- Feb 20, 2006
- Reaction score
- Queensland, Australia
Yes, 2000 would sound about right. Seems to be about the time that this American Fundamentalist phenomenom was noticed as gathering momentum in other English-speaking countries, too. The article regarding concerns in Britain is dated 2002.jckstraw72 said:i guess they could be completely lying to him ...Heorhij said:And this Fr. Damascene is sure they are really scientists, experts?jckstraw72 said:well i don't know how updated that site is -- I can't read Russian and I'm pretty sure the English part has been exactly the same for several years now, but Fr. Damascene mentions many scientists who took part in the conference last year. I can get the issue later and post their names and branch of science if you want.Heorhij said:I certainly can read Russian. There are no biologists who participate in these discussions, and the only "scientist" who seems to be on their board is a "Candidate of Mineralogical Sciences" who has no credentials in the theory of biological evolution whatsoever.jckstraw72 said:there's an issue of the Orthodox Word devoted to this whole issue which gives details about Shestodnev (6 Days) -- a Russian organization that holds conferences every year on the Church's literal viewpoint on Genesis. Speakers include scientists of all kinds from all over the world and theologians. and St. Theophilus of Antioch was the first to give a dating for the earth based on a literal reading of Genesis, followed by many others. They weren't Americans.Riddikulus said:GammaRay,GammaRay said:I hope that Dan-Romania is kidding! :-[
Probably (s)he doesn't know that Genesis accepts evolution (I'll be back with some verse).
(Boy, I wish I could find some non-Orthodox young-Earth-creationists in Greece. ;D)
Glad to hear this phenomenon hasn't hit your shores. This young-earth-creationist *militancy* comes from America. (Sorry guys! :angel
if you can read Russian here's a website on Shestodnev http://creatio.orthodoxy.ru/
the article says that Shestodnev was founded in 2000 with the blessing of His Holiness Alexei II, and has featured talks from speakers from all over the world including doctors and professors of biology (biochemistry, molecular and population genetics, zoology), physics, mathematics, geology, and astronomy who are currently working in secular/scientific institutions, and each year the conference is presided over by hierarchs of the Russian Church.
but anyways my point wasn't how qualified or unqualified the speakers are, but that it is dishonest to caricature creationism as an American fundamentalist phenomenon.
I sorry you don't like the facts, jckstraw72, but I'm not in the habit of being dishonest and don't appreciate your accusation that I have been. However, I suppose, in mitigation, if you have been witnessing this war over creationism and evolution within American Christendom all your life, you are to be excused for believing that other countries have always mimicked this trend. Whatever you believe, such is not the case.
Certainly, in my younger days as Anglican, I had never heard of any conflict on this issue; nor had I any knowledge of any such denial of science with any of my Catholic friends and acquaintances. Only when I came into contact with fundamentalist circles, did I encounter this hositility to evolution. All such fundamentalist groups were to be fueled in their fervour by American Fundamentalist literature which started flowing into NZ in the 90s. Up to that point, I can think of very little of such literature, if any, being circulated in New Zealand on this topic. Interestingly, Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, is an Australian school teacher who made a name for himself on the fundamentalist circuits after moving to America in 1987. Around that time, Answers in Genesis was still known as "Creation Science" and was producing a bi-monthly (if I remember correctly) magazine. I actually attended some *lectures* of Ham's in the early 90s. His books were received with great elation that at last there was information on creationism available. I know people who consider his works, and those of other creationists next in authority to the Bible; and unless one believes as they do one is not considered to be a Christian. This "line in the sand" drawn by creationists was not a trend in any other Christian group in NZ or Britain before that. That this attitude has infiltrated Orthodoxy is abhorrent.