How Christianity Led to Science
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 кві 2019
- There’s this narrative out there that says that science arose in Christian Europe in spite of the antagonism of the religious authorities against reason. It portrays the scientific revolution as the inevitable triumph of reason over superstition.
So that sounds nice enough, but how true is it? Well, one of the first things that stands out for me in considering that is that the rigors of the scientific method did not appear anywhere else in history. No other culture or civilization was able to provide for and encourage the scholarly disciplines enthusiastically enough to produce something as rich as the scientific method.
Really think about that. We’re told that human beings have been employing cognitive thinking for about 50,000 years and it wasn’t until about 500 years ago that we make the last major strides towards something like the scientific method.
And don’t misunderstand that. There had been scientific like inquiry from long before that, but it isn’t the same as a systematic approach to gathering observations and then interpreting that data in a consistently logical way. Other civilizations had mathematics, natural philosophy, and technology, but none of those things amount to anything as complete or rigorous as the scientific method, which only appeared in Christian Europe during the renaissance aided significantly by the Catholic scholastic forerunners.
Based on that knowledge, it should be easy to see that science has not always been some inevitable outcome but, rather, a very elusive step in intellectual inquiry. If Christianity is so incompatible with scientific reason, then how can something that has managed to elude humanity for so long, eventually explode out of backwards, dark age promoting, Christian Europe?
Not only is that a really glaring and uncomfortable refutation of the faith vs science narrative, but it is further frustrated by the fact that the list of people that were essential to the advent of the scientific method, in Europe, were pretty much all Christians working under the patronage of… Church institutions.
"Science was born of Christianity" --Dr Stacey Trasancos..PHD chemistry and 8 kids too!
the Lost Q But it didn’t take a long time.
the Lost Q Unless you mean modern scientific discoveries, but that can be explained by the adherence to Aristotelian views.
@@sapereaude6339 Science only started after Aquinas convinced the Church to embrace Greek philosophy. For the first 600 years of Christianity, the Church saw no use in studying the natural world.
@@IndyDefense Do you have any evidence for that?
@@richardlopez6226 There's a good book on the subject: "The Passion of the Western Mind."
One of the fathers of the scientific method was Roger Bacon, an english franciscan friar from the 13th century.
Who kept his religious beliefs SEPARATE from his scientific endeavors.
@@fuzzywuzzy1355 Not actually true. He was a theologian, alchemist, physician, philosopher, etc.
@@fuzzywuzzy1355 - What many moderns fail to understand is the difference between "keeping science and religion separate" and "keeping superstition out of science and religion." I've read Umberto Eco, too. I thought he treated the Church fairly in The Name of the Rose, but he also interposed his modern, non-religious views into the subject by presenting it as "science advances despite Christianity."
@@kimfleury I like his essays on the concepts of beauty and ugliness in art.
Franciscans separated out faith and reason (prioritizing faith as an act of will), and opened the door to actual investigation of the world in Europe by allowing for skepticism of received wisdom about how the world worked.
SO true. Very frustrating that ppl act like we're anti science. 100% false.
That's because they only look at Protestants.
These people often misinterpret us and have no respect. Their hatred towards Christians has gone too far. It needs to stop and if they won't stop, I'm sure there will be a day of judgement for them
@@wilhufftarkin8543 I agree with Carolus, with a caveat - the mainstream Protestant denominations are more or less with us on this question. It's the modern, evangelical, literal-only interpretation of Sacred Scripture that creates that anti-science impression.
@@paulmiller3469 I'll take your word for it bc I am confused about the plethora of protestant denominations. What I most experience from protestants is gross misunderstanding [that they seem to enjoy] about Catholicism. Their vitriol towards the Blessed Virgin is so hurtful but I know we must inform and forgive.
@@eileen1820 Yeah, I've encountered that, too. I think some of it is regional. If you are in areas where there is a prominent Anglican or Lutheran presence, you hear it less. In areas where there is a more prominent evangelical presence (with roots in Moravian, English Methodist or Lutheran Pietism - basically anywhere with a Wesley influence, including a lot of the Baptists and other folks who were brought in by Billy Graham) you probably hear it more. In my area, we have some Evangelicals, but they aren't prominent. We seem to be a relatively even mix of mainstream Protestant, Evangelical and Catholic.
