A third option exists between the two and is my preference. We simply do not know. When science and faith conflict the problem is more likely not that one is wrong but rather that our understanding is incomplete. The conflict itself is window dressing to cover our arrogance and ego's. Humility is often the correct answer to the question of which is correct. I don't know.
And, in many cases, the answer is not, in fact crucial to what we do every day in our lives. We might have a preference, but should realize nothing crucial hinges on it -- nothing crucial to faith, that is. I believe that is the resolution most commonly held to by Russian theologians around Genesis and the days question: it's simply not a large concern to Orthodox because it doesn't change much. Personally, I find it an enormous relief to escape some of those back-and-forth arguments so common in modern America, i.e. between Protestants and New Atheists. When I see a new convert coming to my church now, eager to take on such issues, I sigh and redirect the conversation.
Where the issues DO matter, there is also a "third way" between deciding on literalism and deciding on analogy -- letting church tradition answer for us. Indeed, that is another refreshing aspect of being Orthodox: not obsessing over biblical passages overmuch; at least not for lay people. We trust others with more authority to judge better than we can. I might (ahem) have expected that fact to have been highlighted a little more explicitly in the original piece. But of course, we're all striving to submit to authority as we need to, and ignore our own egos -- myself included.
The end of every research paper seems to end in these words: "further research is required". It's not just an ask for more funding, it's true. The universe has an inexhaustible comprehensibility.
“Of course, if he were alive today, he never would have said that.”
Most Christians are progressives. Especially Protestants, who (let’s be honest) believe that the Church got it wrong during the Middle Ages and God had to set it right with Luther, then Calvin, then Baptists, and then Pentecostals (or whatever denomination they are currently in).
Most Americans are progressives. We believe that we should always be progressing upward, getting a better job, a raise at work.
We are inculcated in school and through media that we are the pinnacle of History. Some are starting to say, “maybe we have gone too far”, but at this point it is not “we” but finger pointed at “THEY have gone too far.”
The core of the Creation story is that Christ created the universe and everything. The icons of Christ creating the world would offend some of my evangelical friends. If Christ created everything then He is still the Head. The Lord of my (and all) life, and not just my Copilot. And that is untenable to most.
Christopher Dawson said that the doctrine of Progress—"the belief that every day in every way the world grows better and better"—is the fundamental, unanalyzed assumption upon which all modern, Western philosophy rests.
We have also seen a shift in Evolution (as science) since the 1970s. Dawkins has said that if the Big Bang were submitted for peer review today it would be rejected as heterodox. Likewise, Stephen jay Gould in Punctuated Equilibrium in 70's and 80's found that species are NOT continuously evolving, but only evolve during times of stress. Dawkins warred against that theory as being too close to Creationism (partially because it was being used in YEC arguments for textbooks in some states), and he said such a theory leads to the "God of the gaps" logic. But, as you said in the quote from Dawson, the prevailing view today is that evolution is constant, continuous, and (as Scripture says) "all things continue just as we desire".
Yet we see evolution applied more to social evolution than biology.
I take heart that there are buildings in Eastern Europe that have the year of Creation on their cornerstones rather than the AD date. And a monastery newsletter also has the Year of Creation date.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics ⌛ would disagree, rust never sleeps. The Fallen Cosmos is subject to corruption, death and decay. (trust the science😏)
Ouch. We Protestants always have to take such a beating and be summarized in caricatures. Casting that aside, brother, I agree with you in that most Americans are progressives. But, most Protestants I know and have known are Young Earth Creationists and read the Bible literally. I absolutely see the shift toward progressive thinking among certain Protestant groups, but I see that in the entire American culture.
Christ said “I and My Father are one” and He also said that if we do not believe the writings about Him by Moses, we do not believe in Him. Christ did create everything and is the Head of all. Amen.
In fairness, mainline Protestants still outnumber evangelicals. And mainline Protestant denominations are, at this point, openly liberal. So the majority of Protestants do belong to liberal denominations.
Oh dear. I see I failed to define terms. Yes, you are correct about mainline Protestants as liberal. I am actually an evangelical. But in life, I call myself neither. Just a Christian. I honestly blunder and forget that when people say Protestant, they are not saying it in the classic sense. For mainline Protestants, God help them, there are people among them trying to reclaim them from their hijacking.
Basic to Christian metaphysics is the understanding that man came first, and then death, because of man. Essential within the evolutionary worldview, however, is the discovery that death came first -- by a few billion years -- and then man; and, in fact, the emergence of man -- or any species, for that matter -- would not have been possible if death weren't already at work, making all things new. That's a fundamental and irresolvable clash of notions. And it's part of the reason why it's impossible to be a serious Westerner without serious internal discord.
