Poll

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

Yes
66 (16.1%)
No
158 (38.5%)
both metaphorically and literally
186 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 410

Author Topic: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy  (Read 1395179 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Strongylocentrotus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
  • Running Springs, California-1985
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5670 on: October 26, 2014, 11:11:43 PM »
it seems Fr. Herman just passed away earlier this year. So you knew both priests personally?

Yes sir. About three years 1979-1983. I attended the local ROCOR parrish in Redding where Father Seraphim served. I did not know about Father Herman's passing. Thank you.

Despite their disagreements on science, I hope they had a positive impression on you nonetheless.  I tend to see the good in my priests who have been nothing but spiritually edifying in my growth.

Father Seraphim was the most angelic human being I have ever met.  And modest...  The Father Seraphim I knew would be deeply chagrined by the reverence that some people hold for him today.  He would also be embarrassed by some who claim that he was a theologian.  He did have this almost beatific smile on those rare occaisions that he favored me with it.  I can hear him even today smiling and admonishing me "Michael you always miss the point..."  Usually after arguing (discussing?) about toll houses, or science and modernism.  Later after he reposed, I learned that some my positions echoed ones taken by a certain deacon named Lev Puhalo.  Being a Bulgarian, I was of course totally unaware of this deacon and the sharp debate that Father Seraphim had with him in the seventies.  Evidently it was a big deal... roilling the waters in the Synod one time long ago.  But he never let on and was magnanimous and patient with me.  I am now almost 15 years older than he was on that hot, clear September day in 1982 when he left us.  I helped to line the coffin that Basil Anderson built for him... A few years after he died, I dreamed about him in a lineshack on a cattle ranch I was working on: I was laying on a cot drowsing when he came in the door and stomped the snow from his brogans. I got up and said "Father Seraphim would you like some tea? (ishkus dipiish edna konchi chai?) and he put his hands on my shoulders, waggled his head from side to side (like a Bulgarian) and answered "Da, dobre sum".  I turned to get the tea and gave it to him.  He took the tea then smiled saying "Mishu you still are missing the point, and then he blessed me with the sign of the cross and sprinkled me with salt...  I woke up to an empty dark shack, but I cold still smell him... incense, sweat and wet wool...

As for Father Herman... well that is more complicated.  Something I still need to think about and he is recently deposed.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2014, 11:37:22 PM by Strongylocentrotus »
If you cain't stand the stink, then don't kick the skunk!

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5671 on: October 26, 2014, 11:34:06 PM »
Thank you for sharing that beautiful story.  I have stated this many times throughout this discussion.  I personally believe that despite disagreements with him on science, he is still worthy of veneration.  May his prayers be with us all.
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 Strongylocentrotus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
  • Running Springs, California-1985
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5672 on: October 26, 2014, 11:44:39 PM »
Thank you for sharing that beautiful story.  I have stated this many times throughout this discussion.  I personally believe that despite disagreements with him on science, he is still worthy of veneration.  May his prayers be with us all.

Thank you and yes, you are right, but he would be uncomfortable about it...
If you cain't stand the stink, then don't kick the skunk!

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5673 on: October 26, 2014, 11:53:41 PM »
I hope with his vantage point now, he may have the compassion to understand why I take the views I do.  :)

Despite my upbringing by my church to tell me that evolution is wrong, I have managed to still love and stay firm in my faith for the Church.  I see the glory of God in all things, even in science, even in sea urchins and horses ;).  Without Him all things are vain.  Without Christ, all things are false.  And without the Spirit, all things are dead.  (from a spiritual purposeful standpoint)
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 Strongylocentrotus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
  • Running Springs, California-1985
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5674 on: October 27, 2014, 12:48:45 AM »
I hope with his vantage point now, he may have the compassion to understand why I take the views I do.  :)

Despite my upbringing by my church to tell me that evolution is wrong, I have managed to still love and stay firm in my faith for the Church.  I see the glory of God in all things, even in science, even in sea urchins and horses ;).  Without Him all things are vain.  Without Christ, all things are false.  And without the Spirit, all things are dead.  (from a spiritual purposeful standpoint)

Spoken truly and with a lot of Grace... I really believe that you believe, and to some extent I am envious of that.  There are people who are atheist, because they are confident that science can eventually explain everything without recourse to a Theistic agent.  To them this economy is a more elegant explanation.  Some people are atheists because of something, usually traumatic, in their life experience.  Some people are atheists because of the hypocrisy that they perceive in people of faith and in the institutions of faith.  Some people are atheists because they believe that reason alone trumps faith.  Then there are some people like myself who are atheist because they have something missing or different going on in the bio-chemical architecture of their brains. I have never felt the presence of, or as you say, seen the glory of God in all things...  Just as a person can be born without a sense of empathy, or without the ability to distinguish between the colors of red and green, some people are also born without the ability to sense a higher power in the universe.  We humans have religious beliefs and emotions because through natural selection acting on our genes over millions of years, creatures with this ability have prospered genetically better than those without.  Unfortunately, I don't have it and about twenty years ago, I finally had the grace just to accept it.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2014, 12:49:57 AM by Strongylocentrotus »
If you cain't stand the stink, then don't kick the skunk!

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5675 on: October 29, 2014, 01:46:58 PM »
Have you considered seeing the Orthodox Faith for its consistency?  That all the dogmas and virtues it teaches is consonant with a proper and fulfilling way to seek a more fulfilling unity with God?  You could see this in an analogous way to theoretical physicists.  They use the tool of math to look for consistency in the laws of the universe, and if tests seem to confirm what their calculations tell them, they submit to it in faith.

Likewise, it could perhaps help you to see the faith in this way.  Questions like what is God, what is creation, and what is the purpose of one's existence can help you understand how you can choose to live the faith even if unable to feel something...yet.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2014, 01:47:31 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 theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5676 on: January 20, 2015, 10:31:38 PM »
I've read several pages of this thread, and I see some of the same issues that are salient with some evangelical Protestants who try to reconcile science with tradition.  For example, the Biologos website has recently posted an article concerning the struggle of members of their community to reconcile the critical doctrine (for Protestants, anyway) of original sin and the fall with genomic facts concerning the implausibility of common human descent from only two individuals.

 http://biologos.org/blog/evolution-and-original-sin-by-robin-collins-part-4-paul-and-the-fall

If science appears to contradict scripture or a Church Father's writings, how do you reconcile it?  Do you reinterpret the religious text in order to accommodate the science? Or deny the science? 

