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. Wayne

    @Blind CS
    "Good point Robert. I would just add that in the beginning, was God and God alone. He was outside of time and space."

    Yeah tucked neatly away from any chance of being observed. In other words, imaginary.

    February 15, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
    • GodPot

      All Christians have the same argument "What we know of the laws of nature say nothing can come from nothing, so atheists must be wrong. We Christians know that everything came from God and that the laws of nature don't aply to him, so there, neener neener..."

      Very convenient to have a player in your corner that doesn't have to obey any natural laws or rules of logic which allows you to make virtually any argument you want against opponents who by definition must abide by the natural laws and rules. The only way others in the past have battled this kind of idiocy is stated well in the old saying "If you can't beat um, join um" so they invent their own God that doesn't have to obey the rules either and then you are faced with the only way to "prove" your God is the right one, which is to declare war on the other God's and see who the last theist standing is and then declare him the winner. It's quite shameful and disgusting, but that is where we are with much of humanity.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:13 pm |
    • What IF

      Godpot,

      Yes, many years ago I read Allen Drury's "A God Against the Gods" about the blo-ody fight between the cults of Amon and Aten in ancient Egypt, where pharaoh even changed his name from Amenhotep to Akhnaton. The reform was carried on with great zeal—the name of the god Amon was erased from the inscriptions of the capital Thebes and the name of Aten substi-tuted.

      How many millions (billions?) of ancient Egyptian people went to their deaths over the centuries clutching a statue of their favorite god and expecting it to carry them to an afterlife?

      February 15, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • What IF

      p.s. I think that that book was one of my first wake-up calls on my long journey out of theism.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
    • momoya

      @What IF

      I've not read that text, but it sounds good. I hope your story is more common than I realize and that we will see evidence of many similar stories in the near future. I firmly believe that every high school student should be rrequired to take a course in mythology; that would be a start.

      February 15, 2012 at 3:05 pm |
    • What IF

      momoya,

      I had 4 years of Latin in high school – learning about all of those Greek & Roman gods and goddesses in the Aeneid, The Odyssey, The Iliad, etc. could well have been an early clue to believing that every religion's "Emperor" also has no clothes.

      "A God Against the Gods" is an excellent book - historical novel, but very well-researched; and followed up by another one, "Return to Thebes".

      February 15, 2012 at 3:33 pm |
  2. Wayne

    @Blind CS
    "Good point Robert. I would just add that in the beginning, was God and God alone. He was outside of time and space."

    Yeah tucked neatly away from any change of being observed. In other words, imaginary.

    February 15, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
    • False Dichotomy

      Yup, seems like the God of the gaps keeps having to move. Long ago he was on the mountaintop, until we explored the mountain. Then we put him in the sky, then we learned that beyond the sky is space. Then he was out in space, until we learned that beyond space is more space. Now he is hiding outside the universe, until we discover what (if anything) is beyond that.

      February 15, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
  3. Robert Brown

    In the beginning Space…,Time…,Matter…,Energy…,or God…….
    I pick God.

    Science is great but I believe God over the educated guesses and theories of humans. Looking around at nature on the earth does nothing but affirm my faith. Reading about biology, microbiology, astronomy, geology, chemistry, and physics affirm my faith even more. However, none of these gave me faith in God. Faith comes from God.

    Consider the human consciousness, intelligence, soul, and spirit. Consider the creation of life itself.

    Those who seek to prove to themselves, the existence of God, need only to follow His instructions. Seek and you will find.

    February 15, 2012 at 12:28 pm |
    • Wayne

      This is nothing but one big argument from ignorance.

      ". Reading about biology, microbiology, astronomy, geology, chemistry, and physics affirm my faith even more."

      In other words "i don't understand how all this stuff works so it must have been done by God, not just any god but my favorite one"

      Hardly convincing.

      February 15, 2012 at 12:43 pm |
    • momoya

      @Robert Brown

      Why pick anything? An honest person would refrain from choosing since we currently have no way to determine the answer. You "pick god" because you exist in a community that asserts god, but you can't demonstrate the existence of that god.

      Scientific theories are not educated guesses, they are the best picture that science can assemble with the evidence discovered so far. Faith is dumb because it is just blind belief without any evidence. When you describe nature as building your faith, you are assuming that the complexity of life and the universe affirm what you already believe without evidence and without a chain of reasoning that would connect the marvels of nature to your particular god. You can't prove faith and you can't prove god.