This could be a strong argument for Creationism... or against Christian orthodoxy. I think that drives home how important it is for intelligent Christians to grapple with this question.
Have you read ‘Science and the Christian Faith’ by Fr. Christopher Knight? I’m working through it right now but so far he takes the stance that the Church fathers would say something different if they had today’s scientific understanding. So far I’m not convinced by that notion, for reasons you point out in this essay, but I’m curious if anyone else has read it.
I haven't read that. I worked for the publisher until recently and corresponded with Fr. Christopher. Very kind man, extremely intelligent man. But he's just speculating.
A six-day creationist dies and finds himself standing in front of the gates of Heaven.
God Himself is there to greet him, and tells him He is happy to answer any questions the man might have - about anything across the entirety of Space and Time.
The man said: "Was I right, Lord? Was the earth literally created in 6 days?
God chuckles and says: "Of course not."
The man shakes his head in disbelief, troubled to his very core, and murmurs: "This heresy goes even higher than I thought..."
“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”
(Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers)
Jastrow was a man of science, an astronomer and planetary physicist, who moved from agnosticism towards theism. In an interview with Christianity Today, he said:
“Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover. That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact.”
("A Scientist Caught Between Two Faiths" Christianity Today, August 6, 1982)
Michael, thank you so much for this. Just last night, my sons and I were discussing this very topic. My oldest was lamenting how he is being forced to think in evolutionary terms in order to succeed in his university biology classes. He said he has to constantly battle for Truth in his head as he knows his belief in God’s creation is absolutely absurd to his professors and classmates. I will give this writing to my sons as an encouragement - if only to point out that this battle they are facing is not new and to hold steadfast.
Thinking for yourself will cost you your grades. The schools here (west coast) do not provide education; rather, lessons in compliance. My son is pursuing medicine, but discouragement and apathy is overwhelming.
A third option exists between the two and is my preference. We simply do not know. When science and faith conflict the problem is more likely not that one is wrong but rather that our understanding is incomplete. The conflict itself is window dressing to cover our arrogance and ego's. Humility is often the correct answer to the question of which is correct. I don't know.
Eminently sound.
And, in many cases, the answer is not, in fact crucial to what we do every day in our lives. We might have a preference, but should realize nothing crucial hinges on it -- nothing crucial to faith, that is. I believe that is the resolution most commonly held to by Russian theologians around Genesis and the days question: it's simply not a large concern to Orthodox because it doesn't change much. Personally, I find it an enormous relief to escape some of those back-and-forth arguments so common in modern America, i.e. between Protestants and New Atheists. When I see a new convert coming to my church now, eager to take on such issues, I sigh and redirect the conversation.
Where the issues DO matter, there is also a "third way" between deciding on literalism and deciding on analogy -- letting church tradition answer for us. Indeed, that is another refreshing aspect of being Orthodox: not obsessing over biblical passages overmuch; at least not for lay people. We trust others with more authority to judge better than we can. I might (ahem) have expected that fact to have been highlighted a little more explicitly in the original piece. But of course, we're all striving to submit to authority as we need to, and ignore our own egos -- myself included.
In Christ
The end of every research paper seems to end in these words: "further research is required". It's not just an ask for more funding, it's true. The universe has an inexhaustible comprehensibility.
Amen!
Has anyone here read Hugh Ross’s work? it was very helpful for me on this specific question.
“Of course, if he were alive today, he never would have said that.”
Most Christians are progressives. Especially Protestants, who (let’s be honest) believe that the Church got it wrong during the Middle Ages and God had to set it right with Luther, then Calvin, then Baptists, and then Pentecostals (or whatever denomination they are currently in).
Most Americans are progressives. We believe that we should always be progressing upward, getting a better job, a raise at work.
We are inculcated in school and through media that we are the pinnacle of History. Some are starting to say, “maybe we have gone too far”, but at this point it is not “we” but finger pointed at “THEY have gone too far.”
The core of the Creation story is that Christ created the universe and everything. The icons of Christ creating the world would offend some of my evangelical friends. If Christ created everything then He is still the Head. The Lord of my (and all) life, and not just my Copilot. And that is untenable to most.
Christopher Dawson said that the doctrine of Progress—"the belief that every day in every way the world grows better and better"—is the fundamental, unanalyzed assumption upon which all modern, Western philosophy rests.
