Resolved; Christianity was a positive influence in the development of modern science

A few things I'd like to emphasize; I agree with my opponents views on causation and correlation, a relationship does not entail causation. My point is that if Christian scientists did science because they viewed science as being possible because of their religious beliefs, then there is a positive correlation between Christianity and the development of science. Of course if on balance the correlation is not positive, then the overall relationship between Christianity and the development of science. So I'll address my opponents points in the same format he posted them; 1) The negative relationship between Christianity and the development of science. In this section, my opponent argues that because Christianity makes claims that are in the realm of science, and must hold those claims as true, regardless of what science says. However in the case of Genesis 1 and 2 this is hardly the case. Christians as far back as Augustine have interpreted these passages in many different ways. [1] As to his quote from the Pope, I don't see how that is anti-science. What he is saying is that science presupposes a rationally intelligible nature. He is arguing that science only makes sense in a Christian metaphysical framework. How is that anti-science? As to the Pope saying that condoms are not a good way to eliminate aids. He is concerned that the use of condoms is not ethical, not that data supporting the effectiveness of condoms is not accurate. In any case many Christians reject both of his claims. Christians are not committed to hold these positions. A final point I want to make here is that even if it is true that Christians believed that diseases were caused by demons, this is not enough to show that in this instance Christianity hindered science. My opponent must also show that such Christians were not open to natural causes for such diseases. Of course this cuts both ways. My opponent is correct that I have not established a satisfactory connection between the scientists I mentioned and their Christian beliefs, an error which I plan to correct. but when it comes to Christian beliefs about the cause of diseases, I'm not certain that Christians unanimously believed this. Darrel W. Amundsen, professor at Western Washington University and recognized expert in ancient medieval history, argues in his book, "Medicine, Society, and Faith in the Ancient Medieval Worlds" that sickness was attributed as much to natural causes as they were to demonic possession. Darrel rights, ". .. Because it is so common to assume that in the early Middle Ages demonic causality was accepted for most disease, and certainly for mental illness, such natural causes as despair, fear, sudden seizure, and "unknown reasons" may surprise us. Such explanations, however, occur with some frequency. .. " [2] 2) Christianity follows on from scientific development My opponents first point here perplexes me. He states, "not a single scientific fact in recorded history has been found through any direct practice of Christianity. " If I understand my opponent correctly, he seems to be suggesting that in order for Christianity to have a positive relationship with science, it must produce scientific facts. This is absurd, as it would require that Christianity be a science. I'm arguing that Christianity has supported the development of the sciences. My opponent then proceeds to argue that Christianity has retreated in the face of science. But even if this is true, it in no way negates my contention that Christianity nurtured science more than it inhibited it. For the question is not if Christianity is consistent with what science discovers, but whether or not Christianity has supported the methods of science. Thus my opponent needs to show that these retreats manifested themselves as hindrances of the development of scientific methods and discovery. And yet again this sword cuts both ways, I need to show that the Christian beliefs I mentioned manifested themselves as supporting the development of science (which I will). 3) General examples of a negative relationship; Creationism- We are indeed seeing a conflict between science and a type of Christianity, but I do not think that it is a conflict between science and Christianity itself. Many Christians today and throughout history have interpreted Genesis in a multitude of ways. And a good argument can be made that much of the book of Genesis is poetic in nature. [3] Bubonic plague- I'm not sure how this is supposed to be an example of Christians impeding science. It may be an example of a false hypothesis, that demons were making people sick, but again, my opponent needs to show that Christians were not open to competing natural hypotheses, and/or saw such hypotheses as heretical. 4) Improving my positive case; I am going to be shifting the focus from isolated scientists to the church and its leaders. The first thing I want to point out is that the church actually created the first universities. Part of the reason they did so was to educate theologians in order for them to teach effectively and to continue to research and discover things about difficult topics. This lead to different fields and even students getting doctorates in fields such as medicine and law. This is important because it means churches formed universities for religious reasons. Universities, which no doubt have influenced the growth and development of science in a positive way. [4] Furthermore throughout the middle ages a massive effort was undertaken by numerous scholars to use reason to defend Christian doctrines against heresy. This crucial step led to developments in mathematics by Buridan and Oresmes, advances in astronomy by Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo. These developments fertilized the seeds of modern science [5,6,7] (I may expand this argument in my next response). Lastly I would like to emphasize the massive number of scientists who were Christian throughout history this site; . http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk..., lists hundreds of them, and many, if not most, viewed their science as being deeply rooted in their theology. I can't go through all of them but I'd encourage the readers to look into it. Supporting quotes; "When with bold telescopes I survey the old and newly discovered stars and planets when with excellent microscopes I discern the unimitable subtility of nature's curious workmanship; and when, in a word, by the help of anatomical knives, and the light of chemical furnaces, I study the book of nature I find myself oftentimes reduced to exclaim with the Psalmist, How manifold are Thy works, O Lord! in wisdom hast Thou made them all! " - Robert Boyle "Geometry existed before the creation; is co-eternal with the mind of God; is God himself . .. Where there is matter there is geometry. . .. geometry provided God with a model for the Creation and was implanted into man, together with God's own likeness - and not merely conveyed to his mind through the eyes. . .. It is absolutely necessary that the work of such a Creator be of the greatest beauty. .. "- Johannes Kepler 1. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. . http://gratefultothedead.wordpress.com... 3. . http://www.youtube.com..., if that doesn't show up go to; . http://www.sumtercatholic.org... 4. . http://jameshannam.com... 5. . http://ethesis.helsinki.fi... 6. . http://www.bede.org.uk... 7. . http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk...