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. Punky Bold

    Just the header of this opinion piece makes me roll my eyes in frustration. One does not 'believe' in evolution; one is convinced by the overwhelming evidence of evolution, from fossil records to genetics, from an enormous pool of data that supports the theory (a scientific 'theory' is not some idea pulled out of a hat, it is complicated and self-correcting process). Whenever someone asks me if I 'believe' in evolution, and I go through the process of explaining how scientific empiricism works, how evolution functions, it is always the same; I find that I am dealing with someone who has little or no scientific background, who does not – and is usually unwilling to – understand basic scientific concepts and facts. Mostly, I am confronted with the reality that many people have not even asked themselves the basic question 'what is belie?'. This is especially the case with kind-hearted folks trying to reconcile their faith with science, trying to find a compromise between the two. More so, it seems clear, with the ignoramuses who mounted the Creation Museum. I highly recommend Sam Harris' 'The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values' for those people interested in exploring what belief is. There are other books, but this a a good one to start with. I also recommend that people read sacred texts, like the Bible, and ask themselves whether they actually believe much of it, or just pick and choose what most fits their personal beliefs. Trying to fit evolution into the Bible is akin to ramming a square peg into a round hole. Making a link between quantum physics and quantum consciousness is no better (i.e., of Depak Chopra, New Age fame). I guess what I am trying to say is that people are quick to find connections where none can be proven to exist. Just wanting a connection to exist does not make it real.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:45 am |
    • moorejw

      Very well written and thought out post. Thank you for sharing. I may have to check out that Sam Harris book.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:50 am |
    • Gary

      I believe in creation. I did find your comment well written and reasoned. I used to believe in Evolution. I did my own personal search. I read and researched. What I now find interesting is the number of times people point at a fact that they believe supports Evolution and I see Creation. It comes from our own personal null hypothesis. I am currently reading Stephen Hawking's A brief history of Time and I find myself constantly saying to myself "see, there!". When you state that people are quick to find connections where none can be proven to exist, can't that be true for both sides? I don't think people who believe in evolution are evil or disingenuous. I believe that opposing viewpoints, used properly, can drive us to a greater understanding of truth. If we work together hard enough, we can be civil to each other while there exists a lack of consensus.

      April 10, 2011 at 1:41 pm |
  2. bruja68.luis@gmail.com

    I can not believe that adults still discuss this fantasies.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:45 am |
    • Armageddon

      How PITIFUL you are! If you think creation is a fairy tale, you won’t find much else in the book of Genesis relevant either. You must eventually accept creation as a fact for any of the other great biblical truths — including God’s standards of morality — to be significant in your life.
      William James, the father of modern psychology, said, “There’s nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it.” Thus, the ridiculous view that, given enough time, chaos will produce order has taken a firm hold on our culture. And now, more and more Christians are being swept up by it, suggesting that God created all the sophisticated design around us using evolutionary processes.
      But this compromise creates an enormous problem: It makes it logically impossible to believe the rest of God’s Word as it is written.

      However, even with my simple faith in God’s Word set aside, both reason and science soundly refute evolution. Indeed, mounting scientific evidence indicates that intelligent creation is truth! Biblical reasons are not Fantasies not a fiction Neither!

      April 11, 2011 at 2:27 am |
  3. bruja68.luis@gmail.com

    would Jesus believe in Santa Clauss????

    April 10, 2011 at 8:44 am |
  4. Godisamyth

    I think religious people are allergic to research.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:43 am |
    • Gary

      While I agree, I wouldn't limit it to religionists. Evolutionists need to do the same. Let's face it, the majority of us are just parroting what we have been told from others. When I try to discuss evolution with most who claim to believe in evolution they really don't know what they believe or why. When I ask "Do you believe in Darwin's linear gradual evolution model or Stephen Gould's punctuated equilibrium model they look at me blankly." Their belief does not reside in a factual understanding but instead who they put faith in. I find the same with religion. When I discuss someone's belief like the trinity I ask them where is that in the bible, they look at me blankly. We need to get better, all of us, in not just asking others for answers but reasons. Most of the time, it doesn't matter much (diet pepsi or diet coke) but there are fundamental issues that could bring us together. We need to find these issues individually and become an informed consumer. After all, you could be betting your life on it.

      April 10, 2011 at 1:30 pm |
  5. Old Fool

    The Bible is history mixed with metaphor. Those who strictly adhere to the "word of God" are unintelligent and/or intellectually lazy. Faith has its place but it can never replace reason.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:43 am |
  6. Prof

    Dear Creationists:

    Would you please read the science and become informed before writing ...your misinformation and distortion of the subject matter just makes you look ridiculous.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:43 am |
  7. o8sys

    CNN and this DUFF receive the LENIN prize for atheism and doubt. Come on, antichrist, you hate Jesus don't you.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:43 am |
  8. Brandon T

    This article ignores the fundamental difference between science and religion: religion is a belief-based system, where one has to accept certain facts in the absence of observation, while science is a system that attempts to explain observed phenomena. You don't "believe" science, it just is. If you don't like a theory (say, evolution) make your own OBSERVATIONS and try to prove it wrong. That's fine, science advances by proving theories wrong, not right. But choosing not to "believe" in science is devotion, it's idiocy.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:40 am |
  9. JJ

    Jesus did say "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life". So, what else is the Truth than that which is fact? Jesus wouldn't just believe in evolution, he would KNOW it was a fact. Just because you believe something exists doesn't make it real, but when evolution has been proved to be true, meaning it has been backed up by plenty of scientific evidence, if you are denying it you are denying the Truth. You are denying what Jesus says he is.
    Please check out http://www.truthcontest.com and read The Present(with religoin)

    April 10, 2011 at 8:39 am |
  10. Joe

    Why does CNN continue to relay untruthful and deceptive articles relating to Biblical faith and science on it's site/paper? Anyone who has looked into this topic for themselves should know this is a matter of scientific theory and debate... NOT "Proven beyond a reasonable doubt". This man is clearly operating through emotion here, not science. CNN stop discrediting yourselves with these articles.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:35 am |
    • FifthApe


      Its clear you have NO idea how science works. Did you graduate high school?

      April 10, 2011 at 8:38 am |
    • Jesusofsuberbia


      He graduated (if he did) because we allow communities to set their educational standards. So we end up with moron Christians insisting on intelligent design.

      April 10, 2011 at 9:12 am |
  11. knight

    Karl Jibberson you're an idiot: anyone can use google to look up evidence for molecules to man evolution and see that there is only evidence for the opposite, continue spreading your stupid delusion about bacteria turning into men over billions of years WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AND ONLY EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY and you will only be continuing to show what a deluded ultra moron you are. And ignoramus: Jesus said Abel was a real person, and didn't say a word against his genealogy, which included Adam you stupid fool. Get lost already, there's obviously no hope for you. Have fun screaming in Hell forever because you chose ignorance of known history and science, reality-hater.


    April 10, 2011 at 8:32 am |
    • FifthApe


      I can hear the panic in your voice. Thats a good CreaTard. Keep shouting and that might make it go away. I have news for you..... your god is the myth.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:41 am |
    • Eric G.

      Your denial of verifiable evidence does not invalidate it, it makes you dishonest. Your lack of ability to understand the theory of evolution and the evidence supporting it's claims makes you ignorant. Your inability to express your opinion without the use of name calling and threats makes you childlike.

      Please try to be civil and strive to understand what you are speaking about prior to commenting. Or, sit quietly while the adults talk.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:44 am |
  12. Alex Coss

    The article states: '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.' I believe also that God created the world in 6 literal days. But instead of blaming 'creationists' for believing what the bible says, why doesnt the author of the article blame the bible for saying what it says? Why make the messenger look bad, if, what has been lied about is the message?

    Most christians know that God gave Moses the first five books of the bible. And Moses simply wrote what God gave him. Why wont the authors of articles like this cut the chase and simply call the Creator of the world a liar? Or why wont they blame moses for not writting what God meant to say? The real argument here being immasqueraded is the veracity of the Word of God.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:31 am |
    • jaysunstar

      You are making a lot of BAD assumptions about the author of this article. You are assuming that the author agrees with the fact that the bible was written by God himself rather than oral traditions passed down from one generation to the next. The genesis story was ripped off from other creation stories that came hundreds of years before the bible was ever written. To claim that the these stories were written by God himself to be placed in a Holy book is the biggest religious scam of all time. Yet not one christian dares to challenge the notion that the book was written by God. And in their supreme ignorance, they refer to passages within the bible itself to validate their beliefs. faith alone is the ONLY thing a Christian has. I can accept that argument. But please don't try to PROVE anything as not one Christian is equipped to do so.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:44 am |
    • FifthApe


      You believe the entire universe was created in 6 days. 100 billion stars in the Milky Way. 100 billion other galaxies. And the creator of all THIS wrote for instance Exodus 21?

