Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: gettinolder
How would an evolutionist define "Christianity"? I think I gather you are a Christian and an evolutionist, and maybe could answer my question.

First of all, I am not an "evolutionist." I am a scientist whose calling in life is to study and describe the physical world as well as I can. And to explain my observations to others.

A Christian is one who has accepted the lord Jesus, who died on the cross for our sins. Yes, it is a little more complicated than that, but I don't care to get into all of the finer points of what that statement means. No one has to deny that the physical world has the characteristics it has, or to claim that scientists are lying when they describe their observations (which is bearing false witness, an act specifically forbidden in the Ten Commandments) to accept Jesus into one's heart. Recognizing that the creation story told in Genesis is a metaphor meant to teach about morality and is not a literal account does not (or should not) damage one's faith any more than recognizing other metaphors would weaken one's faith.

41 posted on 02/06/2014 7:41:23 PM PST by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: exDemMom

OK.

I guess somewhere between the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the present those of us who still believe we are God’s created are fewer in number.

I know you won’t judge me or think less of me because I disagree with you.

Thanks for the comeback.


43 posted on 02/06/2014 7:53:41 PM PST by gettinolder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

To: exDemMom

A preemptive apology after reading this post - I am not questioning your faith in Christ - I also love science and I enjoy studying God’s creation. That being said, don’t believe the propaganda put forth against ID - or at least try to keep an open mind - after all, look at Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, et al...and how they have discredited science. We were all told that science was agnostic but now it is blatantly atheistic. It is a tool for atheism as long as methodological materialism is only allowed. We should just replace it with methodological realism and not keep science in a box.


45 posted on 02/06/2014 8:03:31 PM PST by Heartlander (We are all Rodeo Clowns now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson