Poll

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

Yes
61 (15.4%)
No
154 (38.8%)
both metaphorically and literally
182 (45.8%)

Total Members Voted: 397

Author Topic: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy  (Read 1123471 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Delusional Overlord
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,242
  • And the cat is back again.
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6075 on: March 20, 2017, 07:13:03 PM »
Who said we believe in the inerrancy of Scripture?
The term planet earth is an innovation which has arisen in recent centuries with the error of heliocentrism.

If one wants to confess a pure doctrine of Orthodoxy, they should be careful not to refer to the earth as a planet, unlike the current Pope as well as Patriarch Kirill and Patriarch Bartholomew, who regularly speak in error when they refer to our planet earth.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6076 on: March 20, 2017, 07:22:33 PM »
But wouldn't that compromise the inerrancy of Scripture?
Trisagion is correct.
Orthodoxy does not demand as a dogma that scripture is "inerrant".
The Nicene Creed says that God's Spirit "spoke by the prophets", not that "whatever the prophets wrote in the Bible must be correct per their intention".
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Offline AlioshaKaramazov

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Faith: Inquiring
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6077 on: March 20, 2017, 08:06:51 PM »
Who said we believe in the inerrancy of Scripture?
http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com.es/2012/01/inerrancy-of-scripture.html

Roman Catholics also believe in it, so I don't think this is a matter of Protestant fundamentalism.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6078 on: March 20, 2017, 08:18:04 PM »
Who said we believe in the inerrancy of Scripture?
http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com.es/2012/01/inerrancy-of-scripture.html

Roman Catholics also believe in it, so I don't think this is a matter of Protestant fundamentalism.
What do you mean "also"?
I am not aware that this is part of any ecumenical council statement?
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Offline AlioshaKaramazov

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Faith: Inquiring
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6079 on: March 20, 2017, 08:31:18 PM »
I am not aware that this is part of any ecumenical council statement?

No, but I don't think we're allowed to dismiss the Patristic belief in the inerrancy of Scripture just because it hasn't been ratified by an Ecumenical Council.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6080 on: March 20, 2017, 08:52:34 PM »
I am not aware that this is part of any ecumenical council statement?

No, but I don't think we're allowed to dismiss the Patristic belief in the inerrancy of Scripture just because it hasn't been ratified by an Ecumenical Council.
Yes we are.
Bible might be infallible in some sense, Ecumenical Councils might be infallible in some sense, but I am unaware of the Orthodox Church teaching infallible of patristics like the RC magisterium. Nor as I understand it is inerrancy (as opposed to infallibility) a definite EO teaching like it is for fundamentalists.
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Online Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 34,452
  • Faith: God
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6081 on: March 20, 2017, 08:54:54 PM »
Fwiw I've found, in trying to come to terms with this stuff, that a distinction between 'inerrant' and 'infallible' can be helpful.* Inerrant here would mean 'incapable of any error of any kind' and infallible would mean something along the lines of 'incapable of deception or leading astray in substance.' Clerical errors, conflating passages, misquotes, etc. would then not detract from the Bible's infallibility, because God can guide and direct and lead even when humans in our weakness make a mistake. Tbh I don't really understand how someone who knows about all the variations in manuscripts and whatnot can possibly say the Scriptures are without differences of any kind. You could speculate that about the original documents being perfect, but we don't have any of those, and there's no possible way that it can be said of the thousands of manuscripts which disagree not just in spellings or individual words, but sometimes entire passages.


*Insofar as 'infallible' is helpful at all, which is another debate I suppose
"Dignity and an empty sack is worth the sack." - 109th Rule of Acquisition

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6082 on: March 20, 2017, 08:58:31 PM »
Quote
It is not necessary, however, for the Orthodox Christian to insist upon the literal truth of every statement contained in Holy Scripture. Many Orthodox scholars believe that the Bible may contain "incidental inaccuracies of a non-essential character."11

For example, the author of the book of Daniel describes Belshazzar as the "king" of Babylon and as the son of Nebuchadnezzar (r. 605-562 B.C.); but, in fact, Belshazzar was the son of King Nabonidus (r. 556-539 B.C.), and never became king himself, although he did serve as viceroy during his father's absences (see Dn 5:1-31).

