October 9th, 2013
02:27 PM ET

Creationists taunt atheists in latest billboard war

By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor
[twitter-follow screen_name='EricCNNBelief']

(CNN)– A new video billboard in New York's Times Square has a message from creationists, "To all of our atheist friends: Thank God you're wrong."

The video advertisement at 42nd Street and Eighth Avenue in Manhattan is one of several billboards going up this week in New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles, paid for by Answers in Genesis.

Answers in Genesis is best known as the multimillion-dollar Christian ministry behind the Creation Museum outside Cincinnati.

The museum presents the case for Young Earth creationism, following what it says is a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis, which says the Earth was created by God in six days less than 10,000 years ago.

Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, said the idea for the advertisements came from an atheist billboard in Times Square at Christmas.

During the holidays, the American Atheists put up a billboard with images of Santa Claus and Jesus that read: "Keep the Merry, dump the myth."

“The Bible says to contend for the faith,” Ham said. “We thought we should come up with something that would make a statement in the culture, a bold statement, and direct them to our website.

"We're not against them personally. We're not trying to attack them personally, but we do believe they're wrong," he said.

"From an atheist's perspective, they believe when they die, they cease to exist. And we say 'no, you're not going to cease to exist; you're going to spend eternity with God or without God. And if you're an atheist, you're going to be spending it without God.' "

Dave Silverman, president of the American Atheists, said he felt sad for creationists when he saw the billboards.

"They refuse to look at the real world. They refuse to look at the evidence we have, and they offer none," Silverman said. "They might as well be saying, 'Thank Zeus you're wrong' or 'Thank Thor you're wrong.' "

Silverman said he welcomed another competitor to marketplace, noting that after atheists bought a billboard two years ago in Times Square that read "You KNOW it's a myth," the Catholic League purchased competing space at the entrance to the Lincoln Tunnel for a sign that read "You KNOW it's true."

"I would suggest, if they're actually trying to attract atheists, they should talk about proof and reason to believe in their god, not just some pithy play on words," Silverman said.

Ham says part of the goal of the campaign is to draw people to the website for Answers in Genesis, where he offers a lengthy post on his beliefs for the proof of God.

Ham insists that this campaign is in keeping with their overall mission. "We're a biblical authority ministry. We're really on about the Bible and the Gospel. Now, we do have a specialty in the area of the creation account and Genesis because that's where we say God's word has come under attack."

Ham said Answers in Genesis made the decision to split its marketing budget for the ministry between a regional campaign for the museum and this billboard campaign, rather than a national campaign.

IRS filings for the ministry in recent years have shown a yearly operating budget of more than $25 million. Ham said the marketing budget is about 2% of that, about $500,000 a year. Though they are waiting for all the bills to come due for this campaign, he said he expected it to cost between $150,000 and $200,000.

Silverman noted that his billboards were not video and cost approximately $25,000 last year.  He said another campaign was in the works for this year.

"They're throwing down the gauntlet, and we're picking it up," Silverman said, adding that his group would "slap them in the face" with it.

Ham said that despite criticism from other Christians for being negative and the usual criticisms from secularists he received on his social media accounts, the advertisements have been a success.

"We wanted people talking about them, and we wanted discussion about this. We wanted people thinking about God," Ham said.

The Creation Museum and the theory of Young Earth creationism are widely reviled by the broader science community.

In a YouTube video posted last year titled "Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children," Bill Nye the Science Guy slammed creationism, imploring parents not to teach it to their children. "We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future," he said. "We need engineers that can build stuff and solve problems."

The museum responded with its own video. 

For the past 30 years, Gallup Inc. has been tracking American opinions about creationism.

In June 2012, Gallup's latest findings showed that 46% of Americans believed in creationism, 32% believed in evolution guided by God, and 15% believed in atheistic evolution.

For as long as Gallup has conducted the survey, creationism has remained far and away the most popular answer, with 40% to 47% of Americans surveyed saying they believed that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years.

The Creation Museum said it recently welcomed its 2 millionth visitor since its opening in 2007.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Atheism • Belief • Christianity • Creationism • New York • Science

soundoff (8,748 Responses)
  1. sam stone

    If u don't quit it right now, I'll have Maddy call u out

    November 9, 2013 at 5:39 pm |
    • sam stone

      how sweet, faith.....stealing my screen name. i guess it will come out in that big, big, fvcking big lawsuit, eh?

      suck your shotgun

      November 9, 2013 at 7:04 pm |
  2. Science Works

    Creationists lost the battle with new text books in Texas too.

