Thanks.
I tend to Old Earth Creationist too (though I may not remember what all is advocated with that - but the simplest aspects of my views could be described by those words). But I'm not dogmatic about anything.
And I know the gophers are a little more involved. Didn't want to go too far down a rabbit-trail (gopher trail?
). It was always a topic I was interested in, and got to learn more hands-on when I had a farm up until last year. We were very - self-contained. I didn't use pesticides - I used ducks and other "predators". I didn't use fertilizer - I composted manures and other waste. The grazing of goats and llamas, managed properly, cleared what I wanted cleared and made the plants I wanted to keep healthier. Our patch of desert turned into a park-like setting in a few years. Of course, much of it used dynamics I'm not suggesting for the Garden of Eden.
Cool to know..
The biggest problem I see (and at least one person mentioned it here) is how to reconcile "death entered by one man" if evolution is the backdrop.
You can redefine death - death to humans only? Death of the creatures drawn from evolution and made human? Spiritual death?
But if you have evolution, you can't deny death. You can get around death of plants as food in Paradise, imo. But you can't have millions of years of evolution without death of both plants and animals.
So either you have to redefine death, or redefine the parameters (perhaps it was only Eden? Or only mankind? etc.). Or you have to make the Scriptural statement mean something else. Or you have to give up evolution. You can't make them ALL fit, imo.
Redefinition of some form is the easiest way, but I'm not sure it's all that intellectually honest.
I can definitely see where you're coming from.
There are, of course, many within Orthodoxy who've spoken on the issue. Specifically, - and thankfully, there are many articles and books by Orthodox Christians who have either accepted and written or spoken on the theory of evolution charitably for what it is.
Breck, Archpriest John V. "Ex Nihilo" Life in Christ, February 2008 #1.
Ex nihilo (1) - Orthodox Church in America
Fritts, Kevin Basil, "On the Dogma of Creation"
On the Dogma of Creation | Kevin Basil
Hallam, Fr. Gregory, "Orthodoxy and Creationism"
Antioch Abouna: Orthodoxy and Creationism
Kalomiros, Dr. Alexandre, "The Six Dawns"
http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/sixdawn1.htm
Maletis, John P., "Let There Be Light: An Orthodox Christian Theory of Human Evolution for the 21st Century". Theandros Vol. 5 No. 3.
Green Smoke Coupon Codes for (10-50% OFF) in Savings at GreenSmoke.com
Mileant, Bishop Alexander of Buenos Aires and South America (ROCOR). The Origins of the World and Mankind: An Attempt to Reconcile the Biblical Account with Scientific Discoveries. Transl. by Karyn and Michael Grigoriev. Ed. by Natalia Semyanko. Holy Trinity Orthodox Mission, La Canada, California, 2004.
http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/patrology/metallinos_faith_and_science.htm
Nicozisin, Fr. George, "Creationism versus Evolution"
Creationism Versus Evolution
On what was noted, Evolution was never about denying death - and others have noted that what generally happens (when understanding the argument) is that death has differing levels. Things being made MORTAL in the world (unless one tries to make the argument that even animals themselves were immortal and ate from the Tree of Life as Man did ) is a matter of dealing with how only man had special priveleges.
And that's where the irony lies - people claiming that you can't have evolution and deny death do not realize where death is still present even for others who DO NOT support evolution since the text of scripture from Genesis alone does not say all creatures died when Adam ate the Forbidden Fruit - nor does it say that all the animals in the sea/oceans God made ate herbs and food. The text NEVER advocates such. As said before, the statement given by the Lord to beasts eating plants, if saying it was a commandment forbidding animals from killing, CANNOT apply to all creation....for the creatures of the SEAS/great deep are not included in the command.
Gen. 1:21 says that on the fifth day of creation week God created ‘great sea creatures’ (‘great whales’ (KJV) / ‘great sea monsters’ (NASB)) along with all the other moving living things in the oceans. (Scholars inform us that in the original Hebrew this would have been their word used to describe specifically a monster, particularly a ‘huge marine animal’ or a ‘hideous land animal’.) . The Levitithan/great monstets of the waters and other creatures.....the Bible declares that “The darkness, the sea, the leviathan ....all good things for which God is praised” ( Psalm 104:4, Job 41:1-3 / Job 41, Psalm 74:13-15 /Psalm 74 , Isaiah 27:1-3 , etc ).