For another example, many scholars think that the story of God's creation of the world in the first chapter of Genesis assumes that "the universe [is] enwrapped in waters held back by a solid bell-shaped barrier called the firmament"12 — and such an assumption is certainly at odds with what modern science has to say about the cosmos. But these kinds of historical and scientific inaccuracies do not undermine the coherence and validity of the essential theological message of Holy Scripture. The Orthodox Church, in affirming the divine inspiration and infallibility of the Holy Bible, does not exclude the possibility that the Bible might contain some minor errors of fact, but she insists upon the absolute truth of scripture's overall message of salvation.

9 Thomas Hopko, The Orthodox Faith, vol. 4: Bible and Church History (Orthodox Church in America, Department of Religious Education, 1973) 5-6.

10 Ibid, 5.

11 Ibid.

12 Raymond E. Brown, et al., eds., The Jerome Biblical Commentary, vol. 2: "The New Testament" (Prentice-Hall, 1968) 512.
http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/bible_cronk_1.htm#_Toc526159494

So the Church looks in the Bible for "the coherence and validity of the essential theological message of Holy Scripture", not for inerrancy on all facts stated in 1000+ pages.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 09:00:27 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6083 on: March 20, 2017, 08:58:56 PM »
Fwiw I've found, in trying to come to terms with this stuff, that a distinction between 'inerrant' and 'infallible' can be helpful.* Inerrant here would mean 'incapable of any error of any kind' and infallible would mean something along the lines of 'incapable of deception or leading astray in substance.' Clerical errors, conflating passages, misquotes, etc. would then not detract from the Bible's infallibility, because God can guide and direct and lead even when humans in our weakness make a mistake. Tbh I don't really understand how someone who knows about all the variations in manuscripts and whatnot can possibly say the Scriptures are without differences of any kind. You could speculate that about the original documents being perfect, but we don't have any of those, and there's no possible way that it can be said of the thousands of manuscripts which disagree not just in spellings or individual words, but sometimes entire passages.


*Insofar as 'infallible' is helpful at all, which is another debate I suppose

+1
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • "Mor has a huge ego"
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 30,739
  • We are all Gustavito!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6084 on: March 20, 2017, 09:12:47 PM »
I am not aware that this is part of any ecumenical council statement?

No, but I don't think we're allowed to dismiss the Patristic belief in the inerrancy of Scripture just because it hasn't been ratified by an Ecumenical Council.
Yes we are.

LOL.

Quote
Bible might be infallible in some sense, Ecumenical Councils might be infallible in some sense, but I am unaware of the Orthodox Church teaching infallible of patristics like the RC magisterium. Nor as I understand it is inerrancy (as opposed to infallibility) a definite EO teaching like it is for fundamentalists.

So much for consensus patrum and lex orandi. 
I'm making a firm decision to stay with the Orthodox Church.

My point is you should try to fixate on something else. I suggest Christ.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6085 on: March 20, 2017, 09:25:50 PM »
I am not aware that this is part of any ecumenical council statement?

No, but I don't think we're allowed to dismiss the Patristic belief in the inerrancy of Scripture just because it hasn't been ratified by an Ecumenical Council.
Yes we are.

LOL.

Quote
Bible might be infallible in some sense, Ecumenical Councils might be infallible in some sense, but I am unaware of the Orthodox Church teaching infallible of patristics like the RC magisterium. Nor as I understand it is inerrancy (as opposed to infallibility) a definite EO teaching like it is for fundamentalists.

So much for consensus patrum and lex orandi.
Hello, Mor.
Feel free to engage in the discussion about how to evaluate the claims of Evolution, Creationism and Inerrancy. For example, do you believe in the Water Canopy theory outlined in Genesis 1 or should Genesis 1 be taken as an allegory.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 09:26:12 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,144
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6086 on: March 20, 2017, 11:00:40 PM »
My persistent question is: what a 20th century AD coherent description of evolution would read like in 15th century BC Hebrew? Would it be understandable by us? Would it require text that is as large as the entire Old Testament to make it understandable to the Hebrews at the time and would all of the gibberish involved be counterproductive to providing the essential information of Genesis given the audience?

I see no  purpose in having knowledgeable Hebrew molecular geneticists at hand for replicating Biblical texts correctly.

I have never seen anyone who complains that it is not in the bible proffer what it would look like if it were in the bible with the vocabulary that was available at the time.
"Mi tío es enfermo, pero la carretera es verde!" - old Chilean saying

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,381
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6087 on: March 21, 2017, 01:26:56 AM »
Patristic belief in the inerrancy of Scripture

Moderns assumptions about "inerrancy of scripture":

Initial reading=plain reading, just how it is
Plain reading = Transparently available to the reader under the right conditions (sensory/reflective faculties working properly, Holy Spirit inspiration in the works, episcopal consensus/voltron engaged)
Plain readings are either true or false, that's it
We access true things when our senses (including the "nous" for the Cartesian Orthodox) cause copies of those things to exist in our minds, which are analagous to inner movie screens.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 01:28:26 AM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Pope Francis
Thank God he said I was a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as 'Animal politicus.' So at least I am a human person.

Vote for a Ministry section on OC.net

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6088 on: March 21, 2017, 08:18:39 AM »
My persistent question is: what a 20th century AD coherent description of evolution would read like in 15th century BC Hebrew? Would it be understandable by us? Would it require text that is as large as the entire Old Testament to make it understandable to the Hebrews at the time and would all of the gibberish involved be counterproductive to providing the essential information of Genesis given the audience?

I see no  purpose in having knowledgeable Hebrew molecular geneticists at hand for replicating Biblical texts correctly.

I have never seen anyone who complains that it is not in the bible proffer what it would look like if it were in the bible with the vocabulary that was available at the time.

1. It's actually not that Hardin Hebrew to describe basic evolution, especially since the Virginia birth could be described in Greek and the old Testament talksabout giving birth to a red head esau.
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • "Mor has a huge ego"
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 30,739
  • We are all Gustavito!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6089 on: March 21, 2017, 02:06:19 PM »
I am not aware that this is part of any ecumenical council statement?

No, but I don't think we're allowed to dismiss the Patristic belief in the inerrancy of Scripture just because it hasn't been ratified by an Ecumenical Council.
Yes we are.

LOL.

Quote
Bible might be infallible in some sense, Ecumenical Councils might be infallible in some sense, but I am unaware of the Orthodox Church teaching infallible of patristics like the RC magisterium. Nor as I understand it is inerrancy (as opposed to infallibility) a definite EO teaching like it is for fundamentalists.

So much for consensus patrum and lex orandi.
Hello, Mor.
Feel free...

I never feel enslaved. 

Quote
... to engage in the discussion about how to evaluate the claims of Evolution, Creationism and Inerrancy. For example, do you believe in the Water Canopy theory outlined in Genesis 1 or should Genesis 1 be taken as an allegory.

Yes. 
I'm making a firm decision to stay with the Orthodox Church.

My point is you should try to fixate on something else. I suggest Christ.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6090 on: March 21, 2017, 03:55:10 PM »
Quote
... to engage in the discussion about how to evaluate the claims of Evolution, Creationism and Inerrancy. For example, do you believe in the Water Canopy theory outlined in Genesis 1 or should Genesis 1 be taken as an allegory.

Yes.
I welcome you to expand your ideas on this.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 03:55:24 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • "Mor has a huge ego"
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 30,739
  • We are all Gustavito!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6091 on: March 21, 2017, 06:32:55 PM »
Quote
... to engage in the discussion about how to evaluate the claims of Evolution, Creationism and Inerrancy. For example, do you believe in the Water Canopy theory outlined in Genesis 1 or should Genesis 1 be taken as an allegory.

Yes.
I welcome you to expand your ideas on this.

I am most grateful for your exceedingly gracious invitation, which is a precious sign of your tremendous good will and benevolence which are not unnoticed by those who have the sensitivity of heart to perceive such things. 
I'm making a firm decision to stay with the Orthodox Church.

