My Take: Jesus would believe in evolution and so should you
The most compelling evidence for evolution comes from the study of genes.
April 10th, 2011
01:00 AM ET

My Take: Jesus would believe in evolution and so should you

Editor's Note: Karl W. Giberson, Ph.D., is vice president of The BioLogos Foundation and is the author or coauthor of seven books, including The Language of Science and Faith.

By Karl W. Giberson, Special to CNN

Jesus once famously said, “I am the Truth.”

Christianity at its best embodies this provocative idea and has long been committed to preserving, expanding and sharing truth. Most of the great universities of the world were founded by Christians committed to the truth—in all its forms—and to training new generations to carry it forward.

When science began in the 17th century, Christians eagerly applied the new knowledge to alleviate suffering and improve living conditions.

But when it comes to the truth of evolution, many Christians feel compelled to look the other way. They hold on to a particular interpretation of an ancient story in Genesis that they have fashioned into a modern account of origins - a story that began as an oral tradition for a wandering tribe of Jews thousands of years ago.

This is the view on display in a $27 million dollar Creation Museum in Kentucky. It inspired the Institute for Creation Research, which purports to offer scientific support for creationism.

And it’s hardly a fringe view. A 2010 Gallup poll indicated that 4 in 10 Americans think that “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so.” (http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/four-americans-believe-strict-creationism.aspx)

While Genesis contains wonderful insights into the relationship between God and the creation, it simply does not contain scientific ideas about the origin of the universe, the age of the earth or the development of life.

For more than two centuries, careful scientific research, much of it done by Christians, has demonstrated clearly that the earth is billions years old, not mere thousands, as many creationists argue. We now know that the human race began millions of years ago in Africa - not thousands of years ago in the Middle East, as the story in Genesis suggests.

And all life forms are related to each other though evolution. These are important truths that science has discovered through careful research. They are not “opinions” that can be set aside if you don’t like them.

Anyone who values truth must take these ideas seriously, for they have been established as true beyond any reasonable doubt.

There is much evidence for evolution. The most compelling comes from the study of genes, especially now that the Human Genome Project has been completed and the genomes of many other species being constantly mapped.

In particular, humans share an unfortunate “broken gene” with many other primates, including chimpanzees, orangutans, and macaques. This gene, which works fine in most mammals, enables the production of Vitamin C. Species with broken versions of the gene can’t make Vitamin C and must get it from foods like oranges and lemons.

Thousands of hapless sailors died painful deaths scurvy during the age of exploration because their “Vitamin C” gene was broken.

How can different species have identical broken genes? The only reasonable explanation is that they inherited it from a common ancestor.

Not surprisingly, evolution since the time of Darwin has claimed that humans, orangutans, chimpanzees, and macaques evolved recently from a common ancestor. The new evidence from genetics corroborates this.

Such evidence proves common ancestry with a level of certainty comparable to the evidence that the earth goes around the sun.

This is but one of many, many evidences that support the truth of evolution - that make it a “sacred fact” that Christians must embrace in the name of truth. And they should embrace this truth with enthusiasm, for this is the world that God created.

Christians must come to welcome - rather than fear - the ideas of evolution. Truths about Nature are sacred, for they speak of our Creator. Such truths constitute “God’s second book” for Christians to read alongside the Bible.

In the 17th century, Galileo used the metaphor of the “two books” to help Christians of his generation understand the sacred truth that the earth moves about the sun. “The Bible,” he liked to say, “tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens ago.”

To understand how the heavens go we must read the book of Nature, not the Bible.

The Book of nature reveals the truth that God created the world through gradual processes over billions of years, rather than over the course of six days, as many creationists believe.

Evolution does not contradict the Bible unless you force an unreasonable interpretation on that ancient book.

To suppose, as the so-called young earth creationists do, that God dictated modern scientific ideas to ancient and uncomprehending scribes is to distort the biblical message beyond recognition. Modern science was not in the worldview of the biblical authors and it is not in the Bible.

Science is not a sinister enterprise aimed at destroying faith. It’s an honest exploration of the wonderful world that God created.

We are often asked to think about what Jesus would do, if he lived among us today. Who would Jesus vote for? What car would he drive?

To these questions we should add “What would Jesus believe about origins?”

And the answer? Jesus would believe evolution, of course. He cares for the Truth.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Karl W. Giberson.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Bible • Christianity • Culture & Science • Culture wars • Opinion • Science

soundoff (3,562 Responses)
  1. Jim

    No, Jesus would NOT believe in the THEORY of evolution and neither did Darwin! Jesus knows that HIS FATHER created everything and Darwin even tried to retract/debunk his THEORY. For evolution to be true, the world would have to be many times over what it truly is. The dust on the moon would have been 3-4 or more feet deep (look at the photos of the Lunar Lander and how far above the landing pad it stopped/ended. That's how deep it would have been had the Earth and everything else been as old as scientists said it was.). And for all you conspiracy THEORISTS, yes we DID go to the moon! If you don't believe me, then how can they measure the distance with a laser? Go to the other side of the world and look through a telescope and you'll see the equipment that was left behind.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
    • trish