      It is right and good to study human consciousness and intelligence because of their ability to be tested and studied. We cannot study or even consider the soul or spirit because we cannot show these to exist. If the soul and spirit could be shown to exist, then we could study it. All we can currently study is the question of why some people believe in souls and spirits without evidence; interesting study, for sure. We can study life, but we have no way to study "creation" for the same reason we cannot study souls or spirits–we don't have evidence of creation. Just because something is cool and weird and not fully understood does not prove a creator for that thing.

      When honest people seek god in order to find him, they find all sorts of different god beliefs and zero proof for any of them. If no manner of belief can be demonstrated to be any better than another manner of belief, then the seeker must conclude that god does not wish to found–or does not exist. If god existed and could be sought and found, then most people, regardless of culture, geography, or era would generally agree on his attributes; but the converse is true. When people seek god they do not find a solid subject with provable qualities, they only find themselves, and so imagine and worship a god that agrees with their own opinions at every turn.

      February 15, 2012 at 1:02 pm |
    • Blind CS

      Good point Robert. I would just add that in the beginning, was God and God alone. He was outside of time and space.

      February 15, 2012 at 1:29 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @Robert Brown,
      I was going to pick God too, but my horoscope said I needed to take "time" for myself... but then again, my psychic said to focus on the "energy" of the universe and other people. I don't know, maybe I'll just find a quiet "space" and meditate on it.

      February 15, 2012 at 1:41 pm |
    • WASP

      @robert: "In the beginning Space…,Time…,Matter…,Energy…,or God…….
      I pick God."
      ok you called science an educated guess, what would you call a belief in something that has nothing to even give credence to it's exsitance other than a religious book. without that book there is no way to prove god or even have an idea of god. well me i choice the educated guess that has healed millions, fed millions more, wiped out some diseases, explained how most of the things you use everyday can even exist.

      February 15, 2012 at 1:56 pm |
    • cbinal

      @Momo you said "Faith is dumb because it is just blind belief without any evidence." You claim you used to be a Christian, read the Bible over and over, and all of that, and now you believe it is a myth. So, I'm curious about one thing, do you believe that History can be used as evidence? What I'm getting at – do you believe that Jesus was historically a real person and the historical evidence shows that eyewitness saw him do miraculous things?

      February 15, 2012 at 2:04 pm |
    • Robert Brown

      Wayne,
      I agree with you that I can’t claim to understand how all this stuff works. As far as God is concerned, what I wrote is my humble opinion. I believe there is only one God, so yes, he is my favorite. I am sorry that you found my statements unconvincing.

      Momoya,
      I pick because that is what I believe. I am being honest with you I really believe in God. I know him because he knows me. I can testify to the presence of God in me and will admit that it would be impossible for me to prove that to you in a scientific way.

      I said educated guesses and theories. I am sorry if that wasn’t clear. I agree with you that theories have some back up. I wasn’t trying to say they are the same.

      Faith is belief based on individual perception. You may think faith is dumb because you don’t have it. I have faith so I think it is great. I can’t prove my faith to you unless you would be willing to accept my testimony and the testimonies of millions of others without physical evidence. The same goes for the existence of God.

      I do believe if people seek God using his instructions then they will be successful. If you search for God using human reasoning it is like someone doing a scientific experiment without following any guidelines or rules. It won’t work.

      I agree with you that there are multiply beliefs in the world. I would encourage folks to seek the only God through his son Jesus Christ. When God saves a person He changes their opinions on several subjects, including spirit and soul.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:16 pm |
    • momoya

      @cbinal

      Proven historical facts can be used in some cases as evidence. I think it is unlikely that the jesus myth of the bible is based on one person. Jesus was a common name at the time, and self-professed messiahs were common at the time. Stories from that region and area discuss lots and lots of "miracles," so it's to be expected that these stories are included in various myths that came out of that culture. If "eyewitness accounts" of supposed miracles was evidence, then you'd be stuck believing in a couple hundred different religions that contradict each other.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:21 pm |
    • WASP

      @blind cs: "I would just add that in the beginning, was God and God alone. He was outside of time and space." ok i would like to know what source outside the bible,seeing it is the thing in question, educated you on the fact that only god exsited at the beginning of everything.
      the next order of business, how come you pick and choice which posts to reply to? i have set up challenges and i know others that have done the same,however you seem to forget to reply to those.....could it be you couldn't find an answer in your book so you just dodged them?