Offline Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5677 on: January 20, 2015, 10:41:28 PM »
I've read several pages of this thread, and I see some of the same issues that are salient with some evangelical Protestants who try to reconcile science with tradition.  For example, the Biologos website has recently posted an article concerning the struggle of members of their community to reconcile the critical doctrine (for Protestants, anyway) of original sin and the fall with genomic facts concerning the implausibility of common human descent from only two individuals.

 http://biologos.org/blog/evolution-and-original-sin-by-robin-collins-part-4-paul-and-the-fall

If science appears to contradict scripture or a Church Father's writings, how do you reconcile it?  Do you reinterpret the religious text in order to accommodate the science? Or deny the science?  


Sound theology never contradicts proper science, and proper science never contradicts sound theology. What this thread demonstrates is that there is lots of bad theology and lots of bad science being promulgated around here.


Selam
« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 10:41:59 PM by Gebre Menfes Kidus »
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5678 on: January 20, 2015, 10:50:09 PM »
I've read several pages of this thread, and I see some of the same issues that are salient with some evangelical Protestants who try to reconcile science with tradition.  For example, the Biologos website has recently posted an article concerning the struggle of members of their community to reconcile the critical doctrine (for Protestants, anyway) of original sin and the fall with genomic facts concerning the implausibility of common human descent from only two individuals.

 http://biologos.org/blog/evolution-and-original-sin-by-robin-collins-part-4-paul-and-the-fall

If science appears to contradict scripture or a Church Father's writings, how do you reconcile it?  Do you reinterpret the religious text in order to accommodate the science? Or deny the science? 

Well, as has been stated, the dogma needs to be defined.  What is the important dogma, and what is the extraneous information that traditionally explains this dogma?  This is how I deal with it.  And I have all the confidence in the world no scientific theory will contradict dogma.  Evolution included.  It's only when people use bad theology to include more things that are not dogmas.  There is no dogma in the Church that says the plants were created before the sun, or that there are only four elements of the world.  The dogma is God created the heavens and the earth.  Mankind received something that other animals do not possess, "the image of God".  Man was given a chance.  We do not know what chance is, but it is typified in the story of Adam and Eve and the tree.  Man disobeyed and sought his own glory instead of obedience to the will of God.  Man's fall is when you seek your own independence from God.  That is dogma.
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 xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,321
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5679 on: January 20, 2015, 10:56:47 PM »
I've read several pages of this thread, and I see some of the same issues that are salient with some evangelical Protestants who try to reconcile science with tradition.  For example, the Biologos website has recently posted an article concerning the struggle of members of their community to reconcile the critical doctrine (for Protestants, anyway) of original sin and the fall with genomic facts concerning the implausibility of common human descent from only two individuals.

 http://biologos.org/blog/evolution-and-original-sin-by-robin-collins-part-4-paul-and-the-fall

If science appears to contradict scripture or a Church Father's writings, how do you reconcile it?  Do you reinterpret the religious text in order to accommodate the science? Or deny the science? 

I don't see why it matters. If Science tells us that death pre-existed the Fall, it doesn't necessarily mean that we don't need a Savior to save us from it.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 10:57:01 PM by xOrthodox4Christx »
This profile is defunct as of 11/8/2017. I created it before Orthodoxy, and have used it after Orthodoxy.

I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

I will likely lurk on this forum under a different name.

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5680 on: January 20, 2015, 11:05:55 PM »

Sound theology never contradicts proper science, and proper science never contradicts sound theology. What this thread demonstrates is that there is lots of bad theology and lots of bad science being promulgated around here.


Selam

I suppose that this statement is dependent on what your understanding of "proper science" and "sound theology" entails.  Evolution is a fact and a theory, and just as with the geocentric debates of the 17th century, the onus seems to be on theologians to react.  I don't see how the scientific method could respond to religious dogma and remain empirically viable. 

Offline Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5681 on: January 21, 2015, 05:28:39 AM »

Sound theology never contradicts proper science, and proper science never contradicts sound theology. What this thread demonstrates is that there is lots of bad theology and lots of bad science being promulgated around here.


Selam

I suppose that this statement is dependent on what your understanding of "proper science" and "sound theology" entails.  Evolution is a fact and a theory, and just as with the geocentric debates of the 17th century, the onus seems to be on theologians to react.  I don't see how the scientific method could respond to religious dogma and remain empirically viable. 

Most people who accept evolution don't understand the scientific method, as this thread has also demonstrated. So you will have to explain what you mean by the scientific method and what you mean by religious dogma. Faith and science are not contradictory. God is the Author of science, so there is no dichotomy between the Teachings of the Church and the evidentiary facts produced by sound empirical science.


Selam
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5682 on: January 21, 2015, 08:16:50 AM »


Most people who accept evolution don't understand the scientific method, as this thread has also demonstrated. So you will have to explain what you mean by the scientific method and what you mean by religious dogma. Faith and science are not contradictory. God is the Author of science, so there is no dichotomy between the Teachings of the Church and the evidentiary facts produced by sound empirical science.


Selam

Gebre,
   I mean what the dictionary means regarding the scientific method. 
"The principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis." - American Heritage Dictionary, 4th ed.  Dogma is "A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church", from the same source. 
  The biblical doctrine (see Psalm 93:1, 96:10) of geocentrism that was promulgated the RCC is clearly contradicted by empirical reality, and now the RCC has apologized for its persecution of Galileo, and it even has an astronomical laboratory.  Evolution, or more specifically common descent, is a similar instance of a conflict between the "Teachings of the Church" and reality.  The RCC and the mainline Protestants have accepted common descent as true, and I think that this is more productive than further defiance in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence. 

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5683 on: January 21, 2015, 09:24:17 AM »


Most people who accept evolution don't understand the scientific method, as this thread has also demonstrated. So you will have to explain what you mean by the scientific method and what you mean by religious dogma. Faith and science are not contradictory. God is the Author of science, so there is no dichotomy between the Teachings of the Church and the evidentiary facts produced by sound empirical science.


Selam

Gebre,
   I mean what the dictionary means regarding the scientific method. 
"The principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis." - American Heritage Dictionary, 4th ed.  Dogma is "A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church", from the same source. 
  The biblical doctrine (see Psalm 93:1, 96:10) of geocentrism that was promulgated the RCC is clearly contradicted by empirical reality, and now the RCC has apologized for its persecution of Galileo, and it even has an astronomical laboratory.  Evolution, or more specifically common descent, is a similar instance of a conflict between the "Teachings of the Church" and reality.  The RCC and the mainline Protestants have accepted common descent as true, and I think that this is more productive than further defiance in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence. 
well said.
God bless!

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5684 on: January 21, 2015, 12:01:34 PM »
Gebre redefines the scientific method as anything that conforms to what the Bible teaches.  At least that's what I understand from him. I never really got what he means by the scientific method all those years.  What is it that all other scientists are doing wrong?  Beats me.  "Bad science" only applies to those who teach evolution, because everyone else uses science correctly even though it's the same methodology.  I encourage you to read through this thread of Gebre's responses, and if you figure out what he means, I'd be most obliged to be enlightened on how my work as a scientist was incorrect all this time.
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 Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5685 on: January 21, 2015, 12:21:34 PM »
Gebre redefines the scientific method as anything that conforms to what the Bible teaches. 

Another example of the gross misinformation on this thread.. I have never defined the scientific method in this way. However, you and other evolutionists constantly redefine the scientific method to suit your pet theory. But we can go around and around on this all day.

Selam
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5686 on: January 21, 2015, 12:23:25 PM »
Gebre redefines the scientific method as anything that conforms to what the Bible teaches. 

Another example of the gross misinformation on this thread.. I have never defined the scientific method in this way. However, you and other evolutionists constantly redefine the scientific method to suit your pet theory. But we can go around and around on this all day.

Selam

Enlighten us please. How do you do the scientific method?
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 Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5687 on: January 21, 2015, 12:30:33 PM »


Most people who accept evolution don't understand the scientific method, as this thread has also demonstrated. So you will have to explain what you mean by the scientific method and what you mean by religious dogma. Faith and science are not contradictory. God is the Author of science, so there is no dichotomy between the Teachings of the Church and the evidentiary facts produced by sound empirical science.


Selam

Gebre,
   I mean what the dictionary means regarding the scientific method.  
"The principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis." - American Heritage Dictionary, 4th ed.  Dogma is "A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church", from the same source.  
  The biblical doctrine (see Psalm 93:1, 96:10) of geocentrism that was promulgated the RCC is clearly contradicted by empirical reality, and now the RCC has apologized for its persecution of Galileo, and it even has an astronomical laboratory.  Evolution, or more specifically common descent, is a similar instance of a conflict between the "Teachings of the Church" and reality.  The RCC and the mainline Protestants have accepted common descent as true, and I think that this is more productive than further defiance in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence.  

With respect, you won't understand the scientific method from a couple of sentences from the dictionary. The fact that you equate the empirically verifiable reality of heliocentrism with the unproven theory of evolution shows that your knowledge of the scientific method is woefully lacking. Read Karl Hempel's book "The Philosophy of Natural Science" for a good understanding of the scientific method.

Selam
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 12:31:42 PM by Gebre Menfes Kidus »
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5688 on: January 21, 2015, 01:05:05 PM »


With respect, you won't understand the scientific method from a couple of sentences from the dictionary. The fact that you equate the empirically verifiable reality of heliocentrism with the unproven theory of evolution shows that your knowledge of the scientific method is woefully lacking. Read Karl Hempel's book "The Philosophy of Natural Science" for a good understanding of the scientific method.

Selam

   This is mind-boggling on so many levels.  According to you, you don't understand what something means by understanding what something means.  Allow me to unpack this for you.
  The retrograde motions of motion of Mars, the precession of the equinoxes, planetary transits, and the sidereal year are verifiable facts. The heliocentric model explains these and predicts the existence of new observations, such as the direct observation of the earth's trajectory through space by the Voyager spacecraft. The heliocentric motion is a consequence of Newtonian Theory, and in particular the law of universal gravitation.   
  The history of life, through genetic evidence such as atavisms, ERV's, the fossil record, vestigial organs etc. is a verifiable reality.  The diversity of life, as evidence by the number of species in existence today and indirectly evidenced throughout history by the fossil record, is also a verifiable reality.  The Theory of Evolution is the scientific theory which explains these facts and predicts new, related, facts.  An example of a new related fact predicted by evolution is that specific varieties of fossil can be located in specifically aged geological strata.  Another, in Darwin's day, would be that the hereditary mechanism of organisms would attest to their common descent.  The hereditary mechanism is called DNA, and it does just that.  With access to DNA, the reality of common descent is just as real as paternity testing.  If you deny common descent, then you must believe paternity tests to be unreliable as well.  Homology equals relatedness. 
   You can deny this all that you want, but the church fathers and the bible are geocentric and anti-evolutionary.  If you deny evolutionary theory, then why not deny Newtonian theory? 

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5689 on: January 21, 2015, 01:10:53 PM »
i don't know if Gebre changed his mind, but last time I remember he mentioned he was a young earth believer.  So it's not just evolutionists he has beef with, but geologists, astromoners, physicists, chemists, and biologists.

In other words, he knows what science is, and everyone else who calls himself a scientist is deluded.  It really amazes me if he wants to gain some credibility in his argument and recommendations what "real science" is.  It's like a Muslim coming to tell me what the Trinity really means.
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

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5690 on: January 21, 2015, 01:15:50 PM »


With respect, you won't understand the scientific method from a couple of sentences from the dictionary. The fact that you equate the empirically verifiable reality of heliocentrism with the unproven theory of evolution shows that your knowledge of the scientific method is woefully lacking. Read Karl Hempel's book "The Philosophy of Natural Science" for a good understanding of the scientific method.

Selam

   This is mind-boggling on so many levels.  According to you, you don't understand what something means by understanding what something means.  Allow me to unpack this for you.
  The retrograde motions of motion of Mars, the precession of the equinoxes, planetary transits, and the sidereal year are verifiable facts. The heliocentric model explains these and predicts the existence of new observations, such as the direct observation of the earth's trajectory through space by the Voyager spacecraft. The heliocentric motion is a consequence of Newtonian Theory, and in particular the law of universal gravitation.   
  The history of life, through genetic evidence such as atavisms, ERV's, the fossil record, vestigial organs etc. is a verifiable reality.  The diversity of life, as evidence by the number of species in existence today and indirectly evidenced throughout history by the fossil record, is also a verifiable reality.  The Theory of Evolution is the scientific theory which explains these facts and predicts new, related, facts.  An example of a new related fact predicted by evolution is that specific varieties of fossil can be located in specifically aged geological strata.  Another, in Darwin's day, would be that the hereditary mechanism of organisms would attest to their common descent.  The hereditary mechanism is called DNA, and it does just that.  With access to DNA, the reality of common descent is just as real as paternity testing.  If you deny common descent, then you must believe paternity tests to be unreliable as well.  Homology equals relatedness. 
   You can deny this all that you want, but the church fathers and the bible are geocentric and anti-evolutionary.  If you deny evolutionary theory, then why not deny Newtonian theory? 

I would not say that the church fathers were "anti-evolutionary", rather they were "pre-evolutionary" and "pre-heliocentric". You can't be against a theory that has not been postulated yet.
God bless!

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5691 on: January 21, 2015, 01:28:54 PM »


With respect, you won't understand the scientific method from a couple of sentences from the dictionary. The fact that you equate the empirically verifiable reality of heliocentrism with the unproven theory of evolution shows that your knowledge of the scientific method is woefully lacking. Read Karl Hempel's book "The Philosophy of Natural Science" for a good understanding of the scientific method.

Selam

   This is mind-boggling on so many levels.  According to you, you don't understand what something means by understanding what something means.  Allow me to unpack this for you.
  The retrograde motions of motion of Mars, the precession of the equinoxes, planetary transits, and the sidereal year are verifiable facts. The heliocentric model explains these and predicts the existence of new observations, such as the direct observation of the earth's trajectory through space by the Voyager spacecraft. The heliocentric motion is a consequence of Newtonian Theory, and in particular the law of universal gravitation.   
  The history of life, through genetic evidence such as atavisms, ERV's, the fossil record, vestigial organs etc. is a verifiable reality.  The diversity of life, as evidence by the number of species in existence today and indirectly evidenced throughout history by the fossil record, is also a verifiable reality.  The Theory of Evolution is the scientific theory which explains these facts and predicts new, related, facts.  An example of a new related fact predicted by evolution is that specific varieties of fossil can be located in specifically aged geological strata.  Another, in Darwin's day, would be that the hereditary mechanism of organisms would attest to their common descent.  The hereditary mechanism is called DNA, and it does just that.  With access to DNA, the reality of common descent is just as real as paternity testing.  If you deny common descent, then you must believe paternity tests to be unreliable as well.  Homology equals relatedness. 
   You can deny this all that you want, but the church fathers and the bible are geocentric and anti-evolutionary.  If you deny evolutionary theory, then why not deny Newtonian theory? 

I would not say that the church fathers were "anti-evolutionary", rather they were "pre-evolutionary" and "pre-heliocentric". You can't be against a theory that has not been postulated yet.
+1

It is not a fair standard to say that the Church fathers are anti any of the science we study today.  It's clear that St. Athanasius wrote about the earth in a flat manner, but it was not to affirm that the earth is flat, but showing the glory and power and wisdom of God in His creation.  The same can be said if one uses today's science with the same praise and worthiness of God's creativeness.
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: 3,274
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5692 on: January 21, 2015, 01:35:19 PM »

   This is mind-boggling on so many levels.  According to you, you don't understand what something means by understanding what something means.  Allow me to unpack this for you.
  The retrograde motions of motion of Mars, the precession of the equinoxes, planetary transits, and the sidereal year are verifiable facts. The heliocentric model explains these and predicts the existence of new observations, such as the direct observation of the earth's trajectory through space by the Voyager spacecraft. The heliocentric motion is a consequence of Newtonian Theory, and in particular the law of universal gravitation.   
 

This argument does not win any points. The Geocentric (and worse, the merry-go-round-centric) models are compatible with General Relativity (until someone can cite a paper stating that Einstein was wrong about this matter).
"Mi tío es enfermo, pero la carretera es verde!" - old Chilean saying

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5693 on: January 21, 2015, 01:48:38 PM »
I agree that the centric argument can be a bit misleading. I better comparison is St. Basil the Great's well known opinion regarding eels, mice and insects who he believed were born directly from the earth. St. Clement discussed the Phoenix which he describes as an actual creature that is consumed and reborn with fire. These are not uneducated men, they knew as much as science taught at that time. I do not fault the Church for their incorrect understandings of nature.  Why then, do we place the same burden on them regarding evolution? Evolution has no spiritual benefit or hinderance, it is merely a manner in which we explain the coherency of many different facts. Attempting to shoehorn evolution into some commentary on doctrine is a fool's errand, because that is not its purpose.
God bless!

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5694 on: January 21, 2015, 02:04:34 PM »

I would not say that the church fathers were "anti-evolutionary", rather they were "pre-evolutionary" and "pre-heliocentric". You can't be against a theory that has not been postulated yet.

You're definitely correct.  My phrasing was poor.  I think my point was that within the ontology of a fundamentalist who believes that the authors of religious texts possessed unlimited and infallible intellectual access to the structure and history of the universe, then a literal reading of pre-scientific religious texts would have to be construed as opposing heliocentrism and evolution. 

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5695 on: January 21, 2015, 02:10:49 PM »

   This is mind-boggling on so many levels.  According to you, you don't understand what something means by understanding what something means.  Allow me to unpack this for you.
  The retrograde motions of motion of Mars, the precession of the equinoxes, planetary transits, and the sidereal year are verifiable facts. The heliocentric model explains these and predicts the existence of new observations, such as the direct observation of the earth's trajectory through space by the Voyager spacecraft. The heliocentric motion is a consequence of Newtonian Theory, and in particular the law of universal gravitation.  
  

This argument does not win any points. The Geocentric (and worse, the merry-go-round-centric) models are compatible with General Relativity (until someone can cite a paper stating that Einstein was wrong about this matter).

Can I get a source on this please? A quick duckduckgo search is devoid of relevant information.  I'm inclined to think that you're more than a little out of your depth.

IC XC
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 02:11:12 PM by theuerjb »

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5696 on: January 21, 2015, 02:21:44 PM »

   This is mind-boggling on so many levels.  According to you, you don't understand what something means by understanding what something means.  Allow me to unpack this for you.
  The retrograde motions of motion of Mars, the precession of the equinoxes, planetary transits, and the sidereal year are verifiable facts. The heliocentric model explains these and predicts the existence of new observations, such as the direct observation of the earth's trajectory through space by the Voyager spacecraft. The heliocentric motion is a consequence of Newtonian Theory, and in particular the law of universal gravitation.  
  

This argument does not win any points. The Geocentric (and worse, the merry-go-round-centric) models are compatible with General Relativity (until someone can cite a paper stating that Einstein was wrong about this matter).

Can I get a source on this please? A quick duckduckgo search is devoid of relevant information.  I'm inclined to think that you're more than a little out of your depth.

IC XC

easy now, Opus does have a good history of treating science accurately and objectively, so I wouldn't say he is "out of his depth".  The posts here is a testimony to that.
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 xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,321
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5697 on: January 21, 2015, 03:12:54 PM »
Are we really mentioning Geocentrism? Really? Just really? Wow.

