Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy

Do you believe that the acount of genesis in the Old testament should be taken literally?

  • Yes

    Votes: 73 16.8%
  • No

    Votes: 163 37.6%
  • both metaphorically and literally

    Votes: 198 45.6%

  • Total voters
    434

Achronos

Toumarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
13,265
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
House Of Balloons
Aposphet said:
The best advice I can offer in such a discussion is to be amazed. Be amazed at the grandeur and the beauty of life. We should be in awe at its sophistication, and its almost mystical surprises. Debates of this kind usually go best when the people arguing have a deep-seeded love for nature. We should always be astounded by the fact that chickens lay eggs, for it is far stranger than any tale told in a nursery rhyme.
I thought it was important to reiterate this.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
48
Location
Portland, Oregon
jckstraw72 said:
PeterTheAleut said:
jckstraw72 said:
hey Jackel - i didnt see any Patristic sources in all your posts ...
Which is at least more genuine than your misuse of Patristic sources.
Pope Peter has spoken!
Y'know, you could at least address my reply without resorting to absurdly sarcastic ad hominems. ::)
 

TheJackel

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Messages
240
Reaction score
0
Points
0
jckstraw72 said:
hey Jackel - i didnt see any Patristic sources in all your posts ...
Patristics sources were required to establish evolution? lol... Ohh jeez, really?.. Good thing that Patristic sources weren't used because Bats aren't birds, and insects don't have 4 legs.  So when you get backed into a corner and can't handle a debate, you resort to irrelevance and off-topic pleading?.I can even give you the evolution of your own religion here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg&feature=player_embedded


The sources I provided for evolution come from Christians, and Non-Christians. And they at least have some level of intellectual integrity. So lets weigh the intellectual integrity here in this forum.

Evolution
Micro evolution
Macro evolution
Speciation
Natural Selection


1) Define those words I have provided above and post the definitions here for us. Yes, I want YOU to do this literally just so we all know that we comprehend the definitions of Evolution, Speciation, Natural Selection, Adaptation, Micro-evolution, and Macro-evolution ect..

2) Read the rest of my post to which has a good amount of information and examples in it..

3) Comeback here and then repost the definitions of: Evolution, Speciation, Natural Selection, Adaptation, Micro-evolution, and Macro-evolution ect..

4) Review them

5) Then reply to me in scientific methodology why you think evolution ;)


Also we can look at some more recent evolution in the human Genome:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=genome+evolution+in+human&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

Speciation in action:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/11/speciation-in-action/?npu=1&mbid=yhp

The length of a birds wings adapt to the changes in the environments to which they fly in:

http://www.conservationmaven.com/frontpage/birds-changing-wing-shape-as-possible-adaptation-to-environm.html



 

TheJackel

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Messages
240
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I thought it was important to reiterate this.
Not relevant at all to establishing evolution. Posting philosophical views do not at all address the issue. And sorry, but the people who actually study nature can be said to have a deep love for it, and thus nullifying any supposed intended argument within it's context. The quote reminds me of "Don't think, just believe and gawk".. "/
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
TheJackel said:
jckstraw72 said:
hey Jackel - i didnt see any Patristic sources in all your posts ...
Patristics sources were required to establish evolution? lol... Ohh jeez, really?.. So when you get backed into a corner and can't handle a debate, you resort to irrelevance and off-topic pleading?.I can even give you the evolution of your own religion here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg&feature=player_embedded


The sources I provided for evolution come from Christians, and Non-Christians. And they at least have some level of intellectual integrity. So lets weigh the intellectual integrity here in this forum.

Evolution
Micro evolution
Macro evolution
Speciation
Natural Selection


1) Define those words I have provided above and post the definitions here for us. Yes, I want YOU to do this literally just so we all know that we comprehend the definitions of Evolution, Speciation, Natural Selection, Adaptation, Micro-evolution, and Macro-evolution ect..

2) Read the rest of my post to which has a good amount of information and examples in it..

3) Comeback here and then repost the definitions of: Evolution, Speciation, Natural Selection, Adaptation, Micro-evolution, and Macro-evolution ect..