      February 15, 2012 at 2:24 pm |
    • momoya

      @Robert Brown

      I agree with you that you have closed of your mind to even conceive of any world view except the one you currently hold. However, you have nothing except what countless other believers of other gods have. Because you offer no argument for your god that other believers do not offer for theirs, I see no reason to give it further consideration.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
    • Robert Brown

      Wasp

      Sorry about my poor communication skills. I wasn't saying science is an educated guess. I think science is great. I said "educated guesses and theories". I agree they are two different things.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
    • cbinal

      @Momo way to dance around that one. So, "YOU" do not believe in a historical Jesus who claimed to be the Messiah, who had disciples, who was reported to have performed miracles? Just want to clear this up – no dancing.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
    • momoya

      @ cbinal

      I gave you a very complete answer that went beyond a simple "yes" or "no."

      I find no reason to believe in a single person who walked on water and raised people from the dead. I'm sure that plenty of "Jesuses" and "self-proclaimed messiahs" walked around claiming to have done such things. I do not believe that any of them performed miracles or that there was just one.

      February 15, 2012 at 3:14 pm |
    • cbinal

      @Momo – haha can't just say "No"? Why not? Probably because you know how foolish it would sound to deny someone from history to which our entire timeline (b.c./a.d.) was based around his birth. At least I know it would just be foolish for me to say Darwin and his theory are just a myth made up by a bunch of wanna-be scientist.

      February 15, 2012 at 3:23 pm |
    • momoya

      @cbinal

      Let's get something straight right now. i couldn't care less what you think of me or my posts or my beliefs or lack thereof. I am providing you with my thoughts so that you can test them for yourself. If you don't want to carry on a discussion with me, don't.

      No, I do not believe in the jesus that you do, nor do I believe that a historical jesus existed as claimed by the gospels.

      Yes, I believe the myth of jesus arose from stories told at a certain point in history in a certain local society.

      Either reply graciously and kindly or don't reply at all.

      February 15, 2012 at 3:42 pm |
    • jimtanker

      Jebus is a character from a work of fiction. BC/AD was created by the ruling empire of the time so of course it stuck. We dont use that anymore anyway, it is now BCE/CE. Join the 21st century.

      February 15, 2012 at 3:47 pm |
    • cbinal

      @Jim and Momo Thanks for making my point – it's OK for you to deny Historical Evidence and change it to suit your theory but, us stubborn Christians wont change our beliefs to accept your so called evidence. Besides what's wrong with b.c. and a.d.? Why did you have to go and change it? Oh because it has a tie to Jesus. Guess you got a little offended because of His name.

      February 15, 2012 at 4:11 pm |
    • Real Deal

      cbinal,

      The 6th century monk who devised the b.c./a.d. calendar system (and the pope who ok'd it) didn't know have any more facts about Jesus than you or I do. The monk was just trying to set a consistent date for celebrating Easter each year. The church was very powerful socially and politically in those days and controlled much of the goings-on. Even so, that dating system was not commonly used world-wide until many, many centuries later, and as jimtanker said, it is being phased out these days.

      February 15, 2012 at 4:14 pm |
    • cbinal

      @Real I'm so glad you know how much they knew about Jesus 1500 years ago and so I guess there is no reason to keep all of those books or records centuries ago that you have never seen or read. Not to mention, "Celebrate Easter?" Easter was his death, not birth, b.c. and a.d. don't start at 32 a.d. Please don't try to enlighten me when you don't know what you are talking about.

      February 15, 2012 at 4:28 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @cbinal
      "...someone from history to which our entire timeline (b.c./a.d.) was based around his birth."

      The BC/AD system wasn't invented until the 500's and it is apparently wrong. If the Bible stories are to be believed Jesus was born between 6 and 4 BC.

      February 15, 2012 at 4:33 pm |
    • cbinal

      @Non You are correct, Herod died in 4 b.c. and just before his death he had the 2 and unders killed in Bethlehem trying to kill the baby that was said to be the newborn King – historical evidence for. So, that would make Jesus birth actually around 5 b.c., which there was actually a coin found commemorating an event that happened in 5 b.c. in which a comet passed through Aries the Ram (symbolism for Israel) also historical evidence for. Now, yes the guy got the date wrong, but, the historical significance of the time frame was the birth of Jesus – undeniable.

      February 15, 2012 at 4:52 pm |
    • cbinal

      Woops sorry – made a mistake there – I hit 5 meant to hit 6.

      February 15, 2012 at 5:13 pm |
    • Real Deal

      cbinal,

      You continue to show your ignorance (and your arrogance) at every turn:

      "The use of BC and AD for numbering calendar years was invented by Dionysius Exiguus in 525 AD. His purpose was to determine the correct date for Easter under the direction of Pope St. John I.

      Prior to this time, one method for determining Easter was based on a 532 year calendar cycle stemming from the Alexandrian era. Other methods were also used which led to the confusion. Dionysius was asked to determine a method for calculating Easter that would then be used by the entire church.

      Dionysius did not want to perpetuate the name of Alexander, the Great Persecutor. He decided to start his 532 year cycle from the year associated with the foundation of Rome. At that time Christ’s birth was supposed to have occurred immediately preceding the year of the founding of Rome."

      The date of the alleged Easter was extrapolated from those numbers.

      http://agards-bible-timeline.com/q4_ad_bc_ce.html

      Notice that I chose a Christian site to illustrate this, although it appears in numerous other places; but I didn't want to hear your "Booo, Wikipedia..." or whatever.

      This monk used some pretty tricky methods in calculating his target date:

      "Dionysius [the monk] proposed an alternative calendar that set the year 0 to Christ's incarnation upon the world based upon the history available to him, and to the beginning of the age of Pisces (where new years began with the sun in the constellation of Pisces). Pisces, the sign of the fish, was linked to the first Christian symbol, ICHTHYS (i.e., fish in Latinised Greek)."
      http://www.calendar-origins.com/year-origin.html

      February 15, 2012 at 6:03 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @cbinal,
      "Now, yes the guy got the date wrong, but, the historical significance of the time frame was the birth of Jesus – undeniable."

      I'm not saying Jesus didn't exist, maybe he did maybe he didn't. What I'm saying is that it is rediculous to use a calendar system, that was invented ~500 years after someone's supposed death, as evidence of that persons existence.

      Or are you saying that the god Itzamna, who brought the calendar to the Mayans, is real. Or, that Zoroaster, existed becuase of the Zoroastrian calendar. or, the Yoruba calendar, which was on it's 10050th year in 2008. Or, Romulus, because of the Calendar of Romulus.

      Just because a calendar system is backdated to some event that was supposed to have happened in the past does not mean that event actually happened.

      February 15, 2012 at 6:36 pm |
    • momoya

      @cbinal

      I'm not denying historical evidence; I'm saying that the historical evidence is lacking and does not support your belief. Just think how you would respond to a person who says that you are denying the historical evidence for Mohammed and Islam, and you're there. I do hope you have read and considered the other excellent comments about why our calendar is the way it is.

      February 15, 2012 at 6:44 pm |
    • cbinal

      @Real I owe you an apology – I'm sorry. I hastily answered your question without looking up what youwere saying. I was in the middle of another post that got under my skin. Yes I agree with the history of what you said – that he was establishing the calendar for a common date for Easter for future generations and in doing so, naturally you go backwards in your calendar to be able to project forward. The Christian "Easter" is still based on Jesus Christ, so in establishing this calendar the obvious beginning point should be Jesus' birth. The only thing I didn't get was you said the estblishment of Rome. Rome was established hundreds of years earlier 6th or 8th Century b.c. Anyway, my whole argument was how can a myth be the focal point of the entire calendar system? To deny Jesus wasn't a real person is just foolish.
      Momo and Non – yes, good comments, even though you may not agree that historical evidence is based on real occurances, I do.

      February 16, 2012 at 1:39 pm |
    • Real Deal

      cbinal,

      Thank you for your apology.

      February 16, 2012 at 3:39 pm |
  4. Blind CS

    I try to respond to all questions and inquiries, but it is nearly impossible. If you have a reasonable refutation for my argument about "something" from "nothing", I'm eager to hear your explanation.

    February 15, 2012 at 12:06 pm |
    • Blind CS

      1) How do you get "something" from "nothing"?

      2) Where in the literature does Josephus explain the meaning of the word "Day" in the creation narrative?

      3) How is it possible to prove that there are no counter examples to slow and gradual evolutionary processes for living systems?

      February 15, 2012 at 12:16 pm |
    • momoya

      Blind CS

      Why are you assuming that "nothing" exists or ever did? I think you are too free and loose with that word when we know that most of the universe is dark matter or dark energy.

      February 15, 2012 at 12:46 pm |
    • Blind CS

      momoya,

      I appreciate your courage in taking on my question, but I think you are outside of your comfort zone here.

      "Something" (matter, energy, etc...) exists in the here and now. I never questioned that point.