In light of Alpha Centauri, the Earth is certainly not the center of the universe. Furthermore, gravity determines orbit of planets and stars, the amount exerted from said planet or star is what manages the order of the universe. If there is no gravity, you get asteroids and stuff. There's still enough gravity to pull asteroids together, but not as significant as the amount a planet would exert.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 03:15:35 PM by xOrthodox4Christx »
This profile is defunct as of 11/8/2017. I created it before Orthodoxy, and have used it after Orthodoxy.

I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

I will likely lurk on this forum under a different name.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5698 on: January 21, 2015, 03:29:00 PM »
Are we really mentioning Geocentrism? Really? Just really? Wow.

In light of Alpha Centauri, the Earth is certainly not the center of the universe. Furthermore, gravity determines orbit of planets and stars, the amount exerted from said planet or star is what manages the order of the universe. If there is no gravity, you get asteroids and stuff. There's still enough gravity to pull asteroids together, but not as significant as the amount a planet would exert.
What Opus is saying is that since everything operates in relative proximity to one another, you can't really say anything is "centric" to anything else.  These are the paths of the sun and interior planets. Both models are equally accurate depending on the perspective that you view them from.  Obviously, one is much easier to understand and useful for scientific discovery.

God bless!

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5699 on: January 21, 2015, 03:55:27 PM »

What Opus is saying is that since everything operates in relative proximity to one another, you can't really say anything is "centric" to anything else.  These are the paths of the sun and interior planets. Both models are equally accurate depending on the perspective that you view them from.  Obviously, one is much easier to understand and useful for scientific discovery.



Yes, according to Newtonian theory in the two-body problem one object doesn't orbit another, they both orbit their barycenter.  I think that I was placing too much emphasis on terminology and people got confused.  "Centrism" of any kind in orbital mechanics is, I'm guessing, just a convenient approximation for the location of the barycenter relative to the orbiting bodies.  I certainly don't think that it's possible that General Relativity could support the notion that the barycenter of the Earth-Sun system is within the radius of the Earth rather than the Sun.

IC XC NIKA

Offline Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5700 on: January 21, 2015, 07:06:23 PM »
i don't know if Gebre changed his mind, but last time I remember he mentioned he was a young earth believer.  So it's not just evolutionists he has beef with, but geologists, astromoners, physicists, chemists, and biologists.

In other words, he knows what science is, and everyone else who calls himself a scientist is deluded.  It really amazes me if he wants to gain some credibility in his argument and recommendations what "real science" is.  It's like a Muslim coming to tell me what the Trinity really means.

More emotionalism from you Mina. This is sadly too often your reaction throughout this discussion, which is why it's a waste of time trying to have a reasonable discourse with you on the subject. I am not wedded to a young earth. I simply said that the Fathers of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church have taught that the earth is approximately 7,000 years old. But this is not a dogma of our Faith. It really doesn't matter to me.

And once again you trot out the specious "I understand science and you don't" argument. That's like declaring that red is the best color because you believe it to be the best color and then accusing someone who prefers blue of not understanding red.

Unlike young earth creationist fundamentalists and evolutionism fundamentalists, I am not emotionally invested in one side or the other. That's why I can remain objective and call BS wherever I see it, on either side. God is the Author of science, and all truth is God's truth. And because I value science, truth, and God, then I refuse to accept the manmade manipulation of data and subjective interpretations of that data as scientific fact.

And I would sincerely appreciate it if you would kindly refrain from misrepresenting my views. Calm down, take a deep breath, and try to leave emotions out of it. I know that's difficult for you. I don't mean to sound condescending.  


Selam
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 07:06:38 PM by Gebre Menfes Kidus »
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,274
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5701 on: January 21, 2015, 07:36:38 PM »

   This is mind-boggling on so many levels.  According to you, you don't understand what something means by understanding what something means.  Allow me to unpack this for you.
  The retrograde motions of motion of Mars, the precession of the equinoxes, planetary transits, and the sidereal year are verifiable facts. The heliocentric model explains these and predicts the existence of new observations, such as the direct observation of the earth's trajectory through space by the Voyager spacecraft. The heliocentric motion is a consequence of Newtonian Theory, and in particular the law of universal gravitation.  
  

This argument does not win any points. The Geocentric (and worse, the merry-go-round-centric) models are compatible with General Relativity (until someone can cite a paper stating that Einstein was wrong about this matter).

Can I get a source on this please? A quick duckduckgo search is devoid of relevant information.  I'm inclined to think that you're more than a little out of your depth.

IC XC

I am work, but I did ponder a romantic analogy with Rachel Weisz (the center of Mor Ephrem's physical universe) who is capable of moving the earth underneath her feet (along with the stars, moon, and sun, to a much lesser extent) drawing Mor towards her.  Then I added Kelly to the scene who yelled from behind Rachel, to inform her that she dropped something (a picture of someone Mor hates) causing Rachel to reverse the direction of the rotation of the planet beneath her. Then I thought I was overdoing it a bit and stopped thinking about it.

Here are some prior statements and references:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,50550.msg977696.html#msg977696
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,55108.msg1102622.html#msg1102622
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,55108.msg1102653.html#msg1102653

"Mi tío es enfermo, pero la carretera es verde!" - old Chilean saying

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5702 on: January 21, 2015, 08:08:02 PM »
i don't know if Gebre changed his mind, but last time I remember he mentioned he was a young earth believer.  So it's not just evolutionists he has beef with, but geologists, astromoners, physicists, chemists, and biologists.

In other words, he knows what science is, and everyone else who calls himself a scientist is deluded.  It really amazes me if he wants to gain some credibility in his argument and recommendations what "real science" is.  It's like a Muslim coming to tell me what the Trinity really means.

More emotionalism from you Mina. This is sadly too often your reaction throughout this discussion, which is why it's a waste of time trying to have a reasonable discourse with you on the subject. I am not wedded to a young earth. I simply said that the Fathers of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church have taught that the earth is approximately 7,000 years old. But this is not a dogma of our Faith. It really doesn't matter to me.

And once again you trot out the specious "I understand science and you don't" argument. That's like declaring that red is the best color because you believe it to be the best color and then accusing someone who prefers blue of not understanding red.

Unlike young earth creationist fundamentalists and evolutionism fundamentalists, I am not emotionally invested in one side or the other. That's why I can remain objective and call BS wherever I see it, on either side. God is the Author of science, and all truth is God's truth. And because I value science, truth, and God, then I refuse to accept the manmade manipulation of data and subjective interpretations of that data as scientific fact.

And I would sincerely appreciate it if you would kindly refrain from misrepresenting my views. Calm down, take a deep breath, and try to leave emotions out of it. I know that's difficult for you. I don't mean to sound condescending. 


Selam

Not really Gebre. Find out where this emotion I protray is.  I simply summarize your views.  In fact, you changed. Before you said that you submit humbly to the views of the Ethiopian Church.  Every once in a while you also vacillate between calling evolution a demonic belief and people like me an Orthodox brother.  So it's not so much that I misrepresent your views but that you are inconsistent in your views.  If you can't take the age of the earth one way or another and consider the scientific age as "manmade manipulation of data", then the BS is not in what evolutionists (or fundamentalist youth earthists) think, but in your so-called objectivity (forget evolution, you can't even scientifically agree to the age of the earth, thinking that both views are valid).  BS is having your cake and eating it, which you repeatedly have shown.

If you really value science, you would have at least agreed that the earth is old, rather than acting like you don't take one view or another.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 08:10:09 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 stavros_388

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,325
  • Unrest is the mark of existence.
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5703 on: January 21, 2015, 08:20:43 PM »
Anyone who persistently believes and claims that he/she understands science and what science is better than the majority of the world's scientists across several scientific disciplines should probably repent for having such prideful thoughts.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5704 on: January 21, 2015, 08:25:54 PM »
i don't know if Gebre changed his mind, but last time I remember he mentioned he was a young earth believer.  So it's not just evolutionists he has beef with, but geologists, astromoners, physicists, chemists, and biologists.

In other words, he knows what science is, and everyone else who calls himself a scientist is deluded.  It really amazes me if he wants to gain some credibility in his argument and recommendations what "real science" is.  It's like a Muslim coming to tell me what the Trinity really means.

More emotionalism from you Mina. This is sadly too often your reaction throughout this discussion, which is why it's a waste of time trying to have a reasonable discourse with you on the subject. I am not wedded to a young earth. I simply said that the Fathers of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church have taught that the earth is approximately 7,000 years old. But this is not a dogma of our Faith. It really doesn't matter to me.

And once again you trot out the specious "I understand science and you don't" argument. That's like declaring that red is the best color because you believe it to be the best color and then accusing someone who prefers blue of not understanding red.

Unlike young earth creationist fundamentalists and evolutionism fundamentalists, I am not emotionally invested in one side or the other. That's why I can remain objective and call BS wherever I see it, on either side. God is the Author of science, and all truth is God's truth. And because I value science, truth, and God, then I refuse to accept the manmade manipulation of data and subjective interpretations of that data as scientific fact.

And I would sincerely appreciate it if you would kindly refrain from misrepresenting my views. Calm down, take a deep breath, and try to leave emotions out of it. I know that's difficult for you. I don't mean to sound condescending.  


Selam
I disagree with this point. Preference between red and blue is purely a subjective one whereas whether the earth is 7k or 4.54 billion years old is not. Two people can't each say they prefer one over the other and both be right, one is correct and the other is incorrect (or in the alternate, neither is right), whereas one person is not right about whether red or blue is the better color.

For myself, I belief evolution is correct after having studied it which is why I hold to that position, I fear too many Christians hold to young earth creationism because they refuse to take an earnest look at both sides of the debate and come to an objective conclusion. I'm not saying that this is true of Gebre, but I personally knew many people from my youth in Christian school who refused to even consider the possibility that evolutionary theory was correct because they perceived it to be an assault on their faith. Unfortunately, many of them have since lost their faith because as they got older, they pushed themselves into a false dilemma of science vs faith and faith lost.
God bless!

Offline Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5705 on: January 21, 2015, 10:04:01 PM »
i don't know if Gebre changed his mind, but last time I remember he mentioned he was a young earth believer.  So it's not just evolutionists he has beef with, but geologists, astromoners, physicists, chemists, and biologists.

In other words, he knows what science is, and everyone else who calls himself a scientist is deluded.  It really amazes me if he wants to gain some credibility in his argument and recommendations what "real science" is.  It's like a Muslim coming to tell me what the Trinity really means.

More emotionalism from you Mina. This is sadly too often your reaction throughout this discussion, which is why it's a waste of time trying to have a reasonable discourse with you on the subject. I am not wedded to a young earth. I simply said that the Fathers of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church have taught that the earth is approximately 7,000 years old. But this is not a dogma of our Faith. It really doesn't matter to me.

And once again you trot out the specious "I understand science and you don't" argument. That's like declaring that red is the best color because you believe it to be the best color and then accusing someone who prefers blue of not understanding red.

Unlike young earth creationist fundamentalists and evolutionism fundamentalists, I am not emotionally invested in one side or the other. That's why I can remain objective and call BS wherever I see it, on either side. God is the Author of science, and all truth is God's truth. And because I value science, truth, and God, then I refuse to accept the manmade manipulation of data and subjective interpretations of that data as scientific fact.

And I would sincerely appreciate it if you would kindly refrain from misrepresenting my views. Calm down, take a deep breath, and try to leave emotions out of it. I know that's difficult for you. I don't mean to sound condescending.  


Selam
I disagree with this point. Preference between red and blue is purely a subjective one whereas whether the earth is 7k or 4.54 billion years old is not. Two people can't each say they prefer one over the other and both be right, one is correct and the other is incorrect (or in the alternate, neither is right), whereas one person is not right about whether red or blue is the better color.

For myself, I belief evolution is correct after having studied it which is why I hold to that position, I fear too many Christians hold to young earth creationism because they refuse to take an earnest look at both sides of the debate and come to an objective conclusion. I'm not saying that this is true of Gebre, but I personally knew many people from my youth in Christian school who refused to even consider the possibility that evolutionary theory was correct because they perceived it to be an assault on their faith. Unfortunately, many of them have since lost their faith because as they got older, they pushed themselves into a false dilemma of science vs faith and faith lost.

I agree with your points here (except for the part about your belief that evolution is correct.) My analogy was not intended to be an analogy of the merits of evolution, but rather an analogy of the way Mina constantly frames the issue.

The reason I jumped back into this discussion was simply to answer theuerjb's question about faith and science. And my point was simply that authentic faith does not contradict authentic science. There is no dichotomy between the two. If there appears to be a conflict between theology and science, then it's due to either bad theology or bad science (or perhaps both.) That's the only point I wanted to make, and I stand by that. My other arguments regarding evolution have already been made elsewhere on this thread. I don't see any reason to rehash them, especially when certain people deliberately misinterpret my views.

I appreciate and respect your opinion, even if we disagree. And I appreciate the respectful and objective tone with which you express your views on this subject.