    November 9, 2013 at 5:30 pm |
    • Third alignment

      Creationism should be taught in the context of social studies in controversial theories, not as hard science.

      November 9, 2013 at 5:35 pm |
      • Science Works

        Kentucky is also Joining the 21st with the new science standards created by 26 states.

        Remember Adam and Eve does not work.

        November 9, 2013 at 5:41 pm |
        • espresso54

          Adam and Steve works mo betta.

          November 9, 2013 at 6:16 pm |
  3. Third alignment

    Creationists and atheists are both wrong. Smart people keep an open mind.

    November 9, 2013 at 4:23 pm |
    • Cpt. Obvious

      Many atheists and god believers have an open mind. Why generalize?

      November 9, 2013 at 4:41 pm |
      • Third alignment

        That is obviously not correct, if you read these blogs. Atheists are not smart because they lack imagination. Creationists have too much imagination.

        November 9, 2013 at 4:49 pm |
        • ME II

          You're making an assumption about a correlation between imagination and intelligence. What is the basis for this correlation?

          November 9, 2013 at 4:53 pm |
        • Third alignment

          Imagination stimulates the intellect often times in positive ways.

          November 9, 2013 at 4:58 pm |
        • Cpt. Obvious

          You are simply incorrect. And you should avoid making generalizations about groups of people based on "these blogs," because that's just stupid for a number of reasons.

          November 9, 2013 at 4:59 pm |
        • Third alignment

          To say that i am simply incorrect without providing an argument is hollow. Warnings don't faze me either, especially when people stumble against my reasoning.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:05 pm |
        • Cpt. Obvious

          You're obviously an idiot. What you offer without argument, I may dismiss without argument. You provide no reasoning for your claims, and I don't see any reason why I should take them seriously. If you'd like cogent argument and serious discussion, go first, and please, try to be less boring.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:08 pm |
        • ME II

          If imagination stimulates intellect, which I doubt that it is that simple, then how can one have too much?

          In addition, your claim that Atheists lack imagination is not supported by evidence. Not believing in god(s) without evidence does not equate to lack of imagination, just an unwillingness to accept imagination as reality.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:11 pm |
        • Third alignment

          The captain is engaging in ad hominem attacks, which is no basis for a logical argument and proof of an epic fail.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:12 pm |
        • Third alignment

          Imagination stimulates intellect. It's that simple. Too much doubt causes a close minded intellect.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:16 pm |
        • ME II

          @Third alignment,
          "To say that i am simply incorrect without providing an argument is hollow. "

          please reread your original post.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:18 pm |
        • ME II

          @Third alignment,
          "Imagination stimulates intellect. It's that simple. Too much doubt causes a close minded intellect."

          What's your basis for this claim?

          November 9, 2013 at 5:21 pm |
        • Third alignment

          Technology is the logical basis of my claim. An open mind will understand.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:32 pm |
        • ME II

          @Third alignment
          "Technology is the logical basis of my claim. An open mind will understand."

          That is an assertion, not an argument.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:36 pm |
        • Third alignment

          Technology is obvious proof that imagination changes the perception of reality. Technosophy is ascendant.

          November 9, 2013 at 5:47 pm |
        • ME II

          Now you're just spouting phrases. Many things can change our "perception of reality" including imagination, doubt, education, observation, experimentation, drugs, responsibility, etc. None of that demonstrates a correlation between imagination and intelligence, let alone any subsequent correlation to creationist or Atheists.

          I have no idea what you mean by Technosophy nor whether it is ascendent, nor why that would matter.

          November 9, 2013 at 6:16 pm |
        • espresso54

          Wow, this is quite a thread. What is technosophy?

          November 9, 2013 at 6:18 pm |
        • Logical default

          Imagination involves blindly believing some fairy tale you're told as a kid as absolute truth? Where is the imagination in that?

          November 27, 2013 at 1:53 pm |
    • tallulah13

      Please cite your evidence. If you have verifiable evidence that a god exists, then there is no need for atheism. No one has yet provided any evidence that any of the thousands of gods worshiped by humanity actually exists. After several thousand years with no evidence, the only logical conclusion to draw is that there are no gods. However, if verifiable evidence emerges, I will believe. That is called having an open mind.

