Orthodox position on evolution?

[Vance]

Yes, I think you do, and all TEers in this forum do. It seems if the evolution is proven wrong, then you will lose your faith. You do not even question if it could be wrong or not. You simply "believe" it is true.

Well, that is just silly in many ways.

1. If evolution were found tomorrow to be falsified, how in the world would that effect my Christian faith?

2. What do you mean I do not question whether it could be wrong or not? Of course, I question everything. And the answer to that questioning has been that I think it almost assuredly how God did it. Probably a 99% likelihood. My current level of confidence is not the result of mere "belief". Most of us here are not like you, we don't just accept such things fed to us by "experts" (as you do with AiG and ICR) without question, we do research, we read, we study. Then we come to decisions, and hold to those decisions with the degree (and only the degree) of confidence that the evidence supports.

I don't really care about any science knowledge. Whatever we know, it would be wrong anyway (include evolution, gravity, what have you). We only use science to train ourselves.

Well, that is equally silly. True, we can't know everything, but to say everything that we can find out scientifically is wrong is just nonsensical.

 

[shernren]

Yes, I think you do, and all TEers in this forum do. It seems if the evolution is proven wrong, then you will lose your faith. You do not even question if it could be wrong or not. You simply "believe" it is true.

That's a very strange statement to make, especially for someone who hangs around OT as often as you do. One of the more common topics we keep returning to is what would happen if our views on origins changed. The most recent discussion in this vein happened here: http://christianforums.com/t6734002&page=2 where a number of us weighed in:

I don't think there is any amount of evidence. I think very much that the Teleological Argument contests to the absolute truth that God exists. The world is too intricate and beautifully simple at the same time. I also think that the concept of a "beginning" or any notion of time was also created inside this universe and does not apply to God, leaving him eternal and needless of a beginning.

I admit that I have not studied philosophy as much as I would like to and thusly may have several holes in my thinking, but luckily for me Colossians tells us that's a sin ( inside joke). I would love to hear from my fellow TE's about their opinions of the absolute and eternal state of God.

The Bible tells us God is spirit (John 4:24a), so I don't suspect the natural limitations of science would allow us to rule God out one way or another (although some atheists and YECs like to think that way). I believe in God because I have faith -- something few Christians will apologize for.
The Bible also tells us that we can verify the real actions of the Holy Spirit by the fruits that Christians produce (Gal 5: 19-23). These are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. So long as I see self-professed Christians doing these things, I will be convinced of the presence of the Holy Spirit.
In short, there's really nothing in the way of physical, measurable evidence that could convince me of God's inexistence. The manifestation of God in my life, and in the lives of others, is what gives me faith that He is alive and well.

For me personally the historical nexus of the Christian faith is in the Cross and Resurrection. If someone could convincingly show me that those things didn't really, historically, literally happen (and all those qualifiers mean different things!), then I would well lose my faith. Even if my faith did survive, it would become something quite unrecognizable to me today.

Having said that, even if that happened, I'm honestly not sure if I'd ever be able to shake the idea of a God over everything - if not a theist God, then maybe a deist God. I've posted elsewhere that without God, the scientific endeavour (which I've heavily invested in) becomes either a matter of survival or an evolutionarily programmed directive - neither of which are appealing alternatives. This world is so much a puzzle that I'd have to believe there's a Puzzler out there - although that conception of God is certainly quite different, in isolation, from the Judeo-Christian God.

I had a friend who sometimes spoke of the five "C"s, by which he meant compassion, curiosity, creativity, community and courage.

Compassion for those in sorrow and suffering.
Curiosity which leads to the quest for knowledge and truth.
Creativity and the love of making beautiful and useful things.
Community or the building of harmonious relationships in families and societies.
Courage to stand up for what is right and just.

As long as there are people who demonstrate these qualities, I will believe in God in some fashion. My ideas about God might change; maybe to the point I would no longer call myself Christian. But it would take the obliteration of these qualities from human nature to completely destroy my faith in God.

When my Christianity loses the power of the experience that holds it, I'll cease to be a believer. When the Cross becomes a symbol for the tragedy of meaninglessness, when the resurrection that promises to transform it ceases to no longer be true, I'll cease to believe.

That's a whole lot of TEs saying, in their own ways, precisely that disproving evolution would not affect their faith in the least, and that there are things far more important than science involved.

 

[theFijian]

Confusion is relative.

Self-contradiction? Not likely.

