EO & evolution

Oct 15, 2008
19,375
7,273
Central California
✟274,079.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
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! :p


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.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,563
20,082
41
Earth
✟1,467,220.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
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! :p

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.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2008
19,375
7,273
Central California
✟274,079.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
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.

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.
 
Upvote 0

jckstraw72

Doin' that whole Orthodox thing
Dec 9, 2005
10,160
1,143
39
South Canaan, PA
Visit site
✟64,422.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Republican
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.

and Fr. Seraphim is so valuable precisely because he did not say anything of his own -- every single point he makes in his book is backed up with the Fathers. his "genius" is in not trying to be a genius, but rather, in pointing us to the life-giving sources of our Faith. And when you meet people who knew him, this is what they remember about him.

Referring to the first edition of Fr. Seraphim's book which appeared in 2000, Thomas C. Oden, General Editor of volume 1 of the “Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture” series, on Genesis1-11, writes in the introduction: “We are grateful for the massive labors of Fr. Rose, from which our efforts have been belatedly benefited … his work has directed us to selections we would otherwise have bypassed,” p. lii.
 
Upvote 0

Christos Anesti

Junior Member
Oct 25, 2009
3,487
333
Michigan
✟20,114.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
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.
 
Upvote 0

jckstraw72

Doin' that whole Orthodox thing
Dec 9, 2005
10,160
1,143
39
South Canaan, PA
Visit site
✟64,422.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Republican
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.

i am glad that both of you eventually saw beyond it!
 
Upvote 0

jckstraw72

Doin' that whole Orthodox thing
Dec 9, 2005
10,160
1,143
39
South Canaan, PA
Visit site
✟64,422.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Republican
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!
 
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2008
19,375
7,273
Central California
✟274,079.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What ziggy stardust said....:p

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!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟37,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
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!

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?
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
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?
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 ).



Then again, to be honest, part of me simply doesn't care as much on the issue as I used to since it doesn't seem to be something essential to following the Lord when it comes to arguing on the matter. It's definitely not a conversation that seems to come up often within the Global South (where issues of poverty/aiding impoverished and addressing economic injustices) or within the Middle East when it comes to the violence done by Radical Islamists or the political upheavels going on there. I may be off on the matter, but it does seem that the discussion is really one of luxury for us in the West to have when there's going back and forth...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

jckstraw72

Doin' that whole Orthodox thing
Dec 9, 2005
10,160
1,143
39
South Canaan, PA
Visit site
✟64,422.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Republican
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?

where do you see in the Hexameron any indication that animals went extinct before man? St. Basil give us this interpretive principle in the Hexameron 9.1:

[FONT=&quot]
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.
[/FONT]



[FONT=&quot]and in his Origin of Man, he says this about animals:

[/FONT]


‘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.’

and you know Origen's cosmology got him anathematized, right? St. Maximus went into great detail fixing his errors.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jckstraw72

Doin' that whole Orthodox thing
Dec 9, 2005
10,160
1,143
39
South Canaan, PA
Visit site
✟64,422.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Republican
oh, and St. Basil also explicitly states, in Hexameron 2.8, that the days are 24 hours long, leaving no time for these 60 million years:

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.

this exact same argument, about why Scripture says "one day" is given also by [FONT=&quot]St. Hippolytus the bishop of Rome (c. 170-235) in his On Genesis, St. Ambrose of Milan in his Hexaemeron 1.37, and St. John Chrysostom in his Homily 3.10-11,[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and St. Gregory Palamas in his Homily 17. Of course there are plenty of others who also teach that the days were 24 hours.
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟37,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
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.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2008
19,375
7,273
Central California
✟274,079.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So let me get this straight--I ask you to explain a timeline of sorts and how you reconcile things, and you assume I'm a dullard with a host of inane thoughts that I fear being challenged? I'm not asking for a reading list, I'm asking YOU to tell us what YOU think history looks like with regard to when our First Parents came about, how God made the Earth, how long it took, how death existed when Scripture tells us there was none, then life, then death again, and how God created hominid lifeforms that eventually become our First Parents yada yada...are you into "ensoulment" or what?

Why the insulting tone in your post and the not-so-subtle condescending hints that I'm some sort of moron?

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.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,563
20,082
41
Earth
✟1,467,220.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
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!

yep. Arianism was not wrong UNTIL AFTER the Council in Nicaea, it was always wrong even before the Council. Nicaea merely affirmed what the Church had always taught.

but, graceandpeace, as those of us who do not believe in evolution have said, one can be an Orthodox Christian and believe in it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,407
5,026
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟435,770.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
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?

Maybe they didn't coexist, but I don't believe the 60 million years bit. On what authority do you believe that? Which fathers taught that? Which Council declared that?
My point is not that they should, but that you dogmatically believe something that you assume we should NOT question and that you cannot imagine questioning.

If you want to achieve agreement on anything, you have to first find out what you DO agree on. I don't think that even the Fathers you misinterpret said anything like that.
It appears that you believe the consensus of modern scientists to be of equal to or greater authority than that of the Church.

Why do you think I should believe in your 60 million years?
 
Upvote 0