Archive for the ‘Unearthed’ Category

« Older Entries

Trials of the Saints: Unearthed

Sunday, July 6th, 2008

The New York Times recently had an op-ed about the Vatican and its new concern about how it appoints saints “Trials of the Saints.”1 Saints, per the Roman Catholic Church, have magical powers to heal, etc. Most times, this healing happens after they are dead.

One would think that determining the actuator of a “miraculous” event, when very dead and at best now only “spirit” and therefore invisible, might be rather difficult. However, the RCC insists that it has very rigorous procedures to determine whether saint-caused miracles are “real.” In the article, Mr. Martin says that the Vatican uses “teams of doctors (not all of them Catholic) who assiduously rule out any other cause for a healing.” The Congregation for the Causes of Saints does not have the document mentioned in the article up at the time of this writing2 However, an earlier document, New Laws for the Causes of Saints, states, “34. a) In the case of a cure from some disease, the Bishop or his delegate is to seek help from a physician, who is to propose questions to the witnesses in order to clarify matters according to necessity and circumstances. b) If the person healed is still alive, he is to be examined by experts so that the duration of the healing can be ascertained.3 It does not mention that any of the doctors need to be not Catholic, and I suspect, without corroborating evidence, that those non-Catholic physicians are few and far between. After this review by experts, the following occurs: “14) The Congregation examines cases of alleged miracles in the following way: 1. The Relator assigned to this task is to prepare a Position on alleged miracles. They are discussed in a meeting of experts (in the case of healings, in a meeting of physicians), whose votes and conclusions are set forth in an accurate report. 2. Then the miracles are to be discussed in the special meeting of the theologians and, finally, in that of the Cardinals and Bishops.”4 There is nothing that requires the Cardinals and Bishops to accept the findings of the physicians. I have yet to find any definitive information on what standards the bishops and cardinals use. I have also not found out how they determine a particular miracle can really be assigned to a particular candidate. It seems to be only determined by who the miracle-claimant said that they most recently prayed to for healing. Truly, I suppose that’s the only possible way to figure it out, without the use of a PKE meter.

We can see that there is a built in prejudice for the acceptance of saints. We see that Pope Benedict has stated that “The evidence for the causes is collected and studied with supreme care and with a diligent search for the historic truth through testimonies and documentary proof “omnino plenae,” for they have no other aim than the glory of God and the spiritual good of the Church and of all who are in search of the Gospel truth and perfection.”5 People with “no other aim” are indeed prejudiced in favor of the RCC. If they were perhaps claimed to have “no other aim” than the truth, perhaps one could more confidently accept what they aver.

I can agree with Mr. Martin in that the RCC must be very careful in how it presents its saints and should endeavor to be very meticulous in its examinations. However, since most “miracles” come from countries with poor health care and record keeping, how can a doctor, or any person really be assured that a miracle occurred? How many recipients of “miracles” have medical records that support their claims of imminent death? Why are there no “miracles” that have the regrowth of an amputated limb, surely not beyond the capabilities of saints who can supposedly cure horrific cancers? Why is the most stringent requirement of the beatification/canonization process the determination of witnesses to be “trustworthy” by members of the Church? If one could actually find any evidence that miracles were “serious scientific business” as Mr. Martin claims, if we could see the reports, etc., I’m sure it would be “more difficult for agnostics and atheists to disbelieve.” However, that has not happened for the last 2000+ years and I doubt it ever will.

  1. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/03/opini … ref=slogin [<]
  2. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congr … s/csaints/ [<]
  3. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congr … me_en.html [<]
  4. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_ … er_en.html [<]
  5. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/bened … ti_en.html [<]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Atheism, Religion, Review, Unearthed | 1 Comment »

H – E – Double Hockey Sticks

Thursday, April 17th, 2008

Human beings seem to have a natural desire to want to be rewarded for their good deeds and punished for the bad (well, to see others punished, anyways).  The comforting concept of an end to all suffering after we die, of an infinite paradise, is simply not enough.  People want justice.  They want to know that all the rapists and murderers, the drunken fathers, the bullies that picked on them in school, the neighbors who have wild parties while they abstain, and of course the heathen unbelievers (especially them) are all going to have to someday pay.  Let’s take a look at some of the different ways in which people believe their fellow humans will eventually suffer.

Judaism

Although Judaism does not have a specific doctrine regarding an afterlife, the Tanakh makes many references to Gehenna, or Sheol, which is believed to be a sort of purgatory for the dead, and there is a mystical tradition of describing it.  The word Gehenna was derived from the Valley of Hinnom outside of Jerusalem, which was where the ancient Israelites sacrificed children, and later it was used as a dump for burning garbage and had a terrible stench.  This fiery place became a metaphor for the entrance to Hell.1  Gehenna is not considered to be a physical place, but rather a feeling of intense shame and awareness of one’s sins.  Some believe that the soul is purified in Gehenna, which allows the soul to ascend to Olam Ha-Ba, which can be compared to the Christian Heaven.2  Very few Jews believe that existence in Gehenna can be permanent, with most believing the longest stay possible is eleven months.  The Kabbalah describes Gehenna as a “waiting room.”

Christianity

The Christian concept of Hell stems from the apocalyptic sections of the New Testament.  Revelation 20: 11-15 describes a “great white throne” before which all the dead must stand to be judged on their actions in life.  Those who do not make the cut are thrown into a lake of fire to burn eternally.  Many portrayals of Hell depict demons who torture the damned.  Matthew 13: 42 states there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth.”  Many Christians believe Hell is located in the Earth’s core, since Ephesians 4: 9 mentions the “lower parts of the earth.”  Some actually believe that the screams of the tormented can be heard in erupting volcanoes.3  Satan is considered to be the ruler of Hell in most denominations, although some believe Saint Peter is Hell’s keeper.  Few denominations can come to a consensus on which sins make a person worthy of Hell’s fiery torture, but it is almost universally believed that anyone who is not a Christian will meet that fate.

Islam

The Islamic concept of Hell is called Jahannam, and it is very similar to that of Christianity in that it is generally portrayed as hot and fiery.  However, Hell’s fate is not considered to be infinite but rather a basis for spiritual rectification, and the devil (shaitan) is not its ruler, just a tortured soul like the rest.4  Also, there are considered to be many levels of Hell depending on the degree of a person’s transgressions in life.  The lowest pit of Hell is called Hawiyah, and it is reserved for those who exhibit hypocrisy, which is considered to be the worst of all sins.  According to the Qur’an, anyone who claims to believe in Allah but denounces Him in his or her heart will end up in Hawiyah.  There is also one pit of Hell, called Zamhareer, which is not fiery but freezing.  The tree of Zaqqum is believed to bear thorny, bitter fruit, which the souls of the damned are compelled to eat, furthering their torment.5

Buddhism

Several different versions of Hell, or Naraka, are believed to exist in the major Buddhist schools of thought.  A person with enough negative karma can be reborn into one of these Narakas.  Existence in these realms is temporary, although beings are thought to be held there for vast stretches of time.  One of the most common schemes for describing the various torments is that of the Eight Cold Narakas and the Eight Hot Narakas.  The cold Narakas depict such tortures as being naked and alone in perpetual blizzards, shivering uncontrollably, forming blisters which burst open, and having the skin or even the entire body crack open, leaving one raw and bloody.  The hot Narakas include suffering such as being attacked with iron claws or fiery weapons, being sliced into pieces, being crushed into a bloody jelly by molten metal, being impaled on a fiery spear, and being roasted in a blazing oven.  Buddhists also believe that Hell can be a state of consciousness in which one suffers because of one’s actions.6

Hinduism

Hindu literature also speaks of Naraka (Neraka in Hinduism), although not in quite as gory detail as the Buddhist literature.  It is believed that at the time of death, souls who have sinned may be captured by the servants of Yama, the Lord of Justice.  Yama will deem the appropriate punishment for the sinner which, as in Buddhism, is temporary.  When the punishment is complete, Hindus believe the soul will be reborn on Earth in a human or animal body.  Some Hindus do not accept the existence of the Nerakas, or consider their descriptions to be metaphorical.7

-Laura

  1. http://www.pantheon.org/articles/g/gehenna.html [<]
  2. http://www.jewfaq.org/olamhaba.htm [<]
  3. Haraldur Sigurdsson, Melting the Earth, The History of Ideas on Volcanic Eruptions, p. 73 [<]
  4. William C. Chittick, Imaginal Worlds: Ibn al-Arab and the Problem of Religious Diversity, 1994 [<]
  5. Qur’an 44.43-46 [<]
  6. http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?showtopic=32187 [<]
  7. http://vedabase.net/en1 [<]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Atheism, Morality, Religion, Unearthed | 2 Comments »

Santería Unearthed

Wednesday, March 19th, 2008

When West African slaves were forcibly transported to the Caribbean and Central and South America to work the sugar plantations beginning in the 16th century, they brought with them many religious traditions.  Despite being forced to convert to Christianity by their Roman Catholic masters, they were able to preserve many of their ancestral and traditional beliefs by fusing them with elements of Christian culture.  This religious tradition, specifically those beliefs and practices derived from the Lukumi religion of the Yoruba people of Nigeria, has evolved into what is now known as Santería (or, “the Way of the Saints”).1  Santería was originally a derisive term the Spanish used to mock the African slaves’ apparent over-devotion to the Catholic saints.  Yet, what they perceived as devotion to the saints was actually a devotion to their own sacred orishas, spiritual beings who represent the forces of nature and are considered to be manifestations of the creator.  The Lukumi people disguised their orishas as Catholic saints in order to avoid persecution.2

One has to be initiated into Santería before information about it is freely released.  However, we do know some things about their beliefs, rituals, and practices.  They believe in a supreme deity and creator of the universe, whom they refer to as Olofi, Olorun, or Olódùmarè (owner of heaven).3  They hold no specific belief in a devil.  Rather than viewing the universe in terms of good and evil, they see all things as having positive aspects (Iré) and negative aspects (Ibi).  Good character (Iwapele) is defined as doing what is right simply because it is right, rather than out of fear of retribution or hope of reward.

All ceremonies and rituals of the Lukumi tradition begin by paying homage to one’s ancestors, called Ara Orun (People of Heaven).  The Ara Orun are held in high esteem and are referred to for moral guidance.  Animal sacrifice is a common practice during rituals, and this has caused some controversy among animal rights activists.  Chickens are the most common sacrifice, and followers of Santería claim their priests and priestesses are trained to perform these ritual sacrifices in safe and humane ways.  Only the blood of the chickens is offered to the orishas, while the meat is cooked and consumed by the community.  These sacrifices are believed to bring good luck, purification and forgiveness of sins.  Trees are also offered to the orishas.  Another controversial ritual involves sprinkling elemental mercury around the home, which vaporizes and can expose those who reside in the household.4

The hierarchical structure of Santería is arranged according to priesthood level and authority.  The priests and priestesses who govern the Orisha temples are known as Babalorishas (fathers of Orisha) and Iyalorishas (mothers of Orisha).  They are also referred to as Santeros(as) and represent the second level in the hierarchical structure.  The top level is reserved for priests of Ifa, who are considered to be Orishas of prophecy, wisdom, and all knowledge.  Ifa priests are given titles such as Babalawo (father who knows the secrets) and Iyanifa (mother of destiny).  Initiates must train for several years in the oral traditions of the faith and undergo a period of solitude in order to become Santeros(as). They are taught the traditional drum music, songs and dances of their ancestors, which are considered forms of prayer to the orishas.  This music is said to induce trance-like states in the initiated Santeros(as), allowing them to channel the orishas, heal the sick, and transmit information to the community.

The practice of Santería in Cuba was actively suppressed in the 1960s during the communist revolution, but its popularity exploded in the 1990s.  Most of today’s Cuban followers of Santería also consider themselves to be Catholics.  They often hold separate rituals to honor the saints and the orishas, even though the disguise of Catholicism is no longer needed.  Adherents are currently concentrated in Cuba and other Caribbean islands, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Venezuela, France, the Netherlands, and the Hispanic populations of Florida, Puerto Rico, New Jersey, New York City and Los Angeles.  There are now Santerían stores in many of these areas, called Botanicas, which sell charms, herbs, potions, musical instruments, and other supplies used in the practice of Santería.  Estimates as to the number of adherents varies widely.5

-Laura

  1. http://www.santeriareligion101.com/ [<]
  2. Ernesto Pichardo, Santería in Contemporary Cuba: The individual life and condition of the priesthood [<]
  3. http://www.religioustolerance.org/santeri3.htm [<]
  4. Technical Report: Mercury in the Environment: Implications for Pediatricians [<]
  5. http://www.religioustolerance.org/santeri2.htm [<]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Atheism, Religion, Unearthed | 3 Comments »

Kabbalah Unearthed

Monday, March 3rd, 2008

Kabbalah is a set of esoteric teachings intended to reveal the mystical aspects of Judaism.  Followers of Kabbalah consider its teachings to be the true meaning of Judaism, whereas other Jews consider the doctrines of Kabbalah to be heretical.  Kabbalists believe Jewish mysticism originated in Eden, although historians have noted that virtually all Kabbalistic works falsely claim, or are ascribed, ancient authorship.  Kabbalists believe that over time, Jewish patriarchs, prophets, and sages interwove their knowledge into Jewish writings and culture through oral transmission, resulting in the current teachings and practices.

Kabbalists believe that in ancient Israel in the 10th century BCE, the teachings of Kabbalah were common knowledge and practiced by over one million people.  However, there is very little historical evidence to support this.1  They believe that the Jewish spiritual leaders at that time (the Sanhedrin) were forced to hide these teachings, because foreign conquests posed a risk that the information might fall into the wrong hands.  The Sanhedrin also feared that Jews who were deported on conquest to other countries would be led to practice in incorrect and forbidden ways without proper supervision and guidance by the masters.  As a result, they believe the Kabbalah became secretive and forbidden for two and a half millennia.

The Zohar, a mystical commentary on the Torah written in medieval Aramaic, is widely considered the most important work of Kabbalah.  Torah study is considered an inherent duty of observant Jews,2 and the Zohar divides this study into four levels.  Peshat is the simple meaning of the text.  Remez refers to biblical allusion and allegory.  Derash is Rabbinic scriptural exegesis.  And finally, Sod is the secret inner meaning of the Torah, i.e. the kabbalah.3  Kabbalah teaches that there are hidden meanings contained in every Hebrew letter, word, number, and even the accent on words in the Hebrew Bible.  Kabbalists practice methods such as Gematria to attempt to ascertain these hidden meanings.

Another famous work, and possibly the earliest extant book on Jewish esotericism, is the Sefer Yetzirah, which kabbalists claim dates back to the patriarch Abraham.  Also revered is astro-magical text the Sefer Raziel HaMalach which, according to kabbalists, was revealed to Adam by the angel Raziel.  Yet, the Sefer Raziel HaMalach draws heavily from the Sefer Yetzirah, and it cannot be shown to predate the 13th century.  Skeptical scholars find attempts to date these works to the pre-Israelite Ancient Near East to be implausible.  Much of the central doctrine did not begin to develop seriously until the 12th century CE, and it seems far-fetched to believe that this doctrine existed undocumented within Judaism from the time of the Assyrian empire (which, ironically, some scholars believe is the source of Jewish mysticism) until it “resurfaced” approximately 17 to 18 centuries later.4

Kabbalists can be defined as monistic panentheists.  They envision two aspects of God, (a) God Himself, whom they consider to be impersonal and unknowable, and (b) the revealed aspect of God that created the universe and interacts with mankind.  They believe God’s existence is beyond anything that can be expressed in the material world, yet they believe all things are linked to God in perfect unity.  Rather than viewing these two aspects as a paradox, Kabbalists believe that through divine emanations they can come to see how they complement one another. 5

Kabbalah teaches that there are ten attributes with which God created the universe and reveals Himself, called the Ten Sefirot (literally, the Ten Emanations).  Kabbalists believe that the differences between these levels are not changes in God but in mankind’s ability to perceive God.  The ten levels are: Keter (will), Chochmah (wisdom), Binah (understanding), Chesed (loving kindness), Din (judgment), Tiferet (harmony), Netzach (victory), Hod (glory), Yesod (foundation), and Malchut (sovereignty).6

The Zohar teaches that there are three elements to the human soul: the nefesh, which is the lower “animal” part of the soul linked to instincts and bodily cravings, the ruach, the middle “spirit” soul containing moral virtues, and the neshamah, the higher “intellect” soul, which allows one to have awareness of God and to benefit from the afterlife.  The nefesh is said to enter the body at birth, whereas the ruach and neshamah are said to develop over time depending on the actions and beliefs of the individual.  Most Kabbalistic works assume a fundamental difference between Jewish and non-Jewish souls.  The Zohar posits that Gentile souls have an evil, demonic aspect to them that is not present in Jews.  Two additional parts of the soul, the chayyah (awareness of the divine life force) and yehidah (fullest union with God possible), are mentioned in the Raaya Meheimna, a section of teachings spread throughout the Zohar, but these higher levels of cognition are considered to be within the grasp of only a few chosen individuals.

-Laura

  1. Aryeh Kaplan “Jewish Meditation: A Practical Guide” [<]
  2. The Written Law (The Torah) [<]
  3. Imbued with Holiness [<]
  4. Parpola S. (1993) “The Assyrian Tree of Life: Tracing the Origins of Jewish Monotheism and Greek Philosophy” Journal of Near Eastern Studies [<]
  5. JewishEncyclopedia.com – Bible Exegesis [<]
  6. http://www.newkabbalah.com/sefirot.html [<]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Atheism, Religion, Unearthed | No Comments »

Secrets: God: the Evidence

Friday, February 15th, 2008

This article is part of the series: Secrets of Christianity: Unearthed

God: the Evidence

Image by ProcrustesCome again? What “evidence”?

In religion, man is assumed to be the most important thing in the “universe”, the special project of some deity. This has lead to religion ignoring observable facts and insisting that the earth is the “center” of the universe” and indeed that everything revolves around it. This baseless assumption defined how most religions and especially Christianity interacted with humanity and our world.

The heliocentric solar system was not unfamiliar to those in ancient times, or to those from other religions. Aristarchus of Samos wrote that he was furthering the theories of Heraclides Ponticus in the third century BC.1 Muslim scholars did work to show that the earth rotates.2 However, all of these early scientists were decried by contemporaries.3 How dare they say that the earth is not the center of the universe! This slowly started to change when instruments were developed to allow us to observe our world more accurately. Galileo saw the moons revolving around Jupiter.4 Copernicus came up with the data and formulas to demonstrate how we revolve.5 We then had to acknowledge that pretty stories meant nothing when reality was knocking on the door.

When Copernicus originally revealed his theories, they were met with interest but not yet aversion. However, they met opposition 3 years later when a Dominican monk denounced them in a work that indicated that the Bible was inerrant, the absolute truth of how the universe worked.6 Following that, Galileo dared to reveal that his telescope supported the heliocentric model. With such an “attack” against the infallibility of the Bible, and therefore Catholic Church, that which was acceptable as an idea became unacceptable as reality.7 Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake for supporting Copernicus’ ideas and Galileo was convicted of heresy.8 Any heliocentric works were on the Vatican’s Index of Prohibited Books in 1616 and the specific books by Copernicus and Galileo were on that list until 1835.9

As you can see above, Copernicus did much to advance man’s knowledge of his world. In 1973, there was a celebration of the 500th anniversary of his birth.10 At this celebration, many scientific papers were presented by many of the preeminent scientists of that time. However, there was one paper presented that was not of this caliber. One of the articles in U.S. News and World Report’s special edition “Secrets of Christianity” mentions this one in its “God: the Evidence” article. One would assume that a magazine dedicated to pursuing the facts about things would have perhaps read this article over more closely, looking for facts to support the subject’s claims or making sure that questionable claims weren’t included. However, that is not the case.

This article begins with mentioning the august figures in attendance at that 1973 symposium. The author takes great pride in listing the names of Stephen Hawking, Roger Penrose, etc. However, it immediately insists that the “only” paper to be “remembered” from that conference was one by Brandon Carter, “Large Number Coincidences and the Anthropic Principle in Cosmology.”11 Now, I suspect that there were many papers that were remembered from that conference. One, “Large Scale Anisotropy of the Cosmic Microwave Background” by R.B. Partridge,12 did much for advancing Big Bang theories.