      Dark matter and dark energy are not well understood, but definately "something" too.

      Sorry, I can't hand you out a free lunch today.

      February 15, 2012 at 1:27 pm |
    • Wayne

      1) How do you get "something" from "nothing"?

      "Let there be light"

      From where? Oh that's right...nothing 0_O

      2) Where in the literature does Josephus explain the meaning of the word "Day" in the creation narrative?

      Irrevelant

      3) How is it possible to prove that there are no counter examples to slow and gradual evolutionary processes for living systems?

      How is it possible to prove that there are no counter examples to your magic ghost creating everything from an incantation spell?

      February 15, 2012 at 1:46 pm |
    • momoya

      Blind CS

      Yes, "something" exists. Nobody is debating that. I was pointing out that dark matter and dark energy are also "something." Why do you dodge my question to you?

      Why should anyone assume that "nothing" exists or ever did exist?

      February 15, 2012 at 2:13 pm |
  5. Blind CS

    God created the universe and sustains it too. All scientific laws were created by God and obey his command.

    This statement has been true since the point of creation (Big bang), the unfolding of God's plan (present) until the end of the age and eventual destruction (Big rip) of the universe.

    February 15, 2012 at 10:57 am |
    • Wayne

      You still ducked the questions i asked you, then you make an assertion back up behind nothing

      "God created the universe and sustains it too. All scientific laws were created by God and obey his command."

      Prove it! Because you said so doesn't prove anything. Show us God, show us how it created scientifc laws. Then show us how any other God anybody can dream up can't replace your God in the same assertion. You can't you are just making up crap. I can't believe there are people out here this stupid.

      February 15, 2012 at 11:02 am |
    • Fallacy Spotting 101

      Post by Blind CS contains instances of the Prejudicial Language fallacy.

      http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#H6

      February 15, 2012 at 11:12 am |
    • Wayne

      The best part about this is we would not have known anything about the big bang, if not for science. Then morons like you steal it and just say "Goddidit" without having to explain anything inbetween. Other than violent offenders, you people are the worst on the planet.

      February 15, 2012 at 11:28 am |
    • Primewonk

      We have pretty good science that explains the expansion of the universe going back to a couple femtoseconds after the expansion started. Intersetingly, neither your version of a god, nor any version of any other god, is necessary or warrented at any step along the way.

      Apparently, you are either wrong, or you are lying.

      February 15, 2012 at 11:48 am |
    • jimtanker

      OK B S, I mean CS.

      Lets hear your evidence.

      February 15, 2012 at 11:56 am |
    • GodPot

      "God created the universe and sustains it too." So how exactly did the universe not fall apart when your God was supposedly dead for three days? So, either he didn't really die which means there was no ransom sacrafice paid, or he's wasn't really God, or he was just one part of a triune God so only 1/3 of God was dead for 3 days, which still seems to mean that no ransom was paid if the price is a life for a life, not 1/3 of a life for a life... and if he could have paid the price with just a third why not just have both Jesus and the Holy spirit cut off their legs instead...

      February 15, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
  6. Ida

    Chad, Nonimus got you there. :-(

    February 15, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    • Ida

      Mis post, please ignore.

      February 15, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    • False Dichotomy

      I have made the same mistake myself, Chad.

      February 15, 2012 at 11:00 am |
  7. Wayne

    @ Blind

    Why are you so hell bent on being wrong about everything?

    "Thanks for posting the video. I think this is a slam dunk. It is true that you can't get "something" for "nothing" and this essentially destroys the cornerstone of the atheist's belief system."

    The cornerstone of an atheists "belief system" is that they don't believe in a God. That's it. It's not based on knowing (or in your case pretending) where anything came from. Even if we didn't know one bit of modern cosmology no atheist would take your position seriously. That a being poofed the universe into existance by using a series of incantation spells. That is unacceptable without knowing anything about the singularity or any basic cosmology. You are trying to create some false diliema of it being your Jesus or "nothing" which obviously is full of sh!t.

    Funny is that the only place your God can hide now is at the point where the universe began. He only exists now in the ever decreasing pockets of scientific ignorance.

    February 15, 2012 at 8:47 am |
  8. Wayne

    @Blind

    "Hawking is deceiving you by not explaining the whole argument this is more supportive of a creative designer.
    Enter our Heavenly Father."