Such a "coincidence" that universities appeared in the medieval period...
The High Middle Ages no less - the "golden age" of Catholic scholasticism.
@the Lost QThere's always a precursor, of course. But universities are far superior than simple academia.
The point stands: they always criticize the medieval period as dark and full of brutes even with the learned people: so, why universities made their appearance in the middle ages then?
The cause why they appeared in the medieval period? It has more to do with patronage and investment (yes, they valued knowledge), than having rudimentary academic precursors.
Look at the state of them now...
@@agentjs09 yup, better than ever!
@the Lost Q and where Greek scholasticism was theoretical, it was not empirical, and where Greek technical know was empirical, it was not theoretical. Science in Greco Roman culture died still born,. Rome itself was stagnant technologically from the late Republic onwards to the Western Empire's fall. The so called Dark Ages were a needed reset. If Rome had not fallen, Europe would still be in a repressive slave based empire and the rest of the world no better than it was in the 16th century.
Oh oh a catholic speaking of science.
Atheists screeching REEEEE
no....
This itself is cringe! Making assumptions about Catholics based on your outside knowledge of it! Very scientific indeed.
If I were a smart, christian dude a 1000 years ago, I'd try to find a way to understand God's creation.
*if*
@@ultimateoriginalgod lol! Burn!
@@ultimateoriginalgod Beat me to it xD
“Atheists, devout Christians, you might want to sit down for this: The Big Bang theory was first proposed by a Roman Catholic priest.
It wasn't just any priest. It was Monseigneur George Lemaître, a brilliant Belgian who entered the priesthood following his service as an artillery officer in the Belgian army during World War I. He was also an accomplished astronomer and a talented mathematician and physician. After earning his graduate degree in astronomy from the University of Cambridge in England, he came to Boston and spent a year at the Harvard College Observatory before earning his doctorate at MIT.”.........WBGH United Kingdom
I've subscribed to your channel recently after watching a lot of your videos. Keep up the great work. Definitely will be sharing with more people.
Aethists often forget that science was also at one point a philosophy
@@troig43 How?
@@troig43 Beep Beep Boop
NPC ATHEIST POWERING ON
LOADING CATCH PHRASE DATABASE
SCIENCE DEBUNKS RELIGION
SCIENCE NOT FAITH
IMAGINARY SKY FRIEND
*WHIR WHIR WHIR*
@@troig43 it didn't prove it. It only indicates that the theory of evolution is the most probable theory of how mankind/life came to be as it is now. To prove something you should be able to demonstrate every step with an undeniable evidence. All scientific method does is it confirms or debunks a theory, yet even after a theory is confirmed it doesn't mean that somebody can't come up with another and abolish the previous one.
The story of creation can be interpreted literally or figuratively. The Bible is a mix of different books. Some of it are historical accounts, some of it are symbolic stories and some of it are poems. Generally we don't have a problem with either explanation when it comes to the story of creation.
Science is a new religion of many people... as it looks like yourself included.
With what scientific method did you prove that faith or supernatural are nonsensical? You didn't and nobody else did either. You believe/you have faith that it doesn't exist. So welcome to the club, madlad.
@@troig43 What kind of low IQ response is that?! lmao
@J J. Well, science is empirical evidence. Religion is affirmation of faith, and faith is belief without evidence.
Talking snakes? Just pointing out the utter absurdity of religious creation myths. If you wish to subscribe to those myths - knock yourself out mate - and - the burden of proof is on you, not me.
Totally right! We need to be hearing this from our pulpits. I'd love to see a sequel to this with how modern secularism is actually pulling us away from science and reason.
More than a few of the priests in my diocese have engineering, science, or psychology degrees.
Quite few books written on this very topic yet that myth (of Enlightenment origins) won't die
Best thing is, The Galileo Myth is just that, a myth. Galileo was not persecuted by the RCC for his scientific findings.
