Answering Tas on his Answer to my Comment

The heritage trail at Siccar Point, Scotland
(Commemorating an idea that did not work)
by Tas Walker | This article is from
Creation 35(2):18–19, April 2013
https://creation.com/siccar-point-trail

CMI was beginning to block my comments, so, I translated Hans Georg to Ioannes Georgius, while keeping Lundahl as Lundahl (the correct contemporary way to Latinise a name, like Marcel Lefèbvre is not simply that, but also not Marcellus Faber, he's Marcellus Lefèbvre).

Ioannes Georgius L[undahl]

FR May 12th, 2014

Playfair was Presbyterian. Cuvier was Lutheran. Lyell was Anglican. Darwin was Anglican. Hume was Presbyterian. So was pres-hume-ably Hutton.

These men were not compromising away their Christianity with an already existing ideology, they were sacrificing it to their take on what it meant to be a Protestant.

Tas Walker

May 12th, 2014

Actually they had compromised. They certainly rejected the Bible's history as being true. Just because someone grows up in a church does not mean they are a follower of Christ and accept what He taught. Teillard de Chardin was a Catholic priest but promoted evolution as the great creative force and the truth to which everything should bow. He was clearly not promoting othodox beliefs. Richard Dawkins was confirmed as an Anglican but he rejected that and is now the foremost advocate of atheism.

Well, yes, they rejected the truth of Biblical history.

But that is not a compromise of Christianity, it is in more than one of them a complete sacrifice of Christianity to sth else : namely their take on what it meant to be Protestant.

And note, being a Protestant in historic context (as opposed to present day Anglo-Saxon world) does not mean attempting to be "a follower of Christ".

Teilhard and Dawkins are different : Teilhard actually compromised (one could argue he too so much there was not any Christianity left), and Dawkins sacrificed Christianity (starting with about as much as Teilhard ended up with) to the Evolutionist ideology that already existed.

But Plaifair, Cuvier, Lyell all went before Teilhard down that road, and they would arguably have sacrificed it wholesale, not just compromise with something else, and that sth else they sacrificed it to was a product of their Protestantism : Reformers had rejected the Pope, they rejected what some of you call the "paper pope", Reformers had rejected Catholic tradition, and they rejected the tradition of seeing the Bible as God's word, inerrant.

Ergo, they were better Protestants than Christians, I would tend to say, not Christians at all (some of them openly)./HGL