Poll

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

Yes
57 (15.7%)
No
141 (38.8%)
both metaphorically and literally
165 (45.5%)

Total Members Voted: 363

Author Topic: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy  (Read 413868 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Riddikulus

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,788
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3960 on: December 15, 2011, 12:53:40 AM »
New book: Alvin Platinga, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism:

"My overall claim in this book: there is superficial conflict but deep concord between science and theistic religion, but superficial concord and deep conflict between science and naturalism."

Thus, there is a science/religion conflict, but the "religion" in this conflict is not "theism" but rather "naturalism".

And an excellent point!
I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)

Offline Shiny

  • Site Supporter
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,267
  • Paint It Red
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3961 on: February 01, 2012, 05:22:43 PM »
So I was looking through some old posts and came across this:

Being made in the image and likeness of God is an entirely different issue than evolution.  They don't rule each other out.

What about now extinct sub-species groups that existed only relatively recently (Neanderthal among others) who had graves dug and adorn with flowers?
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,31604.msg499747.html#msg499747

The answer given wasn't really sufficient. I'd love to get a good answer to it.
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,580
  • Barlaam and Josaphat
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3962 on: February 01, 2012, 05:56:24 PM »
So I was looking through some old posts and came across this:

Being made in the image and likeness of God is an entirely different issue than evolution.  They don't rule each other out.

What about now extinct sub-species groups that existed only relatively recently (Neanderthal among others) who had graves dug and adorn with flowers?
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,31604.msg499747.html#msg499747

The answer given wasn't really sufficient. I'd love to get a good answer to it.
What's the question?
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline celticfan1888

  • Production Operator - Chemtrusion
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,026
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3963 on: February 04, 2012, 07:39:59 AM »
Forgive my sins.

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3964 on: February 04, 2012, 08:39:24 AM »
Actually Adam and Eve were not created immortals.They had the chance to become immortals by eating from the tree of Life.
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Offline Aindriú

  • Faster! Funnier!
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,918
    • Blog
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3965 on: February 04, 2012, 10:01:00 PM »
Actually Adam and Eve were not created immortals.They had the chance to become immortals by eating from the tree of Life.

Council of Carthage (418)
Quote
ST. ZOSIMUS 417-4I8

COUNCIL OF MILEUM II 416, APPROVED BY INNOCENT AND COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE (XVI) 418, APPROVED BY ZOSIMUS

(against the Pelagians) *
Original Sin and Grace *

101 Can. 1. All the bishops established in the sacred synod of the Carthaginian Church have decided that whoever says that Adam, the first man, was made mortal, so that, whether he sinned or whether he did not sin, he would die in body, that is he would go out of the body not because of the merit of sin but by reason of the necessity of nature, * let him be anathema.

102 Can. 2. Likewise it has been decided that whoever says that infants fresh from their mothers' wombs ought not to be baptized, or says that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin from Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration, whence it follows that in regard to them the form of baptism "unto the remission of sins" is understood as not true, but as false, let him be anathema. Since what the Apostle says: "Through one man sin entered into the world (and through sin death), and so passed into all men, in whom all have sinned" [cf. Rom. 5:12], must not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration. *


St. Augustine (354-430), The External History of the Pelagian Controversy
Quote
...Cœlestius behind at Carthage. Here Cœlestius sought ordination as a presbyter. But the Milanese deacon Paulinus stood forward in accusation of him as a heretic, and the matter was brought before a synod under the presidency of Bishop Aurelius.

Paulinus’ charge consisted of seven items, which asserted that Cœlestius taught the following heresies: that Adam was made mortal, and would have died, whether he sinned or did not sin; that the sin of Adam injured himself alone, not the human race; that new-born children are in that state in which Adam was before his sin; that the whole human race does not, on the one hand, die on account of the death or the fall of Adam, nor, on the other, rise again on account of the resurrection of Christ; that infants, even though not baptized, have eternal life; that the law leads to the kingdom of heaven in the same way as the gospel; and that, even before the Lord’s coming, there had been men without sin....
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf105.v.ii.ii.html?highlight=adam,made,mortal,carthage#highlight

I'm going to need this.

Online Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,985
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3966 on: February 05, 2012, 01:00:56 AM »
Actually Adam and Eve were not created immortals.They had the chance to become immortals by eating from the tree of Life.

Aindriú, the point of view of Azul was new to me. Was it your intention to provide viability to this interpretation, since this is what you have done.

Council of Carthage (418)

101 Can. 1. All the bishops established in the sacred synod of the Carthaginian Church have decided that whoever says that Adam, the first man, was made mortal, so that, whether he sinned or whether he did not sin, he would die in body, that is he would go out of the body not because of the merit of sin but by reason of the necessity of nature, * let him be anathema.

This proviso appears to allow Azul's interpretation. Why else would this proviso be added to a matter of faith?

Quote
St. Augustine (354-430), The External History of the Pelagian Controversy
Quote
Paulinus’ charge consisted of seven items, which asserted that Cœlestius taught the following heresies: that Adam was made mortal, and would have died, whether he sinned or did not sin; that the sin of Adam injured himself alone, not the human race; that new-born children are in that state in which Adam was before his sin; that the whole human race does not, on the one hand, die on account of the death or the fall of Adam, nor, on the other, rise again on account of the resurrection of Christ; that infants, even though not baptized, have eternal life; that the law leads to the kingdom of heaven in the same way as the gospel; and that, even before the Lord’s coming, there had been men without sin....

