Theistic Evolution ~ is it compatible with orthodox teaching & doctrine? .

[jckstraw72]

So now you are telling us the Fathers had the ability to study paradise? Please do explain how you can study something or somewhere that you have no possiblity of ever having been?

divine revelation. its the only way to study Paradise. Moses is known in the Church as a Prophet of the past - God literally showed him the creation week. and in fact, many Saints HAVE been there.

 

[ArmyMatt]

So now you are telling us the Fathers had the ability to study paradise? Please do explain how you can study something or somewhere that you have no possiblity of ever having been?

if God can make it so that I can behold the Resurrection of His Son every Sunday 2000 years later, then I am sure He can reveal Paradise to whoever He wants to.

 

[jckstraw72]

There was eating in the garden.

ok, but as Army Matt has said, that still assumes that our biology worked the same way in Paradise, but we know that the Fall affected our bodies - they became less spiritual and more fleshly, and its only then that we needed to eat, so i dont think we can assume that eating was the same.

for some Patristic evidence about plant death before the Fall, see no plant death before the fall « Old Believing’s Blog

Also, my point wasn't to "prove" animal death pre-fall. I can't possibly do that. My point was to demonstrate that animal death pre-fall is not heretical (i.e. it can be compatible with the Orthodox understanding of death) and that, therefore, the fact that TE requires there to be animal death before the fall is NOT a defeater for TE.

You had said this was the point that TE'ers never addressed - so I sought to address it

In Christ,
Macarius

well thanks for dealing with it! much appreciated to have someone actually answer questions rather than just accuse me of being an anti-science fundy! you're right, animal death pre-fall has nowhere been condemned as heresy, but its still not supported by the Tradition (as you said St. Athanasius is just one Father ...)

 

[Photini]

fortunately he actually had a good deal more to say about it than that ...

I'm afraid that at this point in time, accepting Eden as "whatever that may have been" is as good as I can do. Until now, I have never been under the impression that this wasn't an acceptable mindset.

 

[jckstraw72]

I'm afraid that at this point in time, accepting Eden as "whatever that may have been" is as good as I can do. Until now, I have never been under the impression that this wasn't an acceptable mindset.

im not trying to be a jerk, but i really cant understand how thats as good as you can do. you can read St. Basil's Hexameron, or St. John Chrysostom's homilies, or St. Ephraim's homilies, or St. Ambrose's Hexameron, etc - the Church has given us plenty go on.

 

[Ortho_Cat]

 

[Michael G]

im not trying to be a jerk, but i really cant understand how thats as good as you can do. you can read St. Basil's Hexameron, or St. John Chrysostom's homilies, or St. Ephraim's homilies, or St. Ambrose's Hexameron, etc - the Church has given us plenty go on.

Then don't be one.

 

[Michael G]

Some of the Holy Fathers have actually visited Paradise. Others had visions of Paradise. Still others spoke personally with Christ, the Theotokos, and His Saints.

I should have been more accurate in my question. Which ones visited paradise?

 

[jckstraw72]

Then don't be one.

im not. i only had to preface my statement because i know how statements on the internet are often mis-interpreted. thanks for your advice though.

 

[jckstraw72]

I should have been more accurate in my question. Which ones visited paradise?

Matt answered you - St. Paul, St. Euphrosynos the Cook, St. Andrew the Fool for Christ, St. Gregory of Sinai, Tarso the Fool for Christ, etc and Moses was shown Paradise.

 

[Michael G]

im not. thanks for your advice though.

I guess we have differing definitions of that. Openly questioning someone's faith because they do not read Genesis the way you do and have not had the time to read some of the Fathers you have is not exactly being loving toward your neighbor. Oh wait, I am sure the Fathers have written some explanation saying that not everyone is your neighbor, in direct contrast to what Christ taught in the Gospel!

 

[jckstraw72]

here's one more about plants:

St. Paisius Velichovsky, The Scroll, 6 Chapters on Mental Prayer, chap. 2
From these testimonies it is clear that God, having created man according to His image and likeness, conducted him into a Paradise of sweetness to till the immortal gardens.

 

[Macarius]

here's one more about plants:

St. Paisius Velichovsky, The Scroll, 6 Chapters on Mental Prayer, chap. 2
From these testimonies it is clear that God, having created man according to His image and likeness, conducted him into a Paradise of sweetness to till the immortal gardens.

garden = place full of plants

immortal garden = place always full of plants

immortal garden != place full of immortal plants

Why would you need to till a garden where nothing dies? There would be nothing to grow...

 

[Macarius]

does not necessarily mean death if the human body, and what was being eaten are glorified.

It means the physical consumption of a physical thing by another physical thing. That biologically ends the plant.

But I fully agree that this isn't "death" if both are glorified (that is, glorifying God), as I've said repeatedly.

