Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Gothic architecture evolved from Romanesque architecture :P

I wonder where those Medieval streakers got those skills in masonry from...

But also, apart from that, they can be credited by building them, what was their purpose and driving force?

What drove them to build it?

Ah, wait... Roman Catholicism!!! :declare:

Again the Romans twice claim the crown of sweet glory. ;)

I think you are as confused as you are arrogant. Just a few posts back, you say Christianity had zero tolerance for 'science and learning' and now you admit that Gothic Architecture was a fruit of Christianity. Tell me, is architecture not part of learning? As you said before, the West was full of barbarians who burned all the knowledge and learning of the age before. So you explain yourself, where did they get 'the skills of masonry from?'

And FYI, the Gothic Arch was a completely new discovery, one that neither Rome nor Romanesque architecture can account for.

And thinking that just because Roman Catholicism has Roman in it, makes it part of ancient Rome (or its legacy) is not a very clever assumption. Its called Roman, because its head is in Rome and because of its Latin rite.

I don't know, but I think you just destroyed your own credibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The "church had no tolerance of science" thing is an old stereotypical view of the Middle Ages that no one really subscribes to today. http://bede.org.uk/university.htm

Aqueducts are older then the Roman empire. People in Mesopotamia, Indus valley, etc were moving water long before the Romans. http://en.wikipedia...._(water_supply) Maybe large parts of Europe, sure.

I think, my friend, you need to re-read your history No scholar any longer believes that stuff about the dark age, instead the use the word Christendom. If you read the Catholic fathers you'll see th

You know how much of greek, carthaginian and so on knowledge the romans absorbed, don't you?

Yes I know, that's what make Rome the glorious wonder of our species dude.

You don't hear from mini planets that Ra our sun absorbed dust from it's predecessor do you? Jupitar can say to Mars, "Hey Mars, I am the second sun in the our solar system, I am the greatest. You don't hear mars saying "Oh yeah you only absorbed some left over dust and @#$% from Ra.

That's the stupidity of your question there.

Rome took what it did and used it and made it better. And effectively!

People think yeah well ah, pyramids and Taj mahal are wonders...... ROME as a civilization is a wonder in itself....

Rome the epicenter of greatness, uplifting society to blossom amongst the stars.

Rome... a star of brightness composed of man.

Rome.............

If you claim the Romans for Roman catholicism and thus the drive to build cathedrals, can I claim the Romans to be guilty for the sexual abused victims by priests? It's the same logical structure...

I get what you say, but ... That is completely a blatant attack on Roman Catholicism that statement, and from hearsay is the nature of most of that information and whilst some of is true delving into that would completely throwing this discussion off topic.

I think you are as confused as you are arrogant. Just a few posts back, you say Christianity had zero tolerance for 'science and learning' and now you admit that Gothic Architecture was a fruit of Christianity. Tell me, is architecture not part of learning? As you said before, the West was full of barbarians who burned all the knowledge and learning of the age before. So you explain yourself, where did they get 'the skills of masonry from?'

And FYI, the Gothic Arch was a completely new discovery, one that neither Rome nor Romanesque architecture can account for.

And thinking that just because Roman Catholicism has Roman in it, makes it part of ancient Rome (or its legacy) is not a very clever assumption. Its called Roman, because its head is in Rome and because of its Latin rite.

I don't know, but I think you just destroyed your own credibility.

We got to distinguish exactly what I meant by that state,ent.

Refered to paragraph 4? of the 3rd thread.

Interesting that you brought that one up because I feel by elaborating to such a statement will be contradicting my reply to the above quote. Be that as it may, I will say this...

The holy mother church and Christendom, welcomed sciences that benefited the church and kept people believing in God without blasphemous sciences that showed man what a glorious big universe is out there etc, etc and thereby undermining man's believe in Christianity.

This threshold over the curriculum the church had was to enforce what the church claimed to legit and abiding by the word of god rather than from other sources that drove man away (i.e. the scientific shepherd leading his sheep unto the furthest reaches of knowledge and wisdom, elevating him beyond the simplistic yet very basic dogma of that church has dumbed people down with) now this wasn't an attack on Christianty and if it was, than just take alook at what we learn today in Uni and schools? Never in your wildest imagination will this today be accepted then and you would of been burned at the stake.

And Roman Catholicism is very much Roman, and most of the subjects involved in the creation of that faith were Roman. Alot of them were Byzantine.

That is really not a misconception like everyone thinks it is.