Again the proviso appears to justify a line of reasoning that St. Augustine did not expound.
.
In other words, I am confused about what your opinion is on this matter.

Offline Aindriú

  • Faster! Funnier!
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,918
    • Blog
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3967 on: February 05, 2012, 10:41:34 AM »
Actually Adam and Eve were not created immortals.They had the chance to become immortals by eating from the tree of Life.

Aindriú, the point of view of Azul was new to me. Was it your intention to provide viability to this interpretation, since this is what you have done.

Council of Carthage (418)

101 Can. 1. All the bishops established in the sacred synod of the Carthaginian Church have decided that whoever says that Adam, the first man, was made mortal, so that, whether he sinned or whether he did not sin, he would die in body, that is he would go out of the body not because of the merit of sin but by reason of the necessity of nature, * let him be anathema.

This proviso appears to allow Azul's interpretation. Why else would this proviso be added to a matter of faith?

Quote
St. Augustine (354-430), The External History of the Pelagian Controversy
Quote
Paulinus’ charge consisted of seven items, which asserted that Cœlestius taught the following heresies: that Adam was made mortal, and would have died, whether he sinned or did not sin; that the sin of Adam injured himself alone, not the human race; that new-born children are in that state in which Adam was before his sin; that the whole human race does not, on the one hand, die on account of the death or the fall of Adam, nor, on the other, rise again on account of the resurrection of Christ; that infants, even though not baptized, have eternal life; that the law leads to the kingdom of heaven in the same way as the gospel; and that, even before the Lord’s coming, there had been men without sin....

Again the proviso appears to justify a line of reasoning that St. Augustine did not expound.
.
In other words, I am confused about what your opinion is on this matter.


In what way are you seeing that it helps? He says A+E weren't created immortal. The canons say that's a heresy. ???

I'm going to need this.

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,580
  • Barlaam and Josaphat
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3968 on: February 05, 2012, 11:11:39 AM »
Actually Adam and Eve were not created immortals.They had the chance to become immortals by eating from the tree of Life.

Aindriú, the point of view of Azul was new to me. Was it your intention to provide viability to this interpretation, since this is what you have done.

Council of Carthage (418)

101 Can. 1. All the bishops established in the sacred synod of the Carthaginian Church have decided that whoever says that Adam, the first man, was made mortal, so that, whether he sinned or whether he did not sin, he would die in body, that is he would go out of the body not because of the merit of sin but by reason of the necessity of nature, * let him be anathema.

This proviso appears to allow Azul's interpretation. Why else would this proviso be added to a matter of faith?

Quote
St. Augustine (354-430), The External History of the Pelagian Controversy
Quote
Paulinus’ charge consisted of seven items, which asserted that Cœlestius taught the following heresies: that Adam was made mortal, and would have died, whether he sinned or did not sin; that the sin of Adam injured himself alone, not the human race; that new-born children are in that state in which Adam was before his sin; that the whole human race does not, on the one hand, die on account of the death or the fall of Adam, nor, on the other, rise again on account of the resurrection of Christ; that infants, even though not baptized, have eternal life; that the law leads to the kingdom of heaven in the same way as the gospel; and that, even before the Lord’s coming, there had been men without sin....

Again the proviso appears to justify a line of reasoning that St. Augustine did not expound.
.
In other words, I am confused about what your opinion is on this matter.


In what way are you seeing that it helps? He says A+E weren't created immortal. The canons say that's a heresy. ???
What were the synod's reasons for saying Adam and Eve were created immortal? How would it explain these verses from Genesis 3:

"And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken."
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Online PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,855
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3969 on: February 05, 2012, 11:55:39 AM »
Actually Adam and Eve were not created immortals.They had the chance to become immortals by eating from the tree of Life.

Aindriú, the point of view of Azul was new to me. Was it your intention to provide viability to this interpretation, since this is what you have done.

Council of Carthage (418)

101 Can. 1. All the bishops established in the sacred synod of the Carthaginian Church have decided that whoever says that Adam, the first man, was made mortal, so that, whether he sinned or whether he did not sin, he would die in body, that is he would go out of the body not because of the merit of sin but by reason of the necessity of nature, * let him be anathema.

This proviso appears to allow Azul's interpretation. Why else would this proviso be added to a matter of faith?

Quote
St. Augustine (354-430), The External History of the Pelagian Controversy
Quote
Paulinus’ charge consisted of seven items, which asserted that Cœlestius taught the following heresies: that Adam was made mortal, and would have died, whether he sinned or did not sin; that the sin of Adam injured himself alone, not the human race; that new-born children are in that state in which Adam was before his sin; that the whole human race does not, on the one hand, die on account of the death or the fall of Adam, nor, on the other, rise again on account of the resurrection of Christ; that infants, even though not baptized, have eternal life; that the law leads to the kingdom of heaven in the same way as the gospel; and that, even before the Lord’s coming, there had been men without sin....

Again the proviso appears to justify a line of reasoning that St. Augustine did not expound.
.
In other words, I am confused about what your opinion is on this matter.


In what way are you seeing that it helps? He says A+E weren't created immortal. The canons say that's a heresy. ???
What were the synod's reasons for saying Adam and Eve were created immortal? How would it explain these verses from Genesis 3:

"And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken."
Considering that God made this statement only AFTER Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, it could mean that the couple had become mortal upon eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and could regain the immortality they lost by eating of the Tree of Life.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,283
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3970 on: February 05, 2012, 12:15:18 PM »
Actually Adam and Eve were not created immortals.They had the chance to become immortals by eating from the tree of Life.

