come home to the One True Church. Is that too much to ask?
Faith is one thing and no one is contending that to have faith or to have some religious faith in itself is 'wrong', rather that 'Faith' can and has been twisted to excuse many evil things.

By the same token heretical thought can also run out of control, there will always be a tension between faith and empiricism, if any institution be it government or religious to name but two, and who seek to curtail thought is both likely to fail and, to in fact create the conditions for the only method of expression left is violence.

Also when a institution cuts the tongue out of a man for his words, many more will want to know what he is saying... Simple put the 'streisand effect' kicks in.


edited diction
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top