My point is you should try to fixate on something else. I suggest Christ.

Offline Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,144
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6092 on: March 22, 2017, 12:05:02 AM »
My persistent question is: what a 20th century AD coherent description of evolution would read like in 15th century BC Hebrew? Would it be understandable by us? Would it require text that is as large as the entire Old Testament to make it understandable to the Hebrews at the time and would all of the gibberish involved be counterproductive to providing the essential information of Genesis given the audience?

I see no  purpose in having knowledgeable Hebrew molecular geneticists at hand for replicating Biblical texts correctly.

I have never seen anyone who complains that it is not in the bible proffer what it would look like if it were in the bible with the vocabulary that was available at the time.

1. It's actually not that Hardin Hebrew to describe basic evolution, especially since the Virginia birth could be described in Greek and the old Testament talksabout giving birth to a red head esau.

Modern Hebrew or 1500 BC Hebrew? It makes no sense to use a Lexicon that dates 800 BC or later. We know even less about pre-Homeric (by about 700 years) Mycenaean Greek in this time period so that is not helpful.

I think the closer approximation would be to use the Sumerian lexicon (http://www.sumerian.org/sumerlex.htm). You wouldn't make much money trying, but if you could achieve this using Egyptian Hieroglyphics, you would be set for life from selling your  large size, coffee table, art book. Unique curiosities always sell.

In any case, whatever you could come up with based on limited vocabulary would not be the truth nor would it be useful as part of a bible in my opinion.
"Mi tío es enfermo, pero la carretera es verde!" - old Chilean saying

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6093 on: March 22, 2017, 12:18:45 AM »
Modern Hebrew or 1500 BC Hebrew? It makes no sense to use a Lexicon that dates 800 BC or later. We know even less about pre-Homeric (by about 700 years) Mycenaean Greek in this time period so that is not helpful.

I think the closer approximation would be to use the Sumerian lexicon (http://www.sumerian.org/sumerlex.htm). You wouldn't make much money trying, but if you could achieve this using Egyptian Hieroglyphics, you would be set for life from selling your  large size, coffee table, art book. Unique curiosities always sell.

In any case, whatever you could come up with based on limited vocabulary would not be the truth nor would it be useful as part of a bible in my opinion.
I really don't think the language is the issue, since Ancient Hebrew is well translated into many languages and is quite close to Aramaic, which remains until today, when it is a modern language.

In Genesis 1's Creationism, Adam is created directly out of the clay and isn't born from an ape or primate mammal like in Evolution.

If someone imagined evolution, they could say that one kind of animal (eg. fish) mutated or changed at birth into another kind of animal (eg. fish).
The animals gave birth to other kinds of animals, and in one such step, a human was born from an animal.

Evolution vs. Creationism isn't really the only issue though. There are actually plenty of issues in Genesis that don't match our understanding of geology or cosmology like the story of Noah's Ark and the Great Flood, or the teaching about the waters resting above the firm layer ("firmament') of the heavens into which the stars are fastened.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2017, 12:19:21 AM by rakovsky »
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Online Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 34,452
  • Faith: God
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6094 on: March 22, 2017, 12:20:42 AM »
Modern Hebrew or 1500 BC Hebrew? It makes no sense to use a Lexicon that dates 800 BC or later. We know even less about pre-Homeric (by about 700 years) Mycenaean Greek in this time period so that is not helpful.

I think the closer approximation would be to use the Sumerian lexicon (http://www.sumerian.org/sumerlex.htm). You wouldn't make much money trying, but if you could achieve this using Egyptian Hieroglyphics, you would be set for life from selling your  large size, coffee table, art book. Unique curiosities always sell.

In any case, whatever you could come up with based on limited vocabulary would not be the truth nor would it be useful as part of a bible in my opinion.



I read this book a few years back:



It was very good. Someone should rewrite Genesis in Linear B. It'd be a fun project. Or if not that, maybe one of the various Mayan languages? Maya culture is always popular with people in the U.S. Then you could translate it from Mayan into Spanish, which is also being a huge market in Central and Southern America. You spread the truth and reap 30 fold from the talent you invested in translations and literary publications. This is perhaps too ambitious, however.

However, I must disagree with you in saying that such a publication as you describe, with such a limited vocabulary, would not be truthful or useful. Consider how 'simple' Genesis is compared to St. Paul, or St. Paul to St Maximos. All were able to elaborate more philosophistically than the former, expanding, expanding, but this did not mean the simpler was therefore untruthful by virtue of its simplicity. What are your thoughts on this, Opus118?
"Dignity and an empty sack is worth the sack." - 109th Rule of Acquisition

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,778
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6095 on: March 22, 2017, 05:37:01 AM »
I think in order to answer your question Aliosha, you have to answer this:

What is the underlying purpose of the gospel?  What exactly did Christ come to achieve?  Why?
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 Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,144
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6096 on: March 22, 2017, 10:50:15 AM »
However, I must disagree with you in saying that such a publication as you describe, with such a limited vocabulary, would not be truthful or useful. Consider how 'simple' Genesis is compared to St. Paul, or St. Paul to St Maximos. All were able to elaborate more philosophistically than the former, expanding, expanding, but this did not mean the simpler was therefore untruthful by virtue of its simplicity. What are your thoughts on this, Opus118?

This is what I was trying to convey Asteriktos, but apparently failed. Why add information that is not needed and would only detract from the purpose of Genesis. And even if you stick some more detail in there, it would only create greater misconceptions with 19th century literalists (and consternation for the Hebrews). I was thinking a one liner time capsule might work whose meaning would only become apparent in the 20th century like, on the fifth day God created the Sea Squirt (a rudimentary chordate) followed by ...., but that runs into the problem of who gets to name the Sea Squirt later on.
"Mi tío es enfermo, pero la carretera es verde!" - old Chilean saying

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,678
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6097 on: March 22, 2017, 11:17:06 AM »
This is what I was trying to convey Asteriktos, but apparently failed. Why add information that is not needed and would only detract from the purpose of Genesis. And even if you stick some more detail in there, it would only create greater misconceptions with 19th century literalists (and consternation for the Hebrews). I was thinking a one liner time capsule might work whose meaning would only become apparent in the 20th century like, on the fifth day God created the Sea Squirt (a rudimentary chordate) followed by ...., but that runs into the problem of who gets to name the Sea Squirt later on.

To the best of my knowledge:

(1) the earth is a round globe instead of a "stretched out" "disc" with "ends" that sits on "pillars".

(2) And the heavens are not a firm layer into which the sun and stars are fastened and on top of which rests a mass of liquid water that rained down past the stars during the Great Flood.

(3) The sea levels rose significantly in c.10000 BC, but there was no Great Flood that covered the whole earth and killing everyone but Noah's family and the animals on board.

In that case, should I teach those things to ancient people as fact because it would be too hard and technical to explain geology in the ancient Hebrew language?
Or are we forced to say that they are instead stories containing spiritual truths and only partial factual basis?

Same thing goes with Creationism and the Biblical teaching that Adam was created directly out of the earth vs. Evolution and the teaching that the human race was born from mammals. There is no need to worry about the correct scientific name for Sea Squirts.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2017, 11:22:18 AM by rakovsky »
The ocean, impassable by men, and the world beyond it are directed by the same ordinances of the Master. ~ I Clement 20

Online Vanhyo

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Layman in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6098 on: March 23, 2017, 01:13:29 PM »
« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 01:13:50 PM by Vanhyo »

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,778
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6099 on: March 23, 2017, 02:18:51 PM »
You should be careful in anyone claiming to be working for "US Military Space Program" "atheist turned creationist" if they do not make their credentials very easily available.  Usually a curriculum vitae would help, but just merely finding this:

Quote
Spike Psarris was previously an engineer in the United States’ military space program. He entered that program as an atheist and an evolutionist. He left it as a creationist and a Christian.