Council of Carthage (418)
Quote
ST. ZOSIMUS 417-4I8

COUNCIL OF MILEUM II 416, APPROVED BY INNOCENT AND COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE (XVI) 418, APPROVED BY ZOSIMUS

(against the Pelagians) *
Original Sin and Grace *

101 Can. 1. All the bishops established in the sacred synod of the Carthaginian Church have decided that whoever says that Adam, the first man, was made mortal, so that, whether he sinned or whether he did not sin, he would die in body, that is he would go out of the body not because of the merit of sin but by reason of the necessity of nature, * let him be anathema.

102 Can. 2. Likewise it has been decided that whoever says that infants fresh from their mothers' wombs ought not to be baptized, or says that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin from Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration, whence it follows that in regard to them the form of baptism "unto the remission of sins" is understood as not true, but as false, let him be anathema. Since what the Apostle says: "Through one man sin entered into the world (and through sin death), and so passed into all men, in whom all have sinned" [cf. Rom. 5:12], must not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration. *


St. Augustine (354-430), The External History of the Pelagian Controversy
Quote
...Cœlestius behind at Carthage. Here Cœlestius sought ordination as a presbyter. But the Milanese deacon Paulinus stood forward in accusation of him as a heretic, and the matter was brought before a synod under the presidency of Bishop Aurelius.

Paulinus’ charge consisted of seven items, which asserted that Cœlestius taught the following heresies: that Adam was made mortal, and would have died, whether he sinned or did not sin; that the sin of Adam injured himself alone, not the human race; that new-born children are in that state in which Adam was before his sin; that the whole human race does not, on the one hand, die on account of the death or the fall of Adam, nor, on the other, rise again on account of the resurrection of Christ; that infants, even though not baptized, have eternal life; that the law leads to the kingdom of heaven in the same way as the gospel; and that, even before the Lord’s coming, there had been men without sin....
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf105.v.ii.ii.html?highlight=adam,made,mortal,carthage#highlight

As I'm reading those canons carefully, I will say this.  All creation is by nature impermanent.  Only mankind received the grace of immortality, not from their own nature, but from the grace of God.  So that if they haven't sinned, they might continue to live.  So in one way, they were created mortal, but in another way, in immortality, to denote being created in the state of divine grace.
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 Aindriú

  • Faster! Funnier!
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,918
    • Blog
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3971 on: February 05, 2012, 12:30:15 PM »
This is from St. Augustine's writings, whom the council agreed with.

NPNF1-05. St. Augustine: Anti-Pelagian Writings
Chapter 2 [II.]—If Adam Had Not Sinned, He Would Never Have Died.
Quote
They who say that Adam was so formed that he would even without any demerit of sin have died, not as the penalty of sin, but from the necessity of his being, endeavour indeed to refer that passage in the law, which says: “On the day ye eat thereof ye shall surely die,” (Gen. ii. 17.) the body, but to that death of the soul which takes place in sin. It is the unbelievers who have died this death, to whom the Lord pointed when He said, “Let the dead bury their dead.”(Matt. viii. 22; Luke ix. 60.) Now what will be their answer, when we read that God, when reproving and sentencing the first man after his sin, said to him, “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return?”(Gen. iii. 19.) For it was not in respect of his soul that he was “dust,” but clearly by reason of his body, and it was by the death of the self-same body that he was destined to “return to dust.” Still, although it was by reason of his body that he was dust, and although he bare about the natural body in which he was created, he would, if he had not sinned, have been changed into a spiritual body, and would have passed into the incorruptible state, which is promised to the faithful and the saints, without the peril of death.(1 Cor. xv. 52, 53.)  And for this issue we not only are conscious in ourselves of having an earnest desire, but we learn it from the apostle’s intimation, when he says: “For in this we groan, longing to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from heaven; if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened; not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality may be swallowed up of life.” (2 Cor. v. 2–4.) Therefore, if Adam had not sinned, he would not have been divested of his body, but would have been clothed upon with immortality and incorruption, that “mortality might have been swallowed up of life;” that is, that he might have passed from the natural body into the spiritual body.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf105.x.iii.ii.html

St. Augustine appears to hold the view that we were spiritual infants prior to the fall, as well.

I'm going to need this.

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3972 on: February 05, 2012, 12:45:19 PM »
I thought that the fathers said that Adam wasn`t created eighter mortal or immortal but with the possibility to be both.
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Offline jckstraw72

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,174
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3973 on: February 05, 2012, 08:26:08 PM »
I thought that the fathers said that Adam wasn`t created eighter mortal or immortal but with the possibility to be both.

the Fathers sometimes say they were created immortal -- bc as those canons say, they would not die unless they sinned, and sometimes they say they were created neither immortal nor mortal because it remained to be seen how they would use their free will. but both positions acknowledge that Adam and Eve died only as the result of sin, and NOT because God had created them mortal.

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3974 on: February 06, 2012, 04:29:48 AM »
I thought that the fathers said that Adam wasn`t created eighter mortal or immortal but with the possibility to be both.

the Fathers sometimes say they were created immortal -- bc as those canons say, they would not die unless they sinned, and sometimes they say they were created neither immortal nor mortal because it remained to be seen how they would use their free will. but both positions acknowledge that Adam and Eve died only as the result of sin, and NOT because God had created them mortal.