But the command of Genesis 1 for eating herbs/fruit was given to the LAND-DWELLING animals alone - nothing was ever said of other creatures in differing realms eating meat. Thus, you can't argue for no death according to the text and really be complete.
And it never says Adam and Eve were ever made IMMORTAL from Day One - so you're still dealing with issues of mortality even before anything of evolution comes on the scene.
Thus, people tend to redefine death whenever they assume that no animals or creatures on the planet could die in order to tackle what they see in Romans 5 when it speaks of death entering the world through Adam. The entire story of Romans (especially when seeing Romans 6) was centered on the death that comes from living for self - and the life that comes to living for Christ. And before there were chapters added much later, it was one flowing letter with every chapter building upon itself.
And there's nothing saying St. Paul was speaking of sin in regards to the animals when he was talking on new life for the believers. It all goes back to actually seeing how the Apostles and Jesus defined death to begin with - many noting, in consistency with Matthew 16 on dying to self being the path to life, that the DEATH Adam brought was the death that comes from not dying to self......something Christ changed. But it was not focused on all animals or plants dying since the context never supported that.
Moreover, it is a false scenario claiming evolution only deals with death - if that's the case, that one needs to cease saying mankind was able to grow/develop new skills and technologies as time went on. As said elsewhere,
I think what many tend to struggle with is the concept that believing God to gradually develop things isn't counter to God making something "perfect" - there are stages and process.
Man was made in God's image (not a physical image). So his nature, his psyche and spirit comes from God's breath. Yes, "God formed man of the dust of the ground". The word "formed" implies a process, and we need not see God forming man like we would put together a gingerbread man. "Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field". The same word "formed" is used and the human body has the physics of the universe in it.
The word formed could refer to cellular ancestry. However, the inbreathing of God clearly refers to man's spiritual nature which separates him decisively from the animals. biologically, man is a type of animal and always has been. To do otherwise would not be logical as many believers in the sciences have always noted, as man doesn't cease being a Mammal (a type of creature/animal) simply because he is made in the Image of God. Moreover, saying that man did not develop in stages doesn't really deal with the Biblical text since Man was not made fully all at once. God first formed man from the dust of the ground (just as He did with the beasts of the field), then he breathed life into Him...and man became a living being. The Image of God was something that God blessed man with upon creation--but it could have easily taken time time.
God made Adam and Eve perfect - yet they were still able to develop/grow in WISDOM and knowledge (no different than Christ in Luke 2 when he grew up in wisdom/understanding gradually). One doesn't assume that man didn't grow over time when the evidence points otherwise - to take dominion over the entire planet, you need to be resourceful. They did not have airplanes, media technology, dams for rivers/lakes, space ships designed to go into space (as well as mathematical formulas for creating the designs and understanding physics of the world), crop rotation and using tools...or boats to travel the seas.....or even making MUSICAL instruments and iron-working (as Genesis 4:20-22). Yet those things were developed in time. We don't say "Man is IMPERFECT" because he creates/develops new skills and abilities over the centuries - that is a process of development....trial and error.
We have to actually be honest with the text if we're going to deal with it on its own terms.
And I guess I'm just not that invested in it. Because I DO believe "God created" no matter the means He used. And I do believe we die as a result of sin, no matter the mechanism. I believe God's word is true, and every man a liar if necessary. Scripture need not bow to evolution, no matter how convincing it may seem. I will allow for it, but I won't make it Weparamount.
Of course - and in the same way one leans that way, others note that scripture need not be pitted against evolution in order to support the Word of God. Others believes we die as a result of sin - but others also believe God's Word also notes where not all forms of death are a result of sin. Thus, one cannot do the "I stand for the Word of God" dynamic as if others are not of the same mindset - what is present is one disagrees on interpretation of God's Word.
I don't think I'm adding to the discussion at this point. Never looked closely into how gorillas, for example, are adapted, btw, but they have sharp teeth and are vegetarians.
Yep - and of course, so do chimps (even though chimps eat meat and other monkeys) AND other species without sharp teeth still prey on others.
