Pagan Origins of the Christian Faith (Phil. Daily Inquirer)

[regnauld]

---

HUH and where did that conclusion came from? MARS!!!!? wah! boot2x your just spreading your errors even time in memorial. what light? your spreading darkness.

You don't really know the true meaning of Gnosticism, do you?

TRUE AWAKENING or GNOSIS is Acknowledging that YOU ARE THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD as what Jesus The Christ said.

Are you saying this is only exclusive for you, Catholics?

[st.anthony]

Guidance of the magisterieum? You mean to say that Church was guided by the Holy Spirit when she declared that the Earth was the center of the universe and not the sun? hehehe

SAYOP NASAD YOU, your making too many conclusions. hahay



The celestial sphere that we introduced previously is a convenient fiction to locate objects in the sky. However, the Greek philosopher Aristotle (many of Aristotles works are available at the Internet Classics Archive) proposed that the heavens were literally composed of 55 concentric, crystalline spheres to which the celestial objects were attached and which rotated at different velocities (but the angular velocity was constant for a given sphere), with the Earth at the center. The following figure illustrates the ordering of the spheres to which the Sun, Moon, and visible planets were attached.

(The diagram is not to scale, and the planets are aligned for convenience in illustration; generally they were distributed around the spheres.) There were additional "buffering" spheres that lay between the spheres illustrated. The sphere of the stars lay beyond the ones shown here for the planets; finally, in the Aristotelian conception there was an outermost sphere that was the domain of the "Prime Mover". The Prime Mover caused the outermost sphere to rotate at constant angular velocity, and this motion was imparted from sphere to sphere, thus causing the whole thing to rotate.

By adjusting the velocities of these concentric spheres, many features of planetary motion could be explained. However, the troubling observations of varying planetary brightness and retrograde motion could not be accommodated: the spheres moved with constant angular velocity, and the objects attached to them were always the same distance from the earth because they moved on spheres with the earth at the center.
Epicycles and Planetary Motion

The "solution" to these problems came in the form of a mad, but clever proposal: planets were attached, not to the concentric spheres themselves, but to circles attached to the concentric spheres, as illustrated in the adjacent diagram. These circles were called "Epicycles", and the concentric spheres to which they were attached were termed the "Deferents". Then, the centers of the epicycles executed uniform circular motion as they went around the deferent at uniform angular velocity, and at the same time the epicyles (to which the planets were attached) executed their own uniform circular motion.

The net effect was as illustrated in the following animation. As the center of the epicycle moves around the deferent at constant angular velocity, the planet moves around the epicycle, also at constant angular velocity. The apparent position of the planet on the celestial sphere at each time is indicated by the line drawn from the earth through the planet and projected onto the celestial sphere. The resulting apparent path against the background stars is indicated by the blue line.

Now, in this tortured model one sees that it is possible to have retrograde motion and varying brightness, since at times as viewed from the earth the planet can appear to move "backward" on the celestial sphere. Obviously, the distance of the planet from the Earth also varies with time, which leads to variations in brightness. Thus, the idea of uniform circular motion is saved (at least in some sense) by this scheme, and it allows a description of retrograde motion and varying planetary brightness.
More Sophisticated Epicycles: The Ptolemaic Universe


However, in practice, even this was not enough to account for the detailed motion of the planets on the celestial sphere! In more sophisticated epicycle models further "refinements" were introduced:

• In some cases, epicycles were themselves placed on epicycles, as illustrated in the adjacent figure.
• In actual models, the center of the epicycle moved with uniform circular motion, not around the center of the deferent, but around a point that was displaced by some distance from the center of the deferent.

That ancient astronomers could convince themselves that this elaborate scheme still corresponded to "uniform circular motion" is testament to the power of three ideas that we now know to be completely wrong, but that were so ingrained in the astronomers of an earlier age that they were essentially never questioned:

1. All motion in the heavens is uniform circular motion.
2. The objects in the heavens are made from perfect material, and cannot change their intrinsic properties (e.g., their brightness).
3. The Earth is at the center of the Universe.

These ideas concerning uniform circular motion and epicycles were catalogued by Ptolemy in 150 A.D. His book was called the "Almagest" (literally, "The Greatest"), and this picture of the structure of the Solar System has come to be called the "Ptolemaic Universe".

Now is it a CATHOLIC idea? or was it a general idea and truth accepted by that TIME, bro taka raman kag pasangil oi.

[regnauld]

SAYOP NASAD YOU, your making too many conclusions. hahay



The celestial sphere that we introduced previously is a convenient fiction to locate objects in the sky. However, the Greek philosopher Aristotle (many of Aristotles works are available at the Internet Classics Archive) proposed that the heavens were literally composed of 55 concentric, crystalline spheres to which the celestial objects were attached and which rotated at different velocities (but the angular velocity was constant for a given sphere), with the Earth at the center. The following figure illustrates the ordering of the spheres to which the Sun, Moon, and visible planets were attached.

(The diagram is not to scale, and the planets are aligned for convenience in illustration; generally they were distributed around the spheres.) There were additional "buffering" spheres that lay between the spheres illustrated. The sphere of the stars lay beyond the ones shown here for the planets; finally, in the Aristotelian conception there was an outermost sphere that was the domain of the "Prime Mover". The Prime Mover caused the outermost sphere to rotate at constant angular velocity, and this motion was imparted from sphere to sphere, thus causing the whole thing to rotate.