      You have to be kidding.....

      April 10, 2011 at 8:45 am |
    • moorejw

      Here, I'll do it for the author. Your Creator, the one you worship, is a liar, a thief and a murderer. The book you say is written by him proves my point.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:46 am |
    • Pete

      OK then, you wanna hear it? Moses was just like any other dude who wanted a following. Just like Jesus, just like Mohammed, and just like L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith. Each had his own personal thoughts on how the world should be and decided to modify or create a religion to suit his purposes. Some had more noble purposes than others, and I'll let you be the judge of which one(s).
      The simple fact that you say that Moses wrote down God's message shows how flawed the belief is. If God was really all-powerful he would've just created millions of copies of the Old Testament and have them appear at the feet of everyone on Earth in each person's native tongue. Better yet, he would've just spoken to everyone directly.
      The Bible was written by man, otherwise it wouldn't be so flawed, contradicting itself hundreds of times.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:58 am |
  13. prophet

    The Jewish people are chosen for Elohims Purpose and without them we would not of known that Elohim Exists. This is very Important to know.

    This happened so that Humanity can have a choice, they always did but didn't know it.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:29 am |
    • Jesusofsuberbia

      Thanks a lot! I would rather not know. This false bs has ruined the world.

      April 10, 2011 at 9:07 am |
  14. Paul

    Darwin himself accepted Christ as his savior before he died and you all should too...

    April 10, 2011 at 8:28 am |
    • Eric G.

      No, he did not. Nor did Einstein.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:36 am |
    • FifthApe

      "Darwin himself accepted Christ as his savior before he died and you all should too..."

      -- Lying for Jesus now are you. This is a myth. Paul you are a liar.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:36 am |
    • Itsmellslikefish

      Of course Darwin embraced Jesus when he was dying. The point is that when you're dying it's probably pretty scary and the idea of your "screen" going black is scarier than hell (in a manner of speaking). I guess we all want to believe we go to a nice place where can see our Mom and Dad and others...or maybe some of us want to go to a place where we can drink, smoke and fornicate forever more. But going to nothingness is way too hard for our feeble minds to handle. So Jesus enters the picture and "saves" us from going to nothingness. Or we accept the devil and go to hell.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:41 am |
    • Godisamyth

      From Darwin's son: "Lady Hope's account of my father's views on religion is quite untrue. I have publicly accused her of falsehood, but have not seen any reply." [17]

      From Darwin's daughter: "I was present at his deathbed. Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. He never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier. We think the story of his conversion was fabricated in the U.S.A. The whole story has no foundation whatever."

      You're an idiot.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:42 am |
  15. prophet

    If you are refering to Our Saviour then His name is not jesus, it never was, this is the deception of the christisans who are antisemitic, not all but those who want this religion thing for theier own idealogy.

    Our Saviours Name is Yeshua Masiah and this has always been HIs name and His Name means Salvation but not only menas it but does it as well.

    The greeks invented the name isous which has no meaning as does jesus.

    To translate accurately into Greek then salvation is soter so they have not only mistranslated but misled the innocent.

    Hebrew Words arn't just Words but have meaning and Power in them, this is why some people pray but seem to think that their prayers are not heard but Truly they are praying to a name that isn't really. Try Praying To His REal Name and then you will have answers.

    The Jewish people are chosen for Elohims Purpose and without them we would not of known that Elohim Exists. This is very Important to know.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:27 am |
    • Isaac

      thanks for that lesson in fairy tales and myths.... now try to point out something useful to someone living in the 21st century and not the 15th.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:35 am |
    • Pete

      yeah, because an all-powerful, all-knowing being would have to be called upon through his "true name" in order to know he's being spoken too. what the hell is wrong with you? did your mom not get enough folic acid when she was pregnant?