This site is dedicated to exposing the bankruptcy of the evolutionary model, especially in astronomy.
Source


makes it suspect.  Consider this comparison.

http://www.internationalcommunion.org/index.php

Now, you as an astute Orthodox Christian will ask, what is the credentials of this organization in calling itself an Orthodox Church?  Who is the bishop of this Church?  Who's the patriarch?

Another comparison is also this organization that calls itself "Shine International", started by Atef Meshreky turned OCA monk.  For sometime, they had the bio available of this man (who's now called Fr. Macarius).  He's no longer there (maybe OCA is deciding to be a little stricter with him?).  Nevertheless, this organization is very clear it's made up of many denominations and there is a removal any direct or indirect association with the OCA, at least publicly, so as not to give false credentials.

Same thing with Spike Psarris.  As someone who is very much involved in the science world and academia.  What are his publications?  What are his references who can vouch for his work in the military space program (a very vague phrase)?  What type of work did he do in the program that makes him qualified to speak about creationism and astronomy?

You know, I can say, "Hi, I'm a doctor."  But the government also has to sanction my practice, and if I'm not a licensed practitioner (which is readily available online), my MD or DO is not enough.

Given my previous research of organizations like the Creation Institute or Discovery Institute, it has been associated with a lot of lies and deceptions that frankly, I can't really trust this source without proper credentials.  How do I know he was an atheist turned believer?  What's his life story?  What references or witnesses do you have that can vouch for your story?  Psarris doesn't seem to have much of that.  If I can't convince programs and hospitals to hire me based on two or three sentences, then you as an informed and intelligent human being should also be on your guard for someone who does not like to make his credentials so clearly available, especially when he wants to sell you something or be an official voice of publication and views.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 02:50:11 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 TheTrisagion

  • Delusional Overlord
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,242
  • And the cat is back again.
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6100 on: March 23, 2017, 11:14:15 PM »
http://creationsensation.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-big-bang-never-happened-spike.html

Quote
Spike Psarris has a Bachelor's of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of Massachusetts, and has done graduate work in Physics.

So basically, this guy has a bachelor's degree. That's it.  I'm not sure he is exactly what anyone should consider as a heavyweight in the scientific community. The problem I have with guys like this is that their resume is normally very thin, and they puff it up as much as they can to the point of obvious deception and then they try to proclaim they have a "ministry" which is really them peddling videos and books using recycled arguments and flawed data. I used to be a young earth creationist, but the blatant dishonesty of the movement really forced me to take a closer look at what they claim and after looking at both sides, I think it is pretty clear to an unbiased observer that the creationist movement is significantly more dishonest about their methods and credentials.
The term planet earth is an innovation which has arisen in recent centuries with the error of heliocentrism.

If one wants to confess a pure doctrine of Orthodoxy, they should be careful not to refer to the earth as a planet, unlike the current Pope as well as Patriarch Kirill and Patriarch Bartholomew, who regularly speak in error when they refer to our planet earth.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,778
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6101 on: March 24, 2017, 03:25:24 AM »
And sadly, it's the dishonesty of these men that lead so many Western Christians into being "nones" at the very least.
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 beebert

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 813
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Constantinople
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #6102 on: March 24, 2017, 04:35:41 AM »
http://creationsensation.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-big-bang-never-happened-spike.html

Quote
Spike Psarris has a Bachelor's of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of Massachusetts, and has done graduate work in Physics.

So basically, this guy has a bachelor's degree. That's it.  I'm not sure he is exactly what anyone should consider as a heavyweight in the scientific community. The problem I have with guys like this is that their resume is normally very thin, and they puff it up as much as they can to the point of obvious deception and then they try to proclaim they have a "ministry" which is really them peddling videos and books using recycled arguments and flawed data. I used to be a young earth creationist, but the blatant dishonesty of the movement really forced me to take a closer look at what they claim and after looking at both sides, I think it is pretty clear to an unbiased observer that the creationist movement is significantly more dishonest about their methods and credentials.
Young earth creationism is one of the most dishonest, stupid, ignorant, nihilistic, ridiculous views of the world that exists. They are wrong in ever sense of the world an they unfortunately make secular People run away from christianity as a whole because of their colosal stupidity.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2017, 04:37:20 AM by beebert »