    Wait a minute...How do you get from a creative designer to Jesus? You can plug in any dead God as the creative designer and there is no objective way to prove the claim wrong. You think Jesus is your God, therefor he would be the creative designer. Same would be true for any person of any other belief. It's just too bad really believing in something doesn't make it true. So even if you are given the "creative designer" you still are stuck with no way to show how it could not be any God that anyone could just make up.

    February 15, 2012 at 8:35 am |
  9. Kenrick Benjamin

    You think its that simple, Let me ask you one question, what will you do when they break the law, because as you know everything is govern by laws that's why there is order in the Universe and why must i believe you.

    February 15, 2012 at 8:17 am |
    • Fallacy Spotting 101

      Post by Kenrick Benjamin is an instance of the Complex Question fallacy.

      http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#H6

      February 15, 2012 at 10:44 am |
    • Primewonk

      Break what laws?

      February 15, 2012 at 11:53 am |
    • GodPot

      If you again are referring back to the premise of "If you were God" and you are asking "What would you do to lawbreakers" in reference to most Christians belief in the necessity of heII, then I submit you are a moron if you think people have to fear being tortured for eternity to follow common sense laws. And punishment of those scofflaws would fit the crimes, take a life, your life is taken, simple. Not take a life and we will take yours then torture and burn your soul for eternity.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:57 pm |
  10. Wayne

    @Blind cs

    "Science has NOT answered the question about creation or "evolution".

    How in the world could you say that? There isn't one thing anywhere that points to a supernatual creation ex nihilo. There is tons of evidence that supports evolution. Why don't you just admit the truth? You won't accept anything that contridicts your favorite fables no matter what? At least then you would be honest. If that's not the case, then state what you accept to change your position.

    I posted this yesterday and you ignored it. Why? All you have to do is show one example of supernatural creation ex nihilo and you would have shattered evolution. Don't you wan't to do that?

    February 15, 2012 at 8:13 am |
  11. Mr Everyman

    Only 54% of all American believe that humans developed over millions of years. No wonder other nations are pulling ahead of us. This reflects poor scientific education. The Protestant Pastors are in worse shape. Only 12% agree that people developed over millions of years. Agreement numbers on the age of the Earth are astonishing. 46% of so called educated people agreed to a 6,000 year old Earth. Ignorance rules. their education sucks. There may well have been a real Adam and Eve about 152,000 years ago. DNA proves it. All these rocks have change rates placing the Earth's age at 4.5 billion years old. The mountains do not literally clap their hands. This is figurative speech in the Bible. Education is desparately needed!!!!!

    February 15, 2012 at 1:25 am |
  12. False Dichotomy

    Domesticated plants and animals are the experimental proof of evolution.

    February 15, 2012 at 1:21 am |
  13. Mr Everyman

    Only 54% of all American believe that humans developed over millions of years. No wonder other nations are pulling ahead of us. This reflects poor scientific education. The Protestant Pastors are in worse shape. Only 12% agree that people developed over millions of years. Agreement numbers on the age of the Earth are astonishing. 46% of so called educated people agreed to a 6,000 year old Earth. Ignorance rules. their education sucks. There may well have been a real Adam and Eve about 152,000 years ago. DNA proves it. All these rocks have change rates placing the Earth's age at 4.5 billion years old. The mountains do not literally clap their hands. This is figurative speech in the Bible. Education is needed!!!!!

    February 15, 2012 at 1:20 am |
  14. Blind CS

    To Tom Edison:

    Thanks for posting the video. I think this is a slam dunk. It is true that you can't get "something" for "nothing" and this essentially destroys the cornerstone of the atheist's belief system.

    February 15, 2012 at 12:06 am |
    • myweightinwords

      The cornerstone of an atheist's belief system, such as it is, is merely that there is no god.

      Getting something from nothing has nothing to do with what they believe or do not believe.

      Creation vs evolution is never going to matter. Whether I believe in any of the creation myths of any of the world's belief systems or I believe in a Big Bang or some combination thereof does not in anyway effect how I live my life, or how I interact with the world.

      More important than any of that is what I do, how I treat my fellow human beings, and what mark I leave behind.

      February 15, 2012 at 10:55 am |
  15. False Dichotomy

    The dictionary definition of God is “a supernatural creator and overseer of the universe.” Included in this definition are all deities, goddesses and supernatural beings. Since the beginning of recorded history, which is defined by the invention of writing by the Sumerians around 6,000 years ago, historians have cataloged over 3700 supernatural beings, of which 2870 can be considered deities.

    So next time someone tells me they believe in God, I’ll say “Oh which one? Zeus? Hades? Jupiter? Mars? Odin? Thor? Krishna? Vishnu? Ra?…” If they say “Just God. I only believe in the one God,” I’ll point out that they are nearly as atheistic as me. I don’t believe in 2,870 gods, and they don’t believe in 2,869. -Ricky Gervais (who knew?)

    February 14, 2012 at 11:36 pm |
  16. ...

    Vengeance divides ALL people

    Love unites ALL people

    February 14, 2012 at 10:37 pm |
  17. Blind CS

    Hot Air Ace:

    Stephan Hawking is correct within the limited defined context of his argument. Basically, what he says is that it is possible to derive particles from a vacuum space. This idea is supported by quantum mechanics. Scientists like Hawking have become comfortable with thinking that a vacuum space is nothing because it helps them to work out their mathematical equations. However, what this deceptive little man does not tell you is that a vacuum space is not "nothing". It has to be created within space time dimension. Therefore, you don't get literal "something" for literal "nothing". It has to be created.

    Further, Hawking was extremely arrogant when he made the broad sweeping about God. Hawking is deceiving you by not explaining the whole argument this is more supportive of a creative designer.

    Enter our Heavenly Father.

    February 14, 2012 at 6:55 pm |
    • momoya

      Blind CS

      It's painfully obvious that you have no clue what you are talking about. You're not even using the terms correctly to even make a sensible argument. You haven't a clue what Hawking really says or what quantum physics implies.

      You have just destroyed any reputation you might have had. Thanks for advertising your "blowhard" status. It's appreciated.

      February 14, 2012 at 8:58 pm |
    • Chad

      @Blind CS

      well said, one can't assume that a sea of virtual particles existed prior to the big bang. That's outside science theory and it is explicitly in the realm of pure conjecture.

      February 14, 2012 at 9:09 pm |
    • Blind CS

      Momoya: you are obviously confounded. No refutation. No free lunch for you today. Enough said.

      Chad: exactly. Even if a pre-singularity virtual particle conjecture were true, my core argument applies in duplicate to a hypothetical seed multiverse. Multiverses are fine and don't change the outcome.

      February 14, 2012 at 10:08 pm |
    • Nonimus

      I'm not certain, but wouldn't (or maybe couldn't) a pre-singularity universe still be "natural," in the sense that it is still our universe, but at such temperatures and pressures the normal rules break down. In other words, the rules we know today apply at temperatures < 1GK, but above that temperature the rules break down and/or combine to different rules. Perhaps, like saying that the rules in a Black Hole are different than what we know, but Black Holes are still natural and are a part of science.

      February 15, 2012 at 10:55 am |
    • WASP

      @ blind cs: "Blind CS
      Momoya: you are obviously confounded. No refutation. No free lunch for you today. Enough said.
      Chad: exactly. Even if a pre-singularity virtual particle conjecture were true, my core argument applies in duplicate to a hypothetical seed multiverse. Multiverses are fine and don't change the outcome.
      February 14, 2012 at 10:08 pm"
      i think that was that whole S.I.N. manuver again. how about trying to stay on topic without name calling or any other avoidance tactics.

      February 15, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
  18. Blind CS

    Einstein was a great scientist. He's mostly known for the photo-electric effect which earned him a Nobel, and the special + general theories of relativity. Even though he was respected within the science world, he didn't know anything about theology and most of his famous quotes were either poo infested or just plain wrong. Here's one example:

    "God does not play dice with the Universe"

    Quantum mechanics has already proved that this statement is blatantly false. Further, Einstein spent the latter part of his life trying to prove QM wrong, but was not successful. Therefore, outside of his specific area of expertise, why should I believe any of his silly quotes??

    February 14, 2012 at 4:28 pm |
    • Sue

      Given how much the bible gets wrong on science and virtually every other topic presented in it, and contradicts itself many times on many topics, why should be believe anything in it?

      Reference: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science/long.html

      February 14, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
    • Blind CS

      @Sue,

      Ok, tell me what the Bible got wrong?

      February 14, 2012 at 4:45 pm |
    • WASP

      @blind cs: what the bible got wrong? how about creating a whole population of people, not once but twice from one male one female. lets not forget the fact that if you read genesis as the book it is, god can't keep count of how many humans he creates because in genesis 1:26 he created man, genesis 1:27 he created man again, in genesis chapter 2 verse 2 he creates man and woman, then he creates adam Genesis 2:7 and makeseve from his rib in Genesis 2:21 so i would say the bible got a lot wrong. so if god couldn't keep track of how many humans he was creating, i would say it is wrong.