      April 10, 2011 at 8:50 am |
  16. IceT

    Facts are facts whether you choose to believe them or not.
    It's too bad some people need to think Jesus would have believed in evolution for them to be able to accept it, rather than decide for themselves.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:25 am |
  17. Giovanni

    Jesus would roll over in his grave if he heard what his followers say today.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:23 am |
    • Shane

      I'm a huge fan of Jesus, but his fanclub(s) creeps me out!! Too bad they haven't realized they are going str8 to HE.LL!! Feel sorry for the so-called conservative "christians." Please forgive them for they not know what they speak.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:33 am |
    • Moderntimes_are_not_so

      All you need to do to find the truth is wait your life time and upon its end determine if you were right or wrong.
      if you were right you gaint nothing.
      if you were wrong you loose everithig.
      I don't see a winning position in your logic even if your statement is cleaver.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:37 am |
    • Isaac

      No kidding. Like Jesus would be a gun toting hate filled rewarder of the top 1%.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:38 am |
    • thankie

      Giovanni...... i now know you NO nothing about our Lord Jesus Christ. Is Jesus still in his grave? He is in heaven with the almighty God. As for this article, it is off topic

      April 10, 2011 at 8:39 am |
    • Liesmith


      Pascal's Wager has an obvious flaw in that it could be used for *any* religion, many of which are mutually exclusive. Have you accepted Allah, by any chance?

      April 10, 2011 at 8:42 am |
    • moorejw

      The greatest message the Bible gave us, and the one it gave over and over again, was to love thy neighbor and do unto others as they would do unto you. In my mind, that far outshines the message of Christ as Lord and Savior.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:42 am |
    • fesmommy5

      Jesus is not in a grave.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:44 am |
    • Eric G.

      Wait....... Jesus has a grave? What does that mean about the resurection story?

      April 10, 2011 at 8:47 am |
    • Jesusofsuberbia

      I believe in hobbits. Your argument is irrelevant.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:59 am |
    • Giovanni

      lol, that was about all the replies I expected. even Pascal's wager thrown in.
      Typical Christian reaction: "just you wait, and then you will regret it!"
      Most of the worlds population since modern humans evolved were non christian polytheists.
      Even today most people aren't christian. Not sure why you would have such a privileged place ahead of the billions of other humans that have ever lived.

      Its quite a selfish religion actually.

      April 10, 2011 at 9:03 am |
  18. prophet

    Faith is Believeing what nobody cannot disprove or prove. Those who need to have answer don't have Faith.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:23 am |
    • Isaac

      wrong... faith is the great cop-out... the last resort of a simple mind with no answers.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:36 am |
    • The Jackdaw

      Very poetic, but ultimately meaningless.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:37 am |
    • moorejw

      yeaaaaa gonna have to agree with the others on this one...faith is a cop-out. it's a non-answer

      April 10, 2011 at 8:40 am |
    • David

      I'm sure that philosophy works just fine for the feeble-minded.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:52 am |
  19. Z.

    But the problem with this entire article is that it assumes that evolution has been proven true. Before anybody freaks out, I just want to point out some mistakes and unexplainables in Darwin's famous theory: 1. The finches that had distinguishable beaks. Scientists recently went back to that island and found that the diversity of finches was micro-evolution, not macro-evolution; that is, the diversity of the birds decreased, back to their original states, so Darwin can't claim that they were diversifying. 2. Apartheopteryx (I know i spelled this wrong :D) was also not the link between dinosaurs and birds; actual complete bird fossils have been found pre-dating it. 3. Lucy, the famous missing link, required a crucial ankle bone to prove she walked upright. But that bone was taken from a completely separate fossil site. 4. If evolution is supposed to be the gradual growth of the number of species and diversity, what happened during the Cambrian explosion? Thousands of species emerged suddenly. 5. Just for fun, how did the butterfly evolve? How did a creature evolve so that it could evolve during it's own lifespan? It's simply not possible.

    So to conclude, I just wanted to show that this is a completely off topic. The author of the article is not studying the data in depth enough.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:19 am |
    • cmdvimes

      You are simply spouting the usual creationist idiocy. You forgot to mention the second law of thermodynamics. Just because you lack the education (or intelligence) to understand evolutionary theory don't mislead others. We scientists can say "we don't know" while the religious have to have this un-blinking Palin-like certainty in everything.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:32 am |
    • Eric G.

      You must provide references with verifiable evidence that supports your claims. Besides, genetic mapping evidence is demonstrative and proves evolution is fact. I can provide references if you wish.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:34 am |
    • FifthApe

      The CreTard mind at work....

      "what happened during the Cambrian explosion? Thousands of species emerged suddenly. "

      Yes, suddenly over 70 million years. And have a look at those species. Wheres the bunny rabbit.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:35 am |
    • moorejw

      For anyone looking for an informative read into the evidence for evolution, I highly recommend Richard Dawkins' The Greatest Show on Earth. I see many people claiming here that the author did not go into enough detail about the proof for the FACT of evolution. This book goes into fine detail about multiple experiments that have been conducted to show that evolution is no longer just a theory. It is a theory in the sense that gravity is a theory. Plus, the book is quite an entertaining read.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:37 am |
    • Pete

      wow. Religious fanatic logic at its worst. Your thoughts in #2 don't prove evolution wrong. Finding new fossils just adds more data to the pile. Who's to say #5 isn't possible? In what way is it not possible. Don't each of us go through a radical transformation in our mother's womb?

      April 10, 2011 at 8:46 am |
    • DB, Leicester

      I disagree Z. You ignore the author's reference to DNA mapping. But I will add to the article that my understanding is that life on Earth as it is today is not solely due to evolution, but evolution coupled with several waves of mass extinctions.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:47 am |
    • David

      I'm a biologist, and virtually everything you've written is incorrect. You are right about one thing, though - evolution will *never* be proven true - but don't begin your celebrations yet. Nothing can be proven in biology, nor, arguably, in science in general. The evidence in favor of evolution is massive; there is zero (yes, zero) evidence suggesting the basic concept of evolution (genetic change over time) is false. Science is a discipline of best guesses, not a revealer of the pure, unvarnished truth, as religions purport to do. Science, rather, is an honest means of learning. It tells you what is likely going on without attempting to convince you it is perfect. Even when it's wrong, I trust science to eventually provide the answers we seek to the universe's most pressing questions.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:50 am |
    • Brandon

      The things you are saying and using phrases that were outdated a century ago like "missing link" shows me that you actually know nothing of evolution. Take the time to actually study what evolution is and how it works from real scientific sources, not creationist garbage, before you try to make any claims to the contrary.

      Evolution is as close to a fact as anything that we can establish scientifically. When Darwin thought of the idea, he knew nothing of DNA. Had he been wrong, DNA would have been the perfect place to prove it wrong, yet it did the opposite. DNA looked exactly as it should if evolution were true. Do you understand how monumental that is? It's like he figured out what picture a puzzle made when he was missing half the pieces.

      The simplest way to know the universe is billions of years old is what we can see in space. When you look up, most of the stars you see are over 6,000 light years away. If the universe was younger than that, we wouldn't be able to see them. So, now you're either saying the speed of light is incorrect (and not just a little off, you're saying it's millions of times faster, which also means you don't believe in most of physics and astronomy in addition to biology) or that God made the universe to look like it's older than it is, like he's some cosmic trickster, which seems like an awful idea from anyway you look at it.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:54 am |
    • jaysunstar

      For every scientific flaw you point out, I guarantee there are equally as many contradictions in the bible. Fortunately scientists don't claim that science is truth. All scientists learn in science 101 that science is THEORY about truth and we are constantly modifying and improving those theories. To claim that something is absolute truth is a mistake only a Christian would make.

      Scientists look for facts and clues. This is something that very few Christians do. Although many Christian scholars, after studying the facts surrounding the bible, eventually come to the conclusion that contradicts popular Christian thinking today. In fact one of my best friends is a scholar from Yale for sacred theology and phenomenology of religion. He told me, for example that the concept of 'virgin birth' was around way before Jesus' time. The romans didn't think Jesus was important enough to be born of a virgin as other great prophets who came before him. It was therefore CRITICAL that the writers emphasized that he was born of a virgin to establish credibility. Having looked at the story in THIS light makes perfect sense. Yet SOMEHOW over the years, Christians came to believe that Jesus was the ONLY man ever to be born of a virgin. And they use this as an example of his divinity as God himself. It's sick and absurd. And it's been poisoning the minds of people around the world for too long.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:56 am |
  20. gogogopher

    the reason Christians hang on to the creation story is the concept of ORIGINAL SIN is found there.
    If the world wasn't created in six days and Adam and Eve is only story – then original sin is also a myth.
    No original sin...
    ......No need to be "saved" from something.

