home
RSS
July 27th, 2013
08:33 AM ET

Why millennials are leaving the church

Opinion by Rachel Held Evans, Special to CNN

(CNN) - At 32, I barely qualify as a millennial.

I wrote my first essay with a pen and paper, but by the time I graduated from college, I owned a cell phone and used Google as a verb.

I still remember the home phone numbers of my old high school friends, but don’t ask me to recite my husband’s without checking my contacts first.

I own mix tapes that include selections from Nirvana and Pearl Jam, but I’ve never planned a trip without Travelocity.

Despite having one foot in Generation X, I tend to identify most strongly with the attitudes and the ethos of the millennial generation, and because of this, I’m often asked to speak to my fellow evangelical leaders about why millennials are leaving the church.

Armed with the latest surveys, along with personal testimonies from friends and readers, I explain how young adults perceive evangelical Christianity to be too political, too exclusive, old-fashioned, unconcerned with social justice and hostile to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

I point to research that shows young evangelicals often feel they have to choose between their intellectual integrity and their faith, between science and Christianity, between compassion and holiness.

I talk about how the evangelical obsession with sex can make Christian living seem like little more than sticking to a list of rules, and how millennials long for faith communities in which they are safe asking tough questions and wrestling with doubt.

Invariably, after I’ve finished my presentation and opened the floor to questions, a pastor raises his hand and says, “So what you’re saying is we need hipper worship bands. …”

And I proceed to bang my head against the podium.

Time and again, the assumption among Christian leaders, and evangelical leaders in particular, is that the key to drawing twenty-somethings back to church is simply to make a few style updates - edgier music, more casual services, a coffee shop in the fellowship hall, a pastor who wears skinny jeans, an updated Web site that includes online giving.

But here’s the thing: Having been advertised to our whole lives, we millennials have highly sensitive BS meters, and we’re not easily impressed with consumerism or performances.

In fact, I would argue that church-as-performance is just one more thing driving us away from the church, and evangelicalism in particular.

Many of us, myself included, are finding ourselves increasingly drawn to high church traditions - Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, the Episcopal Church, etc. - precisely because the ancient forms of liturgy seem so unpretentious, so unconcerned with being “cool,” and we find that refreshingly authentic.

What millennials really want from the church is not a change in style but a change in substance.

We want an end to the culture wars. We want a truce between science and faith. We want to be known for what we stand for, not what we are against.

We want to ask questions that don’t have predetermined answers.

We want churches that emphasize an allegiance to the kingdom of God over an allegiance to a single political party or a single nation.

We want our LGBT friends to feel truly welcome in our faith communities.

We want to be challenged to live lives of holiness, not only when it comes to sex, but also when it comes to living simply, caring for the poor and oppressed, pursuing reconciliation, engaging in creation care and becoming peacemakers.

You can’t hand us a latte and then go about business as usual and expect us to stick around. We’re not leaving the church because we don’t find the cool factor there; we’re leaving the church because we don’t find Jesus there.

Like every generation before ours and every generation after, deep down, we long for Jesus.

Now these trends are obviously true not only for millennials but also for many folks from other generations. Whenever I write about this topic, I hear from forty-somethings and grandmothers, Generation Xers and retirees, who send me messages in all caps that read “ME TOO!” So I don’t want to portray the divide as wider than it is.

But I would encourage church leaders eager to win millennials back to sit down and really talk with them about what they’re looking for and what they would like to contribute to a faith community.

Their answers might surprise you.

Rachel Held Evans is the author of "Evolving in Monkey Town" and "A Year of Biblical Womanhood." She blogs at rachelheldevans.com. The views expressed in this column belong to Rachel Held Evans.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Belief • Christianity • Church • evangelicals • Opinion

soundoff (9,864 Responses)
  1. Bootyfunk

    why are people leaving religion behind? they're realizing they don't need religion to be a good person, to care for their brothers and sisters. they're realizing supporting religion is supporting ignorance.

    July 28, 2013 at 1:20 am |
    • lol??

      EVIL

      July 28, 2013 at 1:46 am |
  2. Sandor Clegane

    Maybe its because god doesn't exist and people are getting smarter and now know this.

    July 28, 2013 at 1:15 am |
    • Bootyfunk

      education and the internet are killing religion. people who believe in fairy tales don't like fact-checking.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:16 am |
      • Bringtherain

        science is fake

        July 28, 2013 at 1:46 am |
        • Mirosal

          So, the next time you need medical attention, or you're wondering how to make your garden grow, instead of talking to a doctor, or an agraian expert, you'll just pray to your "god" to make things better? You do know people have gone to jail, and rightfully so, for doing that, don't you?

