It is too bad that you would not enjoy a discussion with the Apostles, Saint Basil, or any of the Early Church Fathers, as they were all young earth creationists. :-) Also, I don't know why you think cursing glorifies God. Is that the same mouth that you commune with and kiss icons and the cross with? Oh, and I do not come from a Fundamentalist or Protestant background. God forgive me for judging you while you judge me as an Orthodox Creationists.
While they believed Universe was few thousand years old, they were most certainly not Young Earth Creationists, because they did not believe in 6x24h days of creation, but rather they believed that one aeon (day) of creation lasted 1000 years. So we get that they believed that six days of creation lasted six thousand years.
So there you have it, is was just high-speed evolution! :-) Various Fathers had various ideas, but not protestant "special creation" crap, and it is crap.
I understand that christian scripture has an answer to the question, "where did life come from" that has some holes in it. I understand that you're unimpressed by "evolution" and "darwinism," which are the names given to an alternate answer to that question. I wonder if you would give a brief answer to that question.
It's good to find another Orthodox classical homeschooling dad.
I have not read Fr. Seraphim's book on creation yet, but it is next in my queue. So I can't comment on the book, but I would like to say that as a former protestant convert, I don't feel the need to take the creation narrative literally. That does not mean I agree with the modern theory of evolution either.
I respectfully suggest that rather than being told that their view is "crap," most people would be more amenable hearing constructive suggestions on what a good Orthodox alternative is. Ideally we would all have conquered our passions and react without anger, but I suspect most of us have not yet succeeded in that. My guess is that you lost half your audience when they read the title of your post. ;)
Anyway, to the point of this post... I take issue with the fundamental approach of evolutionists. I cannot prove that what they teach regarding the past is wrong, but neither can they prove that it is right. It is nothing more than speculative conjecture and can never be considered science in the true sense of the word.
G. K. Chesterton said it far better than I can:
"Science is weak about these prehistoric things in a way that has hardly been noticed. The science whose modern marvels we all admire succeeds by incessantly adding to its data. In all practical inventions, in most natural discoveries, it can always increase evidence by experiment. But it cannot experiment in making men; or even in watching to see what the first men make.
But he cannot watch the Missing Link evolving in his own backyard. If he has made a mistake in his calculations, the airplane will correct it by crashing to the ground. But if he has made a mistake about the arboreal habitat of his ancestor, he cannot see his arboreal ancestor falling off the tree. He cannot keep a caveman like a cat in the backyard and watch him to see whether he does really practice cannibalism or carry off his mate on the principles of marriage by capture. He cannot keep a tribe of primitive men like a pack of hounds and notice how far they are influenced by the herd instinct.
If he sees a particular bird behave in a particular way, he can get other birds and see if they behave in that way; but if be finds a skull, or the scrap of a skull in the hollow of a hill, he cannot multiply it into a vision of the valley of dry bones. In dealing with a past that has almost entirely perished he can only go by evidence and not by experiment. And there is hardly enough evidence to be even evidential. Thus while most science moves in a sort of curve, being constantly corrected by new evidence, this science flies off into space in a straight line uncorrected by anything."
It is troubling how many have NOT read The Fathers of our Orthodox Church while attacking them, they call their modern manmade western tradition as "Orthodox" :-(!?? Please read Saint Basil The Great's homilies on Creation, St. Symeon the new theologian's homilies (Vol 1 SVP translation), St. John Chrysostom's homilies and many of the other Orthodox Fathers on creation before mocking their writings as "Roman catholic step child protestant".
Here is one example among many on St. Basil's very clear statement on 24 hours: ‘“And there was evening and there was morning: one day.” And the evening and the morning were one day. Why does Scripture say “one day the first day”? Before speaking to us of the second, the third, and the fourth days, would it not have been more natural to call that one the first which began the series? If it therefore says “one day”, it is from a wish to determine the measure of day and night, and to combine the time that they contain. Now 24 HOURS fill up the space of one day—we mean of a day and of a night; and if, at the time of the solstices, they have not both an equal length, the time marked by Scripture does not the less circumscribe their duration. It is as though it said: twenty-four hours measure the space of a day, or that, in reality a day is the time that the heavens starting from one point take to return there. Thus, every time that, in the revolution of the sun, evening and morning occupy the world, their periodical succession never exceeds the space of one day.’ (Hexaemeron, Homily II:8)
St. Athanasius in the famous homily "On the Incarnation" expounding on our Great Salvation that God became Man that we might become as gods, BEGINS by laying out a STRONG REBUKE to 3 forms of noncreationist philosophies of his day, one which evolutionary professors openly acknowledge as showing historical roots for their false faith in strange and anti-scientific dogmas.
We need our own Orthodox scientists to step up to the plate and match the writings of top 100 phd scientists from protestant backgrounds, including several evolution authors of modern science texts, who are now defending the writings of our Orthodox Fathers, while sadly they miss the equally important message of our Orthodox Salvation.