      February 14, 2012 at 5:48 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @Blind CS,
      You can't get through the first chapter of the first book without a whole slew of problems.

      February 14, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • Nonimus

      ...if taken literally, that is.

      February 14, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • Amused

      What the Bible got wrong? How about naming something the Bible got right? Is there a single thing in the bible that can be proven? No. Just a collection of ancient legends written by ancient humans. Nothing more and nothing less.

      February 14, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
    • Primewonk

      Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

      The universe began 13.7 billion years ago. The first stars formed and began fusion 13.5 billion years ago. The earth wasn't formed until 9 billion years later.

      Your god got the very first verse wrong. Sorry.

      February 15, 2012 at 9:00 am |
  19. jimtanker

    I have a challenge for all of you out there who believe in god and want to prove it to non-believers. Ask your entire congregation to pray for just one of our soldiers to regrow a lost limb. That is all. Just one person to regrow amputated limb. Or is your god not powerful enough for that? Or do you not believe enough that he will do that for you? Or are you a bunch of WBC nutjobs that don’t want our soldiers to be able to play ball with their kids?

    February 14, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
    • Blind CS

      God will do anything you ask according to your faith in His ability, and divine will.

      February 14, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
    • jimtanker

      So what I'm hearing is that either he doesnt want to, or noone has ever asked in earnest. Is that right?

      February 14, 2012 at 4:41 pm |
    • Blind CS

      If you ask him to remove a mountain and have complete faith in His ability to move the mountain and it is according to His divine will for the planet, the mountain will be removed. No problem.

      February 14, 2012 at 4:44 pm |
    • momoya

      Blind CS

      Are you saying that if it's god's will to move a mountain at a particular time and for a particular reason, he still requires that somebody pray with faith that he do it? The way you describe faithful prayer, it sounds like it's redundant–since god should be doing his will all the time, anyway.

      February 14, 2012 at 5:01 pm |
    • Blind CS

      momoya:

      No, the point was that the event will happen if it is (b) what God has purposed for your life. In other words, His will for your life. God's will for your life gets played out based on the free will agency of your choices.

      February 14, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Sorry, but I can say the same thing. I can move any mountain, just by thinking, I just don't want to right now.

      February 14, 2012 at 5:53 pm |
    • WASP

      @blind: examples of delusional. definition:1.a. The act or process of deluding.
      b. The state of being deluded.
      2. A false belief or opinion: labored under the delusion that success was at hand.
      3. Psychiatry A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence, especially as a symptom of mental illness: delusions of persecution.

      examples of where you sound delusional "Blind CS
      If you ask him to remove a mountain and have complete faith in His ability to move the mountain and it is according to His divine will for the planet, the mountain will be removed. No problem.
      February 14, 2012 at 4:44 pm"
      next example of where you sound delusional "Blind CS
      No, the point was that the event will happen if it is (b) what God has purposed for your life. In other words, His will for your life. God's will for your life gets played out based on the free will agency of your choices.
      February 14, 2012 at 5:40 pm"

      so in other words, god will do what he planned for you unless you will him to do what you want him to do with prayer? and even if pray you can't get him to what you want him to do if it's not in his plans for you......so basically you have no way of having any effect on god, or even getting him to do what you ask even if you do pray.

      February 14, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
    • Primewonk

      I guess salamanders and starfish have more faith in Blind CS's god than any amputee, since they can regrow limbs.

      February 15, 2012 at 8:55 am |
    • What IF

      primewonk,

      Yeh, watching axolotyls clasp their tiny feet together in prayer is a kick! They have those little praying feet statues in their nests too!

      February 16, 2012 at 2:05 pm |
    • False Dichotomy

      @What If – that's awesome. Big respect for anyone who can work axolotyls into conversation.

      February 16, 2012 at 5:17 pm |
  20. Blind CS

    Matthew 12: "Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

    February 14, 2012 at 4:23 pm |
    • jimtanker

      “All right,” the Lord said. “You may bake your bread with cow dung instead of human dung.”
      –Ezekiel 4:12-15

      February 14, 2012 at 4:28 pm |
    • Monti

      Yes cursing a magical force....very bad.

      February 14, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
    • jimtanker

      I thought that your god, jebus and holy spirit are all equal. How can it be that you can be punished for cursing one but not the other? Fail!

      February 15, 2012 at 8:40 am |
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.