But the death they received from eating the forbidden fruit was spiritual death, not physical.
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Offline jckstraw72

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,174
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3975 on: February 06, 2012, 08:35:22 AM »
I thought that the fathers said that Adam wasn`t created eighter mortal or immortal but with the possibility to be both.

the Fathers sometimes say they were created immortal -- bc as those canons say, they would not die unless they sinned, and sometimes they say they were created neither immortal nor mortal because it remained to be seen how they would use their free will. but both positions acknowledge that Adam and Eve died only as the result of sin, and NOT because God had created them mortal.

But the death they received from eating the forbidden fruit was spiritual death, not physical.

spiritual death came immediately, but physical death was also a result of the eating of the fruit:

Quote
Canon 109 of African Code, (120 of Council of Carthage), ratified at Trullo and Nicea II.
That Adam was not created by God subject to death.

That whosoever says that Adam, the first man, was created mortal, so that whether he had sinned or not, he would have died in body—that is, he would have gone forth of the body, not because his sin merited this, but by natural necessity, let him be anathema.

Ancient Epitome of Canon CIX.
Whoso shall assert that the protoplast would have died without sin and through natural necessity, let him be anathema.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2012, 08:35:42 AM by jckstraw72 »

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3976 on: February 06, 2012, 10:15:08 AM »
I thought that the fathers said that Adam wasn`t created eighter mortal or immortal but with the possibility to be both.

the Fathers sometimes say they were created immortal -- bc as those canons say, they would not die unless they sinned, and sometimes they say they were created neither immortal nor mortal because it remained to be seen how they would use their free will. but both positions acknowledge that Adam and Eve died only as the result of sin, and NOT because God had created them mortal.

But the death they received from eating the forbidden fruit was spiritual death, not physical.

spiritual death came immediately, but physical death was also a result of the eating of the fruit:

Quote
Canon 109 of African Code, (120 of Council of Carthage), ratified at Trullo and Nicea II.
That Adam was not created by God subject to death.

That whosoever says that Adam, the first man, was created mortal, so that whether he had sinned or not, he would have died in body—that is, he would have gone forth of the body, not because his sin merited this, but by natural necessity, let him be anathema.

Ancient Epitome of Canon CIX.
Whoso shall assert that the protoplast would have died without sin and through natural necessity, let him be anathema.


Was Adam created flesh/material?
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3977 on: February 06, 2012, 10:21:34 AM »
anyway, i don`t see which is the place of Adam`s mortality/immortality in the economy of evolution
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Online PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,855
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3978 on: February 06, 2012, 10:48:59 AM »
I thought that the fathers said that Adam wasn`t created eighter mortal or immortal but with the possibility to be both.

the Fathers sometimes say they were created immortal -- bc as those canons say, they would not die unless they sinned, and sometimes they say they were created neither immortal nor mortal because it remained to be seen how they would use their free will. but both positions acknowledge that Adam and Eve died only as the result of sin, and NOT because God had created them mortal.

But the death they received from eating the forbidden fruit was spiritual death, not physical.
On whose authority do you say this?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline jckstraw72

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,174
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3979 on: February 06, 2012, 12:15:15 PM »
I thought that the fathers said that Adam wasn`t created eighter mortal or immortal but with the possibility to be both.

the Fathers sometimes say they were created immortal -- bc as those canons say, they would not die unless they sinned, and sometimes they say they were created neither immortal nor mortal because it remained to be seen how they would use their free will. but both positions acknowledge that Adam and Eve died only as the result of sin, and NOT because God had created them mortal.

But the death they received from eating the forbidden fruit was spiritual death, not physical.

spiritual death came immediately, but physical death was also a result of the eating of the fruit:

Quote
Canon 109 of African Code, (120 of Council of Carthage), ratified at Trullo and Nicea II.
That Adam was not created by God subject to death.

That whosoever says that Adam, the first man, was created mortal, so that whether he had sinned or not, he would have died in body—that is, he would have gone forth of the body, not because his sin merited this, but by natural necessity, let him be anathema.

Ancient Epitome of Canon CIX.
Whoso shall assert that the protoplast would have died without sin and through natural necessity, let him be anathema.


Was Adam created flesh/material?

yes, although it was a more spiritual flesh than we know now. Our flesh became coarser, denser, heavier -- more fleshly -- at the Fall.

Offline William

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,354
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3980 on: February 11, 2012, 11:56:49 PM »
Does evolution imply that the Fall didn't actually introduce death and decay into the world since these things existed well before the first humans?
Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

Online Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,985
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3981 on: February 12, 2012, 12:46:12 AM »
Does evolution imply that the Fall didn't actually introduce death and decay into the world since these things existed well before the first humans?
The simple answer is no. It is a somewhat imperfect model dealing with the differentiation of species.

Shear logic is the argument against the notion that the fall introduced death. This is where you need to apply your arguments, not evolution, if that is your intention. And if it is your intention, it would be interesting to have a post dealing with cellular rather than organismal death.


Offline jckstraw72

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,174
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3982 on: February 12, 2012, 01:12:48 AM »
Does evolution imply that the Fall didn't actually introduce death and decay into the world since these things existed well before the first humans?

yes, it does.

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,580
  • Barlaam and Josaphat
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3983 on: February 12, 2012, 03:25:36 AM »
Define "death".
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3984 on: February 12, 2012, 06:38:44 AM »
Can anyone point to some evolutionist thesis that implies that death existed long before the existence of humans?

Also is animal death dependent on human death?Couldn`t G-d design a pre-human era just for animals, in which the cycle of life-death would exist?And why wouldn`t men be created mortal in the first place, in the sense of bodily death?If the Garden of Eden was in this world than why would it be so difficult to imagine a departure of the body from the soul?After all what is the fall of Adam and Eve really about?Is there any ecumenical council that condemns this?If some fathers say that Adam and Eve were created neighter mortal or immortal wouldn`t that leave room to the existence of a life-death cycle in nature, let's say the animal world?

« Last Edit: February 12, 2012, 06:40:04 AM by Azul »
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Offline Aindriú

  • Faster! Funnier!
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,918
    • Blog
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3985 on: February 12, 2012, 09:20:05 AM »
And why wouldn`t men be created mortal in the first place, in the sense of bodily death?If the Garden of Eden was in this world than why would it be so difficult to imagine a departure of the body from the soul?After all what is the fall of Adam and Eve really about?Is there any ecumenical council that condemns this?If some fathers say that Adam and Eve were created neighter mortal or immortal wouldn`t that leave room to the existence of a life-death cycle in nature, let's say the animal world?

Carthage 418 is ecumenical. It's canons we're attached to the 6th EC.

I'm going to need this.

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3986 on: February 12, 2012, 09:43:01 AM »
And why wouldn`t men be created mortal in the first place, in the sense of bodily death?If the Garden of Eden was in this world than why would it be so difficult to imagine a departure of the body from the soul?After all what is the fall of Adam and Eve really about?Is there any ecumenical council that condemns this?If some fathers say that Adam and Eve were created neighter mortal or immortal wouldn`t that leave room to the existence of a life-death cycle in nature, let's say the animal world?

Carthage 418 is ecumenical. It's canons we're attached to the 6th EC.

Carthage is certaintly not ecumenical.There are only 7 Ecumenical Councils.Care to show where in the 6th Ecumenical Councils we see this condemnation(canons)?
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,580
  • Barlaam and Josaphat
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3987 on: February 12, 2012, 01:12:38 PM »
Happy Darwin (and Lincoln) Day! (This day is probably not celebrated in certain regions of the U.S.  ::)  )
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline jckstraw72

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,174
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3988 on: February 12, 2012, 02:06:48 PM »
And why wouldn`t men be created mortal in the first place, in the sense of bodily death?If the Garden of Eden was in this world than why would it be so difficult to imagine a departure of the body from the soul?After all what is the fall of Adam and Eve really about?Is there any ecumenical council that condemns this?If some fathers say that Adam and Eve were created neighter mortal or immortal wouldn`t that leave room to the existence of a life-death cycle in nature, let's say the animal world?

Carthage 418 is ecumenical. It's canons we're attached to the 6th EC.

Carthage is certaintly not ecumenical.There are only 7 Ecumenical Councils.Care to show where in the 6th Ecumenical Councils we see this condemnation(canons)?

there are actually quite a few local Councils that were ratified by Ecumenical Councils and their canons have entered the universal life of the Church.

Online Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,985
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3989 on: February 12, 2012, 03:01:44 PM »
Happy Darwin (and Lincoln) Day! (This day is probably not celebrated in certain regions of the U.S.  ::)  )

I do not understand the Darwin fetish thing. I am afraid that I also assumed Presidents Day combined Washington and Lincoln.

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,580
  • Barlaam and Josaphat
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3990 on: February 12, 2012, 03:33:04 PM »
Happy Darwin (and Lincoln) Day! (This day is probably not celebrated in certain regions of the U.S.  ::)  )

I do not understand the Darwin fetish thing.
He only discovered the principle mechanism guiding the evolution of the diversity of life.

"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution." -- Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox and scientist
« Last Edit: February 12, 2012, 03:33:52 PM by Jetavan »
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Online Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,985
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3991 on: February 12, 2012, 05:25:44 PM »
Happy Darwin (and Lincoln) Day! (This day is probably not celebrated in certain regions of the U.S.  ::)  )

I do not understand the Darwin fetish thing.
He only discovered the principle mechanism guiding the evolution of the diversity of life.

"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution." -- Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox and scientist

Yes, but it is celebrating his birthday that strikes me as weird. I would say the same thing for celebrating Einstein's and Newton's birthday and they are probably more deserving of it. The origin of species was actively being pursued in the mid-19th century, from what I recall, and Darwin came up with the solution first.

My last comment on this side topic.


Offline Aindriú

  • Faster! Funnier!
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,918
    • Blog
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3992 on: February 12, 2012, 05:50:01 PM »
And why wouldn`t men be created mortal in the first place, in the sense of bodily death?If the Garden of Eden was in this world than why would it be so difficult to imagine a departure of the body from the soul?After all what is the fall of Adam and Eve really about?Is there any ecumenical council that condemns this?If some fathers say that Adam and Eve were created neighter mortal or immortal wouldn`t that leave room to the existence of a life-death cycle in nature, let's say the animal world?

Carthage 418 is ecumenical. It's canons we're attached to the 6th EC.

Carthage is certaintly not ecumenical.There are only 7 Ecumenical Councils.Care to show where in the 6th Ecumenical Councils we see this condemnation(canons)?

Certain? Prepare for un-certain-ification-ism-ous-on.

