Exodus 20 and Genesis 1 and our early Christian church pastors' support for 6 days of creation and <6000 year age of the earth

trueseek1's picture

On a discussion board with atheists, I am noticing how so many Christians are uncertain about the Word of God in regards to our creation by God. It's surprising that the one time that some Orthodox, Catholic and protestants can agree on something, it has to be a 'new' interpretation of God's Word.

Exodus 20:1-20 seems clear enough about 6 days of creation with most reasonable assumption that our prophet and saint Moses knew how to count days and nights and was writing under the inspiration of our eyewitness, GOD. The context is the 10 commandments of God and the words are

"There are 6 days a man shall work, and on the 7th day he shall rest, ...because God created the Heavens and the Earth, the sea and all that is in them in 6 days, and on the 7th day He rested".

We have guidance from Church pastors of many early Church who confirmed God's Word in understanding of 6 literal days and a young earth:

For example: Saint Basil the Great on his "six days" homily clearly showing us the Church's trusted support of 24 hour day creation "...twenty-four hours measure the space of a day, or that, in reality a day is the time that the heavens starting from one point take to return there. Thus, every time that, in the revolution of the sun, evening and morning occupy the world, their periodical succession never exceeds the space of one day...").

Clement of Alexandria, Julius Africanus, Hippolytus or Rome, Eusebius of Caesarea, and Augustine of Hippo, clearly spoke of an earth that is under 5600 years old. Those Church fathers were mocked by "scientific philosophers" of their time who taught a long age earth theory as well, but they never compromised their faith in God's eyewitness account.

One review I found http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v16/i3/orthodoxy.asp confirmed what the early church taught. It was written about a book by an orthodox monk named Seraphim Rose and his easy conclusions of the study of our church fathers led him to also pass along the Biblical and historically true teachings that our earth is under 10,000 years old.

The book "Refuting Compromise" by an evangelical Australian PhD biochemist named Jonathan Sarfati, did a fantastic job of expanding of Father Rose's presentations of early church fathers and shows us how evangelicals like Hugh Ross and some Dallas seminary professors misrepresented so many trusted early church pastors in their support of very long age theories. But the book goes much further and looks at the Scientific evidences supporting a Biblical understanding of creation.

Recently, I'm noticing some more evangelical departing from Luther, Calvin and Wesley's teachings, and majority of Catholic scholars and a few Orthodox Bishops coming out against the early Church's faith in a young earth, as God's Word and his trusted pastors taught us. Might someone know how can some these days so easily thow our the early Church's faithful testimony of God's Creation, the 1st Adam and the 2nd, the 1st Eve and the 2nd Eve, the worldwide flood, and still remain faithful to the early Church's Biblical teachings?

Some authors even tried to paste their opposition as a "fundamentalist" corner argument, as if belief in the Bible belongs only to one corner, but if St. Basil, St. Ambrose, Augustine and almost all early church fathers support a correct biblical interpretation of an earth under 10,000 years old and Calvin, Luther, Melanchton, Wesley and Lightfoot support a similar interpretation, and church historical accounts in China, Persia, India, Greece, Syria, and Egypt support a "young" earth, how can anyone from any parts of God's body support a view that contradicts God's Word and these trusted Holy Spirit filled trusted pastors of our early Church and remain faithful to Orthodox doctrines?

humbly in His Service,
D.A.

trueseek1's picture

Jonah a myth, therefore early church pastors' views not impt

Strange to mention Jonah as a "myth" and accept it as different than our LORD's death and resurrection since Christ our God disagrees. Here are the trusted words of our LORD:

Matthew 12:40,41 "For even as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, Someone more and greater than Jonah is here!"

Did the consortium of preschism early church fathers at the ecumenical council declare mythological status to the writings of the Word of God? I have been taught that Orthodox and Catholics read the interpretations of our early Church pastors to understand the Holy Spirit's guidance on correctly understanding God's Word and not privately interpreting it like some protestants are said to have done.

Is the belief that Jonah was a myth backed by majority of early Church Fathers or is that a "late modern" interpretation? If our LORD, the God of the universe, did not assign a mthological status to the story of Jonah, but rather used it as the basis for his prophecy of the Cross and Resurrection, how can we now re-interpret it as mythological? Since we all agree that Christians cannot deny Christ's death and resurrection, and cannot make Jesus to be a mythological figure like the gnostics of the 2nd century attacked our ONE Church, how can we now start by using limited archealogical findings to throw away the words of our God?

When Jesus was confronted by the devil, the Son of God said "It is written" and the devil flee for a while by the clarity of the truth of God's Word spoken by the Son of Man in the power of the Spirit of God. I know that our enemy is the devil, who appears as an "englightened" angel of light to deceive even the elect if he can, so please do not take my words against your words as against you but rather see it as my humble but firm conviction that we are all to encourage one another to seek God's Word in understanding our faith and the united interpretations of the early Church fathers can obviously provide us with an additional powerful way to know the mind of God and correctly interpret His Word. "But now I am fearful, lest that even as the serpent beguiled Eve by his cunning, so your minds may be corrupted and seduced from wholehearted and sincere and pure devotion to Christ...such men are false messengers ("apostles") deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And it is no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light;So it is not surprising if his servants also masquerade as ministers of righteousness. But their end will correspond with their deeds." 2 Corinthians 11:3,13-15. Obviously I am not calling our dear brethren the devil, for our battle is not against flesh and blood, but I wonder if the deceitful has taken away their spiritual discernment through a long drawn out intellectualy looking process that misses our LORD's clear understanding of Jonah and His creation?

So when Church fathers believe the Biblical accounts of <10,000 history of man, and many scientists agree but modern popular atheist scientists influence the Christians to not believe, should we not avoid private interpretations of God's Word and trust "It is Written" and the right interpretation by majority, if not all, the early Church fathers, rather than follow the latest trends like some protestants and nonChristian liberals do in the name of Christ?

Reading eastern and evangelical scholars in the book "3 views on eastern orthodoxy" and reading some of the writings of the reformed scholar who now worships with the Catholic brethren (Scott Hahn), I was under the impression that Orthodox and Catholics honor God's Word as the rest of the body of Christ does but they also believe that the guidance of the Holy Spirit to the early Church pastors and following worldwide councils help us rightly interpret God's Word and understand the will of God through the Holy Spirit's work within the Church, but if the "modern church" reinvents historically trustworthy sources and tries to come up with "new interpretations", then should not all believers fight for God's Word as ONE, because of the Love of God that has been shed abroad in all our hearts, just as Athanasius did with Orthodox Catholic Bishop Arius in the 4th century to keep the unity of the ONE faith we all now have?

humbly in His Service,
D.A.

humbly in Christ,
Anthony
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/illuminedheart/my_conversion_from_islam_to_orthodox_christianity_-_part_1




Advertisements