tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4164910523346972642.post2491630269133990466..comments2023-09-23T10:49:30.668-06:00Comments on Thoughts: Gentlemen at the Atheist blog/Reason/LutherBrigittehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10259491144770243688noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4164910523346972642.post-12822511855377851282008-12-24T18:41:00.000-07:002008-12-24T18:41:00.000-07:00Bror writes: "The funny thing here is that Luther ...Bror writes: "The funny thing here is that Luther may have been skeptical of Copernicus, but he knew about him and his theories through Philip Melenchthon who was an ardent supporter of the theory, and it seems also helped arrange for the publication of Copernicus's work."<BR/><BR/>Do we have some references for that?<BR/><BR/>Blessed Christmas to you Bror. I've prayed for you and the other pastors in this happy, busy time.Brigittehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10259491144770243688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4164910523346972642.post-66866674969151165932008-12-24T13:52:00.000-07:002008-12-24T13:52:00.000-07:00The funny thing here is that Luther may have been ...The funny thing here is that Luther may have been skeptical of Copernicus, but he knew about him and his theories through Philip Melenchthon who was an ardent supporter of the theory, and it seems also helped arrange for the publication of Copernicus's work. Philip himself is better known for penning the Augsburg Confession. <BR/>Lutherans, contrary to popular opinion, actually hold reason in very high esteem, believing it a gift from God. We apply reason to religious claims quite often. But we also hold it in check, not wanting to over extend its usefulness. There are somethings we just believe to be true, based on other things we know to be true.Bror Ericksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06913133289813136695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4164910523346972642.post-48603562893829248212008-12-22T22:24:00.000-07:002008-12-22T22:24:00.000-07:00"There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to pr..."There is talk of a new astrologer who wants to prove that the earth moves and goes around instead of the sky, the sun, the moon, just as if somebody were moving in a carriage or ship might hold that he was sitting still and at rest while the earth and the trees walked and moved. But that is how things are nowadays: when a man wishes to be clever he must needs invent something special, and the way he does it must needs be the best! The fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down. However, as Holy Scripture tells us, so did Joshua bid the sun to stand still and not the earth."<BR/><BR/>That's the quote. <BR/><BR/>Obviously, Luther's understanding of "astronomy" (not his field of expertise) was being challenged. This must not be seen as a doctrine, even though he comes up with scripture to shore up his opinion. He is just gabbing at the table. This sort of thing never comes up in confessional, doctrinal writings. <BR/><BR/>Let the relationship between faith and reason be revisited. It's a valid discussion. Theology itself is not without the use of great minds and reasonable discussion.Brigittehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10259491144770243688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4164910523346972642.post-21937842103939138152008-12-22T19:37:00.000-07:002008-12-22T19:37:00.000-07:00The remarks I have in mind were attributed to Luth...The remarks I have in mind were attributed to Luther from one of his so-called "table talks". <BR/><BR/>http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast161/Unit3/response.html<BR/><BR/>Even if Luther should turn out never to have said anything about Copernicus, I used that only as an example. The broader question is whether reason can ever apply to religious claims, and if so, when and when not? This is an age-old question (the relation between Faith and Reason), that often seems in need of being revisited.Eric Sotnakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06162425851889399481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4164910523346972642.post-46069753231705659972008-12-22T18:40:00.000-07:002008-12-22T18:40:00.000-07:00I've read quite a bit of Luther but never came acr...I've read quite a bit of Luther but never came across anything about Copernicus or an opinion on the sun standing still. Luther's thrusts generally were in completely different directions.<BR/><BR/>My guess is that it was not an issue. Wasn't Columbus already sailing around the world? Do you have a reference? Everything Luther ever said and wrote seems to be available for checking.<BR/><BR/>I don't think we are biblicists in the way that every single thing has to be taken completely literally, though we will always go with the literal first. I've spoken with a very conservative Lutheran PHD who thinks he can leave that story to interpretation. Somehow there was more light available on that day and perhaps there can be other explanations...Brigittehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10259491144770243688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4164910523346972642.post-50178675651305062352008-12-22T07:09:00.000-07:002008-12-22T07:09:00.000-07:00Luther wrote:"But in divine things, that is, in th...Luther wrote:<BR/>"But in divine things, that is, in those which pertain to God and which must be so performed as to be acceptable to Him and obtain salvation for us, our nature is so star-and stone-blind, so utterly blind, as to be unable to recognize them at all."<BR/><BR/>I can see the merit in a claim like this to a point. But it can be taken in a number of different senses. Does it mean that reason can NEVER be applied to religious claims? So if a relion claimed, say, that God commanded the sun to stand still in the sky, reason could never counter such a claim?<BR/><BR/>(Luther is reported to have rejected Copernicanism for exactly this reason.)Eric Sotnakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06162425851889399481noreply@blogger.com