    April 10, 2011 at 8:17 am |
    • Z.

      I suppose that's true; however, evolution, honestly is more of a religion that Christianity if we're arguing about truth. Let's say there's no God- that means it's ok to let handicapped people die and it was ok to let the Aryan's kill everyone because they were better. But it's not. So obviously, there has to be something higher.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:22 am |
    • Isaac

      Evolution says nothing.... NOTHING.... about god and the existence or non-existence of one. Just another FALSE claim from brainwashed simpletons who talk to invisible friends.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:27 am |
    • FifthApe

      Z said:

      "Let's say there's no God- that means it's ok to let handicapped people die and it was ok to let the Aryan's kill everyone because they were better. "

      What a load of sh_t. The religious mind at work.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:33 am |
    • Doomguy

      The other reason they are so gung-ho against Darwin is that his theories strike at the heart of Page 1 Chapter 1 of the Bible. If you have to start asking questions on page 1, then the rest comes into question too.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:33 am |
    • jaysunstar

      Z, that is a VERY weak argument. Christianity seeks truth in faith alone. Evolution deals in scientific facts and data. All forms of Christian science have been proven time and again to be highly fallible. So to say that evolution theory is a RELIGION, is bogus. At least evolutionists go outside of the bible to draw conclusions. Where as Christians draw all their conclusions from ONE book and then cherry pick scientific studies to validate their faith.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:35 am |
    • Phage0070

      Z, that still doesn't make any sense. Ethical judgment must come from personal conviction, not some outside force. Are you saying that genocide and abuse of the handicapped are only wrong because some "higher" (by which you mean more powerful, "might = right") force told you so?

      The lack of a god doesn't make genocide right in the same way that the presence of a god doesn't make genocide wrong. To prove this simply consider the idea of an "evil god". Does it make sense? Of course it does, which must mean that the quality of being god doesn't automatically make that being's ethical judgments right. Therefore ethics is not determined by a god as any god concept is beholden to its judgment.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:36 am |
    • Liesmith

      Actually, the theory of natural selection also explains how morality arose. Simply put, those populations which had paternal instinct and cared for one another during times of sickness were more successful than those that didn't. Our willingness to care for others is instinctual.

      If the only thing preventing you from committing genocide is the fear of divine reprisal, then I think you've missed the point of ethics altogether.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:37 am |
    • IceT

      Z ... The fact is the handicapped can die & the Aryan's did try to kill those they didn't like, that only proves God does not existi since it happened until HUMANS stopped it. The higher power you speak of is simply natural HUMAN morals. Morals are a result of HUMAN psychologal evolution & are responsible for our higher development.

      April 10, 2011 at 8:38 am |
    • agathokles

      "Genesis" is myth. But believing that Genesis is a myth does not make its greater meaning "untrue." On the contrary!

      Many people do not understand "myth" as a literary form. Myth is concerned with TRUTH, not FACT. Myth instructs at a higher level: in this case, about the relationship between humans and God. The Bible is "truth," not "fact." And it's only inerrant in those aspects that have to do with our salvation. It's riddled with all sorts of historical errors, but these do not alter its essential truth about humans and God.

      The root of the problem for Christian fundamentalists is that they do not know how to interpret the different forms of literature in the Bible. None of it is a "history" book, in the usual sense of that word. For example, sitting around and trying to determine the exact location of the vineyard that was the subject of Jesus' parable about the workers in the vineyard is an absurdity. If Jesus were among us, he'd probably say, in exasperation, "You're missing the point! There's a point of truth to this parable. How long must I put up with you people!"

      April 10, 2011 at 9:01 am |
    • MH

      Here is another quandary everyone may consider. Recently it was discovered that protein was found in the marrow of a T-Rex femur. Red blood cells, matrix and other cells were identified. Previous theories said that protein/elastic tissue cannot survive that long. Certainly not 65-100 million years. If that is true, then maybe dinosaurs are not that old. Maybe they are 5000 years old and that Genesis is correct saying the earth is only 6000 years old. Need proof. Check out this link to an article on Science Daily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070412140942.htm Who is right, who is wrong?

      April 10, 2011 at 9:02 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
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.