 

[Photini]

im not trying to be a jerk, but i really cant understand how thats as good as you can do. you can read St. Basil's Hexameron, or St. John Chrysostom's homilies, or St. Ephraim's homilies, or St. Ambrose's Hexameron, etc - the Church has given us plenty go on.

I understand. I'm not going to chronicle my spiritual journey in this thread (or forum). But I am in the process of reading St Basil's Hexameron and am reading through the extensive threads and materials linked on Monachos. All I am saying is that right now at this very moment, that's where I'm at. Things just aren't as clear-cut in black and white for me as what they seem to be for some other people. And my skeptical nature prevents me from just accepting something based on a few quotes I read online, not knowing their context.

Be assured though, that I am reading and studying as much as I possibly can in my spare time.

 

[Macarius]

well thanks for dealing with it! much appreciated to have someone actually answer questions rather than just accuse me of being an anti-science fundy! you're right, animal death pre-fall has nowhere been condemned as heresy, but its still not supported by the Tradition (as you said St. Athanasius is just one Father ...)

Sure thing. I don't normally post long replies in TE vs. Creation threads because a) I've not done a thorough study of the fathers on the issue and, b) I don't think there IS a clear doctrine of the Church on the issue.

If I don't go in and answer each of the patristic references you've posted, I hope you'll not take offense. You probably don't mean it this way (in fact, I'm sure you don't) but its basically the same as when catholics post lists of pro-papacy patristic references they've culled from websites. Out of context, and especially context I've not read, they become very difficult for me to answer in any meaningful way.

My general intuition is to say that
A) Some of these are more poetic references to Gen 1 than full exegeses of the passage - mining doctrine from them feels a bit anachronistic.
B) There is a distinction between the theological Truth expressed by the fathers and the debates on scientific inquiry. I'm not sure how to articulate that difference, but I honestly do feel that there is a significant difference between types of things taught by the fathers.

For example, most Orthodox today do not feel obligated to take the father's views on politics as de-facto Orthodox teaching. Nor their views on education. I don't yet have the right phrase or argument to point out why I feel scientific inquiry falls into a similar category, but I do; if it ever occurs to me why I'll post something about it.

Until then, I am very much content to agree to disagree. I use "until" here in the NT sense (as I'll be content to agree to disagree after as well). A view like creationism, so long held by so many in the Church, ought never to be dismissed from it on the basis of mere science. I only ask that creationists temper their language regarding TE, as often it feels like we are accused of syncretism and heresy (when I do not think we are doing either one).

In Christ,
Macarius

 

[ArmyMatt]

It means the physical consumption of a physical thing by another physical thing. That biologically ends the plant.

But I fully agree that this isn't "death" if both are glorified (that is, glorifying God), as I've said repeatedly.

only if the consumer and the "consumed" (for lack of a better word) are fleshly and carnal like they are today.

Why would you need to till a garden where nothing dies? There would be nothing to grow...

depends on how one defines tilling the Garden, just like how it depends on how one defines why plants were able to be consumed.

I only ask that creationists temper their language regarding TE, as often it feels like we are accused of syncretism and heresy (when I do not think we are doing either one).

for the record, I don't think that TE's are heretics, and I hope I never said or implied that they are. I just don't see it is all.

 

[Macarius]

for the record, I don't think that TE's are heretics, and I hope I never said or implied that they are. I just don't see it is all.

I feel the same way (though I can see it as valid); if the Church decides, on the grounds of patristic evidence / tradition, to say that TE is heresy then I'd recant it in a heartbeat; until then, I've no problem with it (and lean towards it, while respecting the depth of the mystery we are speculating on).

I think I'll bow out of this thread now - it has, genuinely, been a great one. I'm impressed with the general civility of it, and it has given me great food for thought / reflection.

In Christ,
Macarius

 

[jckstraw72]

I understand. I'm not going to chronicle my spiritual journey in this thread (or forum). But I am in the process of reading St Basil's Hexameron and am reading through the extensive threads and materials linked on Monachos. All I am saying is that right now at this very moment, that's where I'm at. Things just aren't as clear-cut in black and white for me as what they seem to be for some other people. And my skeptical nature prevents me from just accepting something based on a few quotes I read online, not knowing their context.

Be assured though, that I am reading and studying as much as I possibly can in my spare time.

sounds good, God bless you!

 

[jckstraw72]

garden = place full of plants

immortal garden = place always full of plants

immortal garden != place full of immortal plants

Why would you need to till a garden where nothing dies? There would be nothing to grow...

well i know Fr. Seraphim provides some quotes where they say that this was a spiritual tilling - it means to cultivate the virtues, I can provide some of those when I get back to my room. in the meantime i do have this one quote handy:

St. Theophilus, To Autolycus, II.XIX For God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground."40 By this He signifies to us, that the whole earth was at that time watered by a divine fountain, and had no need that man should till it; but the earth produced all things spontaneously by the command of God, that man might not be wearied by tilling it.