Exactly. The problem with Galileo was:
1) There was a lot of academic and political rivalry
2) He was disobedient, he didn't want abide by the rules. The same with Copernicus, he published before being authorized, that made the Church prohibit his book until they could discuss if it said truth or not. Once they figured out what Copernicus said is ok, they soon accepted the book then. As a matter of fact, a bishop; Nicholas of Cusa believed in heliocentrism like a 100 years before Copernicus (who was also a clergyman)
3) He mocked the Pope (by the way they were friends in the past, the Pope and Galileo) in a publication. The Pope was his ruler. The ruler of the Papal States. If you mock your ruler you will have punishment
4) They never burned him, that's a complete lie. They penalized him with house arrest in his country estate.
Correct me if i got some point wrong.
@@galenusv7831 I've read a lot about it. I'm surprised that someone knows so much. It does you credit brother. Keep the knowledge up! Much kudos
@@Catholic-Redpilled-Spaniard Gracias hermano, lo mismo para vos. Pese a que aparentemente no tengo ni una gota de sangre española, guardo un especial afecto por España, gracias a la gran obra que hicieron en América.
¡Santiago y cierra, España!
@@galenusv7831 Ah, eres hispano! Buenísimo! Y además eres un hispano orgulloso (sanamente orgulloso). Buenísimo, un abrazo enorme, es difícil encontrar hispanos católicos que no desprecian a España y su Obra en América. Solo tengo 18 años, pero me divierte explicar la conquista y evangelización de América por España. Dios contigo, Santiago!
@@Catholic-Redpilled-Spaniard Yo tengo 28 jaja. Sí, ojalá tuvieramos una mancomunidad de naciones, unidas por nuestro pasado, nuestra religión, interés común, cultura, economía, y en casos extremos, unión militar. Algo así como tienen los británicos con su "Commonwealth". Eso deberíamos tener nosotros, Iberoamérica, pero desde los inicios no quisieron que tengamos eso y han hecho de todo para impedirlo.
Deberíamos ser nuestro propio bloque mundial. Ni con los estadounidenses, ni con los rusos, ni con los chinos. Nuestro propio bloque. Pero nunca quisieron que lo seamos y lo han impedido desde los inicios.
Great again and again. Ignorance must be defeated with historique facts and your doing it so effectively. I'll share your videos. Thanks.
You are extraordinarily well versed, well spoken, and give an excellent presentation. I am a new subscriber because of this video and with what I saw and heard. I also just wanted to thank you for taking the time in making this video. Keep up the good work and your an important voice. Merry Christmas!
That narrative is hurting science, because is very hostile to religious people and that can discourage them to become scientists.
What I don't get is why existing so many Catholic universities, those ones allow that narrative to continue existing. They should be able to show their students the truth about the relationship of Christianity and science with no hostilities towards the religious students, and those students should be able to shift the perception of the rest of the world.
Nothing is hurting science more than political agendas and the leftist take over of higher ed with its PC police.
@the Lost Q Creationism as a fundamental truth, which is not even a common christian perspective? Because if you are talking about creationism as the consequence of evidence and philosophical reflection about the methaphysical questions which are pointed by many aspects of science, from the foundation to the conclusion, then, you should read more.
The narrative, if atheism had anything to say coherent, which is not the case, would have been devastating. Imagine if Lamaitre, Pasteur, Planck, Kepler, Newton or anyone related to the best minds ever would have been persecuted mediatically for their strong convictions in theistic frameworks.
Not to talk about the danger of childish philosophies like "scientism", which are the worst example of stupidity that has arised recently. That is the biggest problem to face.
the Lost Q Bro read Genesis it literally talks about evolution in the creation story. The days in Hebrew meant a period of time not a single day.
Just came across your videos. Fellow Catholic here, and just wanted to thank you for explaining things logically. Perhaps this will reach more people! Being someone who went with the world for a long period of time before coming back to my faith 10 years ago and actually starting learning the teachings of our church (which despite CCD, I had NO CLUE about) and, with that, realizing how much sense it all makes. Thanks again!
Respectfully, Brian's hair is seriously awesome! 👍😊
You won the wholesome comment award. xD
A wonderful video and an important one. The nature and the birth of Science has been (and remains) one of my main research topics. And I can say that you do a very good job here trying to link the Christian faith and the birth of « modern » Science. Contemporary historians of sciences are more willing to admit the role of the Christian faith. There is, of course, much more to say on that important topic but, again, you can be proud of that vid! My sincerest congratulations.
"The Scientific Method" (which is being replaced by moderns with "preconceived conclusions").
Any other videos to recommend on this topic?
@@cliffpinchon2832 There must be videos (we can find almost everything on the web nowadays) but not having explored this avenue, I can not offer suggestions. On the other hand, I have a few books to suggest. First of all, I highly recommend Rodney Stark's book "For the Glory of God" (one of his best) and especially chapter 2 entitled "God's Handiwork: The Religious origins of Science". Stark is also a beautiful writer who is at once clear, incisive, and profound. Here is an excerpt: "Keep in mind that to accept, as I do, that science was the legitimate offspring of Christian theology is not to suppose that such dependency long remained. Once properly launched, science was able to stand on its own and soon developed its own motives and momentum. But, as I plan to show, these are not incompatible with religion." Another interesting book is "The genesis of science" by James Hannam. With these books and their rich bibliographies, you will be able to deepen the subject and go far.
@@esprit-critique Thanks!
I wouldn't say that Christianity LED to science, as if science was cause in itself. Science was more of a fortunate by-product of catholic rationality :D
Good point
That’s your opinion. Fact is historians some of whom are atheists and agnostics would state that Christianity led to modern science.
We have to also understand, the church was the only place, pretty much, to further education in the sciences, art, writing, technology, etc., as the lay person was left to tend the farms and tenements.
@@MichaelatMandW yes, but even IF we accept that was true...the Church WAS [fortunately] supportive of learning and reason.
It seems to me that the church took in the best and brightest and gave them safe refuge and food so they could expand on their ideas. The modern day musical scale was also a product of the Church.
This expands upon my point about faith and science. Great video!
Thank you Mr. Holdsworth, this was one of your best videos yet.
You, sir, have earned yourself a new subscriber!
More I learn, more I am estonished how many misconceptions are there about Catholic church.
"Catholics and Christians", okay, I know what you mean, but living in a heavily Evangelical Protestant area, please don't say that again, I mean you know as well as anyone, Catholics are the original Christians.
It's true but I think is important to point out the difference between these two, Modern Christianity came from the Catholic Church ,Martin Lutero publish the Protestant Bible ,christians base their beliefs on that Bible version while Catholics take as theirs the same Bible but with two additional books , Catholics praise the saints and God while Christians only praise God.
Orthodox were the first
@@Damaris972. For the first 1,000 years, there was only one church founded by Christ with many rites (Latin Rite, Maronite Rite, Coptic, Byzantine, etc.), Byzantines who became Orthodox took that name after the split. To this day the Catholic church still consists of 14 Byzantine rites that did not follow the Orthodox when they split off.
I don't think Jesus would approve of many of the Traditions in the modern day Catholic Church. Like forcing men and women to be celibate. The church is going to have to change that one day soon.
Amen Brother,
Scientific method itself was invented by devout Christian Bacon (some will argue it was devout Christian Galileo).
Almost every major field (from Astronomy to Zoology) was founded/discovered and developed by Christians... from Euler and Laplace and Pascal, to the creator of the taxonomy of species that we still use today (God’s creature design structure he called it), to Keplar to Francis Bacon, the inventor of the scientific method itself to Maxwell to Boyle to Kelvin to Galileo to Mendel (“father of modern genetics”) to Pasteur to Faraday to Newton to... Science was created and thrived by those Chr*stians who said they were “thinking God’s thoughts after Him”.
I only hear about Galileo and Giordano Bruno as examples of the Church punishing "freethinkers" and scientists. And Bruno wasn't even a scientist.. This is one of the most irritating topics for me as a guy who is interested in science and history of science. Thanks for making a much needed video about it. God Bless!
Awesome presentation Brian. I am not Roman Catholic, but I am a Catholic. My believing loyalty is in Jesus of Nazareth, Messiah to the world. Blessings to you, Shalom.
I wish all those anti Christian Europeans should listen to this. Because alot believe Europe/ Western Culture just came to be at the Enlightenment.
It's the same lie as when they believe that the medieval people thought the Earth was flat, and then Columbus came saying that the Earth is round.
Here's the same, they believe before the so called "enlightenment" people were stupid and there was all ignorance, and the "holy enlightened people" came to "show the way".
@the Lost Q Regarding freedom of speech, didn't you know that there are and there should be some rules to express your ideas? Freedom of speech is not the same that libertine of speech. You can say your ideas as long as you don't insult freely the others.
It's like chess, or music: you have plethora of ways of making themes, but they must have armony, otherwise they are not music, they are just noise. The same with freedom of speech: you have a plethora of ways of thinking, but you must say it following some basic rules, like not offending just because the sake of it, or making clear incitement of killing someone else for example. Didn't you know that's punishable?
Freedom of speech is not the same as being libertine.
Regarding the two first Commandments: you don't want to follow them, your problem. Nobody is stoping anyone. God made the men with free will. If he choose to turn his back on God, that's his problem.
Dude. This video was awesome. I recently wrote an essay for a mathematics class about how my faith connects to me pursuing a career in mathematics. I had the same point that you had - expecting the universe to make sense compels people to try to understand it using logic.
Great video.
Heck, if it wasn't for Christianity, Galileo wouldn't have even known about science.
Heck, if it wasn't for Hitler, Anna Frank wouldn't have even wrote that diary and became so famous!
My fascination with the works of clergy and monks like Gregor Mendel is one of the reasons I studied biology and now work as a physiologist.
Could anyone suggest some books to read in this topic?
Very well explained...Thank you!
ua-cam.com/video/J3ycQvnaRMQ/v-deo.html
Thank you, Science tells the how of Creation, the Christian Faith gives us the Why: Love, always Love.
Does anyone knows the title of the chant in the background, i would prety much like to hear it in its full glory.
The historical ignorance of the church and actual western history is staggering. Religious prejudice and philosophical frank stupidity. Like postmodernist idiocy. Solid factual post. Thanks Brian . The church is what sanity means.
I don't understand the logic behind these people, my mother has a biology degree and is not an atheist, she's not particularly religious, but not an atheist. I know a deacon, a Catholic Deacon that is very much a scientist, and in fact points out the hypocrisy of people criticising Christianity as anti-science, which if you go a little deeper you'll find that that's actually more true of atheism, historically. Although there certainly are exceptions, keep in mind it was not the Catholic Church that said not to follow your reason, it was Martin Luther.
What is the music background
Dude. What is the name of your intro song?
WOW thats really cool keep up the great work😁😁😁
Seriously impressive - proud to be Catholic
Lol read the new testament alone and then take a look at your denomination of Catholic and how it goes against it in practice and you might then want to go into a Protestant type of Christianity... That built and founded north America!
@@JohnSmith-vw2zd Another bible expert ... hysterical
Proud to be hindu
Great video, I still need to to contemplate whether science flourished because of church or in spite of church. Either way I think it flourished based on intrinsic curiosity placed in man by God. I would love to hear you talk how Christians founded the US most prestigious institutions of highest learning. Appreciate you using your God given gift with words to encourage body of Christ.
Here's a shorthand version of what I learned teaching American history at a Christian school.
Protestant (Bible alone) Christian's in early America deemed the ability to read the Bible of the utmost importance, thus their interest in public education and higher learning institutions.
Catholic Christians' view of education was more expansive (liberal arts, philosophy, theology, scripture study, too).
Among them they created powerhouse institutes of higher learning...which have, since the 1960's, been taken over by radical, leftist, libertine wackos.
Eventually the "orthodox" faithful almost entirely anandoned those institutions and launched new ones from scratch instead (Hillsdale, Christendom, etc.).
Anyone want to add anything?
@@workin4alivin585 yeah; science arose from the church because the church nurtured it and encouraged it. The priest weren't worried about going out on spring break and getting drunk and laid, they had a deep desire to learn. Totally absent in today's culture. The church should take back the university system, should segregate the sexes and make it free to people who really want to learn.
