Agora
Some of them believe - and this way they have shown it in his comments in the same blog - that the negative criticism of the Spanish movies has an origin foreign to the quality of the movies: that if manias to the actors, that if the subsidies of González Sinde … not further at all of the reality. For my part he wanted to be able to speak well about a Spanish movie and this moment has come finally with Agora.
Amenábar shows us the eternal clash between the reason and the religious fanaticism. The first one is personified in the figure of philosopher Hipatia, historical personage whose cloudy biography allows to the scriptwriter to give free rein to his imagination, what I believe that it results for the sake of the history that is counted.
The fanaticism is represented by a strong Christianity, which has just been "legalized" and which aspires already to turn into the only official religion of the Empire, exiling to the plurality of pagan cults. Although superficially another thing could be thought, Amenábar does not attack to any religion in particular. There are clear allusions to other religions different from the Christian in the characterization of some of the fanatics (and even in the election of the actors who interpret them). That nobody makes a mistake: that the action passes in the IVth century it does not mean that the history is not current, very current. It is sad to look around us and to verify that the fanaticism of the destroyers of the library of Alexandria has lasted up to today.
Synopsis:
IVth century. Egypt under the Roman Empire. The violent religious riots in the streets of Alexandria reach to his legendary Library. Caught after his walls, the brilliant astronomer Hipatia (Rachel Weisz) fights to save the knowledge of the Ancient World with the help of his disciples. Between them, two men who dispute his heart: Orestes (Oscar Isaac) and the young slave Davo (Max Minghella), who is debated between the love that he professes secretly and the freedom that might reach joining the unstoppable ascent of the Christians.
The setting, sets, wardrobes and effects, they are impeccable, at level of the big mammoth productions and, as I have read, with less presupposed.
Naturally, to Agora defects can be him: it might have studied in depth more the motivations of the personages and the relations between them: the principal protagonists - the teacher and his disciples - were going a long way much more. The same way it might have extracted more divided to the ideologies that exist after the science and the religion. In these aspects there remains short, perhaps for trying to include too much.
I suppose that the fact of being produced partly by Telecinco, the chain more telebasurera of the moment, will do that critics to salary of other groups mediáticos are fattened by her. I have already read also some article affirming that Agora is an "anti-catholic" movie. I advise them when they should read a destructive criticism - they will be and many - to quarrel where from it comes or who the pay.
I would be content already that the Spanish movies was giving us every year a movie of this level. Or at least, considering the difficulty, any movie in which the protagonist is a Hipatia and not my vecinita Mari Pili, the history that they tell me is not local and banal and the action is not ambientada in the pub of the corner.
Official place: http://www.agoralapelicula.com/
Wikio
I do not agree by no means contigo.es the movie for that at least I was waiting, it is the pure and hard clash of the fanaticism and the freedom. that hates towards Christians not that bullshit, the movie is what is.
the fanatical religions as Muslim and Christian will always be totalitarian, why they distribute hate, they are punutivas in their proper being, they are absolutist, they are just those who have the truth, and if the punishment does not come.
the oriental religions, all, are a philosophy, never punitive, it is the development of the man in his thought towards the intellectual freedom, towards his end, but they will never question your opinion, why it is a free religion, and each one has his Nirvana.
in the civilized world we have spent the history to ourselves in (wars of religion), THAT IS THE LESS OUTRAGEOUS FOR NOT SAYING ANYTHING RAWER, the loss of the philosophy or grade of civilization of our ancestors has cost us many centuries to recover it, and the punitive and extremist religions, they are mistaking us again -
are you free?, would you manage to be free in a hostile environment?, this is what this woman obtains, and this is the wonderful thing.
Why do you so be sure that Hipatia died to the 61?
yesterday evening I went to see the movie and I like, I neither am a movies criticism I nor can judge if his sets might have been better, or if his actors might have interpreted better his roles, not even if Amenábar is better governing or worse than others. But what if I can say is that when I saw the end of the movie she remains paralyzed, I bring in the very direct message, the fanaticism is which is, religiously or politically, it is a poison for the human being, it annihilates the free thought, and submits it to a yoke, this happened centuries ago, but it is necessary only to look around us, and we will see that we have not advanced so much as think. That neither no religion, nor at least catholic, forgets his past to teach better in his future, Congratulations Amenábar, and 10 for a woman who existed centuries ago.
It is an excellent movie, it makes me happy to find finally, a criticism that there does to him justice and sensible comments.
I am lic in Philosophy and admirer of Hipatia for many years. It had a lot of illusion for seeing it. I went to see it two days ago and I still have images me turning in the head. From the moment that they begin to destroy the library a knot was done to me in the gullet that me did not go away up to much after going out of the movies. I do not know if it might have entered more, do not know if the production might have been better. I believe that it is a wonderful, metaphorical, intelligent movie, with a new point of view. I agree with someone who says that when they should read the criticism they should see where from they come. There are the very capable people …
I applaud standing and deeply thrilled Amenábar.
“And of there researches, little, to visit 2 or 3 webs and it is already.”
He says that very much on what, for you, it is to research.
I believe that I have seen a different movie. A jumble from beginning to end. Without thread in the plot. Few evil. In some moment I thought that it saw a parody of “Brian's life” or to Mr. Bean doing of priest in “four weddings and a funeral”. Terrible. To this man it him has gone away of the hands. It had the opportunity to count something very interesting and it has ended up by doing something that has neither feet nor head
I have gone out of the movies with a rare feeling, the peli has not come to me … I will try to explain myself: it was going anxiously to meet a real history and I have not found it. I am Christian and there me hurts the image that happens of fanaticism and destruction of the life, of the knowledge. It is exaggerated and does not adapt itself to the reality, it is a pure fiction therefore we are not before a historical peli. From all forms it has not come to me, he lacks pellisco.
Ann you have given in the nail: we have not changed na -
it gives with difficulty. This is the sad reality …
The history recurs because it works for patro -
nes that recur of chronic form and each one,
for proper account, it is not ready to change much in the deep thing.
Good movie, good script, he lacks soul, but it is evident q is subsidized for zparo, bad approach of the Christianity and the woman for that we are a masses.
Not if Almenábar will have consulted 2 0 3 web as he has said someone. It is clear that it will have realized a work of arduous papers and, skylight, in order to count a history he will have "simplified" or "interpreted" things to his style. Very well, since let's take it as one of the histories of the Bible, with his debatable historical rigor, but with the sure true content, because it comes from God (like the reading of the letter of San Pablo). The content of this movie is, in my humble interpretation, what he supposes, to "reduce" the reason and the thought to sects, rites and sinsentidos based on the ignorance and on the fear of the death. In exploiting fanaticisms that are based on the darkest part of the human mind and the emulation to have a top being who solves the life and prevents me to "see" or "think" with clarity (the slave that Christian does to himself to ask God that him of to Hipatia and, then, it continues for the hate that it stores). For me the best thing the end is, when he tells how Kepler came to the same hypothesis (elliptical orbits), some centuries after …: what happened?. the darkest period of the epoch the man. the middle age …: governed why? … for many "talibans"
I do not understand because … … … ….
It is a big movie. It hurts that the Director falls down in the temptation of trying to manipulate the spectator with his final conclusions, or perhaps this was his first intention …
David, I am sorry to say to you that you have bitten the fishhook even above. Amenabar has strained it to you. The director slides the idea in the end that if that thing about was not for the Christians the elliptical orbit had discovered earlier. But was not he saying that it did not have Hypatia information? Hypatia, like all those of the epoch, was persons (the same Hypatia) who were considering animals to persons (the slaves) and thousand more barbarisms. Do not enter the rag David …
I believe that the movie expresses very well like the human beings instead of constructing We destroy certain things only for fanaticism and ideology. I have liked very much, for me it overcomes to many like Ben-Hur. etc. I believe that yes it has Soul. It is the Universal soul of the Cosmos where we all should feel as brothers and destroy not even physics to us not mentally as we do in the ground, not either for ideology, or for religion, not for envy.
