Evolution and an Orthodox Patristic understanding of Genesis

[stumbler]

CV - If the Bible is God's revelation to us, then what is science? From whom does science, by which I mean the scientific method and the evidence we use for analysis by such a method, proceed?

God gave us the whole world - not just literature, or social science, or science alone.

It is meant to be understood as a whole.

I disagree with you when you state that creationism is necessary to Christianity.

Did Jesus say "And so I say unto you, no one shall enter the kingdom of heaven who does not believe that dinosaurs lived at the same time as men?"

Not in my Bible.

This is a protestant distraction from important matters of faith, and a contest of "I am holier than you because you are open-minded."

I find this whole debate ridiculous and inconsequential. This is a debate with its roots in politics and protestant fundamentalism.

If Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is such a good Orthodox believer, why hasn't he closed the Russian universities that study geology and paleontology? I will tell you why. Because science is science and religion is religion.

Our opinions about the state of science and our speculations on the origins of the universe are not relevant to our Orthodox faith.

What's next? Should we look to the Bible to teach us economics, theatre criticism, geometry, geography, modern dance, music? The Bible is not the sum of all knowledge in all fields. That doesn't mean it isn't true.

[joasia]

Pravoslavnik,

In effect, you, Henry Morris, et. al., are not merely rejecting the Darwinian theory of evolution; you are also rejecting three billion years of geological and paleobiological data. That is why I requested your response, for starters, regarding the age of the earth and the date for the appearance of dinosaurs and homo sapiens on the earth. What is your opinion on these issues?

Darwin's theory is a lie; a fabrication. Even the scientists disagree with it.

The holy fathers never supported evolution. There's no need to continue on other points if you don't see this.

Hence, there is a sense in which these sacred scriptures can be understood which is consistent with Orthodox dogmatic theology regarding the Fall, and with the data of modern science, but it is not the anti-scientific, false interpretation of Protestant Young Earth Creationism that you and others espouse.

What exactly are the "false interpretations"? I still have yet to understand what you are referring to. Where does the teaching of the Orthodox holy fathers state that they believe in evolution and the earth being billions of years old?

[joasia]

Pravoslavnik,

Do you grasp this concept? Please respond to this question. The idea that the planet earth has existed for a mere 7,500 years is completely inconsistent with a vast body of geological and paleobiological data.

The geological and paleobiological data that you refer to is based on evolutionist theories by Darwin and Haegel and Carl Sagen. There is no logical observation. What do these vast bodies explain?

[stumbler]

"Data," by definition, is not based on a theory. Data is a collection of observations.

"Noun
S: (n) data, information (a collection of facts from which conclusions may be drawn) "statistical data"
S: (n) datum, data point (an item of factual information derived from measurement or research)

Source: http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=data

Let's leave our prejudices at the door here.

[Pravoslavnik]

"The geological and paleobiological data that you refer to is based on evolutionist theories by Darwin and Haegel and Carl Sagen. There is no logical observation. What do these vast bodies explain?"

Dear Joanna,

Code: Select all

     A scientific theory is a causal explanation for a corpus of empirical data--of facts that are gathered through scientific observation and measurement.  An example is Isaac Newton's theory of gravitation, which was a comprehensive explanation for the observed natural motion of bodies.  Charles Darwin spent a great deal of time observing and studying available data of various world fauna and fossils before elaborating his theory of the origin of species through a process of natural selection.  His magnum opus was [i]The Origin of Species.[/i]  Since its publication, a vast amount of additional biological data has accumulated in support of the basic theory.  Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould clouded the picture a bit by postulating that there was a type of "punctuated equilibrium" occurring to account for the sometimes abrupt appearance of species in the fossil record.  Other modern biologists, like Kenneth Miller, have argued that the punctuated equilibrium concept is much ado about nothing.  If you are interested in a quality summary of this whole issue, and data base, I cannot recommend [i]Finding Darwin's God[/i] too highly, all the more so in that Dr. Miller is a Christian (Roman Catholic) who is critical of the way that some scientists, like Gould, have inappropriately tried to use scientific findings to "debunk" religious beliefs.
     As another Orthodox poster (Stumbler) has pointed out, the data of paleobiology is not "based on evolutionary theory."  Rather, the evolutionary theory is based upon the observed data.  It is a mechanistic attempt to explain the sequential data, the facts.  The whole enterprise of science is based upon empirical observations being integrated into explanatory theories and natural laws about the cosmos.  

   As such, science is one important way for us to learn the truth about the cosmos.   Some people believe that it is the only way to learn the "truth."  Others, like you and me, believe that the "truth" about the cosmos can also be revealed to us by God, speaking through Holy Men and Women, including the Incarnate God, Himself.  Many people nowadays have tried to promote the idea that the revealed truths of Orthodox Christianity are in conflict with the "truths" of science.  Some scientists have tried to claim that science "debunks" Chritianity.  I believe, as do others, that both science and Orthodox Christianity offer us aspects of the "truth," and are not mutually contradictory, when properly understood.

[ChristosVoskrese]

If you measure time from the theoretical point at which the Big Bang occurred, about six 24 hour days have, in fact, elapsed during the 15 billion years that have elapsed from the perspective our planet earth. Do you grasp this concept?

For a start, I do not believe in the "Big Bang". I believe that God created the universe. The "Big Bang" is now being questioned by reputable scientists, as is Darwin's theory of evolution.

Please respond to this question. The idea that the planet earth has existed for a mere 7,500 years is completely inconsistent with a vast body of geological and paleobiological data. It is an utterly absurd notion, like insisting that the sun revolves around the earth or that the moon is made of green cheese. Do you sincerely believe that the Tyranosaurus Rex lived on earth at the same time as homo sapiens? How are your beliefs supported or refuted by the available scientific evidence? Give us examples of the data that you are using for these assertions.

For a start: Darwin had no evidence of macroevolution when he wrote Origin of Species. (Ironically, that book does not even answer the question of where life came from. It talks about natural selection and survival of the fittest, but it mentions nothing about how life first arose on earth). Darwin's theory was met with opposition from the scientific community at the time. People later accepted his theory because it fitted their worldview. They didn't want to believe in a God. They wanted to set their own moral standards and live their lives the way they wanted to, without any interference from God. In order to justify such a lifestyle, they accepted Darwin's theory of evolution. So scientists, when examining the fossil record, already accept the theory of evolution. They look at the fossil record through the metaphorical "glasses of evolution". Their aim is to find proof for evolution, so they will read evolution into everything that they find. When evolutionists use these findings to "prove" evolution, they are using circular reasoning.

You have not answered most of my points that I have posted previously. Please answer this: If God created the world through evolution, then that makes God the author of death, because evolution is based on the "survival of the fittest". There was no death before Adam sinned.

[jckstraw72]

God is not the author of death, therefore evolution is not true. case closed.

also, how do you evolve into the image and likeness of God? or are ppl saying the body evolved and then God breathed a soul into it? cuz thats dualism -- in Orthodoxy the body and soul are one integral unit.