          July 28, 2013 at 2:37 am |
      • lol??

        EVIL

        July 28, 2013 at 2:08 am |
    • lol??

      EVIL

      July 28, 2013 at 2:08 am |
  3. tom dick harry

    r u sure?

    strongforce
    Johnny
    Trus
    captain america
    Derrick Yu
    Really-O?
    Jeff
    niknak
    EnjaySea
    Jenniferrrrrrrr
    MsMoron99
    Athy
    skytag
    One one
    bostontola
    Cpt. Obvious
    Bible Clown©
    Brother Maynard
    Elise
    mark
    tallulah13
    I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV
    Akira
    Dyslexic doG
    another good reason to ignore Christians
    Candiano
    another good reason to ignore Christians
    On the belt buckleof millions of Nazi soldiers
    This long-dead horse apparently needs flogging again
    Christian Motto
    Wasp
    Rory
    Open the pod bay door
    Agnostickids
    Rodents for Romney
    Polonius
    FYI
    Oberver
    skytag
    Cpt. Obvious
    Judica
    Open the pod bay door
    Rodents for Romney
    FYI
    Polonius
    Satan
    skytag
    Cpt. Obvious
    Judica
    Rodents for Romney
    Righteo
    Johnnyboy
    My Dog is a jealous Dog
    howabouthat
    Realist
    Attack of the 50 Foot Magical Underwear
    realbuckyball
    Thor
    Bill Jamieson
    Cthulhu Cultist
    Zingo
    Tom, Tom, the Other One
    The Floppy and Stunningly Ineffective Zombie Apocalypse of Cluckles the Boneless Chicken

    July 28, 2013 at 1:12 am |
    • Observer

      faith's comments are every bit as ignorant when she/he uses the name of "tom dick harry". No intelligent improvement.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:18 am |
      • lol??

        EVIL

        July 28, 2013 at 2:10 am |
    • logan5

      I have an even better question: Are you feeling OK?

      July 28, 2013 at 1:26 am |
  4. strongforce

    "Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration–courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and, above all, love of the truth."- H. L. Mencken

    July 28, 2013 at 1:10 am |
    • Bootyfunk

      great quote.
      the pillars of religion are guilt, fear and ignorance.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:18 am |
      • Dave

        Bootyfunk, why do you say that?

        The Apostle Paul was very intellectually inclined.
        Doubting Thomas did not get his name for nothing. He needed unequivocal proof before he believed. I believe in science you call that observation.
        The New Testament held women in high esteem.

        The Muslims created or helped to create in large part Algebra.

        For all of the flaws the Catholic church had in the medieval period, it has been credited to them for having protected reading, writing and basic math in the monasteries.

        So I am not getting your point regarding ignorance.

        Regarding fear and guilt, when you say religion, you are including Christianity in the mix. I cannot speak for all religions but I can speak for Christianity. Jesus said come all that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest. Where there is right and truth there has to be guilt to convict you back to the truth, even in science or should my teacher not admonish me if I say 1 + 1 = 3.

        July 28, 2013 at 1:32 am |
        • MikeH

          1+1=2 is a definition... 1+1 could equal 3 if we changed the symbol 3 (numbers and equations are merely representative symbols) to mean what 2 currently means.
          Telling people what they can or cannot do with their personal time when it does not really affect other people is not in anyway the same thing. Rights and wrongs are agreed upon based upon reasoning, not definition. To try to compare the two is a falsehood in itself.
          For example, generally speaking, we all agree killing people is wrong. That is a conclusion we draw based upon a respect for the life of others and their right to exist being equal to our right. No matter how accepted it is, it is still a judgement call based in qualitative value. No matter how widely accepted or by whom the concept is endorsed, it is not the same thing as agreeing to the definition of blue or 1+1=2.

          July 28, 2013 at 2:05 am |
  5. tom dick harry

    has anyone seen an atheist around here?

