Science would have no answer, but it would not even ask the question. There are many thing to which science has no answer - being, consciousness, bliss - for example. As Christians we have the oracles to help answer metaphysically, but not in any terms that could be considered "scientific".
Does anyone else here share this belief that dinosaurs and humans coexisted on earth? Just wondering...
It (Genesis) is stories: stories which relate to the existential concerns of death, freedom, isolation, and meaninglessness. God may not be the direct author of death, yet God knew that the beings that he would create would be mortal, so in a way, God is the author of all things. It would be better for us to come to terms with this and to reflect upon why death is so important to life, rather than to shy away from the idea that God allows death for some important reason. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit." (John 12:24) You who know what this passage implies in its utmost depths will understand the importance of death in finding the fullness of human life.
Does anyone else here share this belief that dinosaurs and humans coexisted on earth? Just wondering...
of course God allows death, and it is even a mercy -- but in response to sin.
truefiction, your interpretation sounds nice, but can you back it up? that is the important question here.
St. John Chrysostom says this:
[FONT="]Homilies on Romans [/FONT][FONT="]10[/FONT][FONT="]
[/FONT]
[FONT="]What armed death against the cosmos? The fact that one man tasted of the tree only. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Homilies on Romans [/FONT][FONT="]14[/FONT]
[FONT="]Commenting on Romans 8:20: What is the meaning of "the creation was made subject to futility"? That it became corruptible. For what cause, and on what account? On account of you, O man. For since you took a body mortal and subject to suffering, so also the earth received a curse, and brought forth thorns and thistles Just as the creation became corruptible when your body became corruptible, so also when your body will be incorrupt, the creation also will follow after it and become corresponding to it. [/FONT]
Faith can be had regardless of what one believes regarding the nature of the sacred writings, or human origins. Science neither disproves nor proves faith, but it may serve to alter the way we understand things, and not always for the worse. This is the key reason why the Church has not rejected the theory of evolution. She knows that She doesn't need to.
But anyways, the problem is that neither the Scriptures nor the Fathers limit the consequences of sin to human death. This is an example of the tinkering I spoke about.
But if that's what you say the Fathers believe and don't truck with any "tinkering", then you have, essentially, defined your position as the only acceptable one. Because anybody else is "tinkering".
the Church has never had such a low standard as to not care how we interpret the Scriptures. and i disagree with your idea of what it means for the Church to speak -- it's not only through Ecumenical Council. and St. Theophan the Recluse says quite the opposite - that we don't need to add Darwin and his followers to the anathemas because the same ideas were already anathematized long ago. but, if you're looking for something "official," then the Church has indeed spoken about the question of whether man was created mortal or immortal, by Ecumenically ratifying this canon:
[FONT="]Canon 109 of African Code[/FONT][FONT="], (120 of Council of Carthage), ratified at Trullo and Nicea II. [/FONT]
[FONT="]That Adam was not created by God subject to death.[/FONT]
That whosoever says that Adam, the first man, was created mortal, so that whether he had sinned or not, he would have died in body—that is, he would have gone forth of the body, not because his sin merited this, but by natural necessity, let him be anathema.
Ancient Epitome of Canon CIX.
Whoso shall assert that the protoplast would have died without sin and through natural necessity, let him be anathema.
--------
the Church finds this error egregious enough as to warrant anathema.
The operative part was "what you say the Fathers believe".
And what is the crux of blaming mankind rather than God for our condition? One thing and one thing alone: to get us to acknowledge the reality of our freedom and the personally responsibility we inherently have for how we live our lives, and to hold ourselves accountable. It does not mean, however, that I personally need to believe that mortality exists because of the actions of one person, just because that is what was traditionally believed.
Also, regarding the conciliar anathema, it does not here apply. My position does not deny that humankind (represented by a prototype figure called "Adam" in the Biblical narrative) is sinful, and is unworthy of immortality on account of this sinfulness. Although I personally deny the historical and scientific authenticity of the narrative, and hold it to be a sort of truefiction. Such a view does not qualify me or anyone else for excommunication.