The 7th Ecumenical Council:
Quote
That the Seventh Ecumenical Council at Nice ascribed the Trullan canons to the Sixth Ecumenical Council, and spoke of them entirely in the Greek spirit, cannot astonish us, as it was attended almost solely by Greeks.  They specially pronounced the recognition of the canons in question in their own first canon; but their own canons have never received the ratification of the Holy See.
358
Thus far Hefele, but it seems that Gratian’s statement on the subject in the Decretum should not be omitted here.  (Pars I. Dist. XVI., c. v.)
“Canon V.  The Sixth Synod is confirmed by the authority of Hadrian.
“I receive the Sixth Synod with all its canons.
“Gratian.  There is a doubt whether it set forth canons but this is easily removed by examining the fourth session of the VIIth [VIth by mistake, vide Roman Correctors’ note] Synod.
“For Peter the Bp. of Nicomedia says:
“C. VI. The Sixth Synod wrote canons.
“I have a book containing the canons of the holy Sixth Synod.  The Patriarch said:  § 1. Some are scandalized through their ignorance of these canons, saying:  Did the Sixth Synod make any canons?  Let them know then that the Sixth Holy Synod was gathered together under Constantine against those who said there is one operation and one will in Christ, in which the holy Fathers anathematized these as heretics and explained the orthodox faith.
“II. Pars § 2. And the synod was dissolved in the XIVth year of Constantine.  After four or five years the same holy Fathers met together under Justinian, the son of Constantine, and promulgated the aforementioned canons, of which let no one have any doubt.  For they who under Constantine were in synod, these same bishops under Justinian subscribed to all these canons.  For it was fitting that a Universal Synod should promulgate ecclesiastical canons.  Item:  § 3. The Holy Sixth Synod after it promulgated its definition against the Monothelites, the emperor Constantine who had summoned it, dying soon after, and Justinian his son reigning in his stead, the same holy synod divinely inspired again met at Constantinople four or five years afterwards, and promulgated one hundred and two canons for the correction of the Church.
“Gratian.  From this therefore it may be gathered that the Sixth Synod was twice assembled:  the first time under Constantine and then passed no canons; the second time under Justinian his son, and promulgated the aforesaid canons.”
Upon this passage of Gratian’s the Roman Correctors have a long and interesting note, with quotations from Anastasius, which should be read with care by the student but is too long to cite here.
I close with some eminently wise remarks by Prof. Michaud.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.ii.html

Council of Trullo/ Quinisext Council /Fifth-Sixth council
Quote
Canon II.

It has also seemed good to this holy Council, that the eighty-five canons, received and ratified by the holy and blessed Fathers before us, and also handed down to us in the name of the holy and glorious Apostles should from this time forth remain firm and unshaken for the cure of souls and the healing of disorders.  And in these canons we are bidden to receive the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles [written] by Clement.  But formerly through the agency of those who erred from the faith certain adulterous matter was introduced, clean contrary to piety, for the polluting of the Church, which obscures the elegance and beauty of the divine decrees in their present form.  We therefore reject these Constitutions so as the better to make sure of the edification and security of the most Christian flock; by no means admitting the offspring of heretical error, and cleaving to the pure and perfect doctrine of the Apostles.  But we set our seal likewise upon all the other holy canons set forth by our holy and blessed Fathers, that is, by the 318 holy God-bearing Fathers assembled at Nice, and those at Ancyra, further those at Neocæsarea and likewise those at Gangra, and besides, those at Antioch in Syria:  those too at Laodicea in Phrygia:  and likewise the 150 who assembled in this heaven-protected royal city:  and the 200 who assembled the first time in the metropolis of the Ephesians, and the 630 holy and blessed Fathers at Chalcedon.  In like manner those of Sardica, and those of Carthage:  those also who again assembled in this heaven-protected royal city under its bishop Nectarius and Theophilus Archbishop of Alexandria.  Likewise too the Canons [i.e. the decretal letters] of Dionysius, formerly Archbishop of the great city of Alexandria; and of Peter, Archbishop of Alexandria and Martyr; of Gregory the Wonder-worker, Bishop of Neocæsarea; of Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria; of Basil, Archbishop of Cæsarea in Cappadocia; of Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa; of Gregory Theologus; of Amphilochius of Iconium; of Timothy, Archbishop of Alexandria; of Theophilus, Archbishop of the same great city of Alexandria; of Cyril, Archbishop of the same Alexandria; of Gennadius, Patriarch of this heaven-protected royal city.  Moreover the Canon set forth by Cyprian, Archbishop of the country of the Africans and Martyr, and by the Synod under him, which has been kept only in the country of the aforesaid Bishops, according to the custom delivered down to them.  And that no one be allowed to transgress or disregard the aforesaid canons, or to receive others beside them, supposititiously set forth by certain who have attempted to make a traffic of the truth.  But should any one be convicted of innovating upon, or attempting to overturn, any of the afore-mentioned canons, he shall be subject to receive the penalty which that canon imposes, and to be cured by it of his transgression.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.iii.ii.html

Quote
The Orthodox Churches consider this council as ecumenical and adds its canons to the decrees of the Fifth and Sixth Councils.
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Quinisext_Council


From the Greek Archdiocese
Quote
LEGISLATIVE MATTERS

It is regarded as supplementing the Fifth and the Sixth Ecumenical Councils, hence, it is called "Quinisext." Its work was purely legislative, it ratified 102 canons and the decisions of the previous Ecumenical Councils.

DOCTRINAL AND DISCIPLINARY CANONS

Sanctioned the so-called "Eighty-five Apostolic Canons" and approved the disciplinary decisions (Canons) of certain regional Councils. The Council added a series of disciplinary decisions or canons to the existing ones. The "Quinisext" Council laid the foundation for the Orthodox Canon Law.
http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8070


I'm going to need this.

Offline William

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,354
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3993 on: February 15, 2012, 10:09:16 PM »
Does evolution imply that the Fall didn't actually introduce death and decay into the world since these things existed well before the first humans?
The simple answer is no. It is a somewhat imperfect model dealing with the differentiation of species.

Shear logic is the argument against the notion that the fall introduced death. This is where you need to apply your arguments, not evolution, if that is your intention. And if it is your intention, it would be interesting to have a post dealing with cellular rather than organismal death.



Okay, then, does sheer logic prove that Christianity is wrong in this regard?

Define "death".

The cessation of an organism's physical life.
Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

Online Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,985
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3994 on: February 16, 2012, 01:16:32 AM »
Does evolution imply that the Fall didn't actually introduce death and decay into the world since these things existed well before the first humans?
The simple answer is no. It is a somewhat imperfect model dealing with the differentiation of species.

Shear logic is the argument against the notion that the fall introduced death. This is where you need to apply your arguments, not evolution, if that is your intention. And if it is your intention, it would be interesting to have a post dealing with cellular rather than organismal death.

Okay, then, does sheer logic prove that Christianity is wrong in this regard?

Define "death".

The cessation of an organism's physical life.

Quote
Okay, then, does sheer logic prove that Christianity is wrong in this regard?

If the notion that Christianity rejects evolution is true, this thread with nearly 4000 posts would not exist. I suspect I misunderstood your question.

Define "death".
Quote
The cessation of an organism's physical life.
I would probably reject this notion if called upon. For example, human skin cells are only a part of the organism homo sapiens yet they can survive as an independent organisms in the environmental condition of a laboratory. This situation is not technically different than the situation for most organisms.

The same is true for plants where seeds are clearly fertilized and viable independent organisms. To believe a world of no death in its entirety is a world in stasis that receives nourishment from God alone as their physical attributes are incompatible with survival otherwise. That is, T. Rex and tigers were superficial organisms without purpose and individual viability.

Since most of the interpretational problems here stem from Genesis, I am still awaiting a description of modern molecular genetics based on the language of ancient Hebrew at the time of Moses and how that text would be translated today. If anyone knows of an analysis like this I would love to know about it and it would influence my view point of this issue.


Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 14,283
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3995 on: February 16, 2012, 02:53:00 PM »
I think I've repeated this before, but yes, that seems to be the crux the issue with Orthodox Christians.  It's not like the Protestant situation, where the Bible is taken literally.  But rather, those of the Orthodox that do reject evolution do so because they feel it is a dogmatic necessity to believe that death of animals only occurred after man's sin and fall.  If there was a scientific theory that agreed with that, there wouldn't be this discussion.

In the past, I mentioned St. Athanasius as a possible source of the belief that animal death did exist.  The response was that even if St. Athanasius believed it, "patristic consensus" showed otherwise.  To which I showed an example of how patristic consensus is not always helpful in this argument, based on the interpretation of the Nephilim.  Nevertheless, the rebuttal is that since this is a very recent controversy, even though the tides might be turning among respectable Orthodox theologians today, there are still those contemporary theologians who reject it, among whom are even canonized saints.

And that's the essential summary of the most important debate on evolution that pertains to the Orthodox Church in my opinion.

The idea is Patristics with a lot of people.  People are using patristics to further their cause.  I used patristics, Jonathan Greiss and jckstraw used patristics.  It's not how we can put molecular biology in a context that agrees with the Fathers, but if cessation of life of a full organism, not necessarily a part, was something that the Fathers found nothing wrong with to believe before the Fall, or Orthodox faith in general. 

In addition, none of this scientific language exists with the Fathers at all, and so the question also comes, if the Fathers knew what is known today, how would they react?
« Last Edit: February 16, 2012, 02:56:59 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 Nigula Qian Zishi

  • Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,837
  • 我美丽的妻子和我。
    • Orthodox Ecclesiology and The World
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Denver
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3996 on: March 01, 2012, 06:26:22 PM »
Man in Creation: The Cosmology of St. Maximus the Confessor
by Jesse Dominick [source]

The theology of creation and salvation in Orthodox Christianity upholds the centrality and kingship of mankind while simultaneously embracing a cosmological vision that is largely absent in western Christendom. A common characteristic of all creation is corruption and death, and yet we are told that God is not the author of death (Wisdom of Solomon 1:13-14), and that all of creation awaits its redemption through the revealing of the Saints (Romans 8:19-22), when all of heaven and earth will be united to God (Ephesians 1:9-10). Within this framework, St. Maximus the Confessor (c. 580-662) is recognized as a theological and spiritual giant by the Orthodox Church. In his two Troparia he is hailed as an “enlightener of the universe” and a “herald of the faith.”

Copy of article reduced to first paragraph to enforce compliance with forum rule regarding length of article quotations

Remainder of article can be read by following the provided link  -PtA
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 11:04:42 PM by PeterTheAleut »
在基督
尼古拉
前执事
的博客

Offline stpaulphilip

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3997 on: March 01, 2012, 06:42:17 PM »
I'm a simple guy.  The word of God says:

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

Atheistic scientists say:

"In the beginning, a huge accident caused amazing order to occur." 

People stumble over the old earth issue.  Were Adam and Eve created as babies or adults?  Obviously they were not babies.  Can God make the light from the stars that are light years away instantly appear to us?  Obviously, yes.  Can God make bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?  Can God cause a Virgin to be with Child?  If you begin to let science determine what you believe about the Bible, you will begin to question the Real Presence, the Virgin birth, the Trinity, etc. 
Isaiah 5:20 "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"

Offline jckstraw72

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,174
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3998 on: March 01, 2012, 07:15:04 PM »
Man in Creation: The Cosmology of St. Maximus the Confessor
by Jesse Dominick [source]

The theology of creation and salvation in Orthodox Christianity upholds the centrality and kingship of mankind while simultaneously embracing a cosmological vision that is largely absent in western Christendom. A common characteristic of all creation is corruption and death, and yet we are told that God is not the author of death (Wisdom of Solomon 1:13-14), and that all of creation awaits its redemption through the revealing of the Saints (Romans 8:19-22), when all of heaven and earth will be united to God (Ephesians 1:9-10). Within this framework, St. Maximus the Confessor (c. 580-662) is recognized as a theological and spiritual giant by the Orthodox Church. In his two Troparia he is hailed as an “enlightener of the universe” and a “herald of the faith.”

Copy of article reduced to first paragraph to enforce compliance with forum rule regarding length of article quotations

Remainder of article can be read by following the provided link  -PtA


i dont know if you meant to post it this way, but if you follow the numbering of the footnotes in the text you will see that there is significant amounts of text missing, which is there in the link you provided. it goes from footnote 8 directly to 11 to 14 to 18, etc.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 11:05:30 PM by PeterTheAleut »

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,580
  • Barlaam and Josaphat
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #3999 on: March 12, 2012, 08:46:46 PM »
Quote
Karen Carter Peterson, a state senator in Louisiana, wants to make sure evolution is taught in science classes. Last week, Peterson introduced a bill that would repeal a four-year-old state law that encourages teachers to critique science such as evolution and global warming. The repeal effort, the second one in the state in the last year, represents the latest in a broader pushback against anti-evolution laws passed since 2008.

Louisiana's Science Education Act, passed in 2008, was the first of its kind to be approved in a state legislature. It claims to promote "critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning." Attempts to pass similar legislation, which are often called "Academic Freedom" bills, have failed in a number of other states including Iowa, Florida, Oklahoma, and New Hampshire. My colleagues James West and Tim McDonnell have reported on parents' and teachers' efforts to push back against climate-change deniers in the classroom in Vermont, Washington, and Connecticut.
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #4000 on: March 13, 2012, 11:59:44 AM »
I'm a simple guy.  The word of God says:

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

Atheistic scientists say:

"In the beginning, a huge accident caused amazing order to occur." 

People stumble over the old earth issue.  Were Adam and Eve created as babies or adults?  Obviously they were not babies.  Can God make the light from the stars that are light years away instantly appear to us?  Obviously, yes.  Can God make bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?  Can God cause a Virgin to be with Child?  If you begin to let science determine what you believe about the Bible, you will begin to question the Real Presence, the Virgin birth, the Trinity, etc. 

I think the New Testament says question everything.
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,539
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #4001 on: March 13, 2012, 12:25:33 PM »
I'm a simple guy.  The word of God says:

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
 I
Atheistic scientists say:

"In the beginning, a huge accident caused amazing order to occur." 

People stumble over the old earth issue.  Were Adam and Eve created as babies or adults?  Obviously they were not babies.  Can God make the light from the stars that are light years away instantly appear to us?  Obviously, yes.  Can God make bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?  Can God cause a Virgin to be with Child?  If you begin to let science determine what you believe about the Bible, you will begin to question the Real Presence, the Virgin birth, the Trinity, etc. 

I think the New Testament says question everything.

I don't think St Paul meant that you should question the dogmas of the Church. Not that I'm saying young earth creationism is dogma, but if you can show it is, then it shouldn't be subject to question. I'm pretty sure St Paul meant that your everyday choices need to be examined to see if they conform to Christ's commandments.

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #4002 on: March 15, 2012, 04:59:10 PM »
I'm a simple guy.  The word of God says:

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

Atheistic scientists say:

"In the beginning, a huge accident caused amazing order to occur." 

People stumble over the old earth issue.  Were Adam and Eve created as babies or adults?  Obviously they were not babies.  Can God make the light from the stars that are light years away instantly appear to us?  Obviously, yes.  Can God make bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?  Can God cause a Virgin to be with Child?  If you begin to let science determine what you believe about the Bible, you will begin to question the Real Presence, the Virgin birth, the Trinity, etc. 

I think the New Testament says question everything.

What New Testament are you reading?
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,138
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • Holy Trinity Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Western Rite Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: AOCNA - Diocese of Charleston and beyond
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #4003 on: March 16, 2012, 06:01:31 PM »
I'm a simple guy.  The word of God says:

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

Atheistic scientists say:

"In the beginning, a huge accident caused amazing order to occur." 

People stumble over the old earth issue.  Were Adam and Eve created as babies or adults?  Obviously they were not babies.  Can God make the light from the stars that are light years away instantly appear to us?  Obviously, yes.  Can God make bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?  Can God cause a Virgin to be with Child?  If you begin to let science determine what you believe about the Bible, you will begin to question the Real Presence, the Virgin birth, the Trinity, etc. 

I think the New Testament says question everything.
I'd like a reference. I missed that part :)

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #4004 on: March 16, 2012, 07:05:42 PM »
1Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast that which is good.
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi