|Showing:||1 - 25 of 930|
I really like this piece. nice to see it here.
yea me too, it was interesitng
Keep it up!
wonderful job, Interesting read.
Very nicely done.Well thought out.
Hmmm...Very good article..~10~
Agrees with Octavia
I dont' agree with Christian mythos, I don't like most Christian, and I respect very few of them. I think most of them will burn in their hell for the "sins" and "crimes against God" they have personally committed.
Good article, though!
fascinating article-thank you
Excellent article my dear. Hmmm, the Christian' s are doomed to repeat history if they do not wake up, they just keep pushing and pushing and don't relize that now a days people don't beleive in there mind wash BS...
I don't mean this offensively or anything, but I was under the impression that religion topics were banned.
I enjoyed the reading. Actually knew who Giordano was from an Omni artcile, oh, almost 20 years ago. However, while it is easy to judge historical actions by our standards today, one must be careful not to fall into an easily set trap.
Martin Luther had never intended to start a new denomination of Christianity. What he did with this arguments was what one did at the time if they wished a debate. Unfortunately, his timing couldn't have been worse.
Giordano Bruno also exercised bad timing. One could gather that he apparently didn't care about his bad timing to judge from your article. Society has always tended to go harsly on the tactless and unsocial, especially when they begin broadcasting comments that do not go with the norm.
Galileo was friends with the pope or he probably would have suffered a similar fate. He was also smart enough not to keep pushing their authority by continuing to speak his beliefs. (Okay, he did continue, but he was creative and careful not to make it obvious.)
In other words, Giordano got what he kept asking for -- a truly horrible death. I'm not condoning it, but given the religious, political, and spiritual climate of the time, it was really the only end.
Also, burning was a form of purification. As horrible as it seems, they thought they were doing what was best for his soul and the afterlife...*shudder*
The church has dropped the ball in many situations, and grudgingly apologized for some of them. But the participants in the majority of their more heinous acts are long dead. I'll grant that the church is and was a proponent of the same ignorance of the past, but it's been quite some time since they've killed a bunch of people over it. Are you insinuating that the new members of the church ought to bear the responsibility for the acts of their predecessors? If you want to judge the church based on modern crimes, be my guest. If you intend to hold the current Vatican responsible for all past crimes, then I must object.
A clarification on BlackTryllyam's comment. Luther didn't initially intend to split with the papacy, but he eventually advocated it upon sensing its inevitability.
|Showing:||1 - 25 of 930|
|World Visitor Map|
|Stuck On You by: Nothing But Thieves...|