home
RSS
Survey: U.S. Protestant pastors reject evolution, split on Earth's age
January 10th, 2012
04:18 PM ET

Survey: U.S. Protestant pastors reject evolution, split on Earth's age

By Dan Gilgoff, CNN.com Religion Editor

America’s Protestant pastors overwhelmingly reject the theory of evolution and are evenly split on whether the earth is 6,000 years old, according to a survey released Monday by the Southern Baptist Convention.

When asked if “God used evolution to create people," 73% of pastors disagreed - 64% said they strongly disagreed - compared to 12% who said they agree.

Asked whether the earth is approximately 6,000 years old, 46% agreed, compared to 43% who disagreed.

A movement called Young Earth creationism promotes the 6,000-year-old figure, arguing that it is rooted in the Bible. Scientists say the earth is about 4.5 billion years old.

The Southern Baptist Convention survey, which queried 1,000 American Protestant pastors, also found that 74% believe the biblical Adam and Eve were literal people.

“Recently discussions have pointed to doubts about a literal Adam and Eve, the age of the earth and other origin issues," said Ed Stetzer, president of LifeWay Research, a division of the Southern Baptist Convention, in a report on LifeWay’s site. “But Protestant pastors are overwhelmingly Creationists and believe in a literal Adam and Eve.”

The phone survey was conducted in May 2011, sampling ministers from randomly selected Protestant churches. The survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percent, LifeWay said.

A 2010 Gallup poll found that 40% of Americans believe God created humans in their present form, versus 54% who said humans developed over millions of years.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Christianity • Science

« Previous entry
soundoff (6,504 Responses)
  1. bdl

    because 7 out of 10 pastors are mindless twits. I become an ordained minister simply by filling out a questionaire over the internet. Any schmuck off the street can become a preacher. When you make money preaching then that should be a red flag to anyone with half a brain.

    January 15, 2012 at 5:54 pm |
  2. northern light

    7 out of 10 sane rational thinking adults ....that live outside the USA ......reject religion....so we can say it's a tie.

    Most US citizens fear that unless they have a tight border the wrong people will get in.....The US tight border also works well at then other way ........keeping the crazy religious fundies in.....much safer for the rest of the world that way.

    January 15, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
  3. GodIsTheWay

    I don't understand why God could not use Evolution (I believe this is called Intelligent Design) to create the abundance of odd and unusual lifeforms (duck billed platypus, dodo bird) not to mention human life itself. Perhaps it's because I'm not Southern Baptist, I can read and my family tree actually branches.

    January 15, 2012 at 1:59 pm |
    • Dr.K.

      I think that is a valid concept for religious people to consider, but careful equating that with "Intelligent Design." ID is not a kind of evolution, and has been pretty thoroughly debunked.

      January 15, 2012 at 2:51 pm |
    • Jake

      I to am surprised that people with faith will just throw out rational thought. Why can't evolution and faith co exists? For all those who believe in a higher power, is it not possible that evolution is the creation of god?

      January 15, 2012 at 3:33 pm |
    • Mike

      God certainly could have used evolution...he didn't but he could have had he wanted to. That's the point...those of us who hear God's voice know for a fact that Christ is alive and evolution is false. It's not that we are against evolution, but we are against that which Christ tells us is not true. If it were, that would be great...but it isn't.

      January 15, 2012 at 4:21 pm |
    • cigarlover6

      ***Rolling eyes** at the surety at which these dogma thump-ers speak. Its mind boggling at the definitiveness with which they speak based on some fairy tale text some crapshooter wrote thousands of years ago. But refuses to believe facts with the scientific scrutiny based on 2k years of knowledge gained. What ignorance. And these type of persons want to govern others and rest of the world.
      ID, it's the ultimate crapshoot to marry fairytale with science. Look at Mike, how sure he is that since JC didn't approve of Evolution 2K years ago, so he can't believe anything science finds. And he is using internet and computer to type this, LOL. Hey did JC approved of internet in your fairytale text? Did he? If not, then why are you enjoying the fruits of modern science? Oh, I get it. Since it doesn't challenges your dogma, thats why. Cool!

      January 15, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
    • GodIsTheWay

      @DrK: Thanks. I had thought Intelligent Design was about God using evolution for the purposes of creationism. Never really studied it.

      @Jake: It's absolutely possible, and I believe, more than likely probable as well.

      @Mike: I haven't yet found a single verse in my bible where Jesus says, "Evolution is wrong, completely. The Father never used it, so stop thinking He did." Not one. So, I'll make a deal with you. You show me the verse, I'll consider stopping believing that He did use it.

      @Cigarlover: You want to spew venomous, evil vitriol, use your own thread to do it. I won't tolerate it on mine. We're having a good discussion here, and not every "fundie thumper" (I'm Antiochian Orthodox, so I guess I'm a fundie thumper) refuses to think while living in the world.

