Timeline for Besides Augustine and Origen, did any church fathers reject a literal interpretation of Genesis 1-2:4?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2023 at 17:14 | comment | added | Terjij Kassal | @Glorius You know that Darwin existed decades before the Big Bang theory? And heliocentrism doesn't say anything about how old the universe is. | |
| Feb 20, 2023 at 16:54 | comment | added | Glorius | @TerjijKassal Evolution depends on a multi-billion year history of the universe which is invariably explained by the Big Bang theory and the heliocentric model. Creationists do not deny that a selection process exists in nature, the theory of evolution is not reducible to that process. Find me an evolutionist who is not a heliocentrist, when you can't, ask yourself why that is. | |
| Feb 20, 2023 at 16:48 | comment | added | Terjij Kassal | @Glorius The theory of evolution by natural selection doesn't depend on the Big Bang or Heliocentrism. | |
| Feb 20, 2023 at 8:03 | comment | added | Glorius | @TerjijKassal If the Earth is immobile in the centre of the universe then there could've been no Big Bang, without it the whole evolutionary chronology and mechanism for "explaining" things falls apart, although it's incredibly stupid even if heliocentrism were true. | |
| Feb 20, 2023 at 3:41 | comment | added | Terjij Kassal | @Glorius Why do you say that heliocentrism is the first step? | |
| Feb 19, 2023 at 11:24 | comment | added | Glorius | @TerjijKassal No, however, heliocentrism is not nearly as grave an error as evolution since it is only the first step of the evolutionary paradigm. | |
| Feb 18, 2023 at 23:45 | comment | added | Terjij Kassal | @Glorius Did they leave room for non-geocentrism? | |
| Feb 13, 2023 at 23:47 | comment | added | guest37 | Strictly speaking, Origen is considered an early Church writer, but not a Church Father. He was anathematized by a local church council in 543 and later by the 5th Ecumenical Council in 553. | |
| S Feb 7, 2023 at 21:06 | history | suggested | agarza | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
fixed link(s) for accessibility
|
| Feb 7, 2023 at 19:56 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 7, 2023 at 21:06 | |||||
| Feb 7, 2023 at 19:25 | comment | added | Glorius | @TerjijKassal The rest of the Church Fathers understand it as 6 literal days. The Church has ruled that you need not hold that yom means a 24-hour period but it is by far the surest opinion. What is undisputed is that the Fathers left no room for evolution. | |
| Feb 7, 2023 at 16:25 | history | edited | Terjij Kassal | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 42 characters in body
|
| Feb 2, 2023 at 15:32 | comment | added | Terjij Kassal | @yters Is there any place where it says that creation could have took 6 literal days? | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 7:30 | comment | added | yters | I believe it's a bit more nuanced regarding Augustine. He thought it could be six literal days, or it could be a single instant that logically followed the progression in the six day account. The latter because he thought time was an extension of the mind, and humans didn't exist to perceive time until the sixth day, so time didn't exist until humans existed. He didn't think creation took longer than six days, and elsewhere says the history of the world was no more than 6000 years, contrary to atheists of his day who believed in an eternal universe. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 5:23 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edit in source of assertion from comment, tags
|
| Feb 1, 2023 at 20:44 | comment | added | Terjij Kassal | @NigelJ He held that the six days in Genesis 1-2:4 did not refer to literal days. | |
| Feb 1, 2023 at 20:42 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 16, 2023 at 3:05 | |||||
| Feb 1, 2023 at 20:42 | comment | added | Terjij Kassal | @NigelJ "The sacred writer was able to separate in the time of his narrative what God did not separate in time in His creative act." (St. Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis, translated and annotated by John Hammond Taylor, S.J., 2 vols. (New York: Newman Press, 1982) (pg. 36) asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1988/PSCF3-88Young.html | |
| Feb 1, 2023 at 20:23 | comment | added | Nigel J | I suggest that considerable substantiation is required to verify the claims made about Augustine's and Origen's interpretations. I am looking for further detail, myself, the results of the research behind the question. | |
| Feb 1, 2023 at 16:59 | history | asked | Terjij Kassal | CC BY-SA 4.0 |