Creation question

[charsan]

Hi all,

Sorry to bother you all. I have a question what does the Orthodox Church believe about Creation? I thought I saw that evolution was not encouraged and that creation happened as the Bible said but I could be wrong. I am sure I saw debates here and I thought Creation was the opinion of the Church. Anyway I am confused. Thank you for reading my silly post

 

[dailyprayerwarrior]

Your post is not silly. Although I cannot answer this question as I am not part of the Orthodox Church, I am sure you will get your answer shortly. God bless you!

 

[HTacianas]

Hi all,

Sorry to bother you all. I have a question what does the Orthodox Church believe about Creation? I thought I saw that evolution was not encouraged and that creation happened as the Bible said but I could be wrong. I am sure I saw debates here and I thought Creation was the opinion of the Church. Anyway I am confused. Thank you for reading my silly post

If by "creation" you mean that God created all things, then Orthodoxy is creationist. If by creationism you mean the protestant dogma of a literal seven day creation, there is no defined answer to your question. You'll find individuals who hold to their own beliefs on the subject. This is one opinion that I for the most part accept:

On Reading the Story of Adam and Eve

 

[charsan]

If by "creation" you mean that God created all things, then Orthodoxy is creationist. If by creationism you mean the protestant dogma of a literal seven day creation, there is no defined answer to your question. You'll find individuals who hold to their own beliefs on the subject. This is one opinion that I for the most part accept:

On Reading the Story of Adam and Eve

Yes I do mean 7 day Creation as opposed to evolution

 

[ArmyMatt]

death only entered at Adam's Fall. that being said, you can believe in evolution and be in good standing.

 

[-57]

Hi all,

Sorry to bother you all. I have a question what does the Orthodox Church believe about Creation? I thought I saw that evolution was not encouraged and that creation happened as the Bible said but I could be wrong. I am sure I saw debates here and I thought Creation was the opinion of the Church. Anyway I am confused. Thank you for reading my silly post

There are some christians who think God used evolution as a means of forming mankind. This would be a direct contradiction to the account presented in Genesis. As we all know forming Adam from the dust then Eve from Adams rib is the furthest thing from evolutionism.

So what do the Theo-Evos do? The answer is they turn Genesis into a parable or some sort of allegorical meaning.

The problem for the Theo-Evo is they have absolutly no biblically based reason for the fall of mankind and original sin.

The bible tells us Adam and Eve disobeyed God...and fell.
The bible tells us sin entered the world via one person...Adam. Romans 5:12

The Theo-Evos tell us populations evolved....and eventually made photo-humans then finally humans.

The thing is the Theo-Evos can't tell us what caused sin..who sinned..why we sinned...when we sinned.

Bottom line, God didn't use evolution as a creation of man process.

 

[St_Worm2]

Hello @ArmyMatt, I was told a few years back by an EOC friend & priest in the making that few, if any, challenges had been made by EOC priests (in the last 100-200 years) to dispute the position held by the Early Church Fathers concerning Creation. This approach is still a very common one in the EOC theology today, is it not?

I'm certain that many are under pressure today to change to the world's way of thinking about this, so the only questions that seem to remain are 1. will they (change) and 2. how long will it take if they do (turn from the teachings of the Fathers to embrace the teachings of modern science instead)?

Perhaps my friend was wrong however. Do you know if there is an Eastern Father who teaches the evolutionary theory of creation?

Thanks!

--David

 

[Halbhh]

the position held by the Early Church Fathers concerning Creation.

Isn't that actually the "positions" with an s, right?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Hello @ArmyMatt, I was told a few years back by an EOC friend & priest in the making that few, if any, challenges had been made by EOC priests (in the last 100-200 years) to dispute the position held by the Early Church Fathers concerning Creation. This approach is still a very common one in the EOC theology today, is it not?

I'm certain that many are under pressure today to change to the world's way of thinking about this, so the only questions that seem to remain are 1. will they (change) and 2. how long will it take if they do (turn from the teachings of the Fathers to embrace the teachings of modern science instead)?

Perhaps my friend was wrong however. Do you know if there is an Eastern Father who teaches the evolutionary theory of creation?

Thanks!