      Indecision is not a virtue. It simply means that you don't feel brave enough to make a choice

      November 9, 2013 at 4:44 pm |
      • Third alignment

        That is incorrect. Smart people have imaginations that sometimes turn into realities. People who doubt until they see proof do not understand both sides as well as people who shun religion, but accept the theory of god like influences.

        November 9, 2013 at 4:56 pm |
      • truthprevails1

        Taliban makes an excellent point. Christians, every one of them without exception, believe in Jesus Christ based on nothing. Hundreds of millions of people have had their lives transformed by someone and there isn't any evidence that he lived. Of course, even if the evidence he lived is evidence, the same evidence is not evidence of anything more than that

        November 9, 2013 at 5:00 pm |
        • sam stone

          U hear me? F u u lying proxy phony xtard

          November 9, 2013 at 5:38 pm |
        • sam stone

          faith stealing others' screen names and calling people phonies

          how fvcking charming

          November 10, 2013 at 7:39 am |
    • doug

      why would anyone not believe in God and yet believe the universe is billions of years old, that advanced civilisations exist on billions of worlds, that human beings can create fire to destroy the world or manipulate DNA. Are we not becoming gods, therefore would it not be possible that someone already beat us to it and became a God and created us, is that a stretch?

      November 9, 2013 at 4:50 pm |
      • Third alignment

        That is a possibility that must be given serious consideration.

        November 9, 2013 at 5:01 pm |
      • Observer


        "Are we not becoming gods, "

        To some extent we are like many of the estimated 40,000 gods. So tell us that proves that you know which ONE is correct.

        November 9, 2013 at 5:05 pm |
        • faux

          Just wait until we rule

          November 9, 2013 at 5:42 pm |
    • Science Works

      Well creationists should know Adam and Eve did not work.

      November 9, 2013 at 5:01 pm |
      • Third alignment

        Fair enough. I would suggest that creationists have a much larger hill to climb.

        November 9, 2013 at 5:18 pm |
    • Opposing View

      Third Alignment... Anyone who doesn't align themselves with God's point of view will wind up in hell...

      November 9, 2013 at 9:19 pm |
      • Charles R. Schabel

        Oh? And what if God's point of view is Muslim or Jewish or Buddhist, or one of the Christian faiths you don't follow? If so then you'll be in the same hell as me; damned by the same narrow-minded, heartless God. I only hope your cell isn't next to mine. Do you believe that babies who die before they can be baptized are in same hell as Hitler, or Stalin, or Pol pot?

        November 11, 2013 at 2:24 pm |
  4. Science Works

    Creationists and where was it found ?

    Newly Discovered Predatory Dinosaur 'King of Gore' Reveals the Origins of T. Rex

    Nov. 6, 2013 — A remarkable new species of tyrannosaur has been unearthed in Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (GSENM), southern Utah.


    November 9, 2013 at 3:01 pm |

    "I would suggest, if they're actually trying to attract atheists, they should talk about proof and reason to believe in their god, not just some pithy play on words," Silverman said.

    Here we are talking about the Proof and the Reason to believe in GOD, mr. Silverman!


    November 9, 2013 at 4:24 am |
    • I hereby demand

      Faith is never proof. If it is written, then is must be true? False.

      November 9, 2013 at 3:28 pm |
  6. The world may never know

    You've got one side telling you snakes can talk.

    You have another side telling you over millions of years some animal became both monkeys and people, not just one or the other.

    Yet if you bring up aliens they both look at you funny.

    November 8, 2013 at 9:25 pm |
    • tallulah13

      The fossil record and DNA record give us evidence of evolution. What exactly is your evidence for aliens?

      November 9, 2013 at 12:40 am |
      • Third alignment

        If we applied your logic to scientific achievement, then we would miss out on many great inventions.

        November 9, 2013 at 5:10 pm |
    • dillonb1950

      Could it be that is because they have Evidence from fossils from all over the world. No 'rea;" evidence of "aliens" yet.....the ideas and suppositions abound applenty but until they have pretty much conclusive evidence..it is only someone's fairy tale....just like religion.

      November 9, 2013 at 9:45 am |
      • Third alignment

        You are technically correct. However, alien gods in theory are not so harmful in the imagination department, compared to 'my way or the highway' religions.

        November 9, 2013 at 4:42 pm |
      • ET Iphone home

        If the bible is considered enough to prove religion, then the ancient writings of Sumeria and art from the ancient world should be enough to prove aliens. Of course you can't verify either way, so it's illogical no matter what, but if you read the bible with an open mind it really does sound more like a group of aliens or group of rulers, than an actual deity.

        November 27, 2013 at 1:59 pm |
    • Third alignment

      You have a valid point. It's important to consider all of the possibilities. Some are remotely possible, while others may be plausible. A doubting Thomas is not incongruous to imagination if applied in moderation.

      November 9, 2013 at 4:33 pm |
  7. Neither

    Creationism sounds like a parable or a story that really means something other than what it says at first glance.

    Science is science and science is the best thing we have going. Though I admit the more I hear atheists ranting away the more I think of that wizard of Oz quote "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

    November 8, 2013 at 8:56 pm |
    • I hereby demand

      I think one should keep an open mind about the existence of god, or gods. Those gods might be aliens from other planets with higher technologies; that came to earth and acted like gods.

      November 9, 2013 at 3:32 pm |
      • Lynne

        You've been ready Zecharia. Sitchen! I think he posits something similar, and it is pretty interesting reading.

        November 9, 2013 at 3:48 pm |
      • Opposing View

        i hereby demand... And I think you've been watching too much TV. Try going to church and learning some truth...

        November 10, 2013 at 8:28 am |
        • ET Iphone home


          November 27, 2013 at 2:00 pm |
  8. dillonb1950

    In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.

    The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

    Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.

    November 8, 2013 at 6:50 pm |
  9. dillonb1950

    Well...we wouldn't want to be thrown in the Lake would we...lol.....if carbon dating is flawed how about "ICE DATING"....try this http://www.livescience.com/40962-oldest-ice-core-in-antarctica.html

    November 8, 2013 at 6:41 pm |
  10. Robert

    When did we allow what we choose to believe in or not to become an US versus Them issue with very little/no acceptance of the opposite viewpoint?

    November 8, 2013 at 4:27 pm |
    • Thank you

      That's a really good question.

      November 8, 2013 at 10:29 pm |
    • HotAirAce

      From the beginning of recorded history what we believe has divided us into different tribes, some more tolerant than others.

      November 8, 2013 at 10:32 pm |
  11. mrjackson777

    Maybe athiest are right. Maybe creastionist are right. 50/50 odds right? Sooo... if atheist are right what did Christians loose? They lived thier lives by a book that said " love your neighbor as you love yourself." If were just random particles floating in space who cares? If christians are right...what are atheist gonna say.... "my bad God "

    November 8, 2013 at 3:51 pm |
    • Dude

      Actually, the odds are 30,000+ : 1 against god.

      There are over 30,000 religions, all claiming to be the only one. No matter which one you pick, you almost certainly have it wrong.

      November 8, 2013 at 3:55 pm |
    • Science Works

      Creationist are way off base when it comes to facts.

      New Species of Shark: Carolina Hammerhead

      Nov. 7, 2013 —


      November 8, 2013 at 4:30 pm |
      • Paul

        Creationists aren't off base when it comes to that at all. The Bible says that animals reproduce after their own kind. That means that sharks produces sharks. No conflict between the Bible and science at all.

        November 9, 2013 at 12:39 am |
        • Observer

          "No conflict between the Bible and science at all."

          That's a rarity.

          November 9, 2013 at 12:47 am |
        • redzoa

          @Paul – Feel free then to explain the progressive order of the fossil record . . .

          November 9, 2013 at 1:48 am |
        • ET Iphone home

          That's ridiculous. So you think a great white shark can give birth to a hammerhead? What mechanism prevents organisms evolving beyond their "kinds"? Please explain that in detail.

          November 27, 2013 at 2:10 pm |
    • Observer


      "Maybe athiest are right. Maybe creastionist are right. 50/50 odds right? Sooo... if atheist are right what did Christians loose? They lived thier lives by a book that said " love your neighbor as you love yourself."