      Just who taught you all that stuff. You should really be insulted. Or you have not seen the other side of the argument.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:47 pm |
  2. amy

    White Jesus would be amazed at his evolution.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
    • trish

      Amy, If Jesus lived at the time where he was suppose to live he would not be white.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:45 pm |
  3. blake

    Mr. Giberson, please do not take your understanding of truth and seek to impose it on Jesus. Never once in the gospels did Jesus question the veracity of the Old Testament Scriptures, including the creation account. He consistently affirmed their complete trustworthiness. According to the Bible, the physical universe, including the earth and life on it, was supernaturally spoken into existence by the Creator God. It was not set into motion thru an evolutionary process. Best rethink this one, if your appeal is going to be to Jesus.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:55 pm |
  4. Richard Aberdeen

    What this author left out is the fact that since the mapping of the human genome, modern science has discovered that ALL human beings alive today trace from a common ancestor no older than 10,000 years ago and some scientists say maybe as recent as the first century AD. This is due to something called "human cross-breeding", which weeds out weaker DNA strains and only the stronger ones survive. Thus, if one defines a true modern human being in the likeness of Adam, at the emergence of farming, which is how the Bible defines a true human being, then the known scientific evidence agrees with Genesis (and also the New Testament, which traces Jesus directly to Adam. This author, like most evolutionists, hasn't thought through his position very carefully. There is no rational reason to assume that God defines a human being the same way that modern science happens to define one. And, some scientists have even proposed that a true modern human being should be defined with the emergence of farming, which is a major so-called "evolutionary" step. The problem with evolution is the term itself. Life does not "evolve", life adapts and changes in order to survive, which is what ALL of the known evidence very clearly demonstrates and, which clearly demonstrates design and not random processes. As Francis Collins (also of BioLogos Foundation) has stated, DNA evidence alone overwhelmingly demonstrates design and not random processes.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:55 pm |
    • trish

      Read again Richard. All human genomes trace to a single ancestor, Yes. Out of Africa, not the Middle East. They go back as far as 150.000 years ago, not 10.000. I have had my genome done and I branch off at 14.000 years ago around the area of Norway.
      That exceeds your statement by 4,000 years ago. If you are going to talk intellegently, you must get your facts straight and not adjust them to meet what you want to be true. Google genomes and look for real ones to look at. Creationists have a habit of turning and adjusting facts. I had a good chuckle over this – unfortunately.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:25 pm |
  5. Paul

    Sigh! Another ridiculous article by someone who claims to know what Jesus would have believed. It's clear from the Scriptures, the main source of Jesus' teachings, that he believed in the Genesis creation account. And for the record, no, evolution has not been "proven." It's not a fact, but more faith-based than Christianity.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
    • CW

      There is FAR more evidence for evolution than for creationism.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:55 pm |
    • D Russell

      This idea that evolution is somehow in question is very limited to a few fundamentalist Christian sects in the US and fundamentalist Muslim societies mostly. These sects live in echo-chambers of their own making that makes them actually believe that it is even an issue for most of the planets population. It is not.

      And speaking of faith; statistically, the single significant factor that determines a persons religious belief system is the culture/family they were born into. All other factors and the odd conversion are so small as to be statistically insignificant. So that means your belief in your specifc religion is based essentually on where you were born (give that some thought some time). And yet even with this unarguable fact, you are willing to say that your particular flavor of supernatural belief is better than every other religion and all the science done since the Enlightenment. Truly that is faith.....

      April 10, 2011 at 7:07 pm |
  6. D Russell

    Unless the anti-evolution crowd is behind the times, they seem not to have noticed that the Human Genome Project and related science, has finally put payed in an undeniable way to the time line creationists like to point to. The HGP has done in the young-earth argument for good (not that the sciences of phyiscs, astronomy, chemestry, biology, archeology, palientology....etc, etc haven't not done that already). It has also at the same time bolstered some of the historically accurate parts of the Bible (there are a few of those mixed in with the mythology and legends) such as the close genetic relationship between the Arabs and Jews.

    What I find very interesting is that the fundamentalists really want to have science back up their supernatural claims. What this really indicates is that science is now seen as the final measure of 'truth' by eveyone in our society- even them.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
  7. wonder

    Well if physically we evolved what about the soul inside did it get evolved too, if not then all souls are same all animal souls are same and all plant souls are same?

    April 10, 2011 at 6:49 pm |
    • CW

      Souls don't exist.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
    • Purple

      Personally, I feel like all beings are connected to one another in some way. If that's the soul, then so be it. I know that I feel a connection with others and with nature most of the time, and perhaps we're all parts of one united spirit. I guess nobody really knows for sure, though.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:13 pm |
  8. AK991S

    Jason Baker has it right, though I would make a distinction. I suspect many educated Christians would believe that evolution happens, rather than happened. You can believe that God created the world and believe that God gave that world laws within which evolution works. That doesn't say anything about your belief in the Old Testament as a history of God's people or as an example.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:48 pm |
  9. enricorosan

    This does not mean that there is no creator (God) and that this creator who is a master of physics and inventor of the laws of the universe invented the mechanism by which all his creations undergo processes of transition from one form to another with the ultimate objective of achieving their maximum potential of survival and adaptation for those forms or states. But I am an agnostic so I will say Evolution is a reality and God is just a possibility.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:44 pm |
    • airwx

      I am glad to see at least one honest person in the discussion....with an open mind no less!

      April 10, 2011 at 6:49 pm |
    • AtheistSteve

      No atheist can be honest and state firmly that god does not exist. That is gnosticism and is just as unsupportable as a theist who claims certain knowledge of gods existence. Agnosticism is the only reasonable position for either side, but the weight of evidence bears heavily on the side of god being fabrication. It isn't a 50/50 propostion, not by a long shot and theist assertions of god having anything to do with natural occurances generally have no idea of the actual scientific explanations or choose to willfully deny such facts. Thus I have no justified reason to accept his existence until such time as evidence is presented to change my mind. Atheism is the default position in all cases where evidence is lacking and for equal reasons I don't believe in unicorns, dragons or ghosts. And finally all those who try to threaten with terrible consequences waiting for me after my death...pffft...I'll be dead...end of story...no heaven...no hell ...no soul....and no reason to believe I'm wrong. You are all just blowing smoke with stuff that by your own reasoning cannot be known to anyone alive, unless of course you choose to follow the advise of some old bronze age text written by primitives. Sorry but that just doesn't meet with the standards of logical critical thinking.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:42 pm |
  10. wonder

    But if I still don't understand where aliens originate from, if Darwin was alive I would have asked him?

    April 10, 2011 at 6:42 pm |
    • UH60L

      Mexico, mostly.....

      April 10, 2011 at 7:06 pm |
  11. scott

    One thing is certain... TRUTH does exist. Personal interpretations will be irrelevant in the end. So, to every reader, I encourage you to seek the Truth... and make a decision. YOUR decision. Choose wisely, however, as you will live with your decision for eternity. Feel free to 'choose' with your heart as well as your mind, for your choice will be written in your heart (regardless of what you might profess). Truly, the evidence is all around us. Seek and ye shall find. God Bless.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:40 pm |
    • D Russell

      I agree. You must make a choice. The supernatural or science.

      I choose science and you should too.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:35 pm |
  12. Gee

    Say what you may, that does not cancel the fact that GOD is there. Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is LORD whether in this life or the life after this.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
    • D Russell

      If King David was here he would be put in the Hague for war crimes related to the genoicide of women and children and whole societies. His saying his supernatural diety told him it was "ok" would make a real nice defense.....

      April 10, 2011 at 7:33 pm |
  13. Dan

    This makes me laugh so much! One kid at my school, Jason Mahr, doesnt believe in evolution...he quotes the Bible like it is the most credible source.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
  14. AK991S

    A few things:

    1. There are atheist scientists who do not believe the theory of evolution. If it were indisputably true, it would not be called a theory. Evidence is not the same as proof, and there are many who choose to study only that which has been and can be proven unequivocally.

    2. Christians do not inherently choose to ignore science. One can acknowledge that evolution would work within the universe governing laws and not accept that modern life is the result of such evolution. Look at an evolutionary time line. Christians believe that God created the universe X000 years ago on that timeline. They're also fully capable of believing that, had God chosen to, he could have created the universe at any other point on that timeline, and everything afterword would have moved forward just as the evolutionary theorists propose.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
    • CW

      Please go look up the definition of scientific theory. It has a VERY different definition than the word "theory" you're ascribing to evolution.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:53 pm |
    • Marconi

      Evolution is not established by atheists (or Christians) believing or disbelieving in it. Citing "some atheist scientists do not believe in evolution" is a logical fallacy

      April 10, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
    • ApplesnOranges

      Theory, in the realm of science, refers to a hypothesis that has been tested or observed and found to be strongly supported. In science, we can never PROVE our hypothesis – we can only support it. When people say "it's only a theory", it is incorrect to assume that this means it is weak. After all, gravity is a theory.
      Additionally, just because we have evidence to suggest that evolution is the most accurate model does NOT mean that it is the only correct one. The very basis of the scientific method is that if the current model is no longer applicable, we must test and observe in order to come up with a better one. Until then, evolution is the best model we have. The future may prove differently.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:06 pm |
    • AtheistSteve

      Evidence are facts, not proof. Proof is only applicable to math and logic. No scientist would ever state that evolution was proven, just that it has been demonstrated to be the most reasonable explanation due to overwhelming support by evidence.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:15 pm |
  15. RS47

    Most people who hold dogmatically to the purported truth of evolution do so from a philosophical position, usually naturalism (this author may be an exception). The reason for this is that there is no good evidence for macroevolution. The so called tree of life is a hoax, as the fossil record for phyla is vertical from their first appearance. Not one definite so-called intermediate or missing link has ever been found, but if evolution is true, the fossil record should be full of such examples. Furthermore, the tremendous amounts of very specific information that would need to self-assemble, required for the creation of life or if macroevolution is true, is something that does not just happen, and has never been demonstrated, even though there have been attempts to do so. This would also be a violation of laws of thermodynamics, which requires that entropy be increasing, not decreasing. A study of large amounts of genetic data by Dr. John Sanford has shown in his book 'Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome' that macroevolution has not and could not occur. Check it out. This work has also not been refuted in a meaningful way. Furthermore, no viable refutation of Dr. Michael Behe's work concerning irreducible complexity, published in his book 'Darwin's Black Box', has been presented. The refutation of irreducible complexity has only been to state that certain pathways or mechanisms can be imagined to do this, but philosophical a priori arguments do not imply their actual reality. Additionally, the genetic similarity between creatures could very well be intentional. Everyone has faith, but be careful what you place your faith in. Look what has happened in mathematical cosmology... many of these folks would rather posit a 'landscape' (multiple universes) to explain the exceedingly exceptional attributes of our universe, rather than posit one God. Quite unbelievable, but this is a statement that a philosophical position is the controlling attribute, and must be defended in any way possible.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:37 pm |
    • Marconi

      Boy, you sure are regurgitating poor arguments that were debunked long ago.

      So long ago that you can find them indexed: http://www.talkorigins.org/

      April 10, 2011 at 6:55 pm |
    • D Russell

      Ya, they really love the "classic" arguments. They have not even dealt with the Human Genome Project yet – they are still working on 1960's science lol. My favourite classic is their 'evolution violates thermodynamics'. The problem is that when I point out their view is based on a flawed deliniation of a system boundry that even a first year engineering student could see – they stop talking to me or move to another site lol. It's no small error to say the earth is a closed system and thus incapable of increasing complexity, ignoring the SUN's energy that bombards the planet lol.

      The truth is that they don't actually believe their arguments. I think they feel that telling a lie is ok if they get someone to convert to them (the 'good' end justifies the means). This is why they repeat the same false arguments because they do fool the uneducated some times. So pointing them to a site that shows the simple flaws in their arguments misses the point – they will keep using them.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:20 pm |
    • RS47

      The 'debunking' you refer to is based on unsubstantiated extentions of assumptions and partly a priori arguments that do not debunk anything except in the minds of those so inclined. Nothing has been demonstrated. But you hold to this as truth.... you do have a great amount of faith. Concerning the second law of thermodynamics, which is usually stated for closed systems, the fact is that even open systems have a nearly universal tendency to higher entropy. No scientific experiment has ever been shown to violate the second law for either open or closed systems. The thermodynamic issue is not the real issue here, however. The real problem for evolution is the information/complexity and biogenesis issue. As I said, study Dr. Sanford's work in 'Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome'. This is work that has not been refuted in any meaningful way, period. No biological experiment or observation has ever shown a cell (without purposeful intelligent manipulation) increasing its information content (changes, yes, increases, no).

      April 10, 2011 at 9:44 pm |
    • D Russell

      RE: "Concerning the second law of thermodynamics, which is usually stated for closed systems, the fact is that even open systems have a nearly universal tendency to higher entropy. No scientific experiment has ever been shown to violate the second law for either open or closed systems. The thermodynamic issue is not the real issue here, however"

      Um well ya, it is the issue because you don't understand science. The second law of thermodynamics states that "the entropy of an isolated macroscopic system never decreases, or, equivalently, that perpetual motion machines are impossible."

      If you have an open system, then you can add energy to for example a machine and as long as you provide that extra energy it will not slow down as long as the energy gained is equal to or greater than the machines losses due to friction etc. The real problem you have (besides not understanding basic science) is that you are not applying what little science you do understand correctly. If there is a vent under the sea that provides a constant source of energy in the form of heat and minerals, then there IS the extra energy available necessary for a life form to become more complex as there IS energy available in many forms for that purpose. Bottom line is you are WRONG. The second law is not violated only because it ONLY APPLIES TO CLOSED SYSTEMS. Life exists in OPEN SYSTEMS. To say "no scientific experiment has ever been shown to violate the second law for open systems" is a nonsense statement as it does not apply to open systems. Life may grow as complex as it has (anti-entropic = to gain complexity) is because it never exists in totally closed systems. There is always light, heat or other form of energy in the equation.

      You must have known this and if not you should not be stating things you don't understand as 'facts'. Which brings us back to my claim that Creationsists know they are not telling the truth. I believe they think that it is ok to confuse the non-scientific because they believe the 'good' end (conversionsion to their religion) justifies the lie.

      April 11, 2011 at 2:12 pm |
    • RS47

      Yes, we do need to be very careful how we construct statements concerning the issue of thermodynamics. I do appreciate your intelligent comments. I will attempt to clarify and restate my point: ALL of the available evidence that has been observed or measured for any open system in nature shows entropy increasing, never decreasing. However, your hypothesis is that in an open system in nature, with some type of externally supplied energy, a decrease in entropy could result (increase in order, such as biogenesis or biological evolution). There is NO evidence for this whatsoever, and ALL observations refute this hypothesis, regardless of system boundary.
      As an aside, a closed system can exist theoretically in a text book, but the only possibility for an actually existing closed system would be the entire universe, and this would be by definition. However, even this universe may not be a closed system.

      April 12, 2011 at 12:09 am |
  16. Audri

    I love how this article takes the words Jesus said "I am the Truth" to explain that He would believe in evolution. But let me just clarify the statement. Jesus said "I AM the Truth." He wasn't saying "I believe Truth." He was saying He WAS the Truth.

    Have any of you commenters actually read the Bible?? You come here and post your opinion because you believe you are right. And yes I would like to point out the fact that I said "believe". I believe we all have a right to an opinion. I am not saying I am correct (although most of our society would agree with me, and most likely all of you) but I am saying that before you tear down or build up the idea of evolution or the Bible, at least know what you're talking about.

    That said I know that I am far from a scientist. And I cannot reasonably debunk or prove any theory. But I will say that while this article had much opinion (which is perfectly acceptable according to the Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Press laws) there was only one claim of proof for evolution and absolutely no mention of the significantly higher amount, than usually assumed, of evidence for creation.

    When you "read the book of nature" you are going to find a disturbing amount of evidence for creation. For example there are entire graveyards of fossils that show that they were buried in water. Noah's Flood. And there are many of these all over the world. Our existence is in fact a joke if all that caused us to evolve into the complex beings that were are, is simple genetic "mistakes". And the Human Genome Project? It took years for that to be completed. It is that complex! And you think that it just came to be? There are other examples. Google it. I'm not saying that everything you read will be correct. I'm just saying to at least do some research.

    And how does evolution not contradict the BIble? Last I checked it did. If by "unreasonable interpretation of the Bible" you mean literal interpretation then yes it does contradict. But while evolution does contradict the Bible, science does not.

    But to me this article seems like a way to say "Ok so we're going to believe evolution because it's more convenient to us and we're going to solve for the inconsistencies (origin of life, for one) in our theory by saying that God did it." Of course it's just my opinion but it seems convenient to me.

    Say what you want to about this post. I may not be the most educated person but I know when I see something that doesn't add up. Just so you know I'm not even through high school and I never comment on these things.

    By the way I'm not trashing this writer's opinion or his attempt at trying to present a new idea. I just don't agree with him and I don't agree with the commenters saying that all Christians are unintelligent or stupid. It's like saying that all atheists are stupid and unintelligent. It's illogical and incorrect.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:37 pm |
  17. Jeff

    And lets not forget that Jesus will rise and wipeout all of us non believers!!!!!! Too funny, so glad he died a slow death....

    April 10, 2011 at 6:37 pm |
    • Audri

      Why would you care if he did? Because you think they might be right? Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. But if you are going to comment at least keep it classy and polite. Vulgarity and crudeness really are unappealing.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:21 pm |
    • sobe4you

      Jeff what the heck are you talking about, so your saying someone who came to the world to save the world deserved what he got? Sounds like you need to rethink what you said. Usually people who try to help us out we don't typically wish they were dead. I pray for your soul because you sound like a grade A A. HOLE

      April 10, 2011 at 9:48 pm |
  18. cevink

    I can't believe the evolutionists here! When you die and the trumpets call, God will put you in his mouth and masticate you like wrigley's big chew. There will be wailings and the gnashing of teeth as, in God's belly, you will find a new definition of pain and suffering as you are slowly digested over a thousand years. Scientist's have been in cohesive lock-step for the last thousand years and are pulling the greatest possible fraud on the American people, THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE. These pesky questions about vitamin C, lack of red blood cell nucleus, vestigal organs, male n1pples, radio carbon dating, and fossil layers are a ruse to deceive and distract you, much like reality TV. Satan is the head of all the networks, pumping out the jams when it comes to Evilution propaganda. DON'T BELIEVE THE LIES. Paris Hilton believes in evolution. You don't want to be a sinning h00ker like her, do you? Charlie Sheen believes in evolution...he's a sodomite. The pope even endorses evolution as a the catalyst for God's plan, but we all know that the pope is Satan in disguise. The creationists will live long and prosper, as for the sodomitic evilutionists and their media empires? Game over, man....game over.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
    • Arnkel

      I find it hard to belive that this conversation is still had today. It is on the same level and ilk as " how many angels can sit on the head of a pin?" What is remarkable to me is that the scientific people continue to discover new proofs and the creationists of any religion use the same tired and refuted arguments. C'mon, let's move past Augustine's ontology and Descarte's innate ideas and Dr. Duane Gish's fabrications! But, as an Existentialist meaning is what matters to me and as to that its a self creation and nothing either side has or can address.
      George Fear

      April 10, 2011 at 6:57 pm |
    • Jake the Christian Evolutionist.

      Who are you to put God in a box. You throw away science like it is an evil thing that will ruin the world. Your reasoning is flawed greatly. You dismiss every reason, every scientific discovery that explains that we did not come about after 6 earth days, 10,000 years ago. IF you were intellegent you would know that the ancient greek that we get the word day from means period of time. Who are you to say how long God took. You are taking an english translation of the words and making it so. It is NOT so. There are so many things that make it impossible for your logic to be true. Look at bones from more than 10.000 years ago. How do you explain dinosaurs and pre-historic creatures? How do you explain the shifting of earths crust? How do you explain rocks that are BILLIONS of years old? you can not just dismiss everything, because at heavens gate God will look at you as call you out for what you are. A fool, who was so blind he wasted the beautiful brain God gave him. God did not make us blind. He made us so we may love him, and learn. You forget the learning part. If you want to spout about evil people, look at others who beilieve in evolution.... How about Ronald Reagan, Pope John Paul II (and saying the pope is the devil is just plain idiotic), George Bush 1 and 2, and billions of other people around the world. There is no confliction between being a Christian and loving God with all your heart, and believing that we were made over time in the image of God. By all means, if you were there at the creation, I would love to hear it, if not, then stop being ignorant to the real TRUTH, and open your eyes.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:59 pm |
    • Jake the Christian Evolutionist.

      And one last thing.. we are STILL evolving today. We are taller now, on average, than any other time in history. We are stroger, can run faster, and longer, we are smarter, and more intellectual... So do not tell me we are not evolving, because you sir, ma'am, or whatever you are, are a product of evolution regardless of what you say.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:04 pm |
    • Brian

      🙂 Really God is the Sarlac Pit Monster from Star Wars. You people make me laugh. Here is my question if God is going to punish us for our sins why hasn't he done it already. I mean we are atleast as wicked as Sodom and Gamorah were. We have committed every sin they did and then some. At the very least why didn't he come down and smoke Nazi Germany? I mean If any group of people in History deserved it more it was the Nazis but god gives them a pass? Why? After all the Germany were Killing his people. If they are your people I would think a great and powerful God would come to the rescue.
      I can't wait for the day when extinction comes to all religions around the world. About the only one I can think of that is worth saving are the Buddhists at least they accept the scientific world and have never fought wars about whose god is the better God. COme to think of it they dont even have a god in their religion. Buddah was just a man and always will be.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:14 pm |
    • PraiseTheLard

      I'm impressed... And to think... there are people like "cevink" who vote...

      April 10, 2011 at 7:53 pm |
    • Cevink

      Thank you, friends. You have just helped me to test Poe's thesis...now it is truly a "law". FFS, I was using lines from Star Wars, Alien, Star Trek, and X-files. Consider Poe's law thoroughly tested.

      Poe's law (religious fundamentalism) — "Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humour, it is impossible to create a parody of fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing."[5] named after Nathan Poe who formulated it on christianforums.com in 2005.[6] Although it originally referred to creationism, the scope later widened to religious fundamentalism.[7]

      April 10, 2011 at 8:05 pm |
  19. steve

    Here's a quick lesson in evolution for you "OMG I didn't come from monkeys!!" folks: let's say you have a population of bears living in the same region. Some have genes for really thick coats that keep them warm, while others have genes for thinner coats, yet they reproduce together, making them the same species. Think of it in the same way as you think of humans with different color skins; they have different traits that may be better suited for different environments, but they are the same species. Okay. Now these bears live in a moderate climate that is comfortable enough for both phenotypes to coexist. But, as the climate changes, one part of the region gets a little cooler, while the other gets a little warmer (yes, climate change is real, even if you refuse to believe that it is man-made). The bears with the thin coat tend to migrate over time, to the warmer area, reproduce together, and slowly the concentration of thin-coats in the warm area is no longer proportionate that of the original population. The same is happening with thick-coats on the cooler side. As the climate differences become more drastic, these two groups rarely interact anymore, and begin experiencing genetic drift. In each climate, similar things are happening to other species (plants, other animals) that would result in a different food chain and food sources. Some bears have traits better suited to some food sources than others. Some bears may die if they have the wrong traits, and eventually that gene will no longer exist in the population. As this process of genetic drift continues, these bear groups become increasingly different, and next thing you know, they can no longer reproduce together. They are now different species! That about sums up evolution for you. Now apply the same process to humans, it is exactly the same thing.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
    • chris

      Sir, what you are explaining is natural selection, not evolution.

      Evolution has never been directly observed nor synthetically reproduced. There exist many holes in the current evolutionary theory and when push comes to shove, you will find that all biologists say the same three words : "We don't know". Evolution attempts to explain how our current world has come to fruition and progress through time, however it is just a theory and a belief system as much as is Christianity.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:50 pm |
    • ArtfulSkeptic

      Cris. Please go take a science class. Natural Selection plus random mutation plus genetic drift and a few other natural processes equals evolution. Now lets look at the evidence for special creation.... whoops, there seems to be none at all.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
    • Karl

      Yah, I get it, long periods of time where we get changes in allelic frequencies along with selection pressures, and perhaps some type of mechanism that gives rise to evolutionary change (such as genetic drift, natural selection, gene flow, adaptive radiation, etc.) and voila.....humans evolved! There's no doubt that populations are exposed to selection pressures, and that there is differential survival and reproductive success with some individuals being endowed with well adapted genes, BUT, these mechanisms only show how allelic frequencies shift in response to selection pressures, but far way, way, way short in demonstrating any type of meaningful evolution that would require to evolve humans from a primordial soup (tongue in cheek). You have a fairly detailed set of information in the genes......show a bit more proof than your example....this doesn't come close to empirical rationalization required to by this type of logic.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
    • chris

      @Artful Skeptic

      Had you read my post instead of insulting my intelligence, you would have realized what you said has no relevancy to what I said. All of these "theories" are just that, and have never been directly observed or synthetically reproduced. Perhaps they have been synthetically induced but never observed. The requirement for these changes is that they take an extremely long time to occur, hence the inability for anyone in our current generations to observe them. As far as I know, the only genetic mutations that occur are lethal to an organism – it's called cancer.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:59 pm |
    • steve


      You're right, this does not necessarily describe how life formed out the primordial soup of molecules. My point is to show evolution in a basic, reasonably logical form that simply can explain how humans, monkeys, and many other types of animals can share a common ancestor. The two different bear populations I described share a common ancestor that they are no longer identical to, and over time they will have become two very different species. Continuing with my bear example, the original bear species must have deviated from another group at some point as a result of a mutation or different outside pressures. Looking at this on a larger scale over a very, very long period of time, this can support how species evolved from each other and share common ancestors. I could go into further detail, but honestly, I don't feel like it. I have things to do. My example is what it is; take it or leave it.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:22 pm |
  20. Proud to be a Christian

    One day EVERY knee will bow and EVERY tongue confess that JESUS CHRIST is LORD.

    April 10, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
    • Clark Nova

      Nahhhh. Hardly likely that I'm going to find myself bowing to an early iron-age Jewish carpenter zombie who's been dead for thousands of years. Ain't gonna happen.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
    • i am the unicorn god that created the universe.

      yeah, im sure your fictional character jesus would love to have every child on his/her knees right in front of him.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:40 pm |
    • Proud to be a Christian

      Well its regrettable that you don't realize the truth that Jesus is Lord. We'll all have to account for how we lived our lives, and only those whose names are written in the book of life – those who have trusted Jesus with their lives and accepted his sacrifice for our sins on the cross – will go to heaven. Those whose names arent in the book of life will be thrown in the lake of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

      This isn't me being a doomsday preacher, this is the truth found in the Bible. Read it for yourself if you don't believe me.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:42 pm |
    • trish

      And if I do not want to do that will you make me. That is what I feel when I read something like that. The far right would not let non-christian religions exist. This would no longer be the land of the free. It would be the land of the forced.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:44 pm |
    • Proud to be a Christian

      No don't get me wrong. You have the COMPLETE freedom to believe ANYTHING and EVERYTHING you want. No one will force you to believe anything or to follow anything you don't believe in.

      But one day you will be forced to reckon with the truth, because when God's judgment comes the time for choosing life is over.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:46 pm |
    • ArtfulSkeptic

      And boy are you gonna be surprised when you meant your maker because, as everyone knows, the World was Created by an Invisible Pink Unicorn who says you are full of candy.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:51 pm |
    • Proud to be a Christian

      Mockery won't get you anywhere either. God's existence is not dependent on your or my belief in him.

      But you cannot say you never heard the truth. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life" John 3:16
      If you have any questions on this let me know and I can try and answer them to the best of my knowledge.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
    • ArtfulSkeptic

      Mockery won't get you anywhere either. The Invisible Pink Unicorn's existence is not dependent on your or my belief in her.

      But you cannot say you never heard the truth. "For The invisible Pink Unicorn so loved the world that she exploded in a great swath of rainbows so that that whoever believes in her should not perish, but have eternal life on the Big Rock Candy mountain" Chocholate Hearts: 3.14159

      If you have any questions on this let me know and I can try and answer them to the best of my knowledge.

      April 10, 2011 at 6:58 pm |
    • Proud to be a Christian

      Well I didn't mock anything or anyone so your comment is already invalid

      But I do have one question, where'd you learn how to spell chocolate?

      April 10, 2011 at 6:59 pm |
    • ArtfulSkeptic

      Yes you did. You tried to insist that the Invisible Pink Unicorn is not real. That amounts to mockery of my sacred beliefs.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:01 pm |
    • Arnkel

      Science? Creation? It will all be resolved on May 21, 2011. LOL
      G Fear

      April 10, 2011 at 7:02 pm |
    • Proud to be a Christian

      Wrong again. Disagreeing with your beliefs is not the same as mocking them.


      I don't know what day it will be, but everything will indeed be settled on that day of judgment. It will be a day of much rejoicing for those that were saved in Christ, and great sorrow for those who like Mr. ArtfulSkeptic lived their lives in disbelief, contempt, and mockery of God.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:05 pm |
    • Okay

      Its funny that everyone against Christianity argues that we are trying to force everyone to read and believe the bible. Not the case, its just unfortunate that you dont..

      April 10, 2011 at 7:08 pm |
    • Jake the Christian Evolutionist.

      I agree with your first statement, but from there it all goes down hill. There is no contradiction between being a God loving Christian, and an Evolutionist. God gave us a brain and reasoning for a reason! Regardless of what you thing mr Proud to be a christian, you are a product of evolution, just like the rest of you are the product of God. Who are we to say God did not use evolution? If you can show proof he did not, great, but there are things that prove he did.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:10 pm |
    • trish

