Re: Did Darwin become a Christian on his deathbed.
If God is unwilling that any be lost, then we should be too. If you want to be an imitation of Christ, you should share His values.
I do.
He says very clearly that whosoever causes one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better if a millstone were tied around his neck and he be cast into the depths of the sea.
Darwin has a lot to answer for.
You've already seen the testimony of a man whose young Earth beliefs nearly wrecked his faith, and he documents others who were not so lucky. C'mon.
He was a weakminded man. 'Strong in faith' means able to resist whatever may come against that faith.
The proper attitude is:
The very first principle of all is the 'God is'.
The second is: He made all things, no matter what anybody (including scientists, philosophers or whoever) may say.
Nothing can change those 2 facts, and to think of abandoning faith for whatever reason is weakminded, doubleminded and faithless.
it is YE creationism that is the great atheist-maker.
That is pure nonsense, and I think you know it.
Given that he suggested God and nature were not at odds, I'd say very few, if any.
His theory has resulted in all the things I pointed out in my previous post, and many more besides. He is accountable for its consequences, and will have to foot the bill when the time comes.
How big the bill will be is between him and God, and is not for us to say.
None at all. Unless you want to call things Darwin and his followers rejected as "Darwinism." As you learned, Darwin wrote that to even let the weakest humans die would be an "overwhelming evil", and Darwinists like Morgan and Punnett pointed out that the racial theories of eugenicists were as scientifically unsound as they were morally objectionable.
I believe the reason Wallace disowned the theory was because he could see exactly where it would lead.
Darwin, warned in advance, had written anxiously to Wallace, 'I hope you have not murdered too completely your own and my child.' Wallace never did abandon natural selection, but later generations came to find him an unfit parent. He did not conform to the pattern of the modern scientist, who, on seeing the evolutionary light, was supposed to shed any illusion about the supernatural. Wallace attempted to reconcile the two, and his reputation suffered accordingly."
http://creationwiki.org/Alfred_Russel_Wallace
He abandoned the fame and glory it would have brought him - but Darwin wouldn't pay that price. Now no amount of furious back-pedalling on the part of evolutionists of every stripe (and that includes him and you) can negate the consequences of the theory.
They are inexorable and unstoppable to anyone with a logical mind who accepts it.
Yes, there are disclaimers, but they are merely futile efforts to deflect the logic which is, as I say, inexorable and unstoppable.
As you see, YE creationism will have much to answer for at judgement.
Not half as much as Darwin and his miserable band of destructive followers. Just look at Dawkins in our time. How many atheists has he created, or supported in their atheism? Too many to count, I'm certain. And you dare to think that YE can begin to compare with this rabble?
I very much doubt it.
The problem here is that I am positive that you can see the logical consequences of evolution belief. And you are doing your level best to minimise the damage to your conscience that it inevitably causes.
Damage that arises from the conflict between your catholicism and your scientific inclinations.
Why not give evolution up? You cannot serve two masters.
Jesus says so.
totopic