It is too bad that you would not enjoy a discussion with the Apostles, Saint Basil, or any of the Early Church Fathers, as they were all young earth creationists. :-) Also, I don't know why you think cursing glorifies God. Is that the same mouth that you commune with and kiss icons and the cross with? Oh, and I do not come from a Fundamentalist or Protestant background. God forgive me for judging you while you judge me as an Orthodox Creationists.
ReplyDeleteWhile they believed Universe was few thousand years old, they were most certainly not Young Earth Creationists, because they did not believe in 6x24h days of creation, but rather they believed that one aeon (day) of creation lasted 1000 years. So we get that they believed that six days of creation lasted six thousand years.
ReplyDeleteSo there you have it, is was just high-speed evolution! :-)
DeleteVarious Fathers had various ideas, but not protestant "special creation" crap, and it is crap.
Good job, cursing and all.
ReplyDeleteAre your major problems with Darwinian theory itself, or with any sort of evolutionary theory in general?
ReplyDeleteI understand that christian scripture has an answer to the question, "where did life come from" that has some holes in it. I understand that you're unimpressed by "evolution" and "darwinism," which are the names given to an alternate answer to that question. I wonder if you would give a brief answer to that question.
ReplyDeleteDavid,
ReplyDeleteIt's good to find another Orthodox classical homeschooling dad.
I have not read Fr. Seraphim's book on creation yet, but it is next in my queue. So I can't comment on the book, but I would like to say that as a former protestant convert, I don't feel the need to take the creation narrative literally. That does not mean I agree with the modern theory of evolution either.
I respectfully suggest that rather than being told that their view is "crap," most people would be more amenable hearing constructive suggestions on what a good Orthodox alternative is. Ideally we would all have conquered our passions and react without anger, but I suspect most of us have not yet succeeded in that. My guess is that you lost half your audience when they read the title of your post. ;)
Anyway, to the point of this post... I take issue with the fundamental approach of evolutionists. I cannot prove that what they teach regarding the past is wrong, but neither can they prove that it is right. It is nothing more than speculative conjecture and can never be considered science in the true sense of the word.
G. K. Chesterton said it far better than I can:
"Science is weak about these prehistoric things in a way that has hardly been noticed. The science whose modern marvels we all admire succeeds by incessantly adding to its data. In all practical inventions, in most natural discoveries, it can always increase evidence by experiment. But it cannot experiment in making men; or even in watching to see what the first men make.
But he cannot watch the Missing Link evolving in his own backyard. If he has made a mistake in his calculations, the airplane will correct it by crashing to the ground. But if he has made a mistake about the arboreal habitat of his ancestor, he cannot see his arboreal ancestor falling off the tree. He cannot keep a caveman like a cat in the backyard and watch him to see whether he does really practice cannibalism or carry off his mate on the principles of marriage by capture. He cannot keep a tribe of primitive men like a pack of hounds and notice how far they are influenced by the herd instinct.
If he sees a particular bird behave in a particular way, he can get other birds and see if they behave in that way; but if be finds a skull, or the scrap of a skull in the hollow of a hill, he cannot multiply it into a vision of the valley of dry bones. In dealing with a past that has almost entirely perished he can only go by evidence and not by experiment. And there is hardly enough evidence to be even evidential. Thus while most science moves in a sort of curve, being constantly corrected by new evidence, this science flies off into space in a straight line uncorrected by anything."
- The Everlasting Man
It is troubling how many have NOT read The Fathers of our Orthodox Church while attacking them, they call their modern manmade western tradition as "Orthodox" :-(!?? Please read Saint Basil The Great's homilies on Creation, St. Symeon the new theologian's homilies (Vol 1 SVP translation), St. John Chrysostom's homilies and many of the other Orthodox Fathers on creation before mocking their writings as "Roman catholic step child protestant".
ReplyDeleteHere is one example among many on St. Basil's very clear statement on 24 hours: ‘“And there was evening and there was morning: one day.” And the evening and the morning were one day. Why does Scripture say “one day the first day”? Before speaking to us of the second, the third, and the fourth days, would it not have been more natural to call that one the first which began the series? If it therefore says “one day”, it is from a wish to determine the measure of day and night, and to combine the time that they contain. Now 24 HOURS fill up the space of one day—we mean of a day and of a night; and if, at the time of the solstices, they have not both an equal length, the time marked by Scripture does not the less circumscribe their duration. It is as though it said: twenty-four hours measure the space of a day, or that, in reality a day is the time that the heavens starting from one point take to return there. Thus, every time that, in the revolution of the sun, evening and morning occupy the world, their periodical succession never exceeds the space of one day.’ (Hexaemeron, Homily II:8)
St. Athanasius in the famous homily "On the Incarnation" expounding on our Great Salvation that God became Man that we might become as gods, BEGINS by laying out a STRONG REBUKE to 3 forms of noncreationist philosophies of his day, one which evolutionary professors openly acknowledge as showing historical roots for their false faith in strange and anti-scientific dogmas.
We need our own Orthodox scientists to step up to the plate and match the writings of top 100 phd scientists from protestant backgrounds, including several evolution authors of modern science texts, who are now defending the writings of our Orthodox Fathers, while sadly they miss the equally important message of our Orthodox Salvation.