Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum / Historical errors

**Posted by Mysterious Brony** 9/21/2015 9:38 pm

Speaking of the Jesus Mythicists, this reminds me of other historical errors that are prevalent in US culture that even in schools they get it wrong. For example, I hear that medieval people believed that the earth was flat despite the fact that people knew the earth was round since ancient times. The spanish inquisiton (black legend) or inquistion in general were runned by sadistic, powerhungry churchmen that tortured heretics in extreme ways versus the liberating, enlightened, protestants who fought for freedom. The crusaders were barbarians who wanted to expand and colonize other countries. One of my personal favorite ones, the so-called religion versus science war (eventhough Galileo was an exception) or any thing pre-Enlightment is bad. However, I rarely hear about the brutal history of communist regimes, the Cristero war in Mexico, the Spanish persecution of the Catholic Church during the 1930s, the violent French Revolution, etc. Is it just me or there is some sort of anti-christian historical bias? Nevertheless, I could be wrong about this, but there is something fishy going. Any thoughts?

**Posted by DanielCC** 9/22/2015 4:38 am

Mysterious Brony wrote:
Is it just me or there is some sort of anti-christian historical bias? Nevertheless, I could be wrong about this, but there is something fishy going. Any thoughts?

Let's be completely honest here: the key word here is not 'Anti-Christian' but 'Anti-Catholic'. Most of these stories are stock Protestant caricatures given an atheist twist.

**Posted by Mysterious Brony** 9/22/2015 9:56 pm

Maybe you're right, some secular activists scream "Inquisition, Crusades, Witch hunts, etc" as a tactic to advance secularism as good.

**Posted by Dennis** 9/24/2015 5:04 am

Without wanting to side-track this thread, I want to post this, since this is of some relevance, I think. This is from the Senior Lecturer at The University of Edinburgh, Alasdair Richmond.

"Bit of a random historical snippet perhaps, but just as an (admittedly out-there) example of explanation-requests changing over time, I understand that Roger Bacon (c. 1214–92 - aka 'Doctor Mirabillis') not only held that a proper theory of the heavens would explain why there were exactly seven planets but also argued that one way to explain this was to note that there should be as many planets as there are windows in the human head, i.e. seven. Thankfully, people didn’t put extra holes in their heads to mark the discovery of Neptune and Pluto, nor subsequently fill-in holes in their heads now that Pluto has been down-graded from planet to dwarf-planet status. (What Bacon would have made of recent exoplanet discoveries I shudder to think ...)"

Since, I don't have any access to proper Roger Bacon scholarship, would this be carded as, (a) A historical error, (b) A straw man, (c) the actuality of what has been said and meant by Bacon?

Last edited by Dennis (9/24/2015 5:19 am)

**Posted by theway** 10/22/2015 9:40 am

I agree with You. And in Speaking of the inquisiton with the sadistic, powerhungry churchmen.

REMEMBER - The Vatican / Romantic Catholic Church, did not Produce a Latin / Italian Version of Scriptures until 400 *( Four Hundred Years ) After Christ. The Catholic Church had nothing to do with scriptures being distributed or taught.in it's original meaning and original basic, simple message.

instead, Rome gathered together OTHER mens Writings about the Scriptures. OTHER mens opinions and Other mens theology and thoughts about their Feelings about the Scriptures.

This has been the Hobby, Project and actions of Rome, for the Last 2000 Years.        Other mens theology and thoughts.
Not the Bible.    ......The Bible is not what the Catholic Church has been Spreading for 2000 Years.     ...    But the Writings, Opinions and of other Men - of the Ages to come. THEN it took the Catholic Church Nearly 2000 Years'. * (( 1500 Years. ) - to Produce a Bible translation into ANOTHER Language, OTHER That Latin..
Think of it.   For nearly 2000 Years the Catholic Church Refused to Translate the Scriptures into any other Language, - I believe that this Lack of Interest in Scriptures has created alot of Errors and False Claims and Statements and Demands made by Many, many RomanTic Catholics.