I have not liked.
Simply, that.
And I believe that I am never going to learn. When a product is massively publicized, at any time, in all the radio channels and televisón, in printed matter, with interviews to his author everywhere, an alert light lights me. And the fact is that a good advertizing campaign is capable of achieving that the unthinkable thing is bandaged, but if really it is good, he does not need of so much big drum. It sells for itself.
In short: it has left cold to me.
Yesterday I saw the movie with my 13-year-old niece (I have 40) and the sensation that I have after the quantity of answers that I could not give to the girl, it is of to that, in spite of having a university education, of having studied BUP and COU of my epoch, I am very ignorant. In agreement that is not a documentary and that not everything what he narrates was real … ….pero my ignorance disappoints me in History (even if it is the one that they have wanted to tell us), in Philosophy, in Astronomy, in Theology, in Sociology. There me appear so many questions that I do not know not even closely. Someone has mentioned that it is necessary to have a few previous knowledge, I agree and believe that that we belong to my generation and have gone university students, we should already have acquired them, but we have many lagoons.
The movies best like this one, the fact is that for me they turn into a revulsive not to allow to spend the opportunity to learn more, to enter and to try to come closer any of many arisen doubts. Certainly: Does anybody recommend to me interesting books related to the central topics of the movie?: The history of Alexandria and his library, the classic thought, The big thinkers and philosophers / experts, religions and fanaticisms, the woman in the religion, the universe and the history of the discoveries on the spatial composition, the big advances in the discovery of the terrestrial dynamics.
I need to go out little my ignorance.
Yesterday on Sunday I went to see AGORA, I was surprised very much that it was stealing my thought from me and was making myself enter directly her, as if to a window I was appearing and under my house the incidents were happening. One made me raise many things, like that even nowadays in some countries kill itself for ideologies as simple as to have different god. But what he lacked is that it did not make me cry, and I that I am of easy tear of which I cry even with the good news, it was necessary to him to study in depth more the personage to love him more and to weep for his death. I am going to go to see again sure that now I will like more since a movie with so much contained with only one time escapes from you a lot of information. I recommend to the whole world to be going to see it that it will not make him indifferent.
I believe that the movie makes the problem of the fanaticism well clear in the religions, the content of the movie transmits a deep mensage, and makes you remember the atrocities that have been done along the history of the religiòn. As for the set, personages, approach of the camera, it is a work of a teacher, something that does not abound nowadays. Brave, amenábar, you are a genius.
The movie has left very bad body, too many needless, great violence to me coldness, incomplete history and badly few.
The touched personages much superficially. Only I have liked the set and the photo, he was hoping for me much more. That he punishes k the history of this woman it has been an only one excuse to count other one k we all know, as it is the fanaticism of the religions and the violence in the God's name.
I not only have loved the movie, but it me keeps on turning in the head. Since everything has already been said almost on this matter in the previous comments, only a few things:
1 - What might have been deepened more in the personages? The movie, at his 2 hours, puts you ahead to complex personages, who are located in terrible intersections. For example, Davo, which wants to be free but which never stops being a slave of the wills of others, breaks in two between his love for Hipatia and his intellectual talent, and for what there expect from him the fanatics who adopt it. It is full of folds, of opposing emotions that are reflected in every capture. And Orestes broken between his devotion by Hipatia and what it represents and the blind faith in the writing that it must demonstrate.
2 - Yes, there are anachronisms, in agreement. The truth, a whistle imports for me if 5 times destroyed the library earlier, I believe that that does not contribute anything to the work (really it is not a documentary).
3 - It is not anti-Christian: Hipatia finishes surrounded with Christians who are his allied only ones and his best friends (especially Orestes). But if certain persons do not accept that one shows to Christian fanatics committing atrocious crimes, then the fact is that they do not want to look at the reality face to face. I imagine that a movie on the Inquisition will seem abominable to them.