4) Review them

5) Then reply to me in scientific methodology why you think evolution ;)


Also we can look at some more recent evolution in the human Genome:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=genome+evolution+in+human&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

Speciation in action:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/11/speciation-in-action/?npu=1&mbid=yhp

The length of a birds wings adapt to the changes in the environments to which they fly in:

http://www.conservationmaven.com/frontpage/birds-changing-wing-shape-as-possible-adaptation-to-environm.html
Where's the link on the evolution of universal sterility in bees?
 

chrevbel

High Elder
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
708
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
Where's the link on the evolution of universal sterility in bees?
Universal?  Methinks we wouldn't see bees at all if that were the case.
 

TheJackel

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Messages
240
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Where's the link on the evolution of universal sterility in bees?
If you believed someone that told you that, I can't help but feel sorry for your gullibility ;/

You can also address your argument here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Z5PpkQadm5EC&pg=PA397&lpg=PA397&dq=universal+sterility+in+bees?&source=bl&ots=5a5_28gbCZ&sig=ilZkJpzyMPmtgFFtbxChKedHSTk&hl=en&ei=D1tcTZCwIYOclgeo1LjkCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=universal%20sterility%20in%20bees%3F&f=false

Abstract:


Distinction between the sterility of first crosses and of hybrids -- Sterility various in degree, not universal, affected by close interbreeding
Pretty damn hard to breed with universal Sterility o_O


How about you actually address the post above vs drifting off into nonsense that shows your lack of knowledge on the subject? I posted that information for you for a reason. I would hope you would actually take the time to comprehend what evolution actually is. Apparently that is beyond your capacity to do. :/
 

TheJackel

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Messages
240
Reaction score
0
Points
0
^^ Thank you for demonstrating my point.

you can sit through a lecture on abiogenesis here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LObuQhCozCo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seIZSkpTLEo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX3N1Ots6Hw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-wi4JSrGTw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqfbUG66yS4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhE1-21xNI0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-YpwsZQwdY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7L-lnbHwmw&feature=related

OR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

Then you can research synthetic life, molecular assemblers, dna robots that self replicate, ect.

You can also watch this video:

Evolution and Common Decent:
 

jckstraw72

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
1,174
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PeterTheAleut said:
jckstraw72 said:
PeterTheAleut said:
jckstraw72 said:
hey Jackel - i didnt see any Patristic sources in all your posts ...
Which is at least more genuine than your misuse of Patristic sources.
Pope Peter has spoken!
Y'know, you could at least address my reply without resorting to absurdly sarcastic ad hominems. ::)
ok. just because you make the assertion that i have misused the Fathers, (even though I have presented them the same way as have our modern Saints and holy elders), without any attempt on your part to demonstrate the proper usage of this wide survey of Fathers from all times and places throughout Church history, doesn't mean i actually have misused the Fathers. in looking through the Fathers I have come to the same conclusion as St. Nektarios, St. Barsanuphius, St. John of Kronstadt, St. Nikolai Velimirovich, St. Justin Popovich, St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, Elder Paisios, Fr. Philotheos Zervakos, Fr. George Calciu, Fr. Seraphim Rose. so you can make this assertion all you want, but the evidence clearly disagrees with you.
 

jckstraw72

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
1,174
Reaction score
0
Points
0
TheJackel said:
jckstraw72 said:
hey Jackel - i didnt see any Patristic sources in all your posts ...
Patristics sources were required to establish evolution? lol... Ohh jeez, really?.. Good thing that Patristic sources weren't used because Bats aren't birds, and insects don't have 4 legs.  So when you get backed into a corner and can't handle a debate, you resort to irrelevance and off-topic pleading?.I can even give you the evolution of your own religion here:
Patristic sources are required to establish the Orthodox interpretation of Genesis.
 

TheJackel

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Messages
240
Reaction score
0
Points
0
jckstraw72 said:
TheJackel said:
jckstraw72 said:
hey Jackel - i didnt see any Patristic sources in all your posts ...
Patristics sources were required to establish evolution? lol... Ohh jeez, really?.. Good thing that Patristic sources weren't used because Bats aren't birds, and insects don't have 4 legs.  So when you get backed into a corner and can't handle a debate, you resort to irrelevance and off-topic pleading?.I can even give you the evolution of your own religion here:
Patristic sources are required to establish the Orthodox interpretation of Genesis.
Good thing those sources are clueless to biochemistry much less are completely absent of, and clueless of their accuracy in accordance to reality. And the key words here are "interpretation of Genesis".. Self-inventing context and then trying to fill in the blanks with ignorance as if it would make any logical sense what-so-ever. But isn't that why some of you cling to the word 'incomprehensible" to make it all better?

You can feel free to point to me a biochemistry lecture in Genesis that goes into Biochemical functional micro-structures, and self-organizing enzymes ect. LOL.. It's Orthodox Christians trying to shape science into religion while ignoring 99 percent of the science? Is Sarfati one of those so called Orthodox Christians ?

Tell me, did the Bee argument come from Orthodox interpretation of Genesis? How about 4 legs on insects? Regardless it's not going to make evolution a magical fairy tale.. Well I suppose you can teach people to be stupid ? Might explain why most theists (not all) I talk to don't even know the differences between Abiogenesis, and Evolution..Or the differences between Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution. And when you tell them, they still have no clue :/

How about this.. Point me to the page here that lists your "sources" ;)... This should be rather fun.
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
Points
0
TheJackel said:
Might explain why most theists (not all) I talk to don't even know the differences between Abiogenesis, and Evolution..Or the differences between Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution. And when you tell them, they still have no clue :/
Look, I'm an undergraduate biology student who hopes to become an evolutionary geneticist one day and I know and understand all these topics. However, how can you expect everyone to do the same? Can you expect everyone to know core principles of astronomy? I definitely don't know them. Can you expect everyone to know core principles of psychology? I don't know them either. Same goes for theatrology, electrology, perhaps particle physics and others.
 

TheJackel

Sr. Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2011
Messages
240
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Dimitrios-Georgios said:
TheJackel said:
Might explain why most theists (not all) I talk to don't even know the differences between Abiogenesis, and Evolution..Or the differences between Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution. And when you tell them, they still have no clue :/
Look, I'm an undergraduate biology student who hopes to become an evolutionary geneticist one day and I know and understand all these topics. However, how can you expect everyone to do the same? Can you expect everyone to know core principles of astronomy? I definitely don't know them. Can you expect everyone to know core principles of psychology? I don't know them either. Same goes for theatrology, electrology, perhaps particle physics and others.
That's great.. I'm in the same field.. And you ought to know the definition of evolution to understand why it's a fact. I expect people to do some simple research to understand, and you only need to know the basics to comprehend why it's a fact of life. I gave people here a good starting point, and a listed process for them to use in the above post. But I really don't tolerate it when people post nonsense like the Bee argument without even taking the time to address the posts I provided them to which would help them understand. Yes, it will take you a good 6 years to get a firm grip on many of the aspects of biochemistry ect.. But it's no excuse to ignore the obvious examples I have provided. "/

How much time was taken by the person with the Bee argument to read my posts on evolution here? None! he just jumps in with comments that are irrelevant, or just plain wrong :/

 
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
Points
0
TheJackel said:
Dimitrios-Georgios said:
TheJackel said:
Might explain why most theists (not all) I talk to don't even know the differences between Abiogenesis, and Evolution..Or the differences between Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution. And when you tell them, they still have no clue :/
Look, I'm an undergraduate biology student who hopes to become an evolutionary geneticist one day and I know and understand all these topics. However, how can you expect everyone to do the same? Can you expect everyone to know core principles of astronomy? I definitely don't know them. Can you expect everyone to know core principles of psychology? I don't know them either. Same goes for theatrology, electrology, perhaps particle physics and others.
That's great.. I'm in the same field.. And you ought to know the definition of evolution to understand why it's a fact. I expect people to do some simple research to understand, and you only need to know the basics to comprehend why it's a fact of life. I gave people here a good starting point, and a listed process for them to use in the above post. But I really don't tolerate it when people post nonsense like the Bee argument without even taking the time to address the posts I provided them to which would help them understand. Yes, it will take you a good 6 years to get a firm grip on many of the aspects of biochemistry ect.. But it's no excuse to ignore the obvious examples I have provided. "/

How much time was taken by the person with the Bee argument to read my posts on evolution here? None! he just jumps in with comments that are irrelevant, or just plain wrong :/
I agree with you that expressing views on things you don't understand is the biggest weapon you can give to your opponent and claim defeat. However, this goes both ways, both to those that speak on evolution without studying it and those that speak on Eastern Orthodoxy without studying what it stands for. Just generally speaking though, without pointing at anyone, really. Just my two cents.
 

minasoliman

Stratopedarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
20,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NJ
Dimitrios-Georgios said:
TheJackel said:
Dimitrios-Georgios said:
TheJackel said:
Might explain why most theists (not all) I talk to don't even know the differences between Abiogenesis, and Evolution..Or the differences between Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution. And when you tell them, they still have no clue :/
Look, I'm an undergraduate biology student who hopes to become an evolutionary geneticist one day and I know and understand all these topics. However, how can you expect everyone to do the same? Can you expect everyone to know core principles of astronomy? I definitely don't know them. Can you expect everyone to know core principles of psychology? I don't know them either. Same goes for theatrology, electrology, perhaps particle physics and others.
That's great.. I'm in the same field.. And you ought to know the definition of evolution to understand why it's a fact. I expect people to do some simple research to understand, and you only need to know the basics to comprehend why it's a fact of life. I gave people here a good starting point, and a listed process for them to use in the above post. But I really don't tolerate it when people post nonsense like the Bee argument without even taking the time to address the posts I provided them to which would help them understand. Yes, it will take you a good 6 years to get a firm grip on many of the aspects of biochemistry ect.. But it's no excuse to ignore the obvious examples I have provided. "/

How much time was taken by the person with the Bee argument to read my posts on evolution here? None! he just jumps in with comments that are irrelevant, or just plain wrong :/
I agree with you that expressing views on things you don't understand is the biggest weapon you can give to your opponent and claim defeat. However, this goes both ways, both to those that speak on evolution without studying it and those that speak on Eastern Orthodoxy without studying what it stands for. Just generally speaking though, without pointing at anyone, really. Just my two cents.
Well, unfortunately, when some Orthodox Christians continue to use the Church fathers as a way to discredit reality in science, they are opening the flood gates of blasphemy against the Church fathers by non-believers.  They are the Canaans of the Church.
 

jckstraw72

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
1,174
Reaction score
0
Points
0
and some people will continually divert attention from Scripture to science, and then force that science upon the Scriptures rather than looking to the Church to illumine the Scriptures. the truth is bastardized this way.
 

Demetrios G.

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
4,821
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
wilderness
jckstraw72 said:
and some people will continually divert attention from Scripture to science, and then force that science upon the Scriptures rather than looking to the Church to illumine the Scriptures. the truth is bastardized this way.
It's also hard to deny that evolution has become a prevailing view within science. Over time we my have to see a christian view that encompasses the prevailing views of science. Otherwise one will become fiction and remain a story in a period in time when man was primitive in his thinking regarding the sciences. It's not about a bastardization of the truth so much as it is a revelation to add to the truths already known. What is most important to remember is that while a science can hold truth it doesn't necessitate that it is an end onto itself. The science doesn't have to become a competitive theory to Christianity if encompassed within it. 
 

Jetavan

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,007
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.esoteric.msu.edu
jckstraw72 said:
and some people will continually divert attention from Scripture to science, and then force that science upon the Scriptures rather than looking to the Church to illumine the Scriptures. the truth is bastardized this way.
Let me see if I understand you correctly. You argue that the Patristic interpretation of Genesis is an interpretation that does not allow for macro-evolution?
 

Ortho_cat

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
5,392
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Wichita, KS
Jetavan said:
jckstraw72 said:
and some people will continually divert attention from Scripture to science, and then force that science upon the Scriptures rather than looking to the Church to illumine the Scriptures. the truth is bastardized this way.
Let me see if I understand you correctly. You argue that the Patristic interpretation of Genesis is an interpretation that does not allow for macro-evolution?
I think he's argued that from the beginning, no?
 
Top