@@oldtymer9106 🔥🔥🔥 From your fingertips to God's ears!
Thanks. I learned so much. Science based upon the true scientific method is complimentary to the scriptures (the basis for Christianity). The problem of much science today is that it is not based on this method. So there is misunderstanding and assumptions in the science vs Christianity debate.
Beautiful. So much in twelve minutes. Peace........JO
Man, you really hit that baby home. With a pile driver.
The comparison between the persecution of the Soviet Union versus any in the Church really leaves no excuse for badmouthing the Church as anti-science. None.
Well done. Definitely one of your best videos.
One thing you might address as an addendum to this video:
The claim that Islam was somehow the source of the scientific method.
You implicitly address this early in the video, but it might be worth drawing out what you said to address this more directly.
Not Islam, but the Arabic texts in the Middle East, yes, they got us closer. Islam didn’t exist at that point. They took lots of the Greek philosophies and grew upon them. They then made universities and taught them for hundreds of years. But then, after Islam became prominent, they were struck by the crusades. Then after a millennia and a half after their inception, Christians finally stopped ignoring them. So your kinda right. But probably not in the way you hoped.
Science is a lens to see into the beauty of God's creation, theology is the lens to see into God's nature.
Please continue to pray for the return of Christianity in Europe.
Hey man ! I understand why His death was necessary! Thanks for the information again!
The beauty of art, life, and the curiosity for science led me to God. It made me appreciate God's existence and creation in the scope of comprehending within science and the admiration for art.
The "List of Catholic clergy scientists" in Wikipedia link:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Catholic_clergy_scientists
I used an excel sheet to count the names: there are 291 names in the list (updated at MAY/2021).
Check out the list of Catholic Clergy Scientists on Wikipedia. Oops, Brian already mentioned it in his video.
Books by Stanley Jaki, James Hannam, and others for more information on this.
6:34 Is that Georges Lemaître?
There is the story of Elmer of Malmesbury, an English monk at the start of the second millennium. He devised a flying contraption so the story goes, probably a glider fitted to his back, and launched himself from the monastery tower. He flew quite a way before hitting an oak tree and breaking both legs. He was in the infirmary waiting for his legs to heal while he worked on his mark 2 model when the abbot came in to have a word with him. He told Elmer he wasn't to throw himself off the tower ever again. That is the only known instance of the medieval church trying to suppress technology, apart from the crossbow which they didn't succeed at doing.
Can you also please clarify about Bruno.He is also mentioned a lot about by the Catholic Church critics.I like your well reasoned videos.
www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/how-fact-becomes-anti-catholic-fiction
you should see how the Soviet Union treated the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, or how they put priests, in Bulgaria because remember Bulgaria was a Soviet puppet state, in the Orthodox Churches, so the priests would give the government offices people's confessions. That's what happens when you make the world atheist.
Shhhh....adults are talking. ..!!!
And now the old Soviet Union is returning to it's Orthodox roots. They are becoming what the USA use to be: Strait, white, Christian and capitalistic.
If you read deeply into the Galileo mess, he really got better than he deserved. He was a big jerk who brought problems to his door. It had nothing to do with the church rejecting science - nothing.
Great video! But what you think about Islam contribution in Science during the Dark Age?
"what about the greeks" , "what about the islamic golden age" , "what about catholic scientists" , everyone picks their starting point when it comes to these interpretations. 'The scientific method' on the other hand, the spesific method, itself, is none of these spesifically, but rather an accumilation of these, or originated with the person first discribing it fully. The genetic fallacy is useless when it comes to this question, but it sure makes religious people feel good, and the same with the nationalists when it comes to describing it as a western invention. Its either part of a chain, or originated with its inventor, none of the lines drawn in the sand are good enough if one wants to be consistant.
In otherwords, science does not have an owner it however does have multiple contributors.
I'm a protestant, and I agree with everything you said.
Let me recommend a book that is an excellent overview (not comprehensive) of the numerous contributions of Catholics to the world: "How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization" by Thomas Woods. It is a fact filled book in an easy to read format.