By adjusting the velocities of these concentric spheres, many features of planetary motion could be explained. However, the troubling observations of varying planetary brightness and retrograde motion could not be accommodated: the spheres moved with constant angular velocity, and the objects attached to them were always the same distance from the earth because they moved on spheres with the earth at the center.
Epicycles and Planetary Motion

The "solution" to these problems came in the form of a mad, but clever proposal: planets were attached, not to the concentric spheres themselves, but to circles attached to the concentric spheres, as illustrated in the adjacent diagram. These circles were called "Epicycles", and the concentric spheres to which they were attached were termed the "Deferents". Then, the centers of the epicycles executed uniform circular motion as they went around the deferent at uniform angular velocity, and at the same time the epicyles (to which the planets were attached) executed their own uniform circular motion.

The net effect was as illustrated in the following animation. As the center of the epicycle moves around the deferent at constant angular velocity, the planet moves around the epicycle, also at constant angular velocity. The apparent position of the planet on the celestial sphere at each time is indicated by the line drawn from the earth through the planet and projected onto the celestial sphere. The resulting apparent path against the background stars is indicated by the blue line.

Now, in this tortured model one sees that it is possible to have retrograde motion and varying brightness, since at times as viewed from the earth the planet can appear to move "backward" on the celestial sphere. Obviously, the distance of the planet from the Earth also varies with time, which leads to variations in brightness. Thus, the idea of uniform circular motion is saved (at least in some sense) by this scheme, and it allows a description of retrograde motion and varying planetary brightness.
More Sophisticated Epicycles: The Ptolemaic Universe


However, in practice, even this was not enough to account for the detailed motion of the planets on the celestial sphere! In more sophisticated epicycle models further "refinements" were introduced:

• In some cases, epicycles were themselves placed on epicycles, as illustrated in the adjacent figure.
• In actual models, the center of the epicycle moved with uniform circular motion, not around the center of the deferent, but around a point that was displaced by some distance from the center of the deferent.

That ancient astronomers could convince themselves that this elaborate scheme still corresponded to "uniform circular motion" is testament to the power of three ideas that we now know to be completely wrong, but that were so ingrained in the astronomers of an earlier age that they were essentially never questioned:

1. All motion in the heavens is uniform circular motion.
2. The objects in the heavens are made from perfect material, and cannot change their intrinsic properties (e.g., their brightness).
3. The Earth is at the center of the Universe.

These ideas concerning uniform circular motion and epicycles were catalogued by Ptolemy in 150 A.D. His book was called the "Almagest" (literally, "The Greatest"), and this picture of the structure of the Solar System has come to be called the "Ptolemaic Universe".

Now is it a CATHOLIC idea? or was it a general idea and truth accepted by that TIME, bro taka raman kag pasangil oi.

Unya ngano man lagi gi condemn sa simbahan si Copernicus, Galileo, and Bruno when they declared that the SUN was the center of the universe and not the earth? Are you saying that the Catholic Church was guided by the Holy Spirit when they condemned those people? hehehe

[Hellblazer 2.1]

i think aristotle wasn't himself when he said that, tonio. ('c',) maybe he was high on marijuana at that time. but then again, it was the church that enforced the geo-centric idea of the universe. and they were quite effective at doing that. take the inquisition for example. a lot of scientists or freethinkers were branded as heretics for suggesting a helio-centric idea of the universe. they were hunted down and killed by the Hounds of God. do you know which order of the priesthood was given the authority of the inquisition, tonio?

[st.anthony]

You don't really know the true meaning of Gnosticism, do you?

TRUE AWAKENING or GNOSIS is Acknowledging that YOU ARE THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD as what Jesus The Christ said.

Are you saying this is only exclusive for you, Catholics?

GNOSTICISM lage as ive said was condemed long2x time ago since it was a heresy that will bring darkness to the world not light, why would the church condem your group if its not bringing errors? wala. so naa juy something in your group that was proven thats why your historically condemed

[Ramini]

grabeha oi...and killed them kai wla gi oppose lang sa church...paeta..and the ever sneaky and dirty land grabbing ploy of the catholic church...hehe!!

[regnauld]

GNOSTICISM lage as ive said was condemed long2x time ago since it was a heresy that will bring darkness to the world not light, why would the church condem your group if its not bringing errors? wala. so naa juy something in your group that was proven thats why your historically condemed

You did not answer my questions.

You don't really know the true meaning of Gnosticism, do you?

Are you saying this is only exclusive for you, Catholics when Jesus said YOU ARE THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD?

[Hellblazer 2.1]

i'd rather be a heretic than a hypocrite. ('c',)

[Ramini]

GNOSTICISM lage as ive said was condemed long2x time ago since it was a heresy that will bring darkness to the world not light, why would the church condem your group if its not bringing errors? wala. so naa juy something in your group that was proven thats why your historically condemed

strong words mate...hehe!!

[The_Child]

i think aristotle wasn't himself when he said that, tonio. ('c',) maybe he was high on marijuana at that time. but then again, it was the church that enforced the geo-centric idea of the universe. and they were quite effective at doing that. take the inquisition for example. a lot of scientists or freethinkers were branded as heretics for suggesting a helio-centric idea of the universe. they were hunted down and killed by the Hounds of God. do you know which order of the priesthood was given the authority of the inquisition, tonio?

not being an apologist for the church, but i think one must understand that during the time, the Church was central figure in Europe. which means that it was not only responsible in the moral safeguarding of its flock but also it has "obligation" to maintain status quo.

its like the USA now, trying to safeguard the dominant discourse of Democracy, as the status quo while regarding every thing else as "heretical" and must be changed. (Communism, Iraq, etc.)

ergo, the attitude during the time and now are not different, its not about moral or truth or spiritual authority that is the issue.its purely political-ideological in nature.