      January 15, 2012 at 7:41 pm |
    • Mike

      I cannot give you a verse, but you always have the option of simply doing what I did...ask God about it. There are things the Bible is not clear about because God WANTS us to ask him. For example, what was the light for the first 3 days if the sun was not there until day 4? What is the real meaning of wisdom, understanding and love? The Bible uses these words but it doesn't define them and I also asked him about these things. If you ask and continue to ask, he will eventually answer. You may not always like the answer, but you will find it to be...the most amazing thing you have ever heard...literally.

      January 17, 2012 at 4:27 pm |
  4. Dave

    This conversation is boring. The facts were generally settled 150 years ago. It is those who pander to ignorance that keep it going. What I want know is where those neat mugs came from.

    January 15, 2012 at 10:20 am |
  5. kflanigan

    For those of you who don't blieve in evolution. What the hell are all these fossils that we keep finding,

    January 15, 2012 at 10:17 am |
  6. AGuest9

    Proof that education is this country has failed: If your minister/priest/imam/rabbi can tell you a fairy tale, and you believe it.

    January 15, 2012 at 8:22 am |
    • kflanigan

      Really spot on. I don't believe in science I believe in my invisible friends.

      January 15, 2012 at 10:19 am |
    • NHWoman

      So the idea that there was a big bang makes sense? What caused the big bang? How did gases come into being? What made the galaxies? You have no more market on the answers than anyone else.

      January 15, 2012 at 1:19 pm |
    • JohnR

      What caused god? And what god did all this creating? I hear the Mayan gods could whip up some damn fine creations!

      January 15, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
    • NHWoman

      John R, do you really expect there to be an answer to any of these questions? No matter which side of the argument the person is on? Do you really think anyone knows with certainty what happened thousands of years before their birth?

      January 15, 2012 at 1:52 pm |
    • Dr. Gary Hurd

      @NHwoman

      Your questions about cosmology are irrelevant to evolutionary biology.

      However, you could learn about the origin of the universe from a relatively easy to read book by Arizona State University physicist Lawrence Krauss, "A Universe From Nothing" (2012 Simon & Schuster).

      January 15, 2012 at 2:07 pm |
    • NHWoman

      Dr. Hurd,
      My comments are no more irrelevant than your response. Cosmology, evolution religion, and Krauss' work all share the same characteristics-they are all accepted hypotheses and in the end, people choose to accept one hypothesis over another.

      January 15, 2012 at 2:12 pm |
    • AGuest9

      "So the idea that there was a big bang makes sense?"

      Yes, it is logical that since everything (mostly everything-we are a direct collision course with the Andromeda galaxy) in the universe is moving out as time progresses, then "winding the tape backwards" would show that the universe(multiverse?) was denser, therefore hotter. Wind it back far enough, you approach a dense, hot point, a singularity.

      "What caused the big bang?"

      No one was there to see what caused it. In all likelihood, studying physics, is that it was a rebound action, caused by the subsequent collapse of a prior universe. Other theories include a brane collision, causing a bubble universe which became our own.

      "How did gases come into being? What made the galaxies?"

      Gases came about through the process of ionization, following models of one-dimensional Lagrangian hydrodynamics. The ionization process took part at an early epoch just after transparency occurred as the universe began cooling. During this cooling period, neutral hydrogen formed in a soup of free subatomic particles that were still hot enough to form a plasma. Gravitational and stronger forces (electrical and nuclear) caused the attraction that formed the first stars. These stars ignited through fusion as they became hotter and denser, synthesizing helium and heavier elements. The gravitational attraction of stars and gaseous nebulae formed into the first galaxies.

      January 15, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • Smukers

      @NHWoman: Regarding my and your beliefs. Here is what you believe: The supernatural, including ghosts, psychics, gods, tarot cards, etc. Whereas, I believe in reality and facts.

      January 15, 2012 at 2:51 pm |
    • JohnR

      My questions were simply echoing yours, NHWoman. Pleased to see that you admit that you have no idea what if any gods or gods played what role in the formation of the universe. It isn't annoying when people cling to fanciful ideas written down in silly old books by people who tried to answer questions they barely knew how to pose? And THEN, after coming up with a ridiculous creation myth, there's this whole salvation doctrine about some guy dying to wash away sins that are supposedly all the fault of two cartoon characters fabricated in genesis! Hilarious! Yeah, just admit you have no idea and go about your business. Leave the science of the past to the scientists!

      January 15, 2012 at 3:08 pm |
    • NHWoman

      This is an absurd discussion now. I can't tell, John R, what you think, I'm just trying to suggest that people with open minds don't draw conclusions or call anything fact; only that they accept hypotheses. All of the stuff written in answer to my rhetorical questions by the people who think they know science/have a market on the truth and knowledge, just shows that they are, indeed, closed minded people. They won't even admit that science is hypothesis. Any more than religious fanatics will admit that religion is a belief system. All one and the same in the end-people trying to explain a universe that came into being long before they were alive-and none knowing with certainty how that came to be.