Anyway, what yes that I believe that it is good is that it does not stop indifferently. To me certainly not.
After having read, I believe that thoroughly, I see that nobody refers to the meddlesome scenes in the movie of the ground seen from the universe, an image of the XXth century, to me short about understanding I think that he is comparing the fanaticisms and discoveries of the different centuries, that possibly if it had not been for the successive relidgion wars now we would be much more advanced, since we had not had to start 20 times from zero, we know little of this history why they were in charge of destroying the library, and some other libraries of that we have not left history.
“EVERY PERSON WHO DOES NOT KNOW THE PAST THIS ONE CONVICTED TO REPEAT IT”
yCREO THAT
pardon I cut myself, only it was meaning that we are repeating it up to the exhaustion.
Since that, a big Spanish movie that I believe me goes to bore, and the cinematic intuition me usually does not fail.
Although it will be necessary to see it. And not necessary in the movies:-S
I suspect that Agora is a movie that will lose in video, for his grand, more attractive scenes in the movies.
and the torren?
joé
to put the link to the torret quesque does not go out for me in what down chews soft porn
Miguel, I coincide completely with on what you have commented.
It has seemed boring to me, does not enter any topic, everything is superficial and it always by half remains. The aforesaid clash between religious faith and science does not have any relief, it is not consistent. Everything is too many simpe and polarized between good and bad. A sorrow of exposition, which might have been good and it remains in poor person.
I do not believe that he lacks soul, we have to do beyond the movie to see what really it includes and the meaning that gives to us.
IMPRESSIVE.
I hope it turns out that the studies of Galilean had not been developed in the antiquity and condemned to the ostracism because they were going against “the writing” … or the fact is that Galilean or Kepler discovered everything if the same. simply they had access to the outstanding figures … As I have said we can see the peli as a metaphor. That more Hypatía gives that Aristotle or Platón … In the middle age the only science was the Bible. How was Sto Tomás saying not? … it uses the science that you want but the conclusion is that God exists …
deplorable, a movie disgust, I got bored as never in the movies,
A very deep criticism by yours, javier, very well based, jajaja
I saw AGORA and last Sunday and me encato so much that I am going to repeat. Impressive, incredible to think that only it is decorated.
He makes you think that day by day even the same hitoria keeps on repeating.
the really this well made movie but it does not stop being a movie ocn his included BLUNDERS, and after reading almost all the comments, nobody refers to them or to the ONLY ONE that I have found
poor person of the person who has committed it and porbre Almenabar for trusting in
IF? and which és the BLUNDER, I have not realized, say to me.
The movie defends a dogma: that the Christians are uneducated. They were thinking in that epoch that the ground was flat, while not Christians, who do not dress of black, had already discovered what Kepler showed thousand years later. Another dogma is that the Christians are fanatical, without distinctions.
Yesterday and today the winners write his history.
Pero Hipatia was 61 years old when murión, the Cirene bishop died two years before Hipatia was dying. Few historians of the epoch affirm that Cirilo incited that group of Christian fanatics to kill Hipatia. Today it is possible to gain access to Cirilo's works, although not to those of Hipatia, which was a big philosopher neoplatónica and teacher of Christians and very educated and tolerant not Christians. His fundamental specialty was not the astronomy. Some time after, in the streets of Alexandria, two Christian bishops died murdered, of form similar to Hipatia. The paganism lasted in Alexandria up to the arrival of the Islam. The conflicts were between Christians. The Roman prefect was Christian and there had enough more character of the one that appears in the movie. The women in that epoch, in the Greek and Roman world were of tercerísima category. The initial Christianity spread fundamentally over the women, who were included in the group of the deprived persons and because they were received by major doses of equality than the culture grecorromana. And more things, but for not boring …
I have it agendada to see it, now with double reason
I am of return, Sorcerer, I came to leave thousand to him besotes
Besotes also pa you, Mrs Azul
The buildings appear semiderruídos because they represent a world in decline, also, the temples helenísticos and Egyptian in these dates (IVth century) they already take centuries construct you and in many cases, there are already almost ruins in desuetude, it is as if in an image of a current city a Romanesque church was appearing. In this sense, except some excesses, the invoice is impeccable.
I saw yesterday the movie and got bored like an oyster. Many means many great setting mammoth production. But the peli is the most boring. I argue maniqueo, personages without tones, simple history. Look last week I saw damned bastards. Also it is based on historical facts, the second world war, also there is struggle between good and bad. But there are tones, there is situation, there is action, there are personages there is good and bad with tones. Anyway aburridísimaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Spanish but boring and it is already.
In my opinion, the bogey of Hipatia of Alexandria arises from time to time to defend causes of the most varied thing, which have not anything in common with what she was thinking. In this case the same happens, Hipatia has not anything in common with what appears in the movie, and the same all the rest personages. It is a question only of a fable with historical pretext, and I do not like the moral that he tries to transmit. I believe that the clash between faith and reason is an invention of the French revolution. Galilean and Kepler, earlier quoted, was both faith men, and the same scientific many. Faith and Reason do not have why to face, but there are different things, and not puedcen the laws are applied of one to other one (like the French Revolution with the Goddess Reason or some current critic criticizing the Faith because it cannot come to her for the logic). I am not of the same opinion, if a man was an absolutely pure rationalist: On what would it be based to demonstrate that the reality that it perceives is real, or that there is a reality? Would not it have to do without everything, how Do You Discard?
Also I think, referring to the comments it arrives exposed:
- that the idea of that the Middle Age was the “Dark Age” is an absolutely false prejudice. To start, we know much more of her that of the Antiquity. Also, during the Middle Age cathedrals got up, were written big literary works (Singing of Roldán, that of Mine Brave man, the Divine Comedy …), eliminated the slavery and there settled a society more humanitarian enough than the one that reigned during the Antiquity.
- secondly, with regard to the oriental religions, many of them are not both religions and philosophies (like the Buddhism or the confucianism). East has aged some time ago. For them everything is relative. And, or there is no truth (in whose case does not matter everything what is said on her, or on mulberry tree, reason, philosophy or faith, and quite, even the Nazism, it can be tolerated) or yes it is, in whose case, it is absurd to say “everything is relative”.
- in the third place, I could not be judged to the Inquisition with current criteria. For the kings who believed in the faith, a heretic was slightly absolutely lethal, that could be a cause of that the people were losing the eternal salvation. I cause many less victims than the Communism, for example. Was it reprehensible? Yes.
But it is not possible to judge it lightly.
- Finally, I would like to mention that it is possible neither to interpret what says the Bible literally, nor affirm that he says a thing and later the opposite either. It is neither a symbolic book, not a novel, an encyclopedia nor an agreement of good customs. I would like to defend also Saint Tomá de Aquino. Many people criticize him without reading his work. And he was one of the most extraordinary philosophers of all the times.
Thanks for his attention.
I went yesterday to see the movie and I have loved!! He did not know what was waiting for me, but it had heard criticism on his slowness and I was been satisfied and with a smile in the lips, because Amenábar achieved that she was remaining beaten to the chair, containing the breath per moments and completely put in the epoch, the city, the history and empatizando with his personages. The friends with whom I was could not say the same. I enjoyed for them, insurance!!
Thank you very much Amenábar for managing teletransportarme to another epoch and counting it that way.
the movie is without doubts, a milestone in Spanish movies, especially for treating topics reserved to foreign productions, for the quality of stages, assembly, wardrobes, ect. but, please, a bit of cinematographic rigor would not come badly: first it has scenes q they seem q we are opposite to a stage play, the actors are so flat q it turns out to be difficult to identify us with his causes, virtues and passions (mistake of the script), without counting q the performances they allow q to wish very much, (bad interpretive quality), per moments it seems q we are before a telefilme (with the exits to the exterior space) and a moment comes q so many philosophy he bores for repetitive … and the worst thing is q we come at the end of the peli and go away with the sensation of having seen, instead of a dramatic movie an ancient history documentary.