--David

there is not a single post-Darwinian saint who affirms it. at least none that I read. there are many clergy and academics who do.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Hi all,

Sorry to bother you all. I have a question what does the Orthodox Church believe about Creation? I thought I saw that evolution was not encouraged and that creation happened as the Bible said but I could be wrong. I am sure I saw debates here and I thought Creation was the opinion of the Church. Anyway I am confused. Thank you for reading my silly post

I thought there was a lot of variability on this, as in some EO believe in evolution and others don't etc. that this is not an issue that defines the Faith like it is for biblical fundamentalists etc. because this is not something that the Early Church dogmatically dealt with (they assume early earth Creationism but not in relationship to heresies etc.)

 

[charsan]

death only entered at Adam's Fall. that being said, you can believe in evolution and be in good standing.

Thank you Fr. Matt

 

[Pavel Mosko]

This is an interesting blog article I stumbled on years back...


Note to Orthodox Evolutionists: Stop Trying to Retroactively Shanghai / Recruit the Fathers to Your Camp!

Note to Orthodox Evolutionists: Stop Trying to Retroactively Shanghai / Recruit the Fathers to Your Camp! - CJS Hayward

 

[St_Worm2]

there is not a single post-Darwinian saint who affirms it. at least none that I read. there are many clergy and academics who do.

Thank you

 

[charsan]

So do the Early Church Fathers hold to young earth creation?

 

[St_Worm2]

Isn't that actually the "positions" with an s, right?

Hello Halbhh, I'm not sure. Perhaps @ArmyMatt can help you/us with that one as well? (he just told us that there are no post-Darwinian saints who hold to evolutionary theory so, knowing that, would it not seem a particularly odd position for those who came before Darwin to hold?) Again though, I don't know for sure (though I think that all of the ECF held to a literal, Biblical understanding of the Creation).

--David

 

[ArmyMatt]

there are many ways to read Genesis. some Fathers are more allegorical, some more literal. both can be true if it points you to Christ.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

So do the Early Church Fathers hold to young earth creation?

They generally assumed it yes.

 

[Halbhh]

would it not seem a particularly odd position for those who came before Darwin to hold?

Right. Having a religious opinion about some future science theory would be really odd.

If we read some religious person thought the sun was powered a certain way is it not, such as through coal or wood, then we should not put too much weight on that mistaken idea.

But, we know already (or one can learn) that the church fathers variously have a wide range of diverse ideas about how to understand aspects of creation not pinned down in Genesis chapter 1. Generally allegorical views, very diverse.

It makes sense that small physical details of creation were not revealed in scripture, because for example --

If scripture specified how old the universe was when the sun was formed (such as "and after 9 thousands of thousands of thousands of years..."), then once humankind learned by science that time span between the birth of the Universe and the birth of the Sun, then it would be an easy, obvious, unambiguous proof of the scripture and of God's existence even to the most unhumble skeptic, so that they could then turn, repent, and be saved, in spite of a total lack of trust in God.

Proof would preempt faith.

Prevent faith.

Since faith isn't to accept obvious facts, observable reality.

We know faith is belief without seeing. (such as wonderfully worded in Hebrews 11.)

 

[Halbhh]

They generally assumed it yes.

I doubt that was even of concern.

It's always interesting to learn additional views of various church fathers I haven't seen yet. And we should probably just present all the varied views they had on any physical aspects of creation equally, as they aren't more than just ideas.

 

[Halbhh]

Hi all,

Sorry to bother you all. I have a question what does the Orthodox Church believe about Creation? I thought I saw that evolution was not encouraged and that creation happened as the Bible said but I could be wrong. I am sure I saw debates here and I thought Creation was the opinion of the Church. Anyway I am confused. Thank you for reading my silly post

It's valuable not to overweight the mere ideas about how God created (small details He chose not to reveal), things we are not told.

With that caveat, this was interesting in relation to your question --

Evolution - OrthodoxWiki


Views about small details of how God created not revealed to us aren't...essential in any way. The key thing we want from Genesis chapter 1 is to believe and hear and be uplifted or changed by the wonderful wording of Genesis chapter 1.

So when we discuss the mere physical side of creation, we are off in the weeds, as compared to the truth revealed to us. It's very much a side-topic.

Of course people will have diverse viewpoints on the mere physical how-it-happened side, speculations.