I don't think that evolution really contradicts any notion of timeless truths or morals. Even if all morality is just relative, then one has just stated a moral dictum- that all morals are relative.Gebre Menfes Kidus said:Well said. And yet "survival of the fittest" negates all of that. The theory of evolution dictates that we are still evolving. So who's to say that the Orthodox Christian morality we believe to be true today will still be true 100, 1,000, or 1,000,000 years from now? Yes, as Orthodox Christians we profess the Teachings and Traditions of the Church to be timelessly true. And yet evolutionary theory contradicts any notion of timeless and eternal moral truth. Within evolution, whatever is best for survival and adaptation is the only morality that matters. So once again, those who hold to a concept of "theistic evolution" are naïve and ignorant about the implications of their own theory. But we've been over this all before.![]()
Well, you have just hit on the key point. Moral relativity is a correlative philosophy of evolutionary theory. The theistic evolutionist can preach divine, immutable, objective moral truth all day long; but their own specious, subjective scientific theory undermines and negates the objective truths they seek to preserve.rakovsky said:I don't think that evolution really contradicts any notion of timeless truths or morals. Even if all morality is just relative, then one has just stated a moral dictum- that all morals are relative.Gebre Menfes Kidus said:Well said. And yet "survival of the fittest" negates all of that. The theory of evolution dictates that we are still evolving. So who's to say that the Orthodox Christian morality we believe to be true today will still be true 100, 1,000, or 1,000,000 years from now? Yes, as Orthodox Christians we profess the Teachings and Traditions of the Church to be timelessly true. And yet evolutionary theory contradicts any notion of timeless and eternal moral truth. Within evolution, whatever is best for survival and adaptation is the only morality that matters. So once again, those who hold to a concept of "theistic evolution" are naïve and ignorant about the implications of their own theory. But we've been over this all before.![]()
It's not about the number of people that determines something is right or wrong. Truth is independent of how many agrees with it or not. Even if nobody acknowledged that a tree fell in the forest, if it fell, then it fell. It just is.Tigray said:I vote yes to this poll.Evolution theory is wrong.The majority of the people in the world don't believe in evolution.The majority of people in Latin America,Caraibean,Sub-saharan Africa(Sub-Saharan Africa has got 63% Christian majority https://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/sub-saharan-africa/ ),Phillipines,in the biggest part of Asia,in Caucasus(Armenia,Georgia) and also some countries in the Balkans and in some states of USA don't believe in evolution.
Amen.edati said:It's not about the number of people that determines something is right or wrong. Truth is independent of how many agrees with it or not. Even if nobody acknowledged that a tree fell in the forest, if it fell, then it fell. It just is.Tigray said:I vote yes to this poll.Evolution theory is wrong.The majority of the people in the world don't believe in evolution.The majority of people in Latin America,Caraibean,Sub-saharan Africa(Sub-Saharan Africa has got 63% Christian majority https://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/sub-saharan-africa/ ),Phillipines,in the biggest part of Asia,in Caucasus(Armenia,Georgia) and also some countries in the Balkans and in some states of USA don't believe in evolution.
It doesn't bother me even if there's more people who believe in evolution. But what I find bothersome is there are Christians who regard the theory as fact, not just simply believe, in denial of the vision of Moses.
Tigray, a near exact copy of this post was already made in this thread. Posting it here after that is verging on spamming the forum. You're new, so I will not give any points. Please be mindful of how and where you post, and do not post copies on other threads.Tigray said:I vote yes to this poll.Evolution theory is wrong.The majority of the people in the world don't believe in evolution.The majority of people in Latin America,Caraibean,Sub-saharan Africa(Sub-Saharan Africa has got 63% Christian majority https://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/sub-saharan-africa/ ),Phillipines,in the biggest part of Asia,in Caucasus(Armenia,Georgia) and also some countries in the Balkans and in some states of USA don't believe in evolution.
He told a joke:This is, I think, why it all has the appearance of what others like to call--- evolution. It all exists in so natural a manner. As I grow older--- 60 now--- I'm seeing more and more that God operates using all the laws of nature, to achieve what is so often called- miraculous.
In a follow up, the person told me that he was a Creationist. I think he meant that things only look like they came through Evolution. I don't know if the story that he told me about God playing Golf was originally written to be about Evolution either.He writes as if the laws of nature are above God. The term is theistic evolution,
Sounds like a JRPG premise/storylineman as a microchasm with the surrounding universe.
hahahaSounds like a JRPG premise/storylineman as a microchasm with the surrounding universe![]()
I didn’t think the joke was about evolution. I think saying God works through the laws of nature makes it sound like He’s limited by them, as if they came first. I may just not like his phrasing. I brought up theisotic evolution because that’s the name of the view that operates on that principle; it could technically be argued as a Creationist view.In a follow up, the person told me that he was a Creationist. I think he meant that things only look like they came through Evolution. I don't know if the story that he told me about God playing Golf was originally written to be about Evolution either.
Well my comment is that idea about God's operations in the joke story makes sense.I think saying God works through the laws of nature makes it sound like He’s limited by them, as if they came first.
So do you have a question or comment based on what this person said?
Nothing. With enough metaphors, yes.If Adam and Eve are metaphorical, and Cain and Abel and Seth and Noah, etc are metaphorical, and the Garden of Eden and the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil are metaphorical, what is to stop the faithful from seeing God also as metaphorical?
The Genealogy of Adam descends down to Christ our Lord in the Gospel of St. Luke. Is that metaphorical?
Not sure about that.Actually, Theophan, the Church DOES glorify Clement of Alexandria as a saint and Father.
Orthodox Wiki said:Charges of heresy
According to Clement, though Christ's goodness operated in the creation of the world, the Son himself was immutable, self-sufficient, and incapable of suffering. According to his interpretation, such are the characteristic qualities of the divine essence. Though the Logos is most closely one with the Father, whose powers he resumes in himself, to Clement both the Son and the Spirit are "first-born powers and first created"; they form the highest stages in the scale of intelligent being, and Clement distinguishes the Son-Logos from the Logos who is immutably immanent in God. Because of this Photius would later charge that he "degraded the Son to the rank of a creature." Separate from the world as the principle of creation, the Logos is yet in it as its guiding principle. Thus a natural life is a life according to the will of the Logos. Clement has also been accused of Docetism in his teachings on the Incarnation. According to him, the body of Christ was not subject to human needs. See the following passage from Stromateis which clearly denies Christ's full humanity:
In regard to the Savior, however, it were ridiculous to suppose that the body demanded, as a body, the necessary aids for its maintenance. For He ate, note for the sake of the body, which had its continuance from a holy power, but lest those in His company might happen to think otherwise of Him, just as aftewards some did certainily supposed that He had appeared as a mere phantasm. He was in general dispassionate; and no movement of feeling penetrated Him, whether pleasure or pain
Yeah, but is 6 days, really 6 days.• St. Ephraim the Syrian (306-373 A.D.)
“No one should think that the Creation of Six Days is an allegory"
*St. Ephraim the Syrian* / Commentary on Genesis Ch.1
We are lumped together nonetheless.There’s a disclaimer in the article; it’s republished from The Conversation as a point of interest. And they're specifically addressing YEC, not creationism in general. I personally don't disagree with the article's criticism. I'm not sure I'd call it a conspiracy theory because I'm hanging on to a narrower definition of that term, but the way YEC exists as a movement and is given dogmatic emphasis in certain circles is messed up, unChristian, unbiblical, and unnecessary. This is different, in my mind, from believing the earth is young. I'm sure it's possible to take Genesis literally and not fall into the kind of mindset the YEC movement requires, and I respect that.
Yeah, I know. It happens with everything it seems.We are lumped together nonetheless.
Of course! It just depends on how you define “day.”Yeah, but is 6 days, really 6 days.
That's correct. If I define a day as much larger than 24hours.Of course! It just depends on how you define “day.”![]()
For posting quotes from the Fathers and Orthodox saints?I am beginning to find Jude frightening.
It could or could not. We don’t know for sure and really don’t need to, if we keep Christ central. It ultimately matters how God defines things. To me, when it gets to the point of debate, it has become a distraction from what we’re supposed to be doing.That's correct. If I define a day as much larger than 24hours.
In a cosmological sense, it could be much larger.
I would much rather call it learning rather than debating. And since we are on the topic, do you know how long, in scientific terms is an aion?It could or could not. We don’t know for sure and really don’t need to, if we keep Christ central. It ultimately matters how God defines things. To me, when it gets to the point of debate, it has become a distraction from what we’re supposed to be doing.
Yeah, but is 6 days, really 6 days.