      Two alternatives do not have to make 50/50 odds. Ridiculous.
      If Christians lived by the Golden Rule, they wouldn't be trashing gays and pro-choice supporters.

      November 8, 2013 at 6:43 pm |
    • J.

      I've thought about that question. What if christians are right ? I hope I will be able to face whatever judgement comes to me, and ask for the forgiveness of those who like me chose not to believe and simply lived in the respect of others.
      Of course as long as I'm alive this is big talk. It's my crazy hope that I'll have enough strength to do just that ... and mean it.

      November 8, 2013 at 11:32 pm |
    • sajj

      No, it is not 50/50. That's like saying, maybe I'll win the lottery, maybe I won't. There are only two possibilities, so the chances must be 50/50, right?

      November 8, 2013 at 11:33 pm |
      • Science Works

        Would Texas publishers want to spend one billion dollars on a 50/50/chance they where correct on the creation issue that some people wanted inserted in new text books ?

        November 9, 2013 at 10:16 am |
    • JPO

      That "if we're wrong, we're wrong, if you're wrong you burn" argument really doesn't hold up. Know why? Because if you don't believe in God, no matter if you go through the motions, follow the bible perfectly, go to church, and everything else, you still would end up burning forever. If you don't believe you still burn. Frankly I don't WANT to worship a God like that. Even if he's real. Why would I want to worship a God who professes to love everyone unconditionally, yet will burn good people just because they don't follow his religion? If you were married to someone who said they loved you but then punished you for not doing everything they say that would be considered an abusive relationship.

      November 9, 2013 at 12:52 pm |
      • Opposing View

        Who said they were good? If you don't believe in God, then you're evil. Unbelief is a "sin"...

        November 10, 2013 at 7:23 am |
      • Opposing View

        JPO... Wrong analogy. You're not "married" to God. You're not even on his level. You are a child and even less than a child. And a child is supposed to obey his parents. You're not supposed to understand everything, just obey. If you do not obey, then what child is not punished for it. God, hell, and the lake, are merely the ultimate expression of that. If you are unruly and do not obey God who created you, then you will end up in hell and the lake (the ultimate place of penalty)...

        Luke 18:17 – (Jesus speaking) ​Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

        November 10, 2013 at 7:40 am |
    • I hereby demand

      'Dude' has it right. It's called Pascal's wager. Very low probability that one religion could be the one true religion. Better to spend your Sundays in the sunshine instead of staring out of stain-glassed windows at church.

      November 9, 2013 at 3:36 pm |
      • Opposing View

        What is a certainty and not a probability is that you have no clue what you are talking about...

        Hebrews 4:5 – one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism...

        November 10, 2013 at 7:59 am |
    • ET Iphone home

      If the creationists are right then the atheist will simply ask god, "Why didn't you saying anything?" And god will have no answer because there is no way to justify any of the atrocities he committed or the fact that he's not even tried reaching out to atheists directly. If he really wanted believers he would have them at the snap of a finger. Most people don't believe because there's no proof. A tyrannical murderous genocidal mad man is still a tyrannical murderous genocidal mad man, regardless of whether he created us or not. I don't want anything to do with a deity like that. If god was real, humans killed that slave master thousands of years ago and earned their freedom. Read genesis again, it's a metaphor for what really happened. Humans were slaves to either another alien race or to other humans and they freed themselves, (free will, fruit of knowledge, etc). Free your mind.

      November 27, 2013 at 2:08 pm |
  12. Brud1

    If there is a God, then please explain how George W. Bush became President.

    November 8, 2013 at 3:24 pm |
    • Dude

      Better of two evils. That's usually how someone gets elected.

      November 8, 2013 at 3:50 pm |
    • ET Iphone home

      People hated him less than Gore. Shame though. It would have been nice to have no 9/11.

      November 27, 2013 at 2:13 pm |
  13. John

    Religion causes war. People die. Why? Because people judge other people. Wait, the Bible says not to do that, yet we do in the name of it. Then again, doesn't God judge? Religion = contradiction.

    If we are all the children of God, does it matter our religion? Would you burn your own children for a lack of awareness?

    There is no Hell...btw. If I were to be condemned to such a place by my Holy Father I would suggest he was not much of a parent. Would you bear a child, leave that child to the world and man's teaching, then blame that child for not worshiping you? Wait, is God so self-righteous the he needed to create man in order to gain worship? Weak.

    November 8, 2013 at 3:01 pm |
    • 1Twolf7

      John, Yes God is Righteous! And for your scenario that you give about would we do that to our kids? No we wouldn't and NEITHER DOES GOD. Just as your own kids have the option to believe what you say and follow your rules that they might grow up to be successful people in society, so God gives us the same choice in a sense, only the choice HE offers is your ultimate destiny and He offers Salvation to any who would receive it, and He wishes Everyone would. If we choose not to receive HIS FREE GIFT, then WE thus choose our own eternity ourselves and THUS SEND OURSELVES TO HELL, just like that kid who didn't listen to the wisdom of his parents and ultimately does something to ruin his life. Even though the parents tried everything, the kid still has the choice to do what he wants. Is it then the parents fault after trying everything they could that their kid chose the wrong direction??? Did they ever stop loving him? No they probably cried many nights and their hearts were broken. Just as God's Heart is broken every time someone REJECTS HIM AND HIS AWESOME LOVE, because HE knows that they have made the wrong choice, and HE will try many more ways to get your attention, HOWEVER IF YOIU CONTINUE TO REJECT HIM, YOU HAVE CHOSEN NOT HIM-

      November 8, 2013 at 3:58 pm |
      • I hereby demand

        You're missing the point. How can a benevolent god create a place like hell?

        November 9, 2013 at 3:44 pm |
        • Opposing View

          Answer: He did it to get away from people like you. Do you really think people like you are going to heaven? Think again. If people like you were in heaven, then it would be hell. So God created hell so people like you would have a place to go...

          November 10, 2013 at 6:20 am |
        • Charles R. Schabel

          A first century church father, I believe his name was Turulian (please pardon my bad spelling) suggested that hell was created to provide entertainment for those in heaven. Do you like his explanation?

          November 11, 2013 at 2:05 pm |
    • Opposing View

      John… People like you are so ignorant, about all I can say is, in hell, all of your questions will be answered…

      John 10:16 – (Jesus speaking) "Ye believe not because ye are not of my sheep"…

      John 8:43 – (Jesus speaking) "Why do ye not understand my speech?"… He then answered that question by saying: "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do"…

      Therefore, when you arrive in hell, your father Lucifer will explain everything to you and all your questions will be answered…

      November 8, 2013 at 11:27 pm |
      • sajj

        So you're saying that God creates people -knowing- that they won't be able to hear his word and save themselves from eternal torment? Now that doesn't sound like something a loving god would do. Thankfully anyone with half a brain knows that Christianity is total BS.

        November 8, 2013 at 11:38 pm |
        • Opposing View

          The Atheist Rule #3: When all else fails, mock or speak evil of that you don't understand….

          2 Peter 2:12 – But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;

          November 10, 2013 at 6:11 am |
      • sam stone

        gee, where would d-bags like OV be without their empty proxy threats?

        come one, OV, jeebus is waiting. do you have tall buildings where you live?

        step up (and off) to the savior

        November 9, 2013 at 8:27 am |
  14. Mike S

    You would think this writer would at least check the Bible before referencing what it says. Nowhere in the book of Genesis does it say the earth is ten thousand years old. It doesn't mention time other than "days". Many scholars believe the reference to days could be a literal 24 hour period of today or a thousand years or more. Time has no meaning to God as it does to us.

    As for the demand of proof of God's existence by the scientific method, I find it very confusing. The scientific method has never proven the "big bang" or evolution. It has proven that natural selection is untrue. Many anecdotes of error in intepreting the fossil record have been published. In over 100 years thousands of scientific experiments have been conducted to recreate the conditions scientists believe were conducive to the first single cell somehow growing into a life form. Everyone of them has failed. Not in recreating the conditions but in producing any viable life from a single cell.

    Atheist's hide behind science that doesn't exist. How can you have hope or understand a single thing about yourself if you base all you believe in on failed science.

    Sadly, one day you will stand before your creator and He will say I never knew you. Unless you make an honest effort to weigh the evidence fairly for yourself not basd on what someone told you. Christians can tell you all day about Christ but until it means something to you personally by opening your heart and being honest with yourself you won't understand. To rigidly refuse to consider any alternative is not scientific at all.

    November 8, 2013 at 2:07 pm |
    • Chris

      That you think that science tries to prove things shows that you have no idea what you are talking about. Science does not try to prove things, they try to disprove things. Any explanation that survives scientific challenges over and over again become what scientists call a theory. A scientific theory is not a guess. It is an explanation of observed natural phenomenon that has survived multiple tests. The theory of evolution is considered to be one of the strongest in science.

      November 8, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
      • Opposing View

        Science is good but only up to a point. The moment science starts tempting you to disbelieve in God, then there's a problem with science…

        What scientists do is they'll dream up all sorts of crazy ideas and theories out of the blue. And they'll then try to find evidence to support those crazy theories. Anything even remotely close, they'll believe it. And that is all scientists do…

        By the way, the theory of evolution is so full of gigantic holes, you could drive a freight train through it…

        November 8, 2013 at 6:04 pm |
        • Julien

          I can assure you you have a very wrong idea of what science is, for example I (humbly) challenge you to find any serious scientific study that try to disprove the existence of god. As far as I know, this is not a scientific subject. Science is simply about understanding the universe in the most descriptive and factual manner. That a result agree or disagree with any religion or ideology is not (well ... should not be) relevant. Of course there have been mistakes and even outright lies by some for ideological purpose, simply because scientists are humans with their flaws and beliefs. That is why experiment is so important: reality is the only objective referee. This lead me to the second point,
          It's not about dreaming up anything crazy and proving it, but making (at least seemingly) logical assumptions within a theory (if this model is right, cause X should result in consequence Y) and testing its validity through an unbiased experiment. If science was just about proving itself right, we would still believe in spontaneous generation and consider time and space as separate and constant.
          Lastly, evolution theory certainly has holes: science does not holds the truth, it construct the best models possible in order to describe it (and we still have a long way to go). But if you really want to convince someone who is scientifically minded (like me) that it is indeed false, try to keep factual: what are these holes you refer to ? How do they affect the overall validity of the theory ?

          November 8, 2013 at 8:52 pm |
        • Opposing View

          Julien… You deal with God and religion as something which can be scientifically debated or dismissed with no consequence. You are grossly mistaken. The eternal God is real. The fact that he created the universe is real. The fact that you will die and someday have to face that God and be judged by him is real. None of those things are scientific or even based on science. You can either believe it or not, but the consequence of not believing it is the damnation of your own soul. Unfortunately most scientists are so ignorant they don't even realize they even have a soul. Which goes to show you how much they know – or don't know…

          You also deal with God as if he is a myth. God is not a myth. He is a proven fact. Jesus Christ himself proved that. For no Son can exist without a Father, and if Jesus Christ existed, then so also does his Father exist, and it cannot be otherwise. So the fact that God exists is not in dispute. The only dispute is whether you believe it or not. And if you don't believe it (in face of the facts) then you're a fool and is bound for hell…

          Lastly, the world is of the devil (and that includes the scientific community). All of their ideas and assumptions are of the devil. They won't know the truth if the truth was standing right in front of them. For how can a blind man see the truth? And all who are not saved are spiritually blind. The very things that scientists have been scratching around in the dirt for and trying to understand for thousands of years, we who are saved have long understood it and have long had the answers. But people like you reject those answers because it didn't come from "science". But rest assured, there is a day coming called Judgment Day. And when that day comes, it will fully back us up and what we are saying. And you'll find out on that day that all of that nonsense the scientists has been telling you is nothing but crud. Even worse, it is crud that will lead your soul to hell…

          November 8, 2013 at 11:06 pm |
        • I hereby demand

          Your views on science and religion send humanity back to the Middle Ages.

          November 9, 2013 at 3:51 pm |
        • Opposing View

          hereby demand… Your views are of the devil. My views are of God. And it is because of your views that there are now billions upon billions of people now in hell and awaiting on the Judgment…

          Hebrews 9:27 – It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment...