      January 15, 2012 at 3:19 pm |
    • JohnR

      I'd say that people who think that the best science as of January 15, 2012 will stand for ever and ever are not so much closed minded, but profoundly naive about how much science will likely continue to progress. And the progress is not just some linear accu-mulation of fact. Significant revisions have occurred before and likely will in the future. But some things are firmly established and one is that seeking historical and scientific knowledge in a bunch of ancient texts cobbled together by priestly classes with an agenda hundreds to thousands of years ago is beyond ludicrous.You can nitpick about the lack of absolute certainty all you want, but that doesn't open the door to reinstating genesis and the rest of the bible as the recognized source of all knowledge. Those days are loooooong over!!!

      January 15, 2012 at 3:27 pm |
    • Dr. Gary Hurd

      @NHWoman

      Obviously you have never been in a chemistry lab. There are things that are facts. They are not imaginary "powers." They are facts. The freezing point, or boiling point of a chemical at a fixed pressure is constant. That is a fact. Theories are explanations of facts. Hypotheses are predictions of outcomes based on theories. In the real world, we use these theories to do things; build things, grow food, cure disease.

      You don't seem to know this.

      January 15, 2012 at 3:38 pm |
    • AGuest9

      So, it's an absurd discussion, now? We'll see how absurd this all is when the next generation's children are getting food from soup-lines. Technology doesn't progress without the scientific method, therefore, neither does the nation.

      January 15, 2012 at 3:48 pm |
    • Uncle Dave

      @Dr. Hurd

      Good call on the "Hypotheses are predictions of outcomes based on theories" comment you made. Unfortunately for your reference to physicist Lawrence Krauss's book, "A Universe From Nothing," even Dr. Krauss admits his hypothesis is not testable and there for is philosophy and not science. So in the final analysis your position on the origin of the universe is just as much a matter of faith as anyone else's.

      January 15, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
    • Dr. Gary Hurd

      @ Uncle Dave, "Dr. Hurd: "So in the final analysis your position on the origin of the universe is just as much a matter of faith as anyone else's."

      No. This is not the case on two levels. First, I accept scientific results, and theory provisionally. Second, I do not think that Larry is able to give the Real©, True™, Official® Origin of the Universe. But, his book is a very good place to start which is why I recommended it. You could also benefit by reading Leonard Susskind's "The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design" (2005 New York: Little and Brown Publishers).

      We might not understand the origin of universes until we can create them. This would not give sanction to believe magic as an alternative to reality.

      January 15, 2012 at 7:42 pm |
  7. Scientist - See: Rational Being

    Evolution is a FACT. Everything that lives is continually evolving or it goes extinct.

    It is happening quickly at a cellular level (the common cold & flu and your immune system), and more slowly with larger more complex systems.

    Artificial selection (by us humans) has created different dog and animal breeds, different crops, and yes, we created the banana.

    Even our technology has evolved under less-than-favorable conditions (remember audio tape downloads?), ISA bus, 25 pin serial port?

    Why is innocent ignorance of country and state laws a criminal offence, yet willful ignorance of the laws of nature and history of the planet celebrated by tax-free religious status?

    January 15, 2012 at 7:20 am |
    • NHWoman

      There are no facts in science. The first thing you learn about the scientific method is that a hypothesis is stated, tested, and if the results support it, that hypothesis is accepted. Accepting something does not make it fact.

      Unless you can see, hear, and smell like other members of the animal kingdom, you are limited by your human form in what you can experience and witness, and your brain is linked to your senses. That means there are some things you cannot know.

      January 15, 2012 at 10:17 am |
    • Billy

      So If I have a hypothesis that putting water in my truck won't make it go and I test it over and over and my truck never runs on water does it make it a fact that diesel engines wont run on water or am I just accepting that diesel engines cant run on water? either way its a fact. That is absolutely getting my vote for the dumbest thing posted on CNN at the end of the year. Nothing will top it. Congratulations my friend.

      January 15, 2012 at 1:22 pm |
    • NHWoman

      Maybe you don't have the market on being dumb after all. Congratulations.

      January 15, 2012 at 1:46 pm |
    • Dr. Gary Hurd

      @NHwoman,

      Your appeal to post-modernist "nobody knows" arguments for ignorance are more damaging to religion than science. There are things we cannot directly experience, but this doesn't mean that things are "unknowable." For example, A blind person cannot see a picture, but they can listen to a description. With the naked eye, we cannot see the most distant galaxies. We can with the Hubble Space Telescope. More importantly, those galaxies were there whether we saw them, or not.

      January 15, 2012 at 2:16 pm |
    • Bizarre

      Dr. Gary Hurd,

      Yes. The default / fall-back answer to the unknown is NOT, "a god did it".

      January 15, 2012 at 2:22 pm |
    • AGuest9

      @Scientist, as much as I would like to agree with you, evolution is a scientific theory, just as gravity is. Both are studied, and the fact that we catch colds with new strains of virii and aren't flying off into space, means that theories aren't as "made up" as creationists want everyone to believe. However, we do have to remain true to our nomenclature.

      January 15, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
  8. Rev. Jason

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

    Jesus wanted love and truth. The Bible is a spiritual guide – not a history book or a science book. Anyone who has taken time to actually put aside bias and feelings and simply research, study and follow the evidence knows that parts of the Bible are written literally and many parts are written to be taken figuratively and as life lessons ......

    January 15, 2012 at 12:38 am |
  9. Bumper

    We exist to glorify God and to magnify his Holy Name.
    Darwin only added confusion to the mix and didn't prove anything scientific.
    Atheists put too much faith in science because they don't really understand it.
    Atheism does not glorify God.
    If you deny the existence of God now, he will deny knowing you on your appointed day of judgement.
    Atheists will almost certainly face eternal punishment and go to hell.
    Once you see the fire and brim stone, it will be too late to change your mind.
    The only way to enter Heaven, is through Christ, NOT Religion (Buddha, Easter bunny, etc...)
    Jesus is real. Read the word of God.

    January 14, 2012 at 10:07 pm |
    • momoya

      If god denies knowing people then he will be lying. Any god who would build and sustain an eternal torture chamber for the people who don't dance to just the right tune in just the right way is disgusting and not worthy of anyone's worship.

      January 14, 2012 at 11:19 pm |
    • kamana

      The jews pointed out at the outset that there never was a jewish male named Jesus Christ nor was there ever a jewish male who performed such miracles as described by the christians. The christians, of course, called the jews liar’s yet they cannot prove to the jews that there ever was a such a jew as they described.

      January 15, 2012 at 11:05 am |
    • Roger

      How can you prove any of the statements you made? And no, because it was in a book written thousands of years ago (bible) is not valid proof.

      January 15, 2012 at 1:33 pm |
    • AGuest9

      No, we exist because we evolved from earlier species on a planet in the "Goldilocks zone" of a medium-sized yellow star that has very minor energy fluctuations and has been sufficiently far enough from any stars that have become supernovae, and dosed surrounding systems with massive amounts of gamma radiation.

      January 15, 2012 at 8:55 pm |
  10. Bumper

    Biology is a "soft" (too much dependence of sub structures) science and really has no place in the science and God debate. Chemistry is not good either. in fact, in my previous comment, I was not referring to either chemistry or the false theory of evolution. Look to the physical and computational sciences for the answers of how God created the Universe because they are more fundamental. In the beginning, fundamental rules (NOT CHEMISTRY, DUH!) elements were created "fully formed", but obviously, living systems were not.

    January 14, 2012 at 9:43 pm |
    • kamana

      There are billions of dead, lifeless planets and rocks in outer space but there is no sign of another living planet such as earth. Why would a god create all those billions of dead bodies and only one living one (earth)?

      January 15, 2012 at 11:19 am |
  11. Bumper

    Evolution is a fake scientific theory. Read my previous postings to find out why.

    January 14, 2012 at 9:36 pm |
    • kamana

      Religion is a product of language and cannot exist without language. Language is an invention and. therefore. aritficial, unnatural and unreal. Everything created by and through the use of language must, likewise, be artificial, unnatural and unreal. Religion is artificial, unnatural and unreal. Only beings who have the use of language can have religion. All other beings cannot.

      January 15, 2012 at 11:22 am |
    • AGuest9

      @Bumper, I sincerely hope that you didn't reproduce.

      January 15, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
  12. AvdBerg

    The Bible is the authority and discerner of all things (Hebrews 5:12). The Word of God is God and the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending (John 1:1; Rev. 1:8).

    The Mystery of God begins with the fact that mankind in his natural state is not able to receive the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14). They use little snippets of the Bible of which they have no knowledge.

    This includes all that is to know about Creation and the history of mankind. The following is a copy of the article ‘Creation’ listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca and is according to the Spirit of truth (John 14:17).

    All of the other pages and articles will explain how and by whom this world has been deceived as confirmed by the Word of God in Revelation 12:9 and they will also explain what mankind must do to be reunited with God and to be able to understand the Bible.

    Creation

    Since mankind is unable to understand the Bible (1 Cor. 2:14) and is separated from God through the power of sin and the spirit of this world, there has been much speculation and misconception about the origin of man as part of God’s Creation.

    We have explained much of the mysteries and the early days of Adam & Eve and where and when they lived, in the article ‘Who is God and who is Satan?’ posted on this website.

    It is well known that Adam & Eve lived approximately 4,000 BC in the area presently called Baghdad and Adam lived to be 930 years of age.

    Most people still believe today that Adam & Eve were the first man and woman that God created, which has proven to be impossible, as mankind in its present form has existed for millions of years.

    Adam was the first Son of God as explained in the article ‘The Mystery of God Revealed’ listed on this website, but Adam and Eve were not the first man and woman as claimed by so many.

    The purpose of this article is to show mankind what took place before the days of Adam & Eve, and how God’s Creation has developed (evolved) for billions of years.

    We are not speaking about evolution as a form of creation, but as a form of development, growth and advancement. This article will also serve as another piece to the puzzle of the Mystery of God (Mark 4:11; 1 Cor. 4:1; 4:1; Eph. 1:9; 3:3; 6:19; 1 Tim. 3:16).

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth (Genesis 1:1). Without giving any recognition of God’s infinite power, mankind started to gain information about two hundred years ago, how this world was created through a theory of natural selection as presented by Charles Darwin.

    Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882) was an English naturalist who realized and presented compelling evidence that all species of life have evolved over time from common ancestors, through the process he called natural selection.

    The fact that evolution occurs, became accepted by the scientific community and much of the general public in his lifetime, while his theory of natural selection came to be widely seen as the primary explanation of the process of evolution in the 1930s, and now forms the basis of modern evolutionary theory.

    In modified form, Darwin’s scientific discovery is the unifying theory of the life sciences, providing logical explanation for the diversity of life.

    Darwin’s theory was met with derision by the religious communities, especially the Roman Church. They had placed the Bible in the index of forbidden books by the Council of Toledo in 1229 AD and were totally void of any wisdom and knowledge of God as orchestrated by and while under the powers and principalities of this world (Eph. 6:12).

    The primary objective of the Vatican in those days, was to convince every man, woman and child that Adam and Eve were the first man and woman.

    Due to mounting pressures by undisputed scientific evidence, even the Vatican has now changed its stand about the Theory of Evolution advanced by Charles Darwin. Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, said Darwin’s theory, which the Church was against, is compatible with Christianity.

    The acknowledgment of Darwin’s theory, coincides with the holding of a papal-backed conference at the Pontifical Gregorian University to observe the 150th anniversary of Darwin’s 'On the Origin of Species'.

    Now Darwin’s Theory of Evolution has still been in crisis, in light of the tremendous advances science has made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years.

    While Darwin’s evidence brought his Theory of Evolution back to only a certain timeframe of God’s Creation, it is only recently that mankind has been able to unlock the mystery of molecular mechanism.

    A biochemistry professor and a student at the University of Montreal have proposed a new theory how life on earth may have started and found the answer in the ribosome, a relatively large mechanism within the cell that takes RNA (Ribonucleic Acid) instruction and builds proteins.

    Scientists have long wondered how chemicals spontaneously came together to create proteins before life began itself.

    According to the professor, life got started approximately four billion years ago and his theory fills in a critical step in understanding how God’s Creation developed and advanced.

    The following statement by the professor is critical in being able to understand God’s Creation:

    "In the absence of such explanations, some people could imagine unseen forces at work when such complex structures emerge in nature."

    The unseen forces (1 Peter 1:8; 1 John 4:20) refer to God who is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship Him in spirit and in truth (John 4:24) in order to be able to come to the acknowledging of the truth and of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ (Col. 2:2).

    The above is what the believers refer to as Creation while many refer to it as evolution as they do not understand and accept God as the creator of all things. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end and the first and the end of all things (Isaiah 40:28; 41:4: 44:6; 48:12; Revelation 1:8,11,17; 21:6; 22:13).

    Now the spirit of this world (Satan) knows that his kingdom will not stand and that it eventually will come to an end (Matthew 12:25,26).

    He also knows that Christ some day will return to set up God’s everlasting Kingdom. Satan’s desire has always been to be equal with God (Isaiah 14:13), and his attempt to know through science (biology, biochemistry and genetics) how life was formed, has been a futile attempt to be equal with God, by trying to disapprove that God created the heaven and the earth (Genesis 1:1).

    In the last decade, the spirit of this world (Satan) has even tried to copy the creation of life by means of what mankind has called ‘cloning’, which is the production of a genetic twin of another organism. But this will prove to be a futile exercise as well.

    Cloning is man’s work and man trying to be god. It is similar to Genetic Engineering or the modifying of biological organisms or genes outside the natural realm of a body, plant or tree.

    Personalized Regenerative Medicine (generating stem cells) falls into the same category. It is all an abomination in God’s eyes.

    The history of mankind and how life was formed and advanced, prior to the days of Adam and Eve (4,000 – 3,070 BC) is irrelevant, as mankind without union with God, was not a living soul (Genesis 2:5).

    All of the other mysteries concerning God’s separation from Adam and Eve and how mankind came to live under the power of sin and the spirit of this world, we have explained in the book 'A World Deceived' and the pages and articles listed on this website.

    Much has happened in the last six thousand years and the days Adam & Eve were called and formed by God (Genesis 2:7) to teach mankind about the wisdom and knowledge of God. However, Adam and Eve failed in their mission and as a result, God separated Himself from them and their offspring (Genesis 6:7).

    In order to keep God’s word alive and to keep the way of the tree of life (Genesis 3:24), God sent others, but mankind has always refused to listen to the prophets, Christ (God in the flesh) whom they crucified, the disciples and all those that followed thereafter as mankind continues to prefer darkness over light (John 3:9).

    It is our hope that through our testimony you will come to understand Christ’s message of repentance and while you may be searching, please remember that there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repents (Luke 15:10).

    And our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that is simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward (2 Cor. 1:12).

    We encourage you to direct any questions to us, and have provided you with a contact page for this purpose.