We have also seen a shift in Evolution (as science) since the 1970s. Dawkins has said that if the Big Bang were submitted for peer review today it would be rejected as heterodox. Likewise, Stephen jay Gould in Punctuated Equilibrium in 70's and 80's found that species are NOT continuously evolving, but only evolve during times of stress. Dawkins warred against that theory as being too close to Creationism (partially because it was being used in YEC arguments for textbooks in some states), and he said such a theory leads to the "God of the gaps" logic. But, as you said in the quote from Dawson, the prevailing view today is that evolution is constant, continuous, and (as Scripture says) "all things continue just as we desire".
Yet we see evolution applied more to social evolution than biology.
I take heart that there are buildings in Eastern Europe that have the year of Creation on their cornerstones rather than the AD date. And a monastery newsletter also has the Year of Creation date.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics ⌛ would disagree, rust never sleeps. The Fallen Cosmos is subject to corruption, death and decay. (trust the science😏)
Ouch. We Protestants always have to take such a beating and be summarized in caricatures. Casting that aside, brother, I agree with you in that most Americans are progressives. But, most Protestants I know and have known are Young Earth Creationists and read the Bible literally. I absolutely see the shift toward progressive thinking among certain Protestant groups, but I see that in the entire American culture.
Christ said “I and My Father are one” and He also said that if we do not believe the writings about Him by Moses, we do not believe in Him. Christ did create everything and is the Head of all. Amen.
In fairness, mainline Protestants still outnumber evangelicals. And mainline Protestant denominations are, at this point, openly liberal. So the majority of Protestants do belong to liberal denominations.
Not trying to slander anyone! Just the opposite.
Oh dear. I see I failed to define terms. Yes, you are correct about mainline Protestants as liberal. I am actually an evangelical. But in life, I call myself neither. Just a Christian. I honestly blunder and forget that when people say Protestant, they are not saying it in the classic sense. For mainline Protestants, God help them, there are people among them trying to reclaim them from their hijacking.
I should have elaborated - “most evangelicals”.
It’s a progressive (“everything is professing”, not liberal) mindset that permeates America.
Basic to Christian metaphysics is the understanding that man came first, and then death, because of man. Essential within the evolutionary worldview, however, is the discovery that death came first -- by a few billion years -- and then man; and, in fact, the emergence of man -- or any species, for that matter -- would not have been possible if death weren't already at work, making all things new. That's a fundamental and irresolvable clash of notions. And it's part of the reason why it's impossible to be a serious Westerner without serious internal discord.
This could be a strong argument for Creationism... or against Christian orthodoxy. I think that drives home how important it is for intelligent Christians to grapple with this question.
Have you read ‘Science and the Christian Faith’ by Fr. Christopher Knight? I’m working through it right now but so far he takes the stance that the Church fathers would say something different if they had today’s scientific understanding. So far I’m not convinced by that notion, for reasons you point out in this essay, but I’m curious if anyone else has read it.
I haven't read that. I worked for the publisher until recently and corresponded with Fr. Christopher. Very kind man, extremely intelligent man. But he's just speculating.
<b>A Young Earther in Heaven</b?
A six-day creationist dies and finds himself standing in front of the gates of Heaven.
God Himself is there to greet him, and tells him He is happy to answer any questions the man might have - about anything across the entirety of Space and Time.
The man said: "Was I right, Lord? Was the earth literally created in 6 days?
God chuckles and says: "Of course not."
The man shakes his head in disbelief, troubled to his very core, and murmurs: "This heresy goes even higher than I thought..."
Haha! That’s amazing.
On a more serious note:
“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”
(Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers)
Jastrow was a man of science, an astronomer and planetary physicist, who moved from agnosticism towards theism. In an interview with Christianity Today, he said:
“Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover. That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact.”
("A Scientist Caught Between Two Faiths" Christianity Today, August 6, 1982)
Where in the world did you procure that picture of the mosaic?
It is stunningly beautiful!
I wish I knew! I've had it saved for years, waiting for the right post.
Excellent article brother. Whole-heartedly agree.
Thank you my friend!
Michael, thank you so much for this. Just last night, my sons and I were discussing this very topic. My oldest was lamenting how he is being forced to think in evolutionary terms in order to succeed in his university biology classes. He said he has to constantly battle for Truth in his head as he knows his belief in God’s creation is absolutely absurd to his professors and classmates. I will give this writing to my sons as an encouragement - if only to point out that this battle they are facing is not new and to hold steadfast.
University! Wow. They're not even letting adults think for themselves anymore?
Thinking for yourself will cost you your grades. The schools here (west coast) do not provide education; rather, lessons in compliance. My son is pursuing medicine, but discouragement and apathy is overwhelming.