This seems like the root idea of his book “Til We Have Faces” which is super underrated. It’s one of his works of fiction that is a good read just at surface level but of course has massive depth as well. There’s a line in the book that’s something like “We can’t see the face of God until we have faces to see it with” which always comes back to me at the strangest moments.
I always look forward to these posts, Paigeashley! Thanks a ton
“I believe in God for the same reason I believe in the rising sun. Not because I see it, but because through it, I see all things” (paraphrasing CS Lewis). I read that when I was much younger and didn’t fully understand it. As I get older it makes more and more sense to me. Especially with all the insanity in the world now, I truly believe that it all stems from a hatred of Christ. It all makes a lot of sense once you see it.
The idea that there was no progress in the medieval era is nonsense. It was called the dark ages because we didn’t know a lot about it at the time the name was coined, not because of lack of scientific progress. Regardless, you’re way off topic. You’re wrong about people being burned at the stake for saying the earth was round. Don’t change the discussion because you can’t support the claim with anything substantial
Most of the nonsense you hear about the church dates back to the 18th and 19th century when The Church of England was trying to discredit the pope and remove the political power of the Vatican (no surprise there, all roads lead to politics). A good example is the Spanish Inquisition. The first mentions of torture and Iron Maidens come from this era and was completely fabricated. Then the infamous Galileo story which is insanely misrepresented. The church funded Galileo’s research in the first place, he was friends with the pope at the time and got into an argument with him, then wrote a very public story where he ridiculed him. This was a political issue for which Galileo ended up on house arrest for a little over a year in an Italian villa complete with all his research equipment and was allowed to continue his work (side note: Johannes Kepler was the one who actually did the math proving heliocentricity. Not that Galileo couldn’t have, but he was an obstinate man and, again, was feuding with the political powers of the time). Then there’s the crusade which I hope you’re already aware is also completely misrepresented. They were a retaliation for centuries of Muslim invasions into Europe and the holy land. This is just the prominent examples but history is widely controlled in the same way the news is, by people with suspect motivations.
“Most architecture and the art”? That seems pretty subjective especially “the art”. Also, the Renaissance wasn’t defined by “people (who) fought against religion“. The most famous pieces were inspired by Christianity. Maybe you’ve heard of The Last Supper, The Sistine Chapel?
Unpopular opinion but I feel sorry for these people. He’s a piece of shit, no doubt, but how could he have become anything else given the circumstances he was born into? Repent, Hunter. It’s never too late. In the eyes of Christ all of our sins are the same
I think the “anti-science” line they use is the most ridiculous of all their nonsense. I need to stay calm when this comes up but it’s the most infuriating thing I’ve ever heard. I’ve gotten to the point where I just feel like owning it. Fine, I’m “anti-science”. Now leave me alone
Apologist doesn’t mean apologizing for something. It comes from the Greek apologia which means defense. An apologist defends a subject from the criticism it’s received. For example a colonial apologist is someone who tries to make the case that colonialism was a good thing