Originally posted by twhitehead
[b]I didn't say Newton started out in the Church and moved to science.
But you implied it.
He couldn't have, for a start: England was no longer a Catholic country. The unifying Catholic matrix had broken up. And then Newton was a religious dissenter, so he kept his religious views very private.
What does the Catholic Church have to do with the science first then sought to use it for religion later - not the other way around.[/b]
I implied nothing of the sort! He had a religious upbringing, so his faith necessarily preceded his scientific achievements. Bear in mind that 'science' didn't even exist at the time. His achievements in 'natural philosophy' were incredibly important in establishing scientific method.
Newton believed that the Church of England was wrong. In fact he believed that the 'Arian heresy' was correct. He hid his dissenting views because they could have got him into trouble.
At one time 'the Church' was meaningful because there was only one official church; the influence of religion became increasingly diminished after the Reformation and the advent of churches like the Church of England.
Everything seems to imply exactly what you want it to mean, Humpty Dumpty! If Newton says he'd be happy to be able to use science to justify religion, then it must mean that he started out as a scientist and found religion later, his religious upbringing notwithstanding ... You're grasping at straws.
Alternatively, Newton might just have been a rather strange man with intensely personal religious views who just happened to be a genius. And so what? We don't have to agree with Newton's views. Or Kepler, or Boyle, or any of the other scientists of religious inspiration. Perhaps their belief in God was just a fortunate accident. All I'm recording is the fact that their beliefs inspired their science. Otherwise you get ignoramuses running around telling you that the Church preached the world was flat until Columbus proved them wrong ...