    Footnote:

    Our Ministry, which is in Christ and according to the Spirit of truth (John 14:17), has reached out to CNN and key contacts for more than two years but they continue to sensationalize news, involving religious doctrines of which they have no knowledge, rather than convey a message of truth. Recently they even arranged to have all of our e-mails blocked to ensure we are no longer able to contact the writers in order to explain their deceptive articles.

    The article about Tim Tebow is a good example how CNN sensationalizes topics of which they have no knowledge and deceive all the people. Tim Tebow is not a Christian and follower of Christ but rather a false Christ (Matthew 24:24).

    The purpose of our postings is to keep straight the way of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

    For a better understanding of the history of Adam & Eve, the story of Noah and what it means to be a Christian, we invite you to read the articles ‘Who is God and who is Satan?’ and ‘Can Christianity or any Other Religion Save You’ listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca

    To give people a better understanding of the principalities and destructive forces (Eph. 6:12) that control the Media, US Politics and the issues that divide this world, we invite you to read the articles ‘CNN Belief Blog ~ Sign of the Times’ and ‘Influence of the Media’.

    All of the other pages and articles will explain how and by whom this world has been deceived as confirmed by the Word of God in Revelation 12:9 and they will also explain what mankind must do to be reunited with God and to be able to understand the Bible.

    He that is spiritual judgeth (discerneth) all things, yet he himself is judged of no man (1 Cor. 2:15; 14:37; Proverbs 28:5; Gal. 6:1; Col. 1:9; John 3:8; 5:30; 8:15; 16:8-11).

    Seek, and ye will find (Matthew 7:7).

    http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

    January 14, 2012 at 7:53 pm |
    • momoya

      Oh, so the bible says that it is correct and beliefs based on other books are wrong! You don't say!

      January 14, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      momoya

      That is correct!!

      John 1:1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

      The problem is that by nature you will not be able to understand it (1 Cor. 2:14). For this reason our message remains the same: Ye must repent and turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan (whose spirit you are of) unto God (Acts 26:18). Without the Baptism of Repentance (Mark 1:4) you will remain spiritually blind and separated from God, this includes atheists and members of the gay and religious community.

      The Gospel we preach is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:11,12).

      For a better understanding what mankind must do to be reunited with God, what it means to repent and to be a sinner, we invite you to read the articles ‘Repent’, 'What is Sin?' and 'Victory over Sin' listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca

      Seek, and ye will find (Matthew 7:7).

      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      January 14, 2012 at 9:08 pm |
    • momoya

      AvdBerg, Circular reasoning works for you because circular reasoning works for you. Your argument that the bible is true because it says it's true doesn't mean much to critical thinkers. I wish you were one.

      January 14, 2012 at 11:15 pm |
    • kamana

      The religionists cannot speak for themselves. They have to quote some ignoramous, who probably could not read nor write, and died thousands of years ago, to speak for them!
      Never trust people who cannot speak for themselves; who must speak with the words of dead men who died long ago.

      January 15, 2012 at 11:50 am |
    • JohnR

      Yeah, the media isn't keen on promoting obscure religious zealots who basically just denounce everyone, including other religious zealots. You don't bring any ratings to the table and never will. And while Tebow is a dork in way over his head in the company of the likes of Brady, Manning and Rodgers who shills religion shamelessly for attention, his version of Christianity is reasonably positive as these things go, whereas you come off as just a bitter grump, Avdberg.

      January 15, 2012 at 1:41 pm |
  13. Joe Ogorek

    Religion is poison.

    January 14, 2012 at 3:26 pm |
    • AvdBerg

      jJoe Ogorek

      Instead of poison we use the word 'deception' and this is why the Word of God records that this whole world has been deceived. It is through religious and man-made doctrines that this whole world has been deceived (Matthew 15:9).

      Seek, and ye will find (Matthew 7:7).

      http://WWW.AWORLDDECEIVED.CA

      January 14, 2012 at 8:04 pm |
    • NHWoman

      Your comment serves no purpose except to upset religious people. That makes you the poison here.

      January 15, 2012 at 10:18 am |
    • JohnR

      @NHwoman His comment is not terrbly productive, but when you assume, as a religious person, that its sole purpose is to upset people like you just because it in fact upset you, you are being a narcissistic fantasist at best.

      January 15, 2012 at 1:43 pm |
    • Dr. Gary Hurd

      @NHwoman, I wonder why you have not commented on the remarkably unorthodox opinions of "AvdBerg"? Did you bother to read them?

      January 15, 2012 at 2:19 pm |
  14. fed up with ignorance

    It is truely sad that human race can maintain its ignorance from with we came.With the imformation that we have today,to hold onto a 2000 year old guess is purely insane.

    January 14, 2012 at 3:14 pm |
  15. CRC

    My Bible is a history book and a science book and it means exactly what it says and it is factually based on science. To all those who disagree; start reading and happy learning.

    January 14, 2012 at 2:16 pm |
    • Bizarre

      CRC : "...it [The Bible] is factually based on science"

      Oh, like:
      - Pi is 3
      - Bats are birds
      - Rabbits chew cud
      - Dipping a live bird in a dead bird's blood cures a person's leprosy
      - The Earth is supported on pillars

      January 14, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • BucketDrop

      Already read it. Calling the bible a history and science book is silly. Are you bored and just trying to see how many comments you get? For those who actually believe this (Baptists, I'm speaking to you), please keep in mind that if the unbelievable paranormal activity and contradictions found in the bible are not enough to knock it out of the rankings of any sort of factual text, then there is no reason you should not take everything you read in a factual context. By this logic, every book, including Harry Potter, is a science and history book, if you believe what it says. Silly.

      January 14, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • BucketDrop

      .... and, lo-and-behold, there is an interesting article right on this very site addressing your of biblical historicity. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/29/my-take-the-3-biggest-biblical-misconceptions/

      January 14, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
    • fed up with ignorance

      Very sorry but you are totally out of touch with reality.

      January 14, 2012 at 3:16 pm |
    • momoya

      Whether or not science can prove a particular detail has NO bearing on whether or not a particular religion can prove its god. So what if science can demonstrate exactly how life began? Does that mean that the muslim version is correct over the christian, or that the North African creation myths have more credulity than the Australian? Presuppose an answer if you must, but rationality implies an honest search for a meaningful answer.

      January 14, 2012 at 4:33 pm |
    • Funny grammar is Funny

      So is CRC saying he/she reads bibles like science books or sciences books like bibles?

      January 14, 2012 at 4:41 pm |
    • Dakota2000

      I have been looking for a good science text.
      Could you tell me which book of the bible has all the physical constants in it like Pi (which my bible got wrong), or the gravitational constant, or the speed of light...

      Since god set the speed limit for light, he must have written it down someplace!

      January 14, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
    • EnjaySea

      Your bible is owned by someone very gullible indeed. My bible is a bookend.

      January 14, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
    • David

      Cool. Mine is a Coaster.

      January 14, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
    • Ed

      You are truly scary.

      January 14, 2012 at 8:57 pm |
    • NHWoman

      Ignore the purposely antagonistic views below. They are obviously not educated enough to read a book written in ancient languages and probably still think the word hand means your wrist down and that shalom means peace.

      January 15, 2012 at 10:21 am |
    • Dr. Gary Hurd

      To read the Genesis in Hebrew is a very interesting experience. But, to discover that these were just a selection of variant texts derived from Sumerian, Babylonian, and Ugaritic texts is a revelation. I recommend (for those who lack the time for language study);

      Pardee, Dennis
      2002 Writings from the Ancient World Vol. 10: Ritual and Cult at Ugarit Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature

      Parker, Simon B. (Editor)
      1997 Ugarit Narrative Poetry Translated by Mark S. Smith, Simon B. Parker, Edward L Greenstein, Theodore J. Lewis, David Marcus, Vol. 9 Writings from the Ancient World. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature

      Schniedewind, William M., Joel H. Hunt
      2007 “A Primer on Ugaritic: Language, Culture, and Literature” Cambridge University Press

      Smith, Mark S.
      2002 “The Early History of God 2nd ed.” Grand Rapids: Wm B Eerdmans Publishing
      ___________
      2003 “The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts” Oxford University Press.

      Sparks, Kenton L.
      2005 “Ancient Texts for the Study of the Hebrew Bible” Peabody PA: Hendrickson Publishers

      Speiser, E. A.
      1962 "Genesis: Introduction, Translation and Notes" New York: Anchor Bible- Doubleday

      And, remember the words of the stand-up philosopher Lewis Black, "It's our Book! You wanted your own book."
      [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGrlWOhtj3g&w=640&h=390]

      In that light, I also recommend reading;

      Rabbi Natan Slifkin,
      2006/2008 “The Challenge of Creation: Judaism’s Encounter with Science, Cosmology and Evolution” New York: Zoo Torah and Yashar Books

      Zevit, Ziony
      2001 "The Religions of Ancient Israel: A Synthesis of Parallactic Approaches” New York: Continuum Press

      Jewish Publication Society
      2004 “The Jewish Study Bible: TANAKA translation” Oxford University Press

      January 15, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
  16. BucketDrop

    What I really like about this article is that at the end it says that more Americans now believe in evolution (or at least that humans evolved over millions of years) than not. I didn't know we had made such progress in this country (seriously...not joking). Yay us!!!

    January 14, 2012 at 2:02 pm |
  17. SG

    Can any scientist looking at this blog explain, in detail, the specific steps necessary for life to evolve from inorganic matter? This explanation must include all steps involved in the evolution of the cell itself with all its complexity, as well as the evolution of the multiple life forms that now exist.

    January 14, 2012 at 1:31 pm |
    • BucketDrop

      Any evolutionary biologist could start to explain as much as we have figured out now. This biologist would get about 3.5 sentences into the explanation and would reach a point where they have explained more rational detail about how we got here than the entirety of the biblical genesis story. So for proof-for-proof, it would not be hard to exceed that which supports creationist beliefs.

