Can An Evolutionist Be a Christian ?

Originally posted by RBHILL
Can a Muslim or Buddhist be Christian?

The way the question is phrased is risky isn't it?

What does Romans 10:9 say ?

"That is you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved."

I see no other requirement there.

Now if we go on to discuss what is conducive to the spiritual growth of the one who has become a Christian, then some matters of "mixture" of beliefs are likely to have to be dealt with no matter who you are.

Originally posted by sonship
Of course an Evolutionist can be saved.

They don't need saving; Evolution in nature
is not inconsistent with the notion of creation.

Originally posted by sonship

Can An Evolutionist Be a Christian ?

I would say [b]Yes.
An Evolutionist CAN become a receiver of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

In the New Testament there is no requirement that one has to renounce every trace of Darwinian thinking before believing that Christ is their Lord, their Savior.

Anyone disagree that a Darwin influenced person can be redeemed, regenerated and become a believer in the Son of God ?[/b]

Yes, but as an ignorant Christian. That is why some of the apostles told the new Christians that they did not want them to be ignorant.

Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

(2 Corinthians 2:11 KJV)

The theory of evolution and millons and billions of years are devices of Satan to bring damnable heresies into the church of Christ. Example: The gap theory.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, but as an ignorant Christian. That is why some of the apostles told the new Christians that they did not want them to be ignorant.

Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

(2 Corinthians 2:11 KJV)

The theory of evolution and millons and billions of years are devices of Satan to bring damnable heresies into the church of Christ. Example: The gap theory.

So you figure only Christians who are also YEC's will get into heaven.

So all that JC worship would have been in vain for those poor folks.

Some religion you have there. Choke on it.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you figure only Christians who are also YEC's will get into heaven.

So all that JC worship would have been in vain for those poor folks.

Some religion you have there. Choke on it.

Leave him alone sonhouse! That's my Christian brother there.

I don't believe RJ thinks only YEC Christians are saved.

Originally posted by sonship
I didn't say it was used by some to replace religion. I said it was used by some to replace God.

I don't know of anyone who uses evolution to 'replace' god.

What Evolution By Natural Selection does, is provide an explanatory framework
that makes sense of a huge and growing number of observations [facts] about
the natural world. This explanatory framework explains the diversity of life now
and in the past, and does so without the need of any intelligent guiding force
of any kind including that of a god or gods.

However this only 'replaces' god/s if you view god/s purely as a mechanism for
explaining natural phenomena...

And I know of no religion or theist [except perhaps deists?] who actually think
of gods like that. It's certainly not a representation of Christian beliefs.

Evolutionary theory doesn't say anything sensible about morality [although it
does provide an explanation for how morality could come to exist in the first
place] and doesn't provide any of the psychological crutches that religion
and theistic belief can potentially provide.

Belief systems that can 'replace' those of religion and theism are things like
Secular Humanism, which does provide a moral system and social support and
context for our lives.

Evolutionary theory doesn't do that, and isn't meant to.

I agree with vivify that the whole concept of an 'evolutionist' and 'Darwin influenced' is wrong. Its like asking whether a physicist can be a Christian, or what about someone that 'believes in physics'? Are they too Newton influenced to be Christian? Or can we pin it on Einstein? Or would they then be a relativist?
I first learned about Evolution from my Christian parents and then later in a Christian run school and even later in a University in a country that now calls itself a Christian nation. It is really only in the backwaters of the US that evolution is questioned as valid science.
Its interesting also that you didn't ask about astronomers, geologists and all the other branches of science that have come to essentially the same findings with regards to the history of the universe (and Earth).

Originally posted by googlefudge
I don't know of anyone who uses evolution to 'replace' god.

Richard Dawkins, I think would disagree.

"Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist"

source [Berlinski, David. 1996. The deniable Darwin. Commentary 101(6) (Jun). http://www.rae.org/dendar.html]

I think that amounts to replacing God with Evolution for some people.
IE. "be an intellectually fulfilled atheist".

Anyway, my point is made that a person can receive Christ and will be received by Christ for salvation in spite of coming to Him with beliefs in Evolution.

Originally posted by sonship

Anyway, my point is made that a person can receive Christ and will be received by Christ for salvation in spite of coming to Him with beliefs in Evolution.[/b]

In spite of, or perhaps 'because' he comes to him with beliefs in evolution.

Originally posted by sonship
Richard Dawkins, I think would disagree.

"Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist"

source [Berlinski, David. 1996. The deniable Darwin. Commentary 101(6) (Jun). http://www.rae.org/dendar.html]

I think that amounts to replacing God w ...[text shortened]... nd will be received by Christ for salvation in spite of coming to Him with beliefs in Evolution.

I disagree, and given what he's written and said, I suspect so would RD.

