Poll

Do you believe that the acount of genesis in the Old testament should be taken literally?

Yes
58 (15.9%)
No
142 (38.9%)
both metaphorically and literally
165 (45.2%)

Total Members Voted: 365

Author Topic: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy  (Read 424240 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Justin Kissel

  • Protospatharios
  • ****************
  • Posts: 32,488
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5805 on: June 06, 2015, 11:16:18 AM »
There are many disagreements about how Science should be done, what methods used, its purpose, what conclusions we can draw, what conclusions we should draw, whether we can ever be certain of something, what its limits are or should be, how and to what extent it interacts and informs other areas of thought/investigation, how open the theory and processes are to modification, etc.

wiki gives an overview:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

a book suggested by a college science professor who used to post here:

What Is This Thing Called Science?, by Alan F. Chalmers

and I found this book to be a good companion text (as it was intended to be):

Science And Its Fabrication, by Alan Chalmers
« Last Edit: June 06, 2015, 11:19:08 AM by Justin Kissel »

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,661
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5806 on: June 06, 2015, 02:57:21 PM »
I take a nuance on this philosophy of science.  We assume a spirit of consistency among all material phenomenon.  We cannot measure "consistency". To atheists, consistency is merely the material laws of science which can be mathematically expressed.  For me, is the language and glory of God.  For one to even speak of philosophy of anything proves to us we study the material world at a "supra-material" level, for lack of a better word.  At that point, this is when the spiritual becomes obvious to me.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2015, 02:57:52 PM by minasoliman »
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline nothing

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 558
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5807 on: June 09, 2015, 08:32:43 AM »
There are many disagreements about how Science should be done, what methods used, its purpose, what conclusions we can draw, what conclusions we should draw, whether we can ever be certain of something, what its limits are or should be, how and to what extent it interacts and informs other areas of thought/investigation, how open the theory and processes are to modification, etc.

Most of the questions you're asking aren't scientific questions, but epistemology, or the philosophy of science (as you cited), or the political control of science. They're all valid questions. They just can't be answered by science.

Even the ones that seem to pertain to the profession of science are not really scientific questions, but something like best practices, or other rules professionals in a domain might impose upon themselves for all sorts of reasons (uniformity, making review easier, comes to mind).

As to my perspective, the validity and applicability of methodological naturals cannot be questioned by science because it is science.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2015, 08:35:45 AM by nothing »
“I’ve lived to bury my desires,
And see my dreams corrode with rust;
Now all that’s left are fruitless fires
That burn my empty heart to dust.”
― Alexander Pushkin

Offline ilyazhito

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 956
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5808 on: June 09, 2015, 05:27:28 PM »
About the poll at the beginning, how is it possible to believe in the Old Testament both metaphorically and literally. It seems that both beliefs exclude each other, but it might also depend on how one defines "days". So how does that work?

Online Justin Kissel

  • Protospatharios
  • ****************
  • Posts: 32,488
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5809 on: June 09, 2015, 06:33:25 PM »
About the poll at the beginning, how is it possible to believe in the Old Testament both metaphorically and literally. It seems that both beliefs exclude each other, but it might also depend on how one defines "days". So how does that work?

I have yet to come across a Father who didn't take it both 'metaphorically' and 'literally' (if we are going to combine a dozen different interpretive approaches or more down into two options), but then I am assuming that 'the account of Genesis' means the first 3-4 chapters, and not any particular verse or word that can be isolated and haggled over in an attempt to define. To use an example I've mentioned before--the 'garments of skin.' They could be literal clothes to cover them since they now had changing ideas about certain parts on the other person; they could be literal coverings (skin) to prepare them for a life of hardship/problems they wouldn't have faced in Eden; they could be a symbol of things that had come upon humanity when they were expelled from Eden (pooping, sex, death, drugs, rock n roll): the good, the bad, or the good and bad; it could be taken as foreshadowing the coming of Christ ("in the flesh"); and so on. And most of the literal interpretations have non-literal levels of communication/insight, and vice versa.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2015, 06:34:26 PM by Justin Kissel »