      January 14, 2012 at 1:59 pm |
    • SG

      I have heard those assertions before. But never the details.

      January 14, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
    • BucketDrop

      Oh, you are serious. Well, in that case, I would say the best place to start would be the National Academy of Sciences article/book on Science and Creationism from the National Academy Press (http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6024). It does a pretty good job outlining evolution from a non-biologist perspective. From there, I would purchase a good introductory textbook on biological sciences. This will have the introductory nitty-gritty details regarding some of the biological facts we know and why evolution is so fundamental to our modern medical, biological and genetics knowledge base. It will also provide an important list of published papers at the back supporting propositions, which is probably more important than the text book itself. Happy learning!

      January 14, 2012 at 2:10 pm |
    • Dr. Gary Hurd

      The origin of life is a very active, and currently productive area of research. I have written a "Short Outline of the Origin of Life" that will at least give you the current directions.
      http://stonesnbones.blogspot.com/2008/12/origin-of-life-outline.html

      For some even more current, and detailed discussions see;
      "Program for Molecular Paleontology and Resurrection: Rewinding the Tape of Life," NASA Astrobiology
      http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/nai/ool-www/program

      January 14, 2012 at 2:10 pm |
    • Dr.K.

      Even if that were perfectly known, what makes you think it could be explained in detail and in laymen's terms in a paragraph or two in a web comment? This is the subject of mountains of research articles, shelves of books, and generations of specialized knowledge. Why do people expect it to be simple? Are people so accustomed to the "just so" stories of religion that they really expect explanations of complex natural processes to be like a preschool book on Noahs Ark?

      January 14, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
    • Haime52

      Can't even do on purpose what they say nature did on accident. How cool is that? And if they did? It would only prove it takes a creator. ...... Oh, Snap!

      January 15, 2012 at 9:54 am |
    • JohnR

      @Haime52 Took your stupid pills today, I see!

      January 15, 2012 at 1:33 pm |
  18. Dr.K.

    "Dr.K,

    Let me suggest that you look over, "Philosophy/Liberal Studies 333: Evolution and Creation"
    http://nsmserver2.fullerton.edu/departments/chemistry/evolution_creation/web/

    A lot of good material."

    I don't normally include links in comments, but I wholeheartedly recommend this web page to everyone interested in this debate. It is also a good example of what scholarship looks like. Thanks, Dr. Gary Hurd

    January 14, 2012 at 12:29 pm |
    • Dr. Gary Hurd

      Glad you enjoyed the link. I give a guest lecture to Jim's class each semester.

      January 14, 2012 at 2:04 pm |
    • AGuest9

      That's fantastic. The university-level is exactly where this discussion belongs, with reasonably-informed adults discussing and debating the salient points, not as dogma being foisted upon young, impressionable children.

      January 16, 2012 at 11:27 am |
  19. RAWoD

    Another bit of information suggesting that the "invidible man" doesn't matter much to intelligent peoples.

    January 14, 2012 at 12:12 pm |
  20. KingV911

    The Bible was written over 2000 years ago. Modern science started about 400 years ago. There is a huge gap in time there. The Bible isn't meant to be a science textbook. People back then had little understanding about how anything worked. Even a few hundred years ago people got burned at the stake for being witches and other absurd things. I am a Christian, and it isn't hard for me to realize the Bible is a collection of writings written by people who didn't have the knowledge that we have today. God didn't write the Bible! If he did, there would probably by a lot less inconsistencies, contradictions, and things that are pretty immoral. Also, he probably would've dispersed it in a different time period – from a marketing standpoint ancient Arabia isn't the best place to get the whole world to know about you.

    January 14, 2012 at 11:56 am |
    • You Mad?

      You are probably a handful of Christians that realize this, the others are so brainwashed into believing whatever they are told by the church. Christianity at it's purest teaches good values, however, the worst thing Christianity preaches is blind obedience, the inability to think for oneself.

      January 14, 2012 at 1:13 pm |
    • bdl

      "collection of writings written by people who didn't have the knowledge that we have today"

      the problem there is it was a collection. If it was so important then why didn't god have one person write it all? Remember god can do anything so why did he wait hundreds of years after all these supposed events occured to speak telepathically to "prophets" thousands of miles away from where those events supposedly occured? By acknowledging the bible as fact you are dismissing everything that logic tells you. You might as well believe in snow white as well. Actually snow white is plausible. The bible is not. Snakes do not talk. They don't talk now and they didn't talk in biblical times. Conveniently all those magical things stopped happening when the bible was finished, and what seperates the biblical prophets from the prophets today that automatically get labeled insane or murdered by the DEA? nothing. Not to mention most christians cannot name one person who wrote anything in the bible and yet they hold so much value in it. Evidently the source of information is not necessary to establish credibility. Just go with the flow if it thats what makes you feel good. give me a break.

      January 15, 2012 at 6:05 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

« Previous entry
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.