Evolution and an Orthodox Patristic understanding of Genesis

[The Apostate]

I don't mean to stir things but I have heard a number of Orthodox people object to evolution and I honestly don't understand the objection. I don't claim to be any great theologian but what Pensees has said is essentially how I have come to understand and what other Orthodox people have explained to me is the way in which evolution is indeed quite compatible with Orthodoxy.

We Orthodox understand that it is God Who creates but that we do not know how he goes about doing this. Personally, it matters not to me the precise, step-by-step means whereby creation and human life came into being because I have faith that, however God chose to do it, it was God Who did, and does, it.

I love Orthodoxy for its much fuller and better-developed theology of theosis than I found in my past existence - the way in which God, the Creator of all things visible and invisible, draws His creation unto Himself, allowing it to develop and grow in a loving, nurturing relationship with Him, into the fullness of life in Him.

I don't think that it is necessary for us to accept one scientific theory or another of how things came to be as they are today because I just don't see it as being essential to the life of an Orthodx Christian or the life of the Church. However, as far as evolutionary theory goes, I am yet to have anybody explain to me why it is incompatible with Orthodoxy. Don't misunderstand me: I'm not rejecting this statement and would be delighted to hear what people who think that way have to say. It's just that, up until now, those people who have said this to me have never been willing to explain to me the reasons behind their assertion and so I have just been left wondering what they mean.

I attended an Orthodox lecture about this last year and the text has since been refined into essay form, and may be viewed here.

[ChristosVoskrese]

However, as far as evolutionary theory goes, I am yet to have anybody explain to me why it is incompatible with Orthodoxy.

I'll put it simply: Holy Scripture says that there was no death until Adam sinned (Romans 5:12). Evolution says that there was death from the beginning.

Our Lord Jesus Christ said: "But from the beginning of the creation, God made them [Adam and Eve] male and female. (Mark 10:6).

Now Jesus was either 1) lying; 2) ignorant of modern science; or 3) correct. But if Jesus is God, then 1 and 2 simply cannot be possible. Therefore, the only answer left is 3: He was right.

Evolution and Orthodoxy do not mix. However, many accept evolution because either they were taught it in schools as a fact and know nothing of the many holes in the theory, or they don't want to come across as ignorant religious fanatics.

[jckstraw72]

What is ridiculous to me is considering the words of scripture a "record" and not considering physical evidence as a "record."

Both are clearly a "record," and it is our duty to understand and evaluate them.

At least physical "records" have not been subjected to multiple translations and cultural biases.

i agree there are physical records -- but those records must be interpreted according to a preassumed framework. i interpret the record according to the Fathers' teachings on Creation, not according to the naturalistic assumption of uniformitarianism. Science must conform to revelation, not revelation to science.

[jckstraw72]

there is much more that can be said, but that is a main objection -- God is NOT the author of death -- death is our enemy, introduced by sin, not by a naturalistic process of evolution. Christ defeated death, thus showing that death is not the way it is meant to be, whereas death is a necessary part of the evolutionary process.

[stumbler]

To interpret things according to a "preassumed framework" is the opposite of science.

Science, being its own discipline, need conform itself only to its own rules.

[jckstraw72]

To interpret things according to a "preassumed framework" is the opposite of science.

well thats exactly what happens with Evolution. scientists must assume that the way the world works now is the way it has always worked -- uniformitarianism. they assume away any catastrophes or huge changes, like the fall, and the flood.

[stumbler]

I think we have pinpointed where your argument loses all sense of logic and becomes evidence of propaganda.

Science accounts for ALL evidence if it is good science, including what seem to be anomalies. In cases where the anomalies are the only elements which can not be explained by the general rule, science is open to refinement.

In your case, if I were a scientist I would hypothesize from the evidence available to me that there was a different form of thinking you used before you were exposed to Protestant ideas.

So science CAN account for catastrophes and cataclysms. :mrgreen: