Nowadays if you want Fr. Seraphim's original works you basically have to get bootleg copies or find one in a parish library...

@@NepticFathers Yes, I have no doubt that is true. I consider myself lucky to have first been aware of him and his work between 1979 -1980. I never knew quite why but from the start I was powerfully drawn to his writings and went towards them without a second thought. Hopefully, one of these days there will be a turnaround and there will be facsimile reprints of those original texts. Thank you for your video and response.

@@gregoryblaska1586 I recently got a bootleg of Orthodox Survival Course, but that book is kind of rough the way it is. I read it back when I first became Orthodox and really liked it. Sometimes the original Plantina books pop up on Lulu and Ebay. The original prints can be very expensive.

@@NepticFathers I really love those old rough Orthodox publications of the earlier days in when Orthodoxy was first being "Englished". Some of them mimeographed, some done on an early word processor or some such thing. For me they carry a unique urgency and effort and as such convey a palpable love that they only have. I can always sense the feeling of the deep and sincere belief behind their getting produced and gotten out. And, yes, those originals are terribly expensive these days.

@@gregoryblaska1586 Do you have any of the original Death to the World 'zines"?

Ya, there are a large number of Orthodox out there that seem to behave in a way that makes it seem like they are trying to get brownie points with the world by supporting Darwinian evolution. Even before looking at scientific data, the theory can be refuted philosophically. It's impossible to describe or have any scientific proof for everything in existence coming into being out of non-being as non-being would not be able to be described using words and thoughts and ideas that only come from within created existence. With Darwinian evolution there needs to be a mechanical explanation for everything and there can never be a description, using human methods, of how all of creation came into existence out of nothing, especially without a cause. Theosis would be needed In order for such an explanation to be able to be experienced by the human mind, which is clearly above and beyond anything that science can offer. Darwinism is the just another gas-lighting ideology that was jammed down everyone’s throats until it stuck.

@@NepticFathers - You seem out of touch with Orthodoxy and I doubt you live in an Orthodox country

@@NicholasAggelopoulos You seem callous and young

@@rigavitch - No educated Orthodox Christian outside America today believes in Creationism. The book itself is a misrepresentation of the statements of the Fathers. Anyone who lives in an Orthodox country and is acculturated with Orthodox thinking would not make such a video that embarasses Orthodox Christians around the world!

Used book sellers tend to price hike books once they become hard to get especially in the case of this book where it has a high demand. Hopefully they will have a new edition or reprint here soon.

I believe a third edition is in the works. No idea of any publication date, though.

Hrm... fascinating. There's also the point that in the Hebrew Bible, the word used for the moon is not created but "made", like how a craftsman assembles something. Thus the Bible says that God made the moon, something that he built rather than snapped into existence. When you look at all the bizarre odditites of the moon that science has NO explanation for (the moon's size, the distance between the Earth and moon, how one face of the moon is always aligned to the Earth, and the moon's creation), the Bible makes 100x more sense than anything science has come up with. This is why most scientists try to avoid the moon topic in general, since it exposes that all their explanations require preposterous coincidences even they cant take seriously

Well, from a complete scientific understanding, the moon does not merely reflect the suns light (else it would be yellow not white). Instead, it absorbs the light from the sun, re-radiating the energy as its own light. Hence, the moon is a source of light that is powered by the sun's energy

@@konnorporter5115 iIn that case, it's amazing how the Apollo Astronauts weren't blinded for life by this re-radiated light as they approached it...let alone when they landed. A light so bright and powerful, it casts shadows on the Earth from almost 239,000 miles away.

So you think that a text writen for the benefit of illiterate Jewish peasantry 23 centuries ago has more validity than our scientific understanding of the solar system? In Genesis the stars and the sun and moon are lights affixed onto a firmament over a flat earth (already known by natural philosophers to be false at the time the OT was written). Above the firmament there are waters and when there is rain, the waters presumably pour through the firmament to the flat earth, since there are no waters below the firmament. The only waters above are those above the firmament (i.e. above the stars). Is that making any sense to you, assuming you are a rational being? To begin with, if you think that the earth is flat, then you have not been high enough on an airplane. Also the Fathers of the Church were aware that these things are not true. St Basil was aware that the earth was round and that the waters above are not above the firmament and that the planets are not "lights" and are not affixed to the firmament.

​@@konnorporter5115that is false and shows you have no understanding of how light or color works. Light is emitted in a spectrum of all colors and our seeing a specific color is due to the material absorbing all colors except the one you're seeing, its reflecting that one back at you. This is the reason the sky is blue. The atmosphere strips out blue light because it has a short enough wavelength, disperses and reflects the blue light back. The moon doesn't emit light, it reflects it. Also the sun is emitting white light as well, it only looks yellow; again, because of our atmosphere. This is why when the sun sets it tends to get darker and more orange or red, you're seeing through more atmosphere altering it's color further. Lasly; even if there wasn't an answer to something science hasn't found, that doesn't mean you get to just start pointing to a book and say look what it says. That still does nothing to show why anyone should belive thats the truth of the matter. Anyone can write things in a book.

Thank you for introducing me to the concept of of confirmatory bias. I've just searched for it. Very interesting because many studies of the last decades, especially those in the medical area, even those muticentric-randomized- double-blind- peer reviewed ones, apparently are not so buleet-proof reliable like they want us to believe. Recently, an article in the British Journal of Medicine questioned the extent to which we can believe in "evidence-based" medicine, given that many factors intersect and conflict with each other, such as financial interests of big pharma, ideological interests and bias. And BJM is the oldest and one of the most respected journals in the the health area.

Really dude? Christ is risen☦️

He didn’t have confirmation bias. God revealed Himself to him.

The huge biography about him is also out of print so that could be a good place to start.

@@NepticFathers I have both editions and began my preparation for our pilgrimage to St Herman’s last week by reading both side by side about a month ago!!! They are both great! But a lot of Fr Herman’s voice had been removed….

@@orthodoxboomergrandma3561 size wise how big is the edition without Fr. Herman's influence? Is much cut out of the book?

@@NepticFathers there’s quite a lot added so they seem about the same 1042 pages for first and 1152 for second, same font size. I’m loving reading both side by side.

Guess why his book is hard to get?

Yes, this is a good book that offers an alternative to Darwinism, and it has a ton of information. Are you looking for something that refutes Darwinism from a scientific perspective or philosophical/theological perspective or both?

@@NepticFathers bit of both, perhaps starting from the scientific angle

@@jcdenton2907 I would recommend Stephen Meyers' and Michael Behe's work for a scientific perspective. They have some great books and great videos on KZfaq about the topic. They are coming from a protestant background I believe and will have differences in beliefs that an Orthodox point of view, but their work is still great. They do a lot better job bringing science up instead of arguments like "Darwinism is wrong because it's not in the Bible."

@Neptic Fathers thanks for the recommendations

Just found out about James Perloff and his work on Darwin and it is fire: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jdp2htKHtKu1lac.html He also has a book he wrote on the subject, and he recently became Orthodox and wrote a book on the Synaxarion.

Creationism is not a theory, it is a cult

One of the commentors said they should hopefully be printing more copies soon, which would probably be better than reading a 1000 page pdf, unless you have a great ereader with eink.

I have found it online also but only the 2000 edition not the 2011, I mean, the first, not the second.

@@NepticFathers oh no I wasn’t planning on reading 1000 pages off a screen!I had it printed and bound at a printers! I wanted to have a hard copy of that book, all of his works are precious. Anyone else notice Father Seraphims books are becoming a rarity… ? his Survival Course recently ‘disappeared’ off of all Amazon platforms.

@@angeleyes7401 how was it bound? Spiral or paperback? I need to find a place than will bind PDFs for me, otherwise I have to hand bind them which takes a long time.