I am well aware of that quote, and it's context.

He meant that although an understanding of how we came to exist on this planet
within this hugely complex biosphere with it's great and bewildering diversity of
life is not necessary to be able to rationally justify being an atheist. It is far more
emotionally satisfying to be able to answer such questions with something other than
"I/We don't know".

Evolutionary theory helps explain how all this diversity of life could come to exist
without any divine guidance... It's not the only such theory, and there are still
questions to which the answer is still "I/We don't know... yet!"... but it doesn't
'replace' god in any meaningful sense.

And as others have said, RD is not an "evolutionist" he is not a devotee of "evolutionism".
He is a scientist, specifically some variety of biologist, and as such doesn't turn to "god
did it" as an explanation for natural phenomena. But, as I think you will agree, god/s and
religion are not merely a way for theists to explain the natural world.
The social and emotional and ethics side of religion and theistic belief are nowhere to be
found in evolutionary theory. It's not, thus, any sort of replacement for gods or god worship.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you figure only Christians who are also YEC's will get into heaven.

So all that JC worship would have been in vain for those poor folks.

Some religion you have there. Choke on it.

No that is not wat I said or mean. You ignoramous!

I apologize to those Christian that believe I show bad manners when addressing unbelievers. 😳

Originally posted by googlefudge
I don't know of anyone who uses evolution to 'replace' god.

What Evolution By Natural Selection does, is provide an explanatory framework
that makes sense of a huge and growing number of observations [facts] about
the natural world. This explanatory framework explains the diversity of life now
and in the past, and does so without the need of any ...[text shortened]... support and
context for our lives.

Evolutionary theory doesn't do that, and isn't meant to.

Evolution has never explained anything. Evolution is just a new word invented by atheists to take the place of explantions that were already known, like adaptation and breeding, and to speculate with false ideas of what might have happened in the past if there was no God. 😏

Originally posted by googlefudge
I disagree, and given what he's written and said, I suspect so would RD.

I am well aware of that quote, and it's context.

He meant that although an understanding of how we came to exist on this planet
within this hugely complex biosphere with it's great and bewildering diversity of
life is not necessary to be able to rationally justify being an ...[text shortened]...
found in evolutionary theory. It's not, thus, any sort of replacement for gods or god worship.

So instead of just admitting, "I don't Know", or accepting God, you would rather make false speculations and take the chance of your soul being cast into the Lake of Fire and Brimstone. 😏

Originally posted by googlefudge

I disagree, and given what he's written and said, I suspect so would RD.

What Dawkins would agree with you is, that Atheism is true.

I am well aware of that quote, and it's context.

He meant that although an understanding of how we came to exist on this planet within this hugely complex biosphere with it's great and bewildering diversity of life is not necessary to be able to rationally justify being an atheist. It is far more emotionally satisfying to be able to answer such questions with something other than "I/We don't know".

But he didn't say emotionally satisfying. He said intellectually fulfilled.
Aren't you changing his quote's import?

Evolutionary theory helps explain how all this diversity of life could come to exist without any divine guidance...

Right. And that amounts to replacing God.
"Divine guidance" has to do with God.

And as others have said, RD is not an "evolutionist" he is not a devotee of "evolutionism".

Richard Dawkins is not an evolutionist?
Right, and Billy Graham is not a Christian Evangelist.

He is a scientist, specifically some variety of biologist, and as such doesn't turn to "god did it" as an explanation for natural phenomena. But, as I think you will agree, god/s and religion are not merely a way for theists to explain the natural world.

He's a scientist who saw the opportunity to make a vastly popular book called "The God Delusion" so he could act as a pseudo philosopher or pseudo anti-theologian showing that the "delusion" of God can be replaced. One of these replacements is evolution.

The social and emotional and ethics side of religion and theistic belief are nowhere to be found in evolutionary theory. It's not, thus, any sort of replacement for gods or god worship.

So RD made I don't know how much on a best seller called - "The God Delusion".

But it has nothing to do with God and God [the delusion of, to RD] being replaced.

Anyway, an evolutionist convinced person can receive God in Christ as Lord and Savior. That's my main point of this thread.

Originally posted by sonship
Richard Dawkins is not an evolutionist?
Right, and Billy Graham is not a Christian Evangelist.

According to Wikipedia, he is an ethologist and evolutionary biologist. These are two related branches of Biology. Would you not agree that 'evolutionary biologist' would be a better term for RD, but probably would not suit someone like me who has a degree in Mathematics? I understand the basics of evolutionary biology, as well as the basics of DNA (I have done a beginner course on it by MIT). So maybe I am a beginner DNAist.

My sister (a Christian) has a degree in Biology and works in the Natural History department of a museum, so I presume that at least part of her work is evolutionary biology. Is she an 'evolutionist'?