Dr. Carter’s idea was one that many apologists attempt to use today. The idea is that the universe, with its myriad laws and constants are “perfect” for human life, or as Dr. Carter put it, “[W]hat we can expect to observe must be restricted by the conditions for our presence as observers.” This has been claimed to “prove” that God exists, because there needs to be an “intelligence” that decided it wanted humans and it then created a universe to support those humans.

The article goes even further to claim that the theories based on observation of facts, such as evolutionary theory and the heliocentric fact, “explained the tone of despair and angst that came to characterize modern culture, the desperate feeling that humankind was along and without moorings, and above all, without God.” However, the article does nothing to show how this supposedly occurred. This is an excellent example of more baseless assumptions upon which religion builds its claims.

Baseless claims like this are rife throughout the article. It is claimed that “scientists began to notice a strange connection among a number of otherwise unexplained coincidences in physics.” This “connection” is supposedly the one “overriding fact”: “Such values had been necessary for the creation of life.” Now, a fact is a very specific thing, especially in the scientific world. A fact is a piece of information presented as having objective reality.13 Because we do not know exactly what is required for the creation of life — something that creationists are quite fond of reminding everyone — it cannot be claimed that it is known for a “fact” that the constants and laws of physics are indeed required for it. The article also does not cite who these “scientists” were, which is always a sign of a claim with no evidence to support it.

The article claims that the argument of “God did it” is a “simpler way of explaining” these constants and laws than the “exotic theories” of physicists. This could be a good assumption if one also believed that fairies made shoes for people in exchange for a bowl of milk rather than the “exotic theory” that cobblers make shoes.

Dr. Carter attempted to make his idea more scientifically palatable by attempting to claim that the “coincidences” that he claimed were too many to just be that, coincidences. However, there is no way to determine how many was “too many.” He also relied on an old idea about the universe. Once, it may have been considered simply “random” by 19th century thinkers, but no scientist thinks that the universe is totally random today nor is it likely that they did even back in 1973. Also, the author of the article has attempted to claim that “Darwin’s theory of “natural selection” could no longer be taken as an exhaustive explanation for the phenomenon of life. Again, these are common mistakes by apologists, using very outdated information and presenting half-truths, since evolutionary theory does not address abiogenesis as he attempts to call the “phenomenon of life.”

There are further attempts to claim that “20th century science is closer to in spirit to the vision of the Book of Genesis than anything offered since Copernicus.” Unless one takes it all completely as “metaphor” and shoehorns any definition one likes into it, it is not. If one does this, then what of the Bible is “metaphor” and what is literal? Why is one person’s “interpretation” better than another’s? The article also tries to claim that finding an origin to the universe is some kind of “scientific embarrassment” and it adds to this the lie that science agrees at all with this unsupported idea that the universe is “expressly designed for life.”

Unfortunately, this article is emblematic of many other Christian apologist arguments. They try to co-opt the terms and discoveries of science to make Christianity sound more plausible, which is especially ironic when “good Christians” didn’t believe any of this when the theories were new and had less evidence supporting them. The article attempts to say that the burden of proof is on those who don’t believe that “God did it.” However anyone knows that the person who proposes an idea is the one who must provide the proof that it is correct and none has been provided. Each scientific discovery pushes any deity farther and farther into the gaps that they try to exploit. Life is in the universe because that’s what those constants and laws just happen to allow to arise. If those constants and laws were different, we would either not be here or we would be here in a different form. The universe isn’t “perfect” for us at all. We are “perfect” for it.

  1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism [<]
  2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_heliocentrism [<]
  3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair [<]
  4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo [<]
  5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus [<]
  6. Rosen, Edward (1995). Copernicus and his Successors. London: Hambledon Press. ISBN 1 85285 071 X [<]
  7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair [<]
  8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno [<]
  9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_Librorum_Prohibitorum [<]
  10. http://siarchives.si.edu/findingaids/FARU0500.HTM [<]
  11. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974IAUS…63..291C [<]
  12. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974IAUS…63..157P [<]
  13. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact [<]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Atheism, Religion, Review, Unearthed | 9 Comments »

« Older Entries