Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
funny how that "certain priest" has yet to be quoted directly (or if he has, certainly not as much as the saints that are glorified). and that comment is about as effective as if I would say that those who are for evolution fitting into the Genesis narrative is due to things a "certain Canadian bishop" said in some books he has written.
and I think some people are a little too heavily-influenced by a guy in the 19th Century who's name rhymes with Shmarles Qwarlin who wrote a certain chmorigin of treetchies book about shmevolution!
I personally don't care if folks believe in evolution or think that it works with Genesis. what I take issue with is when those that are against evolution are all of a sudden spoken to like we are just espousing centuries old garbage and need to get with the times, as it were. I am a Fr Seraphim Rose fan, but it was not his book that convinced me of creationism. it was a monk that I spoke to, Fr Epiphanios of St Nektarios Monastery. who was a dentist and a definite man of science when he was in the world.
And most Father Seraphim fans I know don't use him as an all-purpose go-to guru for EVERY spiritual or scientific quandary. They love him, read him, study him, and learn from him, but most folks like yourself have studied a wide array of Orthodox scholars, teachers, saints, and Fathers who have informed our views and guided your heart. Father Seraphim is but one of those guides, not the be-all, end-all only guide.
The writings and life story of Fr Seraphim Rose played a role in attracting me to Orthodoxy. Obviously I don't agree with him on this issue but I'm glad to have come across him. He was also interested in Guenonian Traditionalism before he became Orthodox too. That's what caught my attention at first.
Ok...so basically there is no official position, & opinions differ, is that correct? Sorry, there are just a lot of back & forth posts.
there is no "official" position in the sense that no Ecumenical Council has ever made a formal proclamation. Some people think this is the only way the Church can officially speak. But, we have a consistent theology on Genesis for 2,000 years and today we have a consistent voice against evolution coming from the Saints. God speaks through His Saints, not only a Council. this idea is like the Orthodox version of Sola Scriptura --- it's Sola Synodia!
What ziggy stardust said....
sometimes this forum makes me feel like i'm from outer space!
Earth control to major Jesse!
there is no "official" position in the sense that no Ecumenical Council has ever made a formal proclamation. Some people think this is the only way the Church can officially speak. But, we have a consistent theology on Genesis for 2,000 years and today we have a consistent voice against evolution coming from the Saints. God speaks through His Saints, not only a Council. this idea is like the Orthodox version of Sola Scriptura --- it's Sola Synodia!
Gotta agree on that one .....it'd be reading past what the Church Father say in order to come to the conclusion that they advocated YEC in the same way that YEC do today on all points. They believed in Instaneous Creation - but that had a very specific nuance. In many respects, one can go both ways when it comes to the issue of evolution and seeing what the Early Church has advocated on it....as they advocated for both symbolic and literal interpretations and allowed for progression of time impacting things (As noted before here and here and #277 when the issue came up ).Umm... no.
I do agree that the Church has a consistent theology on Genesis for 2000 years, but it's NOT the one you are espousing. Try reading St Basil "On the Six Days" or Gregory Nyssa, "Commentary on the Songs of Songs" or Origin "On First Principles". The consistent theology on Genesis it NOT modern literalism! Dinosaurs and man did NOT coexist! Dinosaurs were extinct 60 million years before man. 60 MILLION. Give or take a few million, what's the difference?
Umm... no.
I do agree that the Church has a consistent theology on Genesis for 2000 years, but it's NOT the one you are espousing. Try reading St Basil "On the Six Days" or Gregory Nyssa, "Commentary on the Songs of Songs" or Origin "On First Principles". The consistent theology on Genesis it NOT modern literalism! Dinosaurs and man did NOT coexist! Dinosaurs were extinct 60 million years before man. 60 MILLION. Give or take a few million, what's the difference?