On the topic of Galileo, he was a means for the enemies of the Church to undermine her influence. The fact is Galileo did not get into trouble for questioning geocentrism. The pope and most of the prelates admired, promoted and agreed with Galileo. The problem was he could not prove it. The Church asked him to teach his heliocentric ideas as a theory until such time as it could be proven. He refused and taught it as a fact and began using the Bible as evidence. This took place during the protestant revolt and the Church didn't want to give them more ammunition to pound the Church with if his theory was found at a later time to be incorrect, so he was put under house arrest and was not allowed to teach. It took about another 150 - 200 years before the 'parallax' proof for heliocentrism was discovered.
Science was not the only contributions the Catholic world made: advancements in architecture, creation of the study of economics, invention of musical notation, etc. etc. Much of the advancements can be attributed to the university system, also a gift of Catholicism to the world.
University, defined as an institution of higher learning that awards degrees,
the top ten oldest universities in the world are:
University of Bologna Italy 1088
University of Paris (Sorbonne) France 1150
University of Oxford England 1150
University of Cambridge England 1209
University of Salamanca Spain 1218
University of Padua Italy 1222
University of Naples Federico II Italy 1224
University of Toulouse France 1229
University of Siena Italy 1240
University of Valladolid Spain 1241
The Churches contributions to science and numerous other areas of study began long before 500 years ago.
Take that Atheism.
How is this an L for atheism when most scientists from the beginning of the 20th century onwards still carrying and developing the method were atheists?
@@karlazeen because they didn't do so for better understanding of Gods' Creation, but to become gods and explain it a in way that takes God out of the equation.
I think the Galileo thing was caused by another issue of the time. Their was at one point a debate on weather or not God would create people separately from the known world who would not have had access to the word of God or couldn't be saved
I’m a protestant but I really enjoy your videos and especially this one keep up the good work
Dead Nicholas, pls find a Traditional Catholic Latin Mass, the Mass of all Times. Go there. Pls convert and become a saint. God bless you.
Coming from your talk on toxic Media... imagine how many people would be in the "Church" if they weren't infected by toxic media.
9:19 - I also hear about Giordano Bruno, but the thing is that he, unlike Galileo Galilei, wasn't even a scientists and the reason why he was burned actually has nothing to do with science (it was pure old fashioned heresy), making him actually an even worse example of the 'religion vs science' theory.
Would still love to see your video on him, though! :D
I'm just waiting for the moment when the James Webb Telescope sees another planet with angels flying around
anyone civilization can discover science. but only with the right ideology can super science be achieved.
What many religious people seem to forget is that science was once called philosophy. (Love to knowledge.)
The anti-theist trolls are landing!
You've done well, Brian. Wear it as a badge of honor. 👏👏👏
It's so weird you mention this. After reading How The Catholic Built Western, I heard the name Fr. Stanley Jaki. There's a book about this and I stumbled onto the series by this lady that looked into his theories: www.integratedcatholiclife.org/2015/04/trasancos-jaki-science/
I hate when people say that we would have been more advanced in STEM if there wasn't the church 🤦♂️
Check out Belgian priest and astrophysicist Georges LeMaitre, who first theorized what came to be called The Big Bang, a term applied to the theory to deride it. LeMaitre corresponded frequently with Einstein.
Copernicus
You should go to TED, you will totally nail it
Was this due in part, not necessarily to the philosophy of Christianity, but the large colleges and research institutions fostered under the aegis of the Catholic Church? Without such a large body, financially supported, and dedicated to research without an expressly practical purpose, how else could science be done?
What you say is true, but Catholic Christianity is fixated on discovering the fullness of Truth, be it theological, psychological, philosophical, natural/physical, etc. All of it leads us closer to God.
That is why stones left unturned and loose ends drive us crazy.
It's also why when some of the clergy and hierarchy twist off sideways the faithful laity get so upset, and vice versa. Truth. Fullness of.
Rene Descartes was sitting in a bar late one night and it was closing so the barman said (in French of course) "Hey Rene, how about one for the road, we're closing?" Tt which Descartes replied......."I think not.......and promptly disapeared!" Cogito ergo sum homes!! Be well and thank you!
Lol.
One other concept that I believe helps Christianity nurture science is "grace." Grace is a necessary prerequisite for science. It allows people to argue over things without condemnation of the other person.
Tangential question: Can you explain the incident with Giordano Bruno? I've learned a lot about the Galileo incident, that it was far from the case that the Church was against the heliocentric theory, that Galileo was a very difficult person to work with, that he hadn't actually proven the theory by observing the parallax shift like he said (no one could replicate his experiment, an essential step in the scientific method). Yet he refused to amend his publication so the Church would publish it. And he got into some name calling and disrespect toward the Pope whom he knew from childhood, which landed him in trouble. In my opinion, church officials may have overreacted. But it wasn't because they rejected science.
Please correct me if I went wrong in that summary.
I'm trying to learn about the case of Bruno. The only thing I've ever heard is that he was condemned as a heretic for teaching that the universe must be infinite because God is infinite. This might be wholly untrue. I wonder if you could shed some light on this.
This is a good place to start www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/how-fact-becomes-anti-catholic-fiction
@@BrianHoldsworth Thanks for the link! After reading it, I'm not surprised that there is much more to the story.
This is an older video, but I'd like to make a book recommendation: The Realists Guide to Religion and Science by Fr Paul Robinson. His thesis basically follows your here (to the point I think you may have already read this book). Father looks at the epistemological frameworks of various religions and worldviews (i.e. atheistic materialism) and how we can be realists using both our sense data and our intellect to learn about the world.
You can find it here: therealistguide.com/
I really like the helm.
Brian who wrote the bible?
ok subscribing here i go!
Modern science is historically, culturally, socially, and psychologically the product of the Catholic Culture of Western Europe. The scientific method arose from Catholic natural philosophy.
Hey Brian, perhaps I misunderstood you, or perhaps I didn’t. But in reference to your second point, what would you say about the philosophical proofs for God’s existence? St Thomas Aquinas writes that believe in God is not a matter of faith, but of reason as he can proof to himself that God exists.
This seems to be contrary to your argument that God is so much greater than us that we cannot proof His existence.
Wasn't it really the confluence of Christian culture and the rediscovery of Greek philosophy?
IDK, I'm asking.
It was the “discovery” of Greek and Arabic texts that led Christianity to say, “well this isn’t so bad”, even though they were the ones who ignored it for almost a millennia and a half.
This!
Questions:
What happened to all the water that supposedly flooded the entire world?
What did carnivores eat in Noah’s ark?
Did kangaroos(native to Australia) swim to the Middle East?
How could any fresh-water species survive the world-wide flooding of salt water?
How did Jesus develop in a womb without a male gamete to start conception?
Snakes don’t have vocal cords... how did a serpent communicate with Adam and Eve?
Ever played the echo game where you repeat something that someone says and by the time the message goes all the way around to the original person ends up being completely different? What makes you think that early tellings of biblical stories were immune to this?
I’m sincerely curious and don’t mean to be rude. I’ve asked these questions to creationists and never gotten an answer. Thank you.
Jose Nieves the Bible is a variety of different styles of writing and not all parts are to be taken literally
Wonderful! I'd also say that Christianity saw nature and the world as "creations" of God and so did not worship nature like shamanistic pagans or personify nature like the Greco-Romans. Because of that they were free to study it and understand it.
This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being...
This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont, to be called Lord God παντοκρατωρ or Universal Ruler* - Issac Newton
In other news, water is wet. Atheists don't understand.
Lord is the father of science, Lord Walked on water, through that science how borts are first build.
I am a Christian, and I believe in the scientific method. I never see science as proof that God doesn't exist.
Prominent scientist and theologian Rober Boyle argued that the study of science could improve glorification of God..
The point is whatever humans can't explain they blame it on God
Two words: Georges LeMaître
The only real question worth asking is "did science flourished thanks to church or in spite of church?"
I can give you some more examples besides Galileo.
Logos is rising!
But what about ancient Greek science? Surely Archimedes or Ptolemy worked with the assumption that there are fixed natural laws.
What about those killed during the inquisition? That’s like those killed in the Soviet Union.