response 252 of 293:

Dec 18 20:57 UTC 2003

Is not. Jews didn't much encounter Zoroastrianism until the Babylonian
captivity, at least 600 years after Judaism was established. You aren't
thinking of Mesopotamian myths (Gilgamesh) which are recounted in the
Old Testament, are you?  Or perhaps the monotheistic Pharaoh (Akhnaten)?

Flem, I'd guess that the same forces that drove the scientific renaissance
also drove the Protestant reformation. As such they'd be cousins rather
than the reformation itself directly leading to scientific breakthroughs.

Nonetheless I think this whole discussion is misguided. Europe was much
more heavily influenced by the polytheistic Greeks than by many other
things -- for better and worse. Recall that the Church was often pushing
Aristotle's teachings, and great as he may have been on some fronts, he
was nonetheless a victim of his time in scientific fields.

John, I'm not sure there is a difference in saying that someone's skin
color (or less superficially, their genetics) has less to do with this
than someone's religion. What is it about the religion that propelled this?
Did it teach to question or explore?  Does it demand submission or did it
tolerate a diversity of thought?

Note: I'm not saying that genetics had anything to do with it, either.
Just that a blanket statement that religion may have somehow contributed
is not very convincing -- especially when the religion in question was
often intolerant of questioning, exploration and diversity of thought.