Article <vio1op$d5kc$1@dont-email.me>

Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <vio1op$d5kc$1@dont-email.me>
Deutsch English Français Italiano
<vio1op$d5kc$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article
Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!feeds.news.ox.ac.uk!news.ox.ac.uk!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Top three reasons for optimism about the ID scam
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 16:46:48 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 202
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <vio1op$d5kc$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vii6c0$2llr6$1@dont-email.me> <viija7$2pm92$2@dont-email.me>
 <2a339317-e79f-4f14-81d6-b40ea12c6f7a@gmail.com>
 <viiovt$2qpjk$2@dont-email.me> <vijb1r$33fs4$1@dont-email.me>
 <vikihd$3d968$1@dont-email.me> <db4ukjthn9qcn6d7gmv4p1idpjbohq8gua@4ax.com>
 <vin9g0$5g7m$1@dont-email.me> <04lukj5ekihbu6j3r8ntuhblrqjdvpjkec@4ax.com>
Reply-To: rokimoto557@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="70892"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:oRDvvvE9h8Z0DCyO5L/MnsxF4lE=
In-Reply-To: <04lukj5ekihbu6j3r8ntuhblrqjdvpjkec@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-US
	FREEMAIL_FORGED_REPLYTO,FREEMAIL_REPLYTO_END_DIGIT,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED,
	RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,
	USER_IN_WELCOMELIST,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.6
	smtp.eternal-september.org
Bytes: 11949

On 12/3/2024 12:57 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 09:52:31 -0600, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 12/3/2024 8:20 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 09:08:28 -0600, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>
>>>> My take is that most Christians no longer fear God in this way.  It is
>>>> why most Catholics are just fine with the Heliocentric heresy.
>>>> Heliocentrism was never removed as a heresy in the Church.
>>>
>>> It was never removed as a heresy because it never was a heresy. You
>>> have been told that multiple times, yet you persist in stating it.
>>
>> This is absolutely wrong because of the last major fuss about the issue
>> where it turned out that heliocentrism was only a minor heresy at the
>> time that Bruno was executed.  It was not the reason for his execution,
>> but was one of the heresies that he was found guilty of.
> 
> Your memory serves you badly or else you just can't accept having your
> ass handed to you as Burkhard did the last time you argued this.
> 
>> We found out
> 
> Who is this "we" ? It certainly doesn't include me and I don't know
> who else it includes.
> 
>> that it wasn't made into a capital heresy until the protestants started
>> to make it an issue claiming that the church was being too soft on the
>> heretics.  When Galileo was charged with the heresy it carried the death
>> penalty.
>>
>> Even the Bruno sources claimed that it was one of the things Bruno was
>> found guilty of, but was not what he was executed for.
>>
>>>
>>>> It was only
>>>> down graded, to a more minor heresy
>>>
>>> There is no such thing as a "minor" heresy. There are degrees of
>>> heresy including one of being *suspected* of heresy which was what
>>> Galile was charged with.
>>
>> Apparently there is because the heliocentric heresy was only down graded
>> to such a minor heresy in the 19th century, and was never dropped as a
>> heresy by the church.  We found that out in the last major dust up.  The
>> source that was put up then had the conclaves cited that had made the
>> decisions, and the dates.  As laughable as it may seem, the evidence was
>> discounted by your side because the article was written by a
>> conservative catholic priest who was a geocentrist.
> 
> Taking an unnamed geocentric priest as an authoritative source for
> Catholic Church is indeed laughable.
> 
>> What you need to do
>> is determine that those conclaves never happened and those decisions
>> were never made.
> 
> *You* are the one making the claims, *you* are the one who needs to
> produce evidence - and it needs to be better than an unnamed priest or
> a Wiki article.
> 
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair#:~:text=Galileo's%20opinions%20were%20met%20with,to%20be%20%22formally%20heretical%22.
>>
>> "Galileo's opinios were met with opposition within the Catholic Church,
>> and in 1616 the Inquisition declared heliocentrism to be "formally
>> heretical".
> 
>> Galileo faced the death penalty when he was tried in 1633.
> 
> No, he didn't.

Your senseless denial is noted.

> 
>>
>> The conservative Catholic source that was put up before noted that it
>> was the influence of the protestants that forced the issue that resulted
>> in Galileo being investigated by the church for his views, and cited the
>> conclave and date for the upgrade of the heresy.  That same source cited
>> the conclave in the 1800's that downgraded the heresy back to what it
>> was before Galileo.  That source claimed that heliocentrism remained
>> heretical.  It was obviously something worth finding Bruno guilty of and
>> investigating Galileo for before it became a heresy punishable by death.
>>   The Bruno sources claimed that Bruno had been found guilty of the
>> heresy, but that it did not hold the death penalty at that time that
>> supported the conservative Catholic priest's account.  It was some type
>> of lesser transgression before it was upgraded.
> 
> I told you before that when you want to find out the Church's position
> on something, you should turn to the Church's own documentation, not
> some unnamed renegade geocentric priest or what someone put up on
> Wikipedia; your reliance on sources like that is a pretty clear case
> of confirmation bias.
> .
> Here is what the Church does say:
> 
> https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06342b.htm
> 
> <quote>
> 
> As to the second trial in 1633, this was concerned not so much with
> the doctrine as with the person of Galileo, and his manifest breach of
> contract in not abstaining from the active propaganda of Copernican
> doctrines. The sentence, passed upon him in consequence, clearly
> implied a condemnation of Copernicanism, but it made no formal decree
> on the subject, and did not receive the pope's signature. Nor is this
> only an opinion of theologians; it is corroborated by writers whom
> none will accuse of any bias in favour of the papacy. Thus Professor
> Augustus De Morgan (Budget of Paradoxes) declares

Because it had already been declared to be a heresy back in 1616.

The source that you have been in denial of had the church documentation 
of the change in status of the heresy.  He was a priest, and he cited 
the official church documents on the matter.

> 
> 'It is clear that the absurdity was the act of the Italian
> Inquisition, for the private and personal pleasure of the pope - who
> knew that the course he took could not convict him as pope - and not
> of the body which calls itself the Church.'
> 
> And von Gebler ("Galileo Galilei"):
> 
> 'The Church never condemned it (the Copernican system) at all, for the
> Qualifiers of the Holy Office never mean the Church.'

The church banned the Copernican writings after the 1616 change, and had 
to unban them after better sense prevailed.  The argument was that 
geocentrism was not cannon, and accounts claim that Copernicus' book was 
in the Jesuit library at the time.

> 
> It may be added that Riccioli and other contemporaries of Galileo were
> permitted, after 1616, to declare that no anti-Copernican definition
> had issued from the supreme pontiff.

It was made into a capital heresy from whatever it was before in 1616. 
Bruno had been convicted of it, but it was some type of lesser heresy at 
that time, and he was executed for other beliefs.  That conservative 
Catholic source was not happy that heliocentrism had been down graded 
because he remains a geocentrist.  His consolation was that the matter 
had only been downgraded to what it was before 1616, and that good 
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========