@@NepticFathers spiral. It cost me 50€, I don’t know what they’re charging in other parts of the world, but I thought that was pretty decent for 1000 pages.

Science is way over tradition

We have a common design and they are practical. As human we are a link between the earthly realm and the heavenly. We reflect the heavenly in that we are made in the image and likeness of God, and reflect the earthly in that we have bodies.

@@NepticFatherswhat about the dug up skeletons of humanoid like creatures that are different from humans in their shape, size and make up but similar enough that they seem related

$$$ for that book...

@@NepticFathers i only asked, and got, $100. No reason to price gouge.

I hope they come out with the 3rd edition/reprint soon. A lot of people want it. They told me in an email to pray that the book can come out, so they at least have plans to have a new edition or reprint.

@@orthodoxphronesis it'll happen

If another copy ever gets printed, please say so in this thread. God bless you all!

also in an uncreated universe

Genesis is an allegory. Once you accept that and don't try to mash it with modern science, things become easier.

@@theTavis01 It does clash with science (evolution) as you’re essentially saying everything was created in 6 days. It also makes the claim that all humans originated from one couple and we know that’s genetically impossible. Me taking it for the symbolic and the allegorical elements makes it easier to understand and see the value in it. It’s much more eye opening to view it that way than to take it as historical fact, taking it for face value is the lowest way to interpret it in my opinion. If it never clashed with science you wouldn’t have so many people in the church deny it.

@@awake3083 Easy is absolutely correct. Protestantism and modern Romanism is all about easy. This is why scientistic anti-theism is so powerful. Easy Christians bow down to pseudo-science. The clergy and theologians are weak and pandering to it.

@@awake3083 24-Hour evening and morning cycles is explicitly literal and science has never negated this or disproven it.

Fr. Seraphim was an extremely intelligent man; he knew at least two foreign languages, had a great grasp of eastern and western philosophy, could translate books in foreign languages out loud as if he was reading in English, and had a knowledge of religions and Orthodoxy that was unsurpassed. To think he "couldn't" get a job in science is laughable. I've also had conversation with one of his spiritual sons and I know monastics that knew him personally; his biographers also testify to his intelligence. Maybe he applied for a certain job and didn't get it, but it wouldn't have been because he couldn't. Many of his objections to Darwinism target the philosophical axioms which underpin the modern scientific establishment, which cannot be based upon emperical analysis and basically function as a replacement for religious beliefs for many modern atheists. If one criticizes these philosophical beliefs they are targeted as "anti-scientific" because they are 'heretics' in they eyes of modern scientific academia, with many of them having a terrible grasp of philosophy. That is why when you have guys like John Lennox debate Richard Dawkins, Lennox mops the floor with Dawkins.

@@NepticFathers Ackchyually

If you read Fr Seraphim works you would know he was not against science at all. He said " Science and religion are both after the truth. If they disagree one is pseudo-science or pseudo religion". Fr Seraphim was after the truth.

Why so toxic lol

How could he get a carrer in science, when he cannot even get a career as a priest ...

I actually became a Christian in high school because I had a language arts teacher who would occasionally talk about creation science during random classroom rants.

What are these horror stories?

@@theTavis01 As a Christian I do not honor the beliefs of naturalism nor can I. I will take the side of the Saints of the Orthodox church anyday over the theory of antichrist humanists from a century and a-half ago.

@@theTavis01 The calendar of the Byzantine church was based off the dateing from the Septuagint for the creation of the world so they basically had a very similar time scale to modern young earth creationists. It wasn't changed until the 1700s I believe.

@@theTavis01 I don't reject science, just naturalism as a philosophy, ie. the world can be explained by purely mechanical, naturalistic processes. It is quite absurd to believe that we can somehow explain how material existence came into being from nonexistence especially since we are a part of the material existence. It also leaves no room from the possibility that how the material world came into being transcends human intellectual capabilities.