    Johnny
    Trus
    captain america
    Derrick Yu
    Really-O?
    Jeff
    niknak
    EnjaySea
    Jenniferrrrrrrr
    MsMoron99
    Athy
    skytag
    One one
    bostontola
    Cpt. Obvious
    Bible Clown©
    Brother Maynard
    Elise
    mark
    tallulah13
    I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV
    Akira
    Dyslexic doG
    another good reason to ignore Christians
    Candiano
    another good reason to ignore Christians
    On the belt buckleof millions of Nazi soldiers
    This long-dead horse apparently needs flogging again
    Christian Motto
    Wasp
    Rory
    Open the pod bay door
    Agnostickids
    Rodents for Romney
    Polonius
    FYI
    Oberver
    skytag
    Cpt. Obvious
    Judica
    Open the pod bay door
    Rodents for Romney
    FYI
    Polonius
    Satan
    skytag
    Cpt. Obvious
    Judica
    Rodents for Romney
    Righteo
    Johnnyboy
    My Dog is a jealous Dog
    howabouthat
    Realist
    Attack of the 50 Foot Magical Underwear
    realbuckyball
    Thor
    Bill Jamieson
    Cthulhu Cultist
    Zingo
    Tom, Tom, the Other One
    The Floppy and Stunningly Ineffective Zombie Apocalypse of Cluckles the Boneless Chicken

    July 28, 2013 at 1:09 am |
    • tom dick harry

      darn

      me neither

      July 28, 2013 at 1:10 am |
      • tallulah13

        Sorry to disappoint. I was off doing something else. Perhaps you should give it a try. There's so much more to life than trolling on the internet.

        July 28, 2013 at 1:30 am |
    • Bootyfunk

      i just logged on. what's up?

      July 28, 2013 at 1:16 am |
  6. David Dee

    The author states "and we’re not easily impressed with consumerism or performances." Yet she says "but by the time I graduated from college, I owned a cell phone and used Google as a verb, I own mix tapes that include selections from Nirvana and Pearl Jam, but I've never planned a trip without Travelocity." If that isn't consumerism, then what is?

    July 28, 2013 at 1:03 am |
    • Norwegian

      Cell phones and Google are examples of consumerism. However, they are of such high class that they do impress. This is hard for a church to compete with. Still many churches spend huge efforts to try to impress. I think the point she is trying to make is that the church DO NOT need to compete with Google and Nokia. The church can offer something else, something simpler, something more down to earth

      July 28, 2013 at 1:16 am |
  7. Peter Q Wolfe

    Whoops! Sorry for the typos but I have some valid points of the future trends though. Personally it would be better for God to die cause it doesn't deserve our mercy not the other way round. We never look at that way in humanistic terms right?

    July 28, 2013 at 1:03 am |
  8. JudgeJabez

    Would it surprise you to know that those were the same desires of my heart as a college student in the 1950's and still remain to be so for senior adults? And, I found in the church a group of fellow followers who longed for and HAD truly strong relationships with God through surrender, not to the rules, although Jesus could quote them all, and through loving, obedient, prayerful, holy lives. I did not find condemnation but comfort in knowing that God would never leave me nor forsake me, in being forgiven when I confessed my sins, in having a church family that supported and comforted me when I was in desperate need of the power and strength of the Holy Spirit. If one does not want to have a love relationship with God which He offers to each individual freely, that is his/her choice. But in exercising that choice in the affirmative, I have found life abundant even in suffering, joy even in sorrow, and in Jesus a Friend that "sticketh closer than a brother." Students of mine have desired a faith that works in the trenches, not just to get selfish needs met, but to open doors of service to others. In short, a relationship with Jesus Christ has made it possible for me to leave my little environment - not politics - better than I found it. Godly people should be involved in public service, but politics in the church is out of place, in my opinion. On the other hand, Christians have a duty to speak out against evil. Had it not been so Hitler and Stalin would have been undefeated. Christians are about love and acceptance of every person for whom Christ died (all "whosoevers") regardless of behavior, but God does hold us accountable for moral living as HE defined it - however, each of us is accountable only to God, not to me, for behavior and beliefs. If hate and judgmentalism (which some of the writers exercise while saying they abhor it) "work for them" let them keep at it, but no one of us needs to be abusive just because I or anyone else holds an opinion with which they disagree. Perhaps millenials can lead in revival in the churches by reminding us of the need for selfless love, not by turning their backs on an opportunity to make a difference within the churches who have "left their first love."

    July 28, 2013 at 1:01 am |
    • thoughts

      that is what most got from 'church' to some degree until all the politics divided the people into rights and lefts and dems and repubs and not that nor that and do this and that and not that or this

      too much politics in church – not enough christ

      July 28, 2013 at 1:16 am |
  9. tom dick harry

    An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. carl sagan

    unless you are an "atheist" who posts on this dump
    lol

    July 28, 2013 at 12:59 am |
    • zeyn2010

      We're able to claim that about everything we make can possibly make up! Can you give me proof that tooth fairy does not exist? LOL

      July 28, 2013 at 1:00 am |
    • Pest

      That is a misrepresentation of the definition of "atheist". Feel free to open a dictionary.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:01 am |
    • John Herling

      People are certain that unicorns and little green men from Mars also don't exist, and for the same reason atheists don't believe any deities exist – lack of evidence.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:09 am |
    • RichardSRussell

      "An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God,"

      Partially correct. Such people are surely included among the world's half a billion atheists, but they don't represent more than a small minority of them, and hardly a representative group at that.

      The correct definition of "atheist", which certainly includes those you mention above, is "a person without god beliefs", with no further qualification or explanation of how that condition came to be. This follows directly from the etymology of "atheism":
         "a-" (without) "-theos-" (god) "-ism" (belief).

      All people are born atheists and remain that way until the local brainwashing starts taking effect.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:41 am |
  10. MG

    You almost had me until you brought up Jesus. Now I'm done.

    July 28, 2013 at 12:58 am |
    • zeyn2010

      LOL –

      July 28, 2013 at 12:59 am |
  11. zeyn2010

    The fact that religious organizations would feel the need 'to keep up with the changing times' should give all who follow them the clue that there is no such thing as divine... It might have been that misunderstood advanced technology of advanced beings who visited us back in the day we didn't have technology could have spawned all the religions on earth, and people have misused it for their own benefit for power and money. Sometimes I do wish those who visited us would come back to see the mess they've created...

    July 28, 2013 at 12:54 am |
  12. Peter Q Wolfe

    Sorry for the typo just was being lazy, Accoprding to L.A Times, there was a 'Walking Alone' article coauthored by Robert Putnam that proves that Generation Y is less into organized religion and surplanting it with unconformist beliefs or nonbeliefs. Religion is becomign more individualistic with each individual person, so lots of experimentation is going on with college students e.g. conversions and reaffilations are abundant at the moment. Keeping thta in mind this is just a transition to something newer till the next generation transforms into perhaps a New Religion without prejudice and off the tennants of logic not opinion as much!!!

    July 28, 2013 at 12:52 am |
  13. NavinJay

    Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. Corinthians 14:34. Because the Bible has outdated and ludicrous statements like THIS. Promoting woman as ownership items and they have to be quiet while men speak. And there are people that still give that old silly book credence? Those that do need therapy. Lots and lots of therapy. Give up the imaginary friend.

    July 28, 2013 at 12:43 am |
    • Cameron Masters

      Amen!

      July 28, 2013 at 12:51 am |
      • lol??

        EVIL

        July 28, 2013 at 2:12 am |
    • zeyn2010

      I doubt they actually read it...

      July 28, 2013 at 12:56 am |
    • zeyn2010

      It also disappoints me that God never intend for us to be wise – it was only because Eve ate the apple from the tree of knowledge against God's wishes that we know right from wrong-just like God... according to the story.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:07 am |
      • NavinJay

        But God knows everything so he already knew Eve would eat the apple. So, why punish the for something he already knew they were going to do?

        July 28, 2013 at 1:34 am |
        • zeyn2010

          If God knew everything, he wouldn't have asked Eve why she was hiding after she ate the apple from the forbidden tree.. or was that a part of his plan too? This is just way too complicated a game for a divine being to have a need to play with some poor creatures he/they created...

          July 28, 2013 at 1:51 am |
    • lol??

      Yup, youse guys schmart. Put the Beast in charge of marriage and you end up with qweirdo LUV and 60 mil dead.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:31 am |
  14. Paul

    "We want a truce between science and faith."

    There was never a conflict between science and faith. The confilct has always been one person's interpretation of the scientific evidence vs. another person's interpretation of the same scientific evidence.

    July 28, 2013 at 12:35 am |
    • RichardSRussell

      There's nothing BUT conflict between science and faith. No responsible scientist would EVER use faith to arrive at answers. The very idea is repugnant to the whole IDEA of science.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:39 am |
      • SeattleBeliever

        I don't think religion and science are after the same answers or asking the same questions. So I don't see any conflict between the two. Most of the scientists today, and this may come as a shock to you, are people of faith too. Wow, even the current pope was a chemist before he became a priest. A lot of scientists were priests. The Catholic Church founded the University system. They're not exclusive. Science asks the how, faith asks the why.

        July 28, 2013 at 1:13 am |
    • AtheistSteve

      If your interpretation of science includes supernatural influences then you're doing it wrong.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:40 am |
    • Athy

      There will always be a conflict between science and religion. Religies just cannot accept truth if it conflicts with their beliefs. Their minds are made up and facts contrary to the bible won't be accepted. Unless the pope says it's OK.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:41 am |
    • dsavio

      I disagree. I think there is clearly a conflict between religious faith and scientific endeavor. If you explain the universe with a God then you've cut off and devalued scientific curiosity. We're much better off with religion. Keep whatever is good, dispense with the rest.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:47 am |
    • zeyn2010

      So frustrating when people compare science and faith, when faith requires absolutely no proof!! LOLLL people lets get over this already!

      July 28, 2013 at 12:58 am |
    • Charitas

      Quite right Paul, entirely too much subjectiveness goin' on around here.

      There were many worthwhile issues raised by this article unfortunately the author used a few too many "we wants".
      I, I, Me, Me, Want, Want, tantrum, nolens volens.

      July 28, 2013 at 1:04 am |
  15. redslinky

    Reblogged this on Northern Down Pouring.

    July 28, 2013 at 12:35 am |
  16. observer

    Look at medical science for example. It has improved, because it has changed its practices over time. So what scientists believed has been altered. The actual problem with religion is that even those who are belligerantly religious are not presenting scriptural support because their faith is not based on studying the bible and being ACCURATE about it as it requires (1Timothy 2:3,4).
    My neighbor, a wonderful Biology prophesor, is an atheist. Thre is not a more loving, honest hard worker than him. But he has been unable to prove God does not exist. He has quoted violence and other vices, but i have countered that crime is not proof of the absence of a police force. Sometimes we just have to ask more noble questions and present more reasoned out and researched answers.

    July 28, 2013 at 12:33 am |
    • eric

      let me know when you are able to 'disprove' the invisible dragon in that is in your kitchen, okay? it isn't anyone else's problem to prove that your god actually exists, it is your problem. it's a problem that you should work on, rather than trying to misdirect burden of proof onto others due to your own inability to reason.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:52 am |
    • AtheistSteve

      The onus is not on your professor to prove Gods non-existence any more than it is to prove Zeus doesn't exist. The claim that God is real is unsubstantiated. If it was a credible proposal it would be blatantly and equally obvious to everyone. But that isn't the case now is it? There are as many differing views among believers on the nature of God as there are people.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:53 am |
      • observer

        The science i see is proof enough that God exists. The engineering marvel the human body is. The organized cycles in the universe. The movement of planets. Bible prophesies. I have honestly read the bible from cover to cover seven times. I am also a avid lover of science. Evev if some believe we evolved out of some symboitic soup, i have not been able to find any type of process tha was not started by someone; a soup that was't thought out by someone. The chance that the dna strand came up by chance is in my opinion naive. Or that the intricate proteins there in just happened. As soon as my house starts to repair itself anf do the laundry, i will accept evolution. I disagree with religion, but science only confirms intelligent design

        July 28, 2013 at 1:19 am |
        • AtheistSteve

          Everything you said is a logical fallacy called the argument from ignorance. Just because you don't understand how things came about in naturalistic terms doesn't mean "God did it". The appearance of design in nature is illusory. Does a rock appear designed? How will your argument hold up when the puzzle of abiogenesis is solved and a natural mechanism for life originating from non-life is discovered? There Is much we don't understand about the universe and some of it may never be known but the gaps for God to hide in are diminished with every new finding.

          July 28, 2013 at 1:43 am |
  17. Joshua Long

    You nailed it Rachel. I've found myself extremely drawn to episcopal & Eastern Orthodoxy because of the interesting tenets especially in their inner or more obscure teachings. Such matters are actually discouraged & considered potentially heretical in Baptist doctrine, my childhood church. Reconsiderations are seldom bad. Oh how shrill the bitter shriek! Their toes curl when you mention that name. It's as if they sense there may be more than meets the eye.

    July 28, 2013 at 12:26 am |
    • Athy

      Having trouble with the reply function, Josh? It's not really that hard.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:35 am |
      • *

        Athy,

        I think Joshua was addressing the article's author, Rachel. Sometimes you are too quick on the trigger.

        July 28, 2013 at 12:49 am |
        • Athy

          My apologies.