Selam
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5706 on: January 21, 2015, 10:17:27 PM »
i don't know if Gebre changed his mind, but last time I remember he mentioned he was a young earth believer.  So it's not just evolutionists he has beef with, but geologists, astromoners, physicists, chemists, and biologists.

In other words, he knows what science is, and everyone else who calls himself a scientist is deluded.  It really amazes me if he wants to gain some credibility in his argument and recommendations what "real science" is.  It's like a Muslim coming to tell me what the Trinity really means.

More emotionalism from you Mina. This is sadly too often your reaction throughout this discussion, which is why it's a waste of time trying to have a reasonable discourse with you on the subject. I am not wedded to a young earth. I simply said that the Fathers of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church have taught that the earth is approximately 7,000 years old. But this is not a dogma of our Faith. It really doesn't matter to me.

And once again you trot out the specious "I understand science and you don't" argument. That's like declaring that red is the best color because you believe it to be the best color and then accusing someone who prefers blue of not understanding red.

Unlike young earth creationist fundamentalists and evolutionism fundamentalists, I am not emotionally invested in one side or the other. That's why I can remain objective and call BS wherever I see it, on either side. God is the Author of science, and all truth is God's truth. And because I value science, truth, and God, then I refuse to accept the manmade manipulation of data and subjective interpretations of that data as scientific fact.

And I would sincerely appreciate it if you would kindly refrain from misrepresenting my views. Calm down, take a deep breath, and try to leave emotions out of it. I know that's difficult for you. I don't mean to sound condescending.  


Selam

Not really Gebre. Find out where this emotion I protray is.  I simply summarize your views.  In fact, you changed. Before you said that you submit humbly to the views of the Ethiopian Church.  Every once in a while you also vacillate between calling evolution a demonic belief and people like me an Orthodox brother.  So it's not so much that I misrepresent your views but that you are inconsistent in your views.  If you can't take the age of the earth one way or another and consider the scientific age as "manmade manipulation of data", then the BS is not in what evolutionists (or fundamentalist youth earthists) think, but in your so-called objectivity (forget evolution, you can't even scientifically agree to the age of the earth, thinking that both views are valid).  BS is having your cake and eating it, which you repeatedly have shown.

If you really value science, you would have at least agreed that the earth is old, rather than acting like you don't take one view or another.


I have been quite consistent. Yes, I believe evolution is a demonic deception. I also believe that we are all deceived by many things. To live and act as if our own reasoning is so immaculate that we are immune to deception is the epitome of arrogance. As for the age of the earth, I will defer to the Fathers of my Church on this issue. But I have never declared this to be a theological dogma upon which our Faith hinges. So therefore I am able to remain open and objective about the age of the earth. If evolution can ever be empirically proven then I will recant my assertion that it is a demonic deception, and I will concede that I was the one who was deceived. It won't be the first time I was deceived about something.

But I don't wish to rehash this debate. Your faith in evolution is obviously very precious to you, and it is clear that your mind is made up. I have realized that arguing with a fundamentalist is fool's errand. But I wish you well all the same. I think you are a good person.


Selam
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 10:18:55 PM by Gebre Menfes Kidus »
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5707 on: January 21, 2015, 10:20:47 PM »


I am work, but I did ponder a romantic analogy with Rachel Weisz (the center of Mor Ephrem's physical universe) who is capable of moving the earth underneath her feet (along with the stars, moon, and sun, to a much lesser extent) drawing Mor towards her.  Then I added Kelly to the scene who yelled from behind Rachel, to inform her that she dropped something (a picture of someone Mor hates) causing Rachel to reverse the direction of the rotation of the planet beneath her. Then I thought I was overdoing it a bit and stopped thinking about it.

Here are some prior statements and references:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,50550.msg977696.html#msg977696
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,55108.msg1102622.html#msg1102622
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,55108.msg1102653.html#msg1102653



I'm sorry that I said that you were out of your depth!  I appear to have put much less thought into this than you have.  

IC XC NIKA

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5708 on: January 21, 2015, 10:22:01 PM »
Anyone who persistently believes and claims that he/she understands science and what science is better than the majority of the world's scientists across several scientific disciplines should probably repent for having such prideful thoughts.

I never thought of the issue that way.  But you're right, it is a sin of pride. 

IC XC NIKA

Offline Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5709 on: January 21, 2015, 10:25:56 PM »
Anyone who persistently believes and claims that he/she understands science and what science is better than the majority of the world's scientists across several scientific disciplines should probably repent for having such prideful thoughts.

I never thought of the issue that way.  But you're right, it is a sin of pride.  

IC XC NIKA

Ahhh... the old argument of determining scientific truth by democracy. Thanks for providing another perfect example of a failure to understand the scientific method. And thanks for also demonstrating my point about evolutionism being a form of fundamentalism. "The majority says it's so, so that makes it so! And if you don't agree with the majority, then you are a prideful sinner!" That my friends is not science. That is fundamentalism at its worst.


Selam
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 10:28:05 PM by Gebre Menfes Kidus »
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5710 on: January 21, 2015, 10:41:26 PM »
Anyone who persistently believes and claims that he/she understands science and what science is better than the majority of the world's scientists across several scientific disciplines should probably repent for having such prideful thoughts.

I never thought of the issue that way.  But you're right, it is a sin of pride.  

IC XC NIKA

Ahhh... the old argument of determining scientific truth by democracy. Thanks for providing another perfect example of a failure to understand the scientific method. And thanks for also demonstrating my point about evolutionism being a form of fundamentalism. "The majority says it's so, so that makes it so! And if you don't agree with the majority, then you are a prideful sinner!" That my friends is not science. That is fundamentalism at its worst.


Selam

Science isn't a democracy of human opinion.  It's the tyranny of reality.  I'd really like it, and you probably would too, if quantum theory and chemistry would stop working right now in the nitrocellulose in the case of the 7.62x39mm round in the chamber of the AK-47 pointed at an innocent child's head in  Iraq right now, but reality doesn't care.  Science is an amoral tyranny.  The only thing we can do is to petition God to intervene, or to use the power of reality to effect positive change ourselves.  The exothermic chemical reaction occurring in the AK-47 right now will occur just as often as the reactions happening in the intestines of the poor who you give food to.  It's your choice to see to it that the latter is what happens more often than the former.  May God grant you repentance, serenity, and a better mind.

IC XC NIKA
« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 10:44:01 PM by theuerjb »

Offline Rhinosaur

  • Homo Vivius
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 987
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodoxy
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5711 on: January 21, 2015, 10:48:40 PM »
i don't know if Gebre changed his mind, but last time I remember he mentioned he was a young earth believer.  So it's not just evolutionists he has beef with, but geologists, astromoners, physicists, chemists, and biologists.