If you think what I said: "I do, and I don't" qualified for both, that is because you do not understand. This is an example on the beauty of literalism.

I understand that most of your posts are self-contradictory and confusing that's for sure. I was simply asked you to perhaps proof-read your posts before hitting 'submit' but you decide to get personal. Shame.

 

[juvenissun]

That's a very strange statement to make, especially for someone who hangs around OT as often as you do. One of the more common topics we keep returning to is what would happen if our views on origins changed. The most recent discussion in this vein happened here: http://christianforums.com/t6734002&page=2 where a number of us weighed in:











That's a whole lot of TEs saying, in their own ways, precisely that disproving evolution would not affect their faith in the least, and that there are things far more important than science involved.

Your quotes are very nice. I appreciate them.

However, they do not address my comment. I don't see any of you ever questioned the nature of evolution. Again, you just believe it is true. You understand or study everything about evolution by standing on the assumption that it is true.

I am the one who is trying to learn the true nature of evolution.

 

[gluadys]

Your quotes are very nice. I appreciate them.

However, they do not address my comment. I don't see any of you ever questioned the nature of evolution. Again, you just believe it is true. You understand or study everything about evolution by standing on the assumption that it is true.

I am the one who is trying to learn the true nature of evolution.

No reference to evolution showed up in those answers because it wasn't relevant to the question posed.

But you err if you assume that most of us have not questioned the nature of evolution. Most of us have had occasion and reason to question both YEC and evolution and have concluded 1.) that evolution offers the best scientific explanation of bio-diversity and 2.) that it poses no threat or contradiction to Christian faith.

The only thing it poses a threat to is bad theology and an unwarranted interpretation of scripture, and we are all better off without those anyway.

 

[theFijian]

However, they do not address my comment. I don't see any of you ever questioned the nature of evolution. Again, you just believe it is true. You understand or study everything about evolution by standing on the assumption that it is true.

Sorry but this is demonstrably false. I used to be a Creationist just like you, it was the scientific evidence and deeper study of scripture which led me to reject Creationism.

 

[juvenissun]

Sorry but this is demonstrably false. I used to be a Creationist just like you, it was the scientific evidence and deeper study of scripture which led me to reject Creationism.

Reply to both you and Glaudys:

May be you have questioned the validity of evolution before. However, the questioning was not serious enough and not persistent enough. In other words, you gave up the questioning for one reason or another. Then you went down hill from there. I see all the "evidences" as you see them. I am not closing my eyes. But, those "overwhelming" evidences just have not passed through my scientific scrutiny YET. That is one of the reasons I am hanging around in this forum.

For TE brothers and sisters, I am not questioning your faith. I am telling you that evolution is a theory that does not warrant your "believe" YET.

 

[theFijian]

May be you have questioned the validity of evolution before. However, the questioning was not serious enough and not persistent enough. In other words, you gave up the questioning for one reason or another. Then you went down hill from there.

Wow. It's like you know me better than I know myself. What utter rot, you have no idea how much time I have spent wrestling with the scientific and scriptural issues so please don't pretend to know what I've been through. And I'll forgive the condescending tone for just now.

I see all the "evidences" as you see them. I am not closing my eyes. But, those "overwhelming" evidences just have not passed through my scientific scrutiny YET. That is one of the reasons I am hanging around in this forum.

It was hanging round in this forum that slowly dismantled the edifice of Creationism that I clung to. One by one all the Creationist so-called 'refutations' of evolution were shown to me to be false by the people posting here. I learned not to trust organisations like AIG and their ilk. For someone who claims any kind of scientific scrutiny I can only assume your critical faculties are faulty.

For TE brothers and sisters, I am not questioning your faith. I am telling you that evolution is a theory that does not warrant your "believe" YET.

I don't 'believe' evolution, I accept it based on the overwhelming evidence in it's favour. You reject it despite the evidence.

 

[Im_A]

Reply to both you and Glaudys:

May be you have questioned the validity of evolution before. However, the questioning was not serious enough and not persistent enough. In other words, you gave up the questioning for one reason or another. Then you went down hill from there. I see all the "evidences" as you see them. I am not closing my eyes. But, those "overwhelming" evidences just have not passed through my scientific scrutiny YET. That is one of the reasons I am hanging around in this forum.

For TE brothers and sisters, I am not questioning your faith. I am telling you that evolution is a theory that does not warrant your "believe" YET.

who are you to question one's seriousness in their questioning and seriousness to seek truth out? just because they didn't come to your conclusion that doesn't mean their seriousness in the search is lost.