          July 28, 2013 at 1:06 am |
    • evgeniajellybean

      I grew up in the baptist church as well, and when I turned 13 years old, I couldn't take it anymore. The hypocrisy was unprecedented. I wanted to be Jewish, but that didn't "feel" much better. So then I decided I was agnostic for a few years, and finally found the Orthodox Church. I converted 6 years ago, and it has changed my life for the better. Everything this author said was spot on! I hope you will consider the Orthodox Church on a deeper level – attend some liturgies and other services. It is the truth. 🙂

      July 28, 2013 at 12:59 am |
  18. Austin

    what?

    July 28, 2013 at 12:17 am |
    • RichardSRussell

      Check in with Costco, Austin. I hear they're running a Sunday special on clues.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:21 am |
  19. observer

    Unfortunately, science is also a faith. Most science is based on assumptions, and it changes every few years. The Bible does not argue to be scientific text, but when and where it tiuches science, it is very accurate. Science expects us to believe things it cannot answer fully, like the origin of species. The fact that we cannot for example explain miracles scientifically does not mean the bible is wrong. We label all unexplainable things as "miracles" because we do not have the science knowledge to explain it. For example, a glucometer would be a miracle in the medieval period. Not so today. But scientists could not have believed in a glucometer then, because they were not educated AT THAT TIME about those things.

    July 28, 2013 at 12:15 am |
    • Name*Mike

      Science is not based on faith; science is based on evidence.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:19 am |
    • RichardSRussell

      Au contraire, Pierre! Science is the diametric opposite of faith.

      Faith starts with assertions and looks for support.

      Science starts with facts and looks for explanations.

      Of COURSE some of the explanations change from time to time — they get better, but they still have to explain everything that the old theories did, the same way Einstein's relativity explained everything Newton's theories of motion did, and more besides.

      Only a stone fool would think that something that never changed over thousands of years was somehow superior to continuous quality improvement.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:20 am |
      • kithill

        I'm sorry, but I think you're being naive if you think science, as it's practiced today, is not an exercise in faith. The very concept of theory is indeed based on assumptions about what we don't know. I'm not knocking good science but the politics and experimenter bias in science is rampant for whatever reasons. This includes almost all sciences. Do we really know what a species is? Is there really a gay gene? Can matter travel faster than light? Can using leeches to bleed people really treat disease? To quote that famous Italian politician, Pontius Pilate, "What is truth?"

        July 28, 2013 at 12:47 am |
    • Rick

      Science is based on experimentation and observations. Some proposals are taken as most likely, but are never deemed fact until proven so experimentally. Nothing is taken on faith in science like it is in religion.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:21 am |
    • WeJustDontKnow

      You are wrong. Science has told us more about this world than the Bible ever has. Enjoy that fact.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:23 am |
      • observer

        Sciece has definitely done a lot. However, it dinishes itself by assuming it is the Only source of scientific knowledge, when there is so much it cannot, and has not explained. The bible does not–as i said before–argue to be a science book. But when it touches science, it is accurate. For example, in isaiah 40:22, the bible talks about "the CIRCLE OF THE EARTH". In Job 26:7 says God hangs the earth upon nothing. These prove the bible is an intelligent book scientifically, but it was not authored to impress people. It is accurate. Before you tell me these words were recently injected here, check the septuagint and other old old bibles which existed before the church tried to kill galileo. The church and the bible (this is the point i want to clarify) are neither syninymous, nor in agreement.

        July 28, 2013 at 12:49 am |
    • WeJustDontKnow

      observer.. I read the rest of your comment and just want to say that your point had nothing to say at all. You are not intelligent, and proved nothing with your babblings of a fool. Your comment actually proves more against what you think you were saying. If I have to explain that to you... Well it will just prove my point. Enjoy.

      July 28, 2013 at 12:28 am |
    • Paul

      "Unfortunately, science is also a faith."

      Science is not a faith, it's a tool we use to help us understand and evaluated the world around us.

      " Most science is based on assumptions, and it changes every few years."

      Science doesn't make assumptions. It can't because it's abstract. It's the scientists that make assumptions and, yes, sometimes they are wrong. Hence the changes when corrections are made.

      "Science expects us to believe things it cannot answer fully, like the origin of species."

      That would be the scientists, not science. It's just their interpretation of the scientific evidence. One group believes in common descent (evolutionists), and another group believes that animals only reproduce after their own kind (creationists).

      July 28, 2013 at 12:50 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 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125
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.