Is the scientific revolution the result of Christianity’s influence in Europe? No/Yes!!

Posted on by

the issue/question of why europe became the origin for the scientific revolution has been said by many, now and in the past, to be the unique result of christian thought and could not of happened elsewhere in the world and thats why it didn’t.

I see many Christians, of all types, who care about science and who want to resist attacks about Christian beliefs being opposed to science MAKING these claims.

They say conclusions about God and order and laws is from Christian faith and led to seeing this in nature etc etc.

I say this is not true. Christian thought/beliefs had nothing to do with the science revolution and Europe’s superiority.

I say instead that it simply was Christian motivation that raise the common people’s intelligence and on this rising tide the upper classes, rising along, reached a higher status of intelligence and were the authors of all scientific accomplishment or attempts.

Further that this happened in the great protestant revolution and then was most emphasized in the most protestant peoples. Especially the peoples of the british isles. that was where the puritan/Evangelical denominations were most in numbers relative to the population. so a very early Congregationalist/prebsybeterrin southern and easstern england and  presbyterrian southern Scotland(ulster0 and Congrgationist New england are the influences that raised the Englishman to number one.

most inventions, discoveries, thought, philosophy of scvience between 1600 and1900AD was done by the British peoples wherever they were. lIkewise in all matters of man.

Therefore it was actually, simply, a rising curve of intelligence of the common, numerous, man of this group that raised the intellectual interest and accomplishment. This happening also in other Protestant nations but less so being less protestant in passion.

Now the french upper class was also powerfully into science but because the common people were less intelligent then France’s upper cl;asses suffered despite being more numerous in population then the British isles.

Science was a very upper class thing and all were exchanging ideas and patents however it really was the accomplishment of the common man that brought the greater results and the scientific revolution. This because of religious motivation.

So the european scientific revolution is just another example of rising curves on a graph based on small marginal differences.

Christianity can say it motivates men to do and be as God wants us to be. Then we get smarter as we do that.  Yet still science is just about human intelligence and that just from people trying hard and that is relative to motivation.

Science and the modern world(good stuff) is the result of the true faith now called evangelical christianity acting on populations of the common people in North West Europe.Not about the ideas of christianity nor from a trickle down intelligence from the upper classes due to the enlightenment.

Its about the true faith, human motivation, human intelligence and a rising curve that rises today and includes almost all of mankind. Yet started with Martin Luther.

 

 

61 thoughts on “Is the scientific revolution the result of Christianity’s influence in Europe? No/Yes!!”

  1. keiths: It’s a claim about reality, and it’s falsifiable in principle, so yes, it qualifies as a scientific question. If someone positively identified Mary’s bodily remains here on earth, for instance, then the Assumption would be falsified.

    Excuse me, How ae you going to identify “scientifically” Mary´s body?

  2. Blas: Excuse me, How ae you going to identify “scientifically” Mary´s body?

    Find bones in an ossuary that has the inscription, “Mary, Mother of Jesus the Messiah”? Check everything out to make sure it’s no fake.

    Nothing’s ever 100% certain, but that should lead to a pretty good positive identification if it all checks out.

    Glen Davidson

  3. Blas: Excuse me, How ae you going to identify “scientifically” Mary´s body?

    Won’t the remains just glow purple or something? Maybe smell like latakia?

  6. Blas,

    The point is that a scientific approach to the Assumption would look nothing like Pope Leo’s approach, which was about as un- and anti-scientfic as you can get.

    As I wrote earlier:

    In any case, Pius XII’s attitude is profoundly anti-scientific. It isn’t scientific to pronounce something as infallible dogma when there’s no evidence for it. It isn’t scientific to threaten people with the wrath of God (and Peter and Paul for good measure!) for daring to question it.

    The Church’s position on the Assumption is:

    Shut up. Stop thinking about it. We’ll tell you what to believe. Or else.

    And by the way, we cannot possibly be wrong about this.

    It’s hard to imagine a more anti-scientific attitude.

  9. Read it again, Blas:

    …by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.

    45. Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith…

    47. It is forbidden to any man to change this, our declaration, pronouncement, and definition or, by rash attempt, to oppose and counter it. If any man should presume to make such an attempt, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

    The message is clear:

    We have spoken, and we cannot be mistaken. Don’t even think about doubting, or God and his enforcers, Peter and Paul, will come after you, you apostate.

    It’s ridiculous, and it should make any Catholic hang his or her head in shame for the Church’s attitude.

  10. On the bright side, I can live comfortably with being threated with icky stuff in an imaginary afterlife.

    Less so being threatened with stoning or flogging or beheading.

    So can we look forward to another 600 years or so of actual threats?

Leave a Reply