      How we live our lives.? There are more good people who believe in Nature, Science and no god, who treat all equally, speak truthfull and help one another. One of the reasons I turned off of religion was the deceit, corruption and basic hipocracy of those who profess they believe. What I find is most "live by the 10 commandments" but how but only how "they" interpret them" If all who professed to be "Christian" acted like Christians and did follow the 10 commandments more would believe and the world would be a better place. Christianity is not a religion that preaches love of all or peace. An eye for and eye does not sound like love to me. Look at the beloved preachers on TV. A large majority practice multiple sinful activities. The importance of religion is its faith and its following. I do know Christians who are truely followers and I respect them greatly. I know far to many others who use it as a crutch to show how great they are, how rightous, how "humble" I truely believe that the Religion known as Christianity is not the true representation of what Jesus practiced and preached. It and the Bible, are the creation of a group of men who decided that in order to overcome paganism a more enticing and competetive religion had to be developed and through picking and choosing, for there are far more gospels available than are in the Bible, they created what is the present Bible of today. Very few Christians realize that most of the great Cathedrals and "holy grounds" are built on the important Pagan sites. Most of the religious holidays are on Pagan holidays. Jesus was a man with new ideas and a following. He loved and laughed and taught that goodness could be achieved with good living. He had a wife and possibly a child or two. Because he was dangerous and interfered with the power of the times he was killed. Those who truely believe need to educate themselves with what is available out there and science is one of them. I'm not saying give up your religion, I'm saying why are you so afraid to even learn about what is out there. It could possibly strenghten your faith and make you more tolerant of mine..

      April 10, 2011 at 7:11 pm |
    • Magic

      This is the way it is:

      Ra travels across the sky in his solar-boat; at dawn he drives away the demon Apep of darkness. All Hail Sacred Ra.

      Why didn't we just leave it at that?

      April 10, 2011 at 7:13 pm |
    • SB

      Actually mockery is particularly effective against religion because it demonstrates that any made up narrative is just as good at explaining unresolved mysteries of life as the religious narrative.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:14 pm |
    • Proud to be a Christian


      First of all, I am not shutting out anything that is "out there". In fact, I agree with a lot of what modern science says, because it is true. God didn't create us as blind, dumb animals. We are to explore the natural world and discover things about it. But like Jesus said, he is "the way, the truth, and the life". The Bible is truth for humanity, and that's why what it says is what I base my faith on.
      Yes, there are many passages that have a million different interpretations, and I can't say I have the right one. But there are certain truths that are crystal clear in the Bible. These include: God created the world and humanity, humans chose to disobey God and so sin entered into the world and corrupted it, Jesus came into the world to die in our stead and pay the price for our redemption, we must place our faith in Jesus and accept his sacrifice in order to be saved, and only those who have been saved will go to heaven.
      I also agree with you that there are countless people who claim to be Christians who are hypocrites and do numerous things that contradict what they say they believe. But they will give an account of how they lived their lives to God, and so will you. When that happens, it's only a personal relationship with God that counts, nothing else.
      I am not perfect, I am not holier than thou, I am not forcing you to do or believe anything. I am simply telling you the truth that is present in the word of God (the Bible). If you have any questions on this I am more than happy to try and answer them.

      My friend, if you say you are a Christian and believe in the Theory of Evolution, I pity the way you have let your faith be deviated by human rationale. The Bible states clearly that "God created the heavens and the Earth" "and all that is in them". He made man "in his own image". The Bible doesn't say God created a cell, that over the next two trillion years evolved into "the heavens and the earth and all that is in them".

      April 10, 2011 at 7:21 pm |
    • pmmarion

      In your dreams, whack job...

      April 10, 2011 at 7:45 pm |
    • trish

      @Proud to be a Christian. What you are doing is quoting something that someone, other than Jesus, wrote in a writing at sometime hundreds of years after the birth of Christ. I can say that " I am the light and the way" and it is the same as what you are saying. We do not know what Jesus said. In truth, if you study the historians you will find that what is stated in the Bible is probably not what the true Jesus preached. The story of the creation, is just that, it was meant for the uneducated. It is a great story. But it is that, a story written by MAN, not God. It does follow is some ways the story of evolution, but in it God does not define a day does he. It could be millions of years long. Quoting from the Bible to rational intellegent individuals indicates that you have not really thought about just how the Bible was constructed and by whom. Read some of my other responses. I recommend a book in one. It is written by a very well known biblical scholar who specializes in the "historical Jesus" Who Jesus really was in his time, what was going on in his time, what were the issues in his time, how the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written and what was taken from whom and what was left out. You speak well of others, you have not mimiced nor put down anyone and I applaud you for that for some of the things written are really offensive and nonproductive. However, you do seem a shade brainwashed when it comes to the Bible. Quotes need to be quotes and no one knows what God said or what Jesus said. What we do know is what other men wrote about what they thought, and another group of men put together a book that was needed at the time to help turn the tide toward Christianity and away from Paganism. That is the truth. It has many good and moral stories, much history, and a thoughtful approach to a way of living. But is it the word of "God"?, who knows. If you want to believe that you and only your kind are going to be the only ones going to the "promised land" than I would say that you are less than the man next to you who believes that all mankind are the same and can be saved, I put you next to those that believe we are the infidels and need to be exterminated. Theyat least are out in the open where as you sit there thinking that you are better than your non believing next door neighbor. As for me. I believe in my creed "Do what you will, but harm none" That is in both thought, word and deed. If I can accomplish that then I too will be sitting on the right hand of ????? whoever there is, for I do believe there is someone – probably Mother Nature.

      April 10, 2011 at 7:53 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
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.