 

[Mallon]

For TE brothers and sisters, I am not questioning your faith. I am telling you that evolution is a theory that does not warrant your "believe" YET.

... says the guy who admits to not knowing anything about it.

 

[juvenissun]

Wow. It's like you know me better than I know myself. What utter rot, you have no idea how much time I have spent wrestling with the scientific and scriptural issues so please don't pretend to know what I've been through. And I'll forgive the condescending tone for just now.



It was hanging round in this forum that slowly dismantled the edifice of Creationism that I clung to. One by one all the Creationist so-called 'refutations' of evolution were shown to me to be false by the people posting here. I learned not to trust organisations like AIG and their ilk. For someone who claims any kind of scientific scrutiny I can only assume your critical faculties are faulty.



I don't 'believe' evolution, I accept it based on the overwhelming evidence in it's favour. You reject it despite the evidence.

There is no point to waste my electrons here. I am debating on one issue, only one, in another thread. I wish you won't mind to visit there and tell me what you think.

 

[theFijian]

There is no point to waste my electrons here. I am debating on one issue, only one, in another thread. I wish you won't mind to visit there and tell me what you think.

Gladly, but you'll need to tell me which thread you are referring to.

 

[Vance]

The problem is that you have no idea how many years we have studied this stuff and on what basis we have reached our conclusions. You are so sure about your position that you assume that if we have accepted evolution is MUST be because we have not questioned it closely enough. That is ridiculous. As is your statement that you are hear to learn about evolution. No, you are here to criticize evolution without any real intent on learning what it says with an open mind.

Before even understanding what it says, and what evidence supports it, you have reached a conclusion that it is false. You are not approaching the subject with the intent of simply following the evidence where it leads and reaching the resulting conclusions. You simply want to know enough to have better arguments against something you have ALREADY concluded is false, while knowing nothing about it.

That is a very poor approach to "learning" about anything.

 

[jckstraw72]

hey punks, this is about the Orthodox understanding of evolution.

 

[Vance]

hey punks, this is about the Orthodox understanding of evolution.

What, a thread on an internet forum going off-topic!? Amazing! :0)

Very true, though, I think the end result of that discussion was that the Orthodox Church has a mix of views on the subject, some accepting that Scripture does not exclude evolution, some feeling that it does. There has not been a formal statement of compatibility, however, as in the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[jckstraw72]

There has not been a formal statement of compatibility, however, as in the Roman Catholic Church.

the day we do that is the day we cease to be Orthodox for we have forsaken the Church Fathers.

 

[Vance]

the day we do that is the day we cease to be Orthodox for we have forsaken the Church Fathers.

I am glad the Catholics did not feel that way! I am not Catholic, and I don't have the level of veneration of the early Fathers that they do, but I am glad that they, who DO venerate those early Fathers, read it differently.

I guess this would be my question, regarding all of those Orthodox clergy who DO accept evolution: do you think that they have forsaken the early Fathers, and just don't care what they say, or do you think that they simply interpret those early Fathers differently than you?

 

[juvenissun]

The problem is that you have no idea how many years we have studied this stuff and on what basis we have reached our conclusions. You are so sure about your position that you assume that if we have accepted evolution is MUST be because we have not questioned it closely enough. That is ridiculous. As is your statement that you are hear to learn about evolution. No, you are here to criticize evolution without any real intent on learning what it says with an open mind.

Before even understanding what it says, and what evidence supports it, you have reached a conclusion that it is false. You are not approaching the subject with the intent of simply following the evidence where it leads and reaching the resulting conclusions. You simply want to know enough to have better arguments against something you have ALREADY concluded is false, while knowing nothing about it.

That is a very poor approach to "learning" about anything.

Yes, I am here to learn. But I am also here to criticize. It is the best way to learn.

TheFijing must be very confused again.

 

[jckstraw72]

I guess this would be my question, regarding all of those Orthodox clergy who DO accept evolution: do you think that they have forsaken the early Fathers, and just don't care what they say, or do you think that they simply interpret those early Fathers differently than you?

not to be a jerk, but i think you already asked me this. i think they brush them aside with "oh, they didnt know the science we do" -- nevermind of course that they were holy men illumined by God, they weren't illumined by Darwin!

 

[theFijian]

TheFijing must be very confused again.

People resort to insults when they're out of their depth, perhaps you should think about reading more and posting less.