WHEN EMBARRASSMENT CREATES A COMMON PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR...
Introduction
Whether we are authors or readers, we all react according to our own concepts, concepts which lead us to make various analyses on given subjects.
There are subjects which lead to different analyses, because they call upon our subjectivity.
. If this subjectivity is tendentious, it will lead, very often, to the rejection of the reasoning of others.
. If it is well based, it will make it possible to accept - or at least to recognize - the logic of reasoning of those others, even if this logic leads to different conclusions. This subjectivity could be described as open-minded.
Thus, there are subjects for which it is difficult to establish only one analysis, accepted by all, because they call upon the subjectivity of each individual.
But there are other subjects which call upon an analysis of facts. From these subjects should thus appear a consensus of ideas, on the condition, however, that one’s objectivity is not influenced by a strong subjacent subjectivity, coming from a sectarian spirit.
The analysis of my study “Between Galileo and the Church: the Bible” demands that the various commentators follow grammatical and semantic rules, which are well established.
Who are these commentators?
There are:
those who have read the study,
those who have not read it.
. The first group, although there have been few of them, have all expressed favorable comments.
. Concerning the second group, it will be necessary to consider:
- those who, because of the subject and for personal reasons, did not show any interest,
- those who, although they did not read the book, criticized it sharply a priori or simply rejected it. Ill-advised they intermingled objectivity and subjectivity, rejecting from the start the bases of analysis which this type of work demands.
Why such an a priori rejection?
This rejection comes from people belonging to different groups:
. some belonging to Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical or Jewish communities,
. others to agnostic or atheistic groups.
But there is a surprising fact: all of them, whether they are religious or not, had the same reaction, that is an almost complete silence with regard to the book.
Religious people have concepts according to the group they belong to, and so have atheists or agnostics. But why is it that they all react in the same way: silence?
. Protestants and Evangelicals, who profess their confidence in the Holy Scriptures, should have been delighted owing to the fact that this thorough semantic study shows that the original Texts of the Bible have expressed clearly, for more than 3000 years, that which Copernicus and Galileo discovered a little more than three and a half centuries ago: the Sun not turning around the Earth.
But this truth disturbs them, not from the scientific point of view, but from the Biblical point of view - their Version of the Bible, to which they are strongly attached, affirming the rotation of the Sun around the Earth and which is contradicted by my study. Not wanting to correct their translations, they thus persist in the error and the discredit which wrongly fell upon the Bible at the time of the trial of Galileo.
. Catholics, also refusing the comforming of their Versions with the Original texts, share the same responsibility of error and discredit of the Bible.
It is quite obvious that the Catholic Church (not only in the past but also today), not having detected these mistranslations and being supposed to hold supremacy on the matter, will have to recognize this gap officially and solve it. Until now, It has only developed arguments which do not put an end to this problematic affaire, Galileo having not been rehabilitated yet.
. The atheists or agnostics, even if they have good reasons to criticize religious people and the Versions of the Bible, are embarrassed by learning that the original Texts, even in this scientific discipline, cannot be contested. They, like the others, abstain from any comment.
The goal of my study is thus to obtain:
. not only the official rehabilitation of the astronomer Galileo,
. but also a real rehabilitation of the Bible - Its original Texts having never proclaimed the error of the rotation of the Sun around the Earth. For more than six years, I have been reiterating these arguments in my various letters and e-mails, without success.
Apart from a few exceptions, the media (press, radio, television), Associations organizing Book exhibitions or Conferences adopt this same “law of silence”.
Galileo deeply marked history. During 2009, many scientific demonstrations took place in his honour and others are programmed in 2010. But why is it that the question of his rehabilitation is so little discussed? Wouldn't one like to see him rehabilitated one day?

In conclusion:
An end must be put to the unjust trial of the astronomer. Not only must his rehabilitation be officialized but also that of the Bible regarding Its original Texts.
Recently, I contacted the competent authorities.
I remain at the disposal of any person desiring to see Truth triumph.
I express my thanks to those who helped me and encouraged me in this delicate task. I also thank the booksellers who have agreed to sell my book.
Joel Col
For more information please consult:
http://monsite.orange.fr/error.truth
http://monsite.orange.fr/autoedition.meguila
Also do a search with “Joel Col” Galileo

Condamnation of Galileo.
In 1633, Galileo was condemned by the Church for biblical and scientific reasons. Subsequently, science gradually proved that Galileo’s theory was correct.

I reconsidered the ultimate phase of the trial of the astronomer: the contradiction of his new thesis with regard to the biblical verses sustained by the Church.

In my French book “Entre Galilée et l’Église : la Bible” (Between Galileo and the Church, the Bible…) I analyse the conflicting verses. And I demonstrate, through a comprehensive semantic study, that in the Hebrew and Greek Texts, the sun does not turn around the Earth, contrary to what the versions assert. I conclude that if the translations of the Bible had been faithful to the original Texts, Galileo would not have been condemned for “having held and believed a doctrine which is false and contrary to the divine and Holy Scripture.”

As a result of this study, I clarify the many debates held through the centuries and endeavour to align the translations of the Bible with their original Texts and to officially rehabilitate Galileo.
Joël Col

This will give the pope more time to concentrate on the use of condoms, birth control, onan and other verboten things.

This changes nothing, absolutely nothing. It diverts attention from the fact that the church can be seriously vindictive. What´s more important: that you´re being treated fairly when it MATTERS or that they erect a stupid statue centuries after you´re dead?

Apparently it´s OK to be wronged if they apologise 400 years too late... that´s what this act of superficial hypocrisy says.

To HELL with the pope

And there I was thinking this was an article about the european GPS efforts.

Damned right. We need to concentrate on discrediting Darwin. Got no time for Franklin and his blasphemous lightning rods, or Jenner and his vaccines.

They're all hypocrites! Why would the roman catholics now, after 400 years, apologize? It's been over a 100 years since Galileo was proven correct, there are doing this for public appeal, to relieve some of the hatred for there actions of persecuting those who went against the norm and were correct.

AT adds: Maybe they're 400 years behind the times.

Gallileo not believing in the afterlife? You've gotta be kidding! 

Jim, did you actually take the time to read the Pope's address? Not a CNN news article but the actual speech? Also, you create nice easy straw man in your remarks about papal infallibility.

Bizarre religious arse faces. Best thing this country ever did was turn protestant - and therefore eventually atheist. Thank you, Henry.

AT adds: We were saved by a vacuum cleaner?

Google for:

Galileo pope protest university

and you'll see why the Vatican is 'honouring' Galileo. It's simply that the current pope was told to sod off when he wanted to give a speech at La Sapienza university in Rome in January this year. There were protests, banners an dissent from academics. Why? Because Pope Benedict XVI gave a speech in 1990 stating that he "condones the 1633 trial and conviction of the scientist Galileo for heresy".

Now, could the 'infallible' pope have been wrong? Is he going to recant? Should he be made to recant? As a former head of the Inquisition he will know where the instruments of torture are to be found. I suppose the next step, following precedence, is to show him said instruments.

Funny old world, innit.