Basicly - False Claims, Statements and Demands about the God of the Bible, His Character and His Message and the faith of its followers. The Faith of the Catholic Church is a Foundation rooted in OTHER mens Writings about the Scriptures. OTHER mens opinions and Other mens theology and thoughts about their Feelings, Desires and Wishful Imagination concerning the Scriptures.

Last edited by theway (10/22/2015 9:45 am)

**Posted by DanielCC** 10/22/2015 10:12 am

It should be noted that re translations of Scripture for most the Western Church's existence wealthy individuals were often want to commission private translations of varying sections into their own native tongue. Granted this was not as 'often' as it might have been since individuals so inclined were most often of the class to know Latin as well. Criticise the Church for not encouraging universal literacy if you will but that's a whole different issue.

Now, for some fun...

Yes, but on the upside those Churchmen produced a plethora of writings which were much better than the majority of the Bible - really what is there to compare with the deep phenomenological insights into selfhood, time, freedom and culpability which one finds in Augustine, or the accounts of mystical experience in St John of the Cross or Teresa of Avila? And I'm not even starting on the wealth of philosophical, logical and scientific treatise one would not find from reading the history of the Jewish kings.

**Posted by Etzelnik** 10/22/2015 7:11 pm

DanielCC wrote:
Yes, but on the upside those Churchmen produced a plethora of writings which were much better than the majority of the Bible - really what is there to compare with the deep phenomenological insights into selfhood, time, freedom and culpability which one finds in Augustine, or the accounts of mystical experience in St John of the Cross or Teresa of Avila? And I'm not even starting on the wealth of philosophical, logical and scientific treatise one would not find from reading the history of the Jewish kings.

I wouldn't say that the Bible is intended to compete with such. The Bible is essentially notes on the greater lecture of reason.

I would also mention that Judges through Kings provide tremendous insight into proper governance, provided that the reader open his eyes and seek it out.

**Posted by Mysterious Brony** 10/23/2015 12:11 am

@theway Please stay on topic, if you want to criticize the Catholic Church then start a new topic. Also, if you think that the Catholic Church or those "Others mens writings" are wrong then you need to give arguments of why they are wrong and you need to give your own arguments of why you are right. Good day!

**Posted by Last Rites** 10/26/2015 8:56 pm

Mysterious Brony wrote:
One of my personal favorite ones, the so-called religion versus science war (eventhough Galileo was an exception) or any thing pre-Enlightment is bad.

That's my favorite too. My understanding is that the atheist version of this narrative originated in the late 19th century with anti-Christian authors John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White mostly responsible for distributing it. Both men wrote "histories" of the conflict between religion and science. I quote the word because their books are rife with unsourced claims and other content that is easily proved erroneous. Their ideas have persisted as myths much like the "flat Earth" tale you mentioned in your post.

Mysterious Brony wrote:
However, I rarely hear about the brutal history of communist regimes, the Cristero war in Mexico, the Spanish persecution of the Catholic Church during the 1930s, the violent French Revolution, etc. Is it just me or there is some sort of anti-christian historical bias? Nevertheless, I could be wrong about this, but there is something fishy going. Any thoughts?

It obviously depends on your specific education, but when I student taught I spent a significant amount of time with my 11th graders on the commies and the French Revolution. Some of the more obscure stuff, like anything in Spain post 19th century, isn't taught for the simple reason that there isn't enough time.

To your main question, is history biased against Christians, I would say no. Not among professional historians, anyway.

**Posted by Mysterious Brony** 10/26/2015 11:42 pm

@Last Rites Yes! I know about Draper and White and they hold most of the responsibility for spreading those historical caricatures. At least in US culture, historical myths keep roaming around that are biased against Christianity or Christians. I also agree with you that history is not biased against Christians or among professional historians. In fact, Cambridge recently released a 700 page book that focuses on Medieval Science: http://www.amazon.com/Cambridge-History-Science-Medieval/dp/1107521645/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1445920573&sr=1-1&keywords=cambridge+medieval+science.