[/FONT]Those who do not admit the common meaning of the Scriptures say that water is not water, but some other nature, and they explain a plant and a fish according to their own opinion. They describe also the production of reptiles and wild animals, changing it according to their own notions, just like the dream interpreters, who interpret for their own ends the appearances seen in their dreams. When I hear "grass," I think of grass, and in the same manner I understand everything as it is said, a plant, a fish, a wild animal, and an ox. Indeed, "I am not ashamed of the Gospel (Rom. 1:16)."... Since Moses left unsaid, as useless for us, things in no way pertaining to us, shall we for this reason believe that the words of the Spirit are of less value than the foolish wisdom [of those who have written about the world]? Or shall I rather give glory to Him Who has not kept our mind occupied with vanities but has ordained that all things be written for the edification and guidance of our souls? This is a thing of which they seem to have been unaware, who have attempted by false arguments and allegorical interpretations to bestow on the Scripture a dignity of their own imagining. But theirs is the attitude of one who considers himself wiser than the revelations of the Spirit and introduces his own ideas in pretense of an explanation. Therefore, let it be understood as it has been written.
‘Since then the lion is a carnivore, since then also vultures watch for carrion. For the vultures were not yet looking over the earth at the very moment when the animals were born; in fact, nothing of what had received designation or existence had yet died so that the vultures might eat them. Nature had not yet divided, for it was all in its freshness: hunters did not capture, for such was not yet the practice of men; the beasts, for their part, did not yet tear their prey, for they were not carnivores … But all followed the way of the swans, and all grazed on the grass of the meadow …
‘Such was the first creation, and such will be the restoration after this. Man will return to his ancient constitution in rejecting malice, a life weighed down with cares, the slavery of the soul with regard to daily worries. When he has renounced all this, he will return to that paradisal life which was not enslaved to the passions of the flesh, which is free, the life of closeness to God, a partaker of the life of the angels.’
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 twenty-four 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. But must we believe in a mysterious reason for this? God who made the nature of time measured it out and determined it by intervals of days; and, wishing to give it a week as a measure, he ordered the week to revolve from period to period upon itself, to count the movement of time, forming the week of one day revolving seven times upon itself: a proper circle begins and ends with itself.
I'm assuming you're referencing Father Seraphim Rose at the end there, correct? Why not say his name? And secondly, Rus is NOT being guided by Father Seraphim if that is your speculation. We've talked about Father Seraphim in the past on here, and Rus admits that he is not super knowledgeable or "into" Father Seraphim, though he is respectful of the holy priest's accomplishments. I have never known Rus to be heavily-influenced by Father Seraphim. Jckstraw is a big "fan" of Father Seraphim, yes. I am not really influenced by his teachings in any way though I respect the man a great deal.
Your characterization of Kristos, yourself, and others giving awesome explanations and the other side repeating things over and over, is a poor one. In fact, I believe it is our side of the discussion begging you folks to lay out a coherent history for us, over and over, and it is NOT being taken up or laid out. I think that speaks volumes. And this post here again is vague. You're not in favor of evolution, but just cool with the speculation about it and possibility of it being a factor and it in no way affects salvation history or your view of Orthodoxy, etc. and you get angry at the 'charge' of being pro-evolution. I'm not sure why, if the theory is sound and respectable, that you'd be offended, and secondly, what IS your view?
The statement that you are begging for a coherent history only tells me that you have not taken the time to understand what I am saying. Perhaps you are not ready for your presuppositions to be challenged. Nevertheless, I have provide a reading list in my previous post if anyone is interested.
there is no "official" position in the sense that no Ecumenical Council has ever made a formal proclamation. Some people think this is the only way the Church can officially speak. But, we have a consistent theology on Genesis for 2,000 years and today we have a consistent voice against evolution coming from the Saints. God speaks through His Saints, not only a Council. this idea is like the Orthodox version of Sola Scriptura --- it's Sola Synodia!
Dinosaurs and man did NOT coexist! Dinosaurs were extinct 60 million years before man. 60 MILLION. Give or take a few million, what's the difference?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?