Yes gentleman! Amenábar you deserve 10! not so much for the impeccable of the movie, I agree in that it was possible to have extracted a little of top the personages and not to be fattened so much in the astronomical dialogues, which for my taste become a little repetitive.
But the courage that Amenábar has had in spite of rescuing what happened in Alexandria in those times has fascinated me, that happened and the history is obstinate, it is obstinate in telling that the Christians were a few intolerant fanatics with other religions, eager to be able and that used the violence to vaccinate all with the needle of the fear, a lot of fear they used to develop his monopoly, all this helped by the famine and the ignorance of the populo.
He has reminded also the sad episode to me with the Cathar ones happened uns sigls further on.
In short, for my taste a big history movie with effects and spectacular sets with an impartial vision of the facts.
New paragraph, I would like underlining in the movie when Cirilo reads the letter of San Pablo saying that it is the God's word and they hope that Orestes should kneel down without obtaining it, when he says on the woman: … and the woman must never exhibit his thought in public … the woman HAS TO BE QUIET, this is the God's word … you judge yourself.
Also, you all have commented on the religious fanátismo, but for me it is not a question simply of fanaticism, it is a question of a struggle of real power, and this is what since then they obtain in all the countries where the Christians exercise his monopoly. To include more and more possessions, there manage more and more possessions of their own brothers, with the escusa of being assined to the God's service.
UNCLE, WHO IS BASED ON REAL FACTS, NOT THE PURE REALITY AND I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD STILL HAVE ADORNED IT A LITTLE MORE.
DO WE FORGET THAT IS A MOVIE?
SINCE A MOVIE IS DONE FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT OF THE PUBLIC, NOT TO TEACH US HISTORY.
FOR THAT WE HAVE THE BOOKS.
I THE VITH YESTERDAY. IT LOOKED LIKE TO ME A BIG MOVIE. THE MONEY OF THE BUDGET APOLOGIZES TO EVERY DETAIL.
I DID NOT LOVE, AND I LIKED VERY MUCH. I WAS THRILLED BY THE PART IN WHICH ORESTES ASKS HIM HIPATIA TO CONVERT TO CHRISTIANITY AND SHE, IN SPITE OF KNOWING THE CONSEQUENCES, IT STAYS FAITHFUL TO HIS IDEALS.
I SAY IT AGAIN, IT IS A PELI AND SHE NEEDS ADORNMENTS LIKE THAT.
CROUTON GOES AND DISAPPOINTMENT GOES IF IT TELLS US THE PURE REALITY OF AN OLDSTER DYING OF NATURAL DEATH OR WHAT IS!
There are wrong those who say that in the peli reason and faith faces. The Christians are loaded on Hipatia not because she is a philosopher, astronomer or pagan, but to be done by the political power and to put in path Prefect Orestes, since Hipatia is much appreciated by the Prefect.
The message of the peli is very clear: if you are just as I and that one other is just as you, that one other is just as I.
Finally, that we all are equal, let's profess a religion or not, and that for the mere fact of being equal, we should respect ourselves.
The movie me has loved and, how it him has happened to many of you, it follows me patrolling for the head. And for those who say that it makes them indifferent I say: "whitened tombs” to them.
I have seen the movie yesterday and it seems THE BEST to me. To those who think that it can try to discredit the Catholic Church he would say to them that, apart from not being targets, they have not seen well the movie (ó, simply, they have not seen it). If someone wanted to discredit to the Catholic Church (with pardon of the bona fide believers) arguments would remain him in our current epoch, many would remain him.
The uneducated people who treads on the churches ó that are catholic simply because it is romantic have to know that these Christian "mattresses" were very violent since Christ died from now on and, to extend his doctrine, the verdá is that they were a few intolerant dictators of everything l that it was not with them and also they were a few born tormentors, if not that give themselves a return for the museum that exists in the Carcasonne castle. There they will see frightful torture instruments to have the people well under his domain and that will pay the tithe to them. It does not surprise me that the Cathar ones before similar panorama were saying when they were prepared in the scaffold to be burned before the last invitation to save his life: Before turning we prefer to die burned! They tell that the smell of burned meat could feel from Foix.