In other words, he knows what science is, and everyone else who calls himself a scientist is deluded.  It really amazes me if he wants to gain some credibility in his argument and recommendations what "real science" is.  It's like a Muslim coming to tell me what the Trinity really means.

More emotionalism from you Mina. This is sadly too often your reaction throughout this discussion, which is why it's a waste of time trying to have a reasonable discourse with you on the subject. I am not wedded to a young earth. I simply said that the Fathers of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church have taught that the earth is approximately 7,000 years old. But this is not a dogma of our Faith. It really doesn't matter to me.

And once again you trot out the specious "I understand science and you don't" argument. That's like declaring that red is the best color because you believe it to be the best color and then accusing someone who prefers blue of not understanding red.

Unlike young earth creationist fundamentalists and evolutionism fundamentalists, I am not emotionally invested in one side or the other. That's why I can remain objective and call BS wherever I see it, on either side. God is the Author of science, and all truth is God's truth. And because I value science, truth, and God, then I refuse to accept the manmade manipulation of data and subjective interpretations of that data as scientific fact.

And I would sincerely appreciate it if you would kindly refrain from misrepresenting my views. Calm down, take a deep breath, and try to leave emotions out of it. I know that's difficult for you. I don't mean to sound condescending.  


Selam

Not really Gebre. Find out where this emotion I protray is.  I simply summarize your views.  In fact, you changed. Before you said that you submit humbly to the views of the Ethiopian Church.  Every once in a while you also vacillate between calling evolution a demonic belief and people like me an Orthodox brother.  So it's not so much that I misrepresent your views but that you are inconsistent in your views.  If you can't take the age of the earth one way or another and consider the scientific age as "manmade manipulation of data", then the BS is not in what evolutionists (or fundamentalist youth earthists) think, but in your so-called objectivity (forget evolution, you can't even scientifically agree to the age of the earth, thinking that both views are valid).  BS is having your cake and eating it, which you repeatedly have shown.

If you really value science, you would have at least agreed that the earth is old, rather than acting like you don't take one view or another.


I have been quite consistent. Yes, I believe evolution is a demonic deception. I also believe that we are all deceived by many things. To live and act as if our own reasoning is so immaculate that we are immune to deception is the epitome of arrogance. As for the age of the earth, I will defer to the Fathers of my Church on this issue. But I have never declared this to be a theological dogma upon which our Faith hinges. So therefore I am able to remain open and objective about the age of the earth. If evolution can ever be empirically proven then I will recant my assertion that it is a demonic deception, and I will concede that I was the one who was deceived. It won't be the first time I was deceived about something.

But I don't wish to rehash this debate. Your faith in evolution is obviously very precious to you, and it is clear that your mind is made up. I have realized that arguing with a fundamentalist is fool's errand. But I wish you well all the same. I think you are a good person.


Selam

I believe in Satan just as much as you do but do you honestly believe that he put all of those fossils, laid out all of those geological formations, and created all of that DNA and astronomical evidence?  That means that Satan has the power to warp the physical world in ways akin to that of God, yet we know that Satan only has as much power as we give him.  The serpent coaxed Adam to eat the apple, he didn't shove it down his throat.  We know that we live in a fallen world, that Christ is our redeemer and that we must fight with all our might against Satan to bring about God's Kingdom on Earth.  This can be observed through the wisdom of the Church Fathers, through the power of faith and simply by observing the world around us.  This does not mean, however, that credible scientific evidence should be scorned in favor of a timeline postulated by individuals who had no access to modern scientific knowledge.  I'm glad that you don't embrace the dogma of organizations like Answers in Genesis but to believe young earth creationism is to pit Orthodoxy against science which should never happen.

Offline Gebre Menfes Kidus

  • "SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,127
  • Trolling Babylon 24/7, without apology!
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=1456515775
  • Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5712 on: January 21, 2015, 10:50:05 PM »
Anyone who persistently believes and claims that he/she understands science and what science is better than the majority of the world's scientists across several scientific disciplines should probably repent for having such prideful thoughts.

I never thought of the issue that way.  But you're right, it is a sin of pride.  

IC XC NIKA

Ahhh... the old argument of determining scientific truth by democracy. Thanks for providing another perfect example of a failure to understand the scientific method. And thanks for also demonstrating my point about evolutionism being a form of fundamentalism. "The majority says it's so, so that makes it so! And if you don't agree with the majority, then you are a prideful sinner!" That my friends is not science. That is fundamentalism at its worst.


Selam

Science isn't a democracy of human opinion.  It's the tyranny of reality.  I'd really like it, and you probably would too, if quantum theory and chemistry would stop working right now in the nitrocellulose in the case of the 7.62x39mm round in the chamber of the AK-47 pointed at an innocent child's head in  Iraq right now, but reality doesn't care.  Science is an amoral tyranny.  The only thing we can do is to petition God to intervene, or to use the power of reality to effect positive change ourselves.  The exothermic chemical reaction occurring in the AK-47 right now will occur just as often as the reactions happening in the intestines of the poor who you give food to.  It's your choice to see to it that the latter is what happens more often than the former.  May God grant you repentance, serenity, and a better mind.

IC XC NIKA

Thank you for understanding my point. And thank you for your prayers. I certainly need them.


Selam
"Whether it’s the guillotine, the hangman’s noose, or reciprocal endeavors of militaristic horror, radical evil will never be recompensed with radical punishment. The only answer, the only remedy, and the only truly effective response to radical evil is radical love."
+ Gebre Menfes Kidus +
http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000984270/Rebel-Song.aspx

Offline theuerjb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 35
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5713 on: January 21, 2015, 11:12:29 PM »

Thank you for understanding my point. And thank you for your prayers. I certainly need them.

Selam

But the tyranny of reality supports common descent!  My evolutionary biology textbook (Evolutionary Biology by Douglas Futuyma) doesn't appeal to authority, it appeals to evidence!  I hope that you'll accept the scientific truth someday.

IC XC NIKA

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Reply #5714 on: January 21, 2015, 11:23:45 PM »

Thank you for understanding my point. And thank you for your prayers. I certainly need them.

Selam

But the tyranny of reality supports common descent!  My evolutionary biology textbook (Evolutionary Biology by Douglas Futuyma) doesn't appeal to authority, it appeals to evidence!  I hope that you'll accept the scientific truth someday.

IC XC NIKA
There is no such thing as scientific truth. There are theories, models, hypotheses, but not truth. Science helps us understand reality, but it is not in itself reality.  Plato's cave and all that.
God bless!