Atheists Spread the Bruno Science Lie
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
Seems to me that it is human nature to like to find people or read statements that agree with our existing opinions. When people deny facts in favor of their opinions (such as, "My little Johnny would never rustle cattle!" when the varmint was caught red handed), that is a problem. Changing the facts to fit an opinion or a narrative is lying, and that's a natural fact. That's a big problem. Atheists are generally known for lying, and one of their favorites lies is about "The Church hates science". In this case, the false legend built up about Giordano Bruno.
Recently, a rider from the Owlhoot Trail spread a claim from atheistic dogma that Giordano Bruno "was killed by the Church for daring to believe and expand upon the heliocentric model, he dared to state that the Earth revolved around the Sun, not the other way around, and that there were more planets than just the Earth and the other Solar System based planets out there". Absolutely false.
His remark was in response to a short video posted at The Question Evolution Project regarding falsehoods circulated about the Middle Ages. Such a claim ignores history and how universities were invented back then, plus the fact that great scientists (many of them were creationists) began important studies. Indeed, the atheopath dismissed the entirety of the video. Obviously, it contained truth that was threatening to his fundamentally flawed worldview.
Let's take that a bit further. This pusillanimous attack is used to demonize Catholicism and especially Christianity in general, and to support the presupposition that Christianity as a whole is wicked. If that's the case, then to be consistent and honorable, we must discard all of the sciences, art, and other accomplishments that began in the Middle Ages. For that matter, discard everything invented by Christians — especially creationists — because we're bad people.
Creation Ministries International touched on the Bruno thing when they were exposing the numerous falsehoods in the newer version of Cosmos. Since people like that are fond of using the genetic fallacy to avoid facing the facts, we need to go somewhere else. (I'll allow that the CMI article was not thorough on the Bruno section, but that was not their intention.) How about if we take a look at something completely different: history for atheists, written by an atheist?
Tim O'Neill makes me want to weep. He is intelligent, articulate, pleasant, and the kind of guy I'd like to hang around with. The noetic effect of sin that affects the thinking of those who reject God does not seem to have fouled him up yet. I hope and pray that he will humble himself and submit to Jesus Christ for salvation. There is still hope for that.
Mr. O'Neill points out that the claims made about Bruno were not based on historical records but (in my words) Atheistic Clearinghouses of Disinformation. The stuff is propaganda and has no support. Bruno was not a scientist, but a mystic who happened to use science on occasion. In fact, it's clear that he was a nut.
Some angry misotheists claim that Isaac Newton was a mystic, so his biblical creation beliefs are negated. They should reject the laws of motion and his studies of gravity as well. O'Neill points out that many of the Medieval scientists had a mystical bent, but unlike Giordano Bruno, they were indeed practicing actual science. Bruno was not executed for being a scientist. He was executed for being a heretic, like other people of that time who spread wild-eyed beliefs, and opposed the political powers that be.
To see how Tim examines the history, including the culture of the time and related procedures, I strongly recommend clicking on "The Great Myths 3: Giordano Bruno was a Martyr for Science".
Seems to me that it is human nature to like to find people or read statements that agree with our existing opinions. When people deny facts in favor of their opinions (such as, "My little Johnny would never rustle cattle!" when the varmint was caught red handed), that is a problem. Changing the facts to fit an opinion or a narrative is lying, and that's a natural fact. That's a big problem. Atheists are generally known for lying, and one of their favorites lies is about "The Church hates science". In this case, the false legend built up about Giordano Bruno.
Recently, a rider from the Owlhoot Trail spread a claim from atheistic dogma that Giordano Bruno "was killed by the Church for daring to believe and expand upon the heliocentric model, he dared to state that the Earth revolved around the Sun, not the other way around, and that there were more planets than just the Earth and the other Solar System based planets out there". Absolutely false.
 |
| Click for larger To see the atheopathy inherent in the system, click here and take a gander at the comments Used under federal Fair Use provisions for educational purposes |
Let's take that a bit further. This pusillanimous attack is used to demonize Catholicism and especially Christianity in general, and to support the presupposition that Christianity as a whole is wicked. If that's the case, then to be consistent and honorable, we must discard all of the sciences, art, and other accomplishments that began in the Middle Ages. For that matter, discard everything invented by Christians — especially creationists — because we're bad people.
Creation Ministries International touched on the Bruno thing when they were exposing the numerous falsehoods in the newer version of Cosmos. Since people like that are fond of using the genetic fallacy to avoid facing the facts, we need to go somewhere else. (I'll allow that the CMI article was not thorough on the Bruno section, but that was not their intention.) How about if we take a look at something completely different: history for atheists, written by an atheist?
Tim O'Neill makes me want to weep. He is intelligent, articulate, pleasant, and the kind of guy I'd like to hang around with. The noetic effect of sin that affects the thinking of those who reject God does not seem to have fouled him up yet. I hope and pray that he will humble himself and submit to Jesus Christ for salvation. There is still hope for that.
Mr. O'Neill points out that the claims made about Bruno were not based on historical records but (in my words) Atheistic Clearinghouses of Disinformation. The stuff is propaganda and has no support. Bruno was not a scientist, but a mystic who happened to use science on occasion. In fact, it's clear that he was a nut.
Some angry misotheists claim that Isaac Newton was a mystic, so his biblical creation beliefs are negated. They should reject the laws of motion and his studies of gravity as well. O'Neill points out that many of the Medieval scientists had a mystical bent, but unlike Giordano Bruno, they were indeed practicing actual science. Bruno was not executed for being a scientist. He was executed for being a heretic, like other people of that time who spread wild-eyed beliefs, and opposed the political powers that be.
To see how Tim examines the history, including the culture of the time and related procedures, I strongly recommend clicking on "The Great Myths 3: Giordano Bruno was a Martyr for Science".
Comments