Hopko and Schmemann?

[All4Christ]

FTR to the OP, I think Fr Tom is as Orthodox as they come 95% of the time.

I also would say that the good he has done far outweighs any negatives.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I also would say that the good he has done far outweighs any negatives.

I would agree. even those of us who were critical of Fr Schmemann and him on specific points still said the good far outweighed the bad

 

[jckstraw72]

There is a "museum" in the States trying to show the scientific validity of YEC. I personally think it is a worthless museum that does more harm than good. It's great to try to support your beliefs, but making up fake scientific "facts" to support your POV just is silly.

I agree with you and Matt that science cannot be used to prove YEC. This is a standard belief of Orthodox YECism, which you can see emphasized by both Frs. Seraphim and Damascene in "Genesis, Creation, and Early Man."

Nevertheless, we shouldn't fall for the evolutionsts' trap of accusing YEC scientists of making up facts. They aren't making anyting up - they have their presuppositions that they begin with, which we disagree with, but they're not just fabricating stuff out of thin air. It's a question of a bad foundation. Same with the evolutionists -- they may be sincere as all get out, but it's a question of a bad foundation.

 

[All4Christ]

I agree with you and Matt that science cannot be used to prove YEC. This is a standard belief of Orthodox YECism, which you can see emphasized by both Frs. Seraphim and Damascene in "Genesis, Creation, and Early Man."

Nevertheless, we shouldn't fall for the evolutionsts' trap of accusing YEC scientists of making up facts. They aren't making anyting up - they have their presuppositions that they begin with, which we disagree with, but they're not just fabricating stuff out of thin air. It's a question of a bad foundation. Same with the evolutionists -- they may be sincere as all get out, but it's a question of a bad foundation.

Some things that are claimed by some Young Earthers are completely false - and can be proven false. Would you disagree?

Perhaps it was hasty to say "make up facts", though I think many of the "scientific" findings are built with an agenda of supporting their beliefs, which invites potential problems.

 

[gzt]

the grace of extending the veil of "mystery" must also be extended to the old earth party, of course.

 

[All4Christ]

the grace of extending the veil of "mystery" must also be extended to the old earth party, of course.

...which is why don't choose a side on the age of the earth. Either way, OEC or YEC, there is mystery. I do hold to the Creationist part though, either way.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

There is a "museum" in the States trying to show the scientific validity of YEC. I personally think it is a worthless museum that does more harm than good.

Is that the Noah's Ark museum, if I'm not mistaken...the one Bill Nye ended up critiquing heavily saying they brainwashed people a lot with?

​

 

[ArmyMatt]

I agree with you and Matt that science cannot be used to prove YEC. This is a standard belief of Orthodox YECism, which you can see emphasized by both Frs. Seraphim and Damascene in "Genesis, Creation, and Early Man."

Nevertheless, we shouldn't fall for the evolutionsts' trap of accusing YEC scientists of making up facts. They aren't making anyting up - they have their presuppositions that they begin with, which we disagree with, but they're not just fabricating stuff out of thin air. It's a question of a bad foundation. Same with the evolutionists -- they may be sincere as all get out, but it's a question of a bad foundation.

oh I don't think they make stuff up, I think they fall into the same trap as the evolutionists, using naturalism to prove something supernatural

 

[gzt]

The evolutionists do not use naturalism to prove the supernatural.

 

[gzt]

But anyway, we're wandering far fromt he point here, which is that Fr Thomas Hopko didn't say anything wrong in Winter Pascha.

 

[rusmeister]

The evolutionists do not use naturalism to prove the supernatural.

Then, (setting aside the red flag of BLM) please explain why you dogmatically assert the age of the earth in your avatar, and why you said you think YEC ought to be anathematized.

 

[rusmeister]

But anyway, we're wandering far fromt he point here, which is that Fr Thomas Hopko didn't say anything wrong in Winter Pascha.

I've got a serious opinion here that says he did:

Book Review: The Winter Pascha

 

[rusmeister]

Some things that are claimed by some Young Earthers are completely false - and can be proven false. Would you disagree?

Perhaps it was hasty to say "make up facts", though I think many of the "scientific" findings are built with an agenda of supporting their beliefs, which invites potential problems.

What JS is saying, and I concur, is that the entire theory of evolution as held today was built in the same way and with similar criticisms. It is mainly a difference of scale, not of quality.

 

[jckstraw72]

Indeed, there is no doubt that he is wrong in The Winter Pascha. Matt noted that elsewhere he says she gave birth without pain, which helps to mitigate it somehwat. But in the Winter Pascha he says there is nothing miraculous about the birthing process itself. The Church has ecumenically pronounced that there, in fact, is.

 

[jckstraw72]

I've got a serious opinion here that says he did:

Book Review: The Winter Pascha

To be clear here, this is a schismatic bishop, so just be aware of that. However, that does not automatically negate his scholarship here, which is spot on.

 

[rusmeister]

To be clear here, this is a schismatic bishop, so just be aware of that. However, that does not automatically negate his scholarship here, which is spot on.

Thanks. I don't know all of these things. I just read his article carefully and it seemed good, right and true. I'll stick with personal agnosticism, accepting what the consensus of the Church says in Liturgy, the fathers, etc, and not worry about it beyond that. I'm not smart enough to say that I know better than the Church (as defined above). Hopko was not willing to do that. It's this insistence that everything synthesize with what we experience and think we know in this Fallen world that is the great mistake. That's what theistic evolution is all about, attempts to assert that every aspect of Christ's birth were in the Fallen manner, etc are all about.

 

[ArmyMatt]

The evolutionists do not use naturalism to prove the supernatural.

no one said that

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

So do you all promote Young Earth Creationism as the only acceptable account in Orthodoxy? Or are you just against Darwinism? (Personally, I don't adhere to Darwinism, but I wouldn't be opposed to Old Earth Creationism. I'm not sure how everything worked exactly, but I know that it is an amazing fact that God created this World and that He created us, so I am happy and thankful knowing that, no matter the details). Most of what I've read outside of TAW in modern Orthodoxy, as well as my priest, says that Orthodoxy insists that God created the world, and that He intelligently designed the world, but they have not insisted on Young Earth Creationism. They even suggested that the Bible is not a science textbook, and that Orthodox Christianity didn't teach the fundamentalist YEC position was necessary. Please note that I am not making a statement of my beliefs here. I am just requesting clarification of your positions.

Evolution or Creation Science?

Evolution, Creation and the Hidden Cause - Glory to God for All Things

Like Dostoevsky, I accept evolution. I don't see how there is anything objectionable to man being formed by God over many generations. I also respect those who don't accept evolution.

 

[gzt]

Indeed, there is no doubt that he is wrong in The Winter Pascha. Matt noted that elsewhere he says she gave birth without pain, which helps to mitigate it somehwat. But in the Winter Pascha he says there is nothing miraculous about the birthing process itself. The Church has ecumenically pronounced that there, in fact, is.

What he intended by saying that was unclear, especially given ihs later remark about "painless birth".

 

[jckstraw72]

If his intention was unclear, how can you state so unreservedly that he didn't say anything wrong?