Comments on: avoiding the Socinian conclusion

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 01:18:15 +0000

if we go back, way back, to Maimonides, he felt there were elements of Christianity which were flawed, in his view, and that these types of movements within Christianity were inevitable, although with Islam and Mohammed he seemed much harsher, with the near entirety of it being a heresy. But that is his opinion, and it shows that the H word can be used in all sorts of contexts. thanks for your comments.

By: rey

rey — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 01:03:05 +0000

Oops, not “The Biblical basis of modern scholarship” but “The Biblical basis of modern Science”

By: rey

rey — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 01:02:32 +0000

Its interesting to me that all the great Christian scientists that Henry Morris champions in his books against evolution as the founders of various scientific disciplines were heretical by his own (I think Baptist) definition and that of his readership. I’m thinking of a book called “The Biblical basis of modern scholarship” (I think) and every scientist who he hails there as a Christian was a Socinian, Arian, or Pelagian (or all three at once). It seems almost as if one had to be a Socinian to break free from superstition and engage in science at that time. I don’t know how else to explain it. Morris doesn’t list Michael Servetus, but we know also he was an anti-trinitarian (of what sort I don’t know) and he discovered the circulatory system, and then was burned at the stake by Calvin for his anti-trinitarian views.