A marvelous book has gone out for my admired Amenábar. Sorrow of having seen an agreement on the fanaticism and the intolerance instead of a wonderful movie.
I wait for your following movie.
F.E.N.O.M.E.N.A.L.
And if was anti-catholic what? What is happening? It is intolerable? It is unacceptable? It would be dogmatic, totalitarista, undemocratic? Yes? Why? Still today, more than 17 centuries after the time of the history that Amenabar tells us or from the Council of Constantino's nicea (that by that time the pasabolanos had already begun was doing time, to "clean" the world), is a sin to do it. It seems neither terrible nor blameworthy to nobody to do a movie antiNazi. Worse still and with good reason, an apologetic movie of the nacismo would disgust us. The catholic church is responsible for the biggest barbarism committed never in the world: he is responsible for the implacable pursuit of thinkers, philosophers, theologians and up to Christians during centuries (the Inquisition lasted in Spain, the moral reservation of occidente_tiene huevos_hasta the 19th century). He is responsible for the torture and systematical slaughter of thousands and thousands of persons more, of the biggest and the most systematical and organized attempt of extermination of any sign of paganism in the world (of everything not catholic or that the catholic dognatismo was compromising):sólo because it did not obtain it today we can think and speak and live with relative freedom and enjoy and think in accordance with all the knowledge and skills that he did not manage to exterminate. What would an anti-catholic movie have of villain? The unbearable thing to the reason and to the morality there is the emetic catholic apology that impregnates big regions of the whole history of cinema and that still today sobreabunda in the televisions, as it it would be if the apology it out of the nacismo. Or more.
Certainly, and this goes for the apologist Dalahad if he has not realized his most illustrious is you a heretic when he says that the bible is a symbolic text, it is Protestant when there assumes the right to read it and to interpret it and god's enemy on having said that reason and faith are different things. And his defense of the catholic Church and his history is not very different, not to move away from the parallelism, of whom they deny still today the Holocaust, but with the intellectual aggravating circumstance of heretic is in this Jewish case, that is to say, pagan. It was clear that Kepler was a “man of faith” and also that was born in 1571 in the bosom of a Protestant family and of a Lutheran culture that was protecting him. And that was not until the XVIIIth century when Benedicto XIV authorized the texts that defendián the heliocentric thesis and it extracted these works of Index Librorum Prohibitorum. And that the works contained there we know them today only partly thanks to his inestimable collaboration and of all the bishops they ordered to burn libraries and murder those who in spite of everything defended them, in many cases, fé men. Although the more entertained of his apology, dear teacher, comes when it is said that more it killed the communism. This quantitative comparison would need, first that quite, of the finished inventory of corpses with which the Church has paid the world. When you have it well decisive, you spend it to me that insurance I am capable of adding a few names.
uy … errata
parabolanos:dícese of a horde of enlisted, protected killers, dirijidos and financed by some bishop or catholic patriarch, for example, Cirilo de Alejandría, about whom indescribable Benedicto XVI says things like:
“Also today, continuing with our way after the traces of the Parents of the Church, we meet a big figure: san Cirilo de Alejandría. Ligature to the controversy cristológica that led to the Council of Éfeso of the year 431, last representative of importance of the Alexandrine tradition, Cirilo was defined later in East as «a custodian of the accuracy» – that custodian of the real faith means – and enclosed like «stamp of the Parents» ….Venerado like saint both in East and in Occident, in 1882 san Cirilo was proclaimed a doctor of the Church by the Pope León XIII, who at the same time attributed the same title to another important exponent of the Greek patrística, san Cirilo de Jerusalén. The attention and the love were revealed this way by the oriental Christian traditions of that Pope, which later doctor of the Church wanted to proclaim also to san Juan Damasceno, showing that both the oriental tradition and the western one express the doctrine of the Christ's only Church.”