Edited by Burzum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I know, that's what make Rome the glorious wonder of our species dude.

I'm rather disappointed that the glorious wonder of our species left baby girls out on the road (which incidentally was full of sewage, because hey, where else should the drains lead?) because they were considered much less valuable than males.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This threshold over the curriculum the church had was to enforce what the church claimed to legit and abiding by the word of god rather than from other sources that drove man away (i.e. the scientific shepherd leading his sheep unto the furthest reaches of knowledge and wisdom, elevating him beyond the simplistic yet very basic dogma of that church has dumbed people down with) now this wasn't an attack on Christianty and if it was, than just take alook at what we learn today in Uni and schools? Never in your wildest imagination will this today be accepted then and you would of been burned at the stake.

I will ignore the complete scarcity of facts here. The Church has always held that Science and Religion, understood properly can never contradict each other, because they had the same author. This goes back to even before the middle ages, to the time of St Augustine! To say otherwise, would show how little one knows about anything of the Church. Where do you think these universities originated from? The middle ages, the age, which you say 'was against learning'.

And, if you say that the Church is 'very much Roman' (a claim which apparently you know nothing about) then what's to say that the Church in 'trying to enforce what was legit', didn't inherit it from the Roman Empire?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm rather disappointed that the glorious wonder of our species left baby girls out on the road (which incidentally was full of sewage, because hey, where else should the drains lead?) because they were considered much less valuable than males.

Because males were her strength and soldiers.

I will ignore the complete scarcity of facts here. The Church has always held that Science and Religion, understood properly can never contradict each other, because they had the same author. This goes back to even before the middle ages, to the time of St Augustine! To say otherwise, would show how little one knows about anything of the Church. Where do you think these universities originated from? The middle ages, the age, which you say 'was against learning'.

And, if you say that the Church is 'very much Roman' (a claim which apparently you know nothing about) then what's to say that the Church in 'trying to enforce what was legit', didn't inherit it from the Roman Empire?

Yes from the middle ages, in the early periods, that was brought to Europe from the middle east. ;) Is this a repeat from the above?

You sticking up for Europe, without admitting that Europe were primitive compared to the world in that age. Sure there was a spike of industrial ingenuity, so you could credit Islam for their concept of universities? That's bit like your philosophy....

And, if you say that the Church is 'very much Roman' (a claim which apparently you know nothing about) then what's to say that the Church in 'trying to enforce what was legit', didn't inherit it from the Roman Empire?

You like attacking that claim, lets see some sources that support yours :) Go on.

It better be from "credible" sources and not some junk forged by misinformed individuals claiming to be professors.

You need to seriously recap on the early days of when that faith was crafted.

Learn who the orchastrators of faith were, Read about Constantine and their agenda.

Criticize me all you want, what you fail to realize is, I know what happened :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Either your arrogance is completely clogging your ability to process the facts, what's actually going on here is, you all I shall mention 4 of you in this thread have a underline misogyny for Rome.

Completely unpatriotic, and therefor intolerant of the glorious civilization that ever roamed the Earth in Ancient times and indeed AD.

Just embrace Rome.... Feel the power. The POWER. Let it soar through your veins like and eagle of adrenalin. Feel the exuberant rush of pride.

The power is and was Rome. Our symbol of might, rule and law.

Fail to embrace Rome you fail to embrace your own species and therefor "Like a bee that rejects her hive has neither both a future or hope."

Stop acting like rejects and accept and embrace the love and beauty of Rome....

Edited by Burzum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Either your arrogance is completely clogging your ability to process the facts, what's actually going on here is, you all I shall mention 4 of you in this thread have a underline misogyny for Rome.

Completely unpatriotic, and therefor intolerant of the glorious civilization that ever roamed the Earth in Ancient times and indeed AD.

Just embrace Rome.... Feel the power. The POWER. Let it soar through your veins like and eagle of adrenalin. Feel the exuberant rush of pride.

The power is and was Rome. Our symbol of might, rule and law.

Fail to embrace Rome you fail to embrace your own species and therefor "Like a bee that rejects her hive has neither both a future or hope."

Stop acting like rejects and accept and embrace the love and beauty of Rome....

Oh, please. The Romans knew how to have a civilized argument. You expect me to give you sources, when you haven't done so yourself. Be specific. Give substance to your arguments. Learn from the people you look up to.

And when did I not admit that Europe was primitive? That is the whole point of my argument. Europe had to start from scratch because of the barbarian invasions. Despite that, they overtook the middle east and the far east.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes no sense to generalize so much about either Rome or Christendom, they both did good and bad things. A great deal of knowledge was lost when Rome made Christianity the official religion and suppressed the "pagan" religions (one of the bad things Rome did). Mobs that sacked the temples didn't differentiate between religious texts and scholarly works, they just burned everything. Christian monks were the great preservers of what survived - they didn't do much to disseminate knowledge for a long time, but they worked hard at preserving it. This was a great help to the eventual rise of Europe, though the Crusaders also brought a lot back from the Middle East that helped.

As for the barbarians - they didn't do nearly as much damage to Rome as the Roman civil wars did. Rome was its own worst enemy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, please. The Romans knew how to have a civilized argument. You expect me to give you sources, when you haven't done so yourself. Be specific. Give substance to your arguments. Learn from the people you look up to. And when did I not admit that Europe was primitive? That is the whole point of my argument. Europe had to start from scratch because of the barbarian invasions. Despite that, they overtook the middle east and the far east.

Typical barbaric tone. sigh.......

And extremely hypocritical. You expect me to provide sources when you yourself haven't? lolz

And dude.

**BANGS MY HEAD AGAINST THE WALL**

wtf is this...........

That is the whole point of my argument. Europe had to start from scratch because of the barbarian invasions. Despite that, they overtook the middle east and the far east.

Europe were the barbarians!!!!! Hello?

Somehow, it's like... impossible for you to make sense? Holy @#$% dude.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rome was so civilized that they had to invade every single land to take the really and only true way of living (of course you can't live in another way, an If you do it you're a savage barbarian!) and the liberty (They weren't a slavist and classist society!).

Typical barbaric tone. sigh.......

You're showing very unrespectful, you said that you're trying to show the civilization point of view in the argument being so... isn't the respect of pluralism of ideas one point of the civilization and modernism?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical barbaric tone. sigh.......

And extremely hypocritical. You expect me to provide sources when you yourself haven't? lolz

And dude.

**BANGS MY HEAD AGAINST THE WALL**

wtf is this...........

Europe were the barbarians!!!!! Hello?

Somehow, it's like... impossible for you to make sense? Holy @#$% dude.

Hahahaha! Tell me this, where is Rome situated? Try and belittle me if you wish, its getting you nowhere. As I said before, give substance to you arguments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahahaha! Tell me this, where is Rome situated? Try and belittle me if you wish, its getting you nowhere. As I said before, give substance to you arguments.

I wasn't belittling you...

Rome is located in the Andes, near India.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fact of the matter is that Amish is speaking so highly of the church and is sticking up for the streakers that populated the rest of Europe and invaded Rome.

He himself denies his own heritage and our species glory by side stepping this and thereby telling me that I have no substance to my claims.

Amish my substance is Rome. But you have a bland comprehension of Rome and therefor you crave substance you can't have.

Lost in denial...tutut.......

Edited by Burzum
Link to post
Share on other sites

I rest my case. One cannot argue with you on this matter it would seem. I bow to your superior knowledge. Ave to you!

Oh and here's a Latin quote for you: "volentes esse legis doctores non intellegentes neque quae loquuntur neque de quibus adfirmant."

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is point, hahaha you know what is a no Latin speaker, don't you?

Both points are reconciliables. Rome change the world, why? And why fall? Think about that.

I rest my case. One cannot argue with you on this matter it would seem. I bow to your superior knowledge. Ave to you!

Oh and here's a Latin quote for you: "volentes esse legis doctores non intellegentes neque quae loquuntur neque de quibus adfirmant."

That was the original meaning of barbarian -.-

But guess what? Barbarian means "uncivilized" By that analogy you just all admitted that you are barbarians yourselves!

Don't you all feel so clever?

Amish I have a question for you.

Why are you lying to your soul? You seem to lack a point, because you so determined to put your point across and by now you don't have a point anyway. lol

I think I rest my case as far as this is concerned. Yes I am a barbarian, in that I speak English, but what you fail to understand is how to be civilized and work on a foundation layed by a civilization.

Edited by Burzum
Link to post
Share on other sites

I rest my case. One cannot argue with you on this matter it would seem. I bow to your superior knowledge. Ave to you!

Oh and here's a Latin quote for you: "volentes esse legis doctores non intellegentes neque quae loquuntur neque de quibus adfirmant."

Why you don't you just admit it?

Just accept and say Rome was very influential and gave our world so much.

Say it: Rome...... was?

Edited by Burzum
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...