          November 10, 2013 at 6:34 am |
    • dillonb1950

      The Creationists attack on carbon dating is well understood and the reasons are obvious. Gods word is INFALLIBLE according to the bible so if god says 6 days he means 6 days. If it says a man is 600 years old it means he is 600 hundred years old. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You make a lot of statements about thousands of studies but how come none are found in any of the Universities that study carbon dating as their mmain subject area?
      Try this on for size http://ncse.com/cej/3/2/answers-to-creationist-attacks-carbon-14-dating

      November 8, 2013 at 5:37 pm |
      • Opposing View

        The carbon dating theory is flawed. It is only accurate if certain assumptions are true. Yet scientist have no way to verify if they are true, they can only assume they are true. In contrast, when creationists say the earth if only 6,000 years old, we're not just guessing. Instead, we're getting or information from someone who was actually there when the earth was created – Jesus Christ himself. He personally witnessed it happen. So he should well know how old the earth is. So you can either believe Jesus Christ, or else you're calling him a liar. And all who call Jesus Christ a liar will end up in the lake…

        By the way, the scripture states (Hebrew 6:18) It is impossible for God to lie…

        November 8, 2013 at 6:25 pm |
        • dillonb1950

          In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.

          The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

          Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.

          November 8, 2013 at 6:47 pm |
        • sajj

          Where in the Bible does Jesus talk about the age of the Earth? Can you quote specific Bible verses?

          November 9, 2013 at 12:01 am |
        • Opposing View

          dillonb1950… No, the reality is, there are many scientific "theories" which are so imbedded into the minds of scientists and the scientific community as a whole, that no amount of evidence to the contrary is going sway them from their belief short of the arrival and appearance of the eternal God himself. That's because many theories which scientists believe in are what I call "bedrock" theories. Theories which form the foundation to support a long string of other theories they've come up with over the years. Founding theories upon which many other assumptions has been based. Einstein's Theory of Relativity, for example, is one such bedrock theory (and there are many more like it). Do not kid yourself, no matter how much evidence is produced to the contrary, not one scientist anywhere in the world would be willing to give up their belief in Einstein's theory short of them personally seeing the Eternal God himself. And that's a fact. And is also the very "trap" which Lucifer has got scientists in. Because what happens if an important theory such as Einstein's Theory of Relativity turns out to be utterly false and wrong? And I'm not talking about just "slightly" wrong, I'm talking about being "completely" wrong. Answer: In general, the whole scientific community would unravel like a thread. Because in one stroke, all other theories which has been based on Einstein's theory would also be wrong. It would make all of their conclusions meaningless. In short, no scientist would be willing to accept the fact that their entire life's work and belief in certain things has been wrong. Instead they will cling to that belief even if is wrong, and try to find some way to make it right. And that is precisely what we see happening with each new discovery in the scientific community today. They are not searching for truth. Instead, they're only searching to find a way to make themselves right. And when the facts don't line up or fit, they'll come up with some sort of crazy notion or idea to make it fit. That is precisely what scientists do. Whereas, we who are saved already know the truth and have long known the truth. And we've also long told the scientists that they are wrong. Unfortunately, the scientists are so hell-bent on making themselves right, that they don't want to hear it. That's their bad. They'll find out on Judgment Day…

          November 9, 2013 at 12:06 am |
        • redzoa

          "And that is precisely what we see happening with each new discovery in the scientific community today. They are not searching for truth. Instead, they're only searching to find a way to make themselves right."

          This betrays a miscomprehension of how science works in practice. First, the likelihood that any modern scientific theory would be found completely wrong is effectively zero (allowing for a non-zero probability too small to reasonably calculate). The reason is simply because virtually all modern scientific theories possess validated explanatory power. That is, not only do they accord with what has been observed, they have successfully predicted what will be observed in the future. For example, we knew that humans had 23 pairs of chromosomes, but that all the other apes had 24. Evolution predicted that we should see something in our genomes accounting for the discrepancy. Voila! Our fused 2nd chromosome complete with superfluous teleomeres/centromere. These types of predictions/successful validations can be found throughout the human genome, fossil record, etc. One of my favorites is our (human) defunct gene for egg yolk protein production within our placental mammal genomes (i.e. common ancestry predicts such oddities).

          But to return to your erroneous allegation that scientists invariably retreat from confounding evidence, you should understand that every scientist and every scientific journal wants to publish the data that revolutionizes our understanding. Careers are launched on observations that undermine some widely accepted view of how nature works. There is little incentive to simply confirm what is already known. A wonderful example of this process is in the development and application of RNA interference.

          If there were evidence to wholly undermine a scientific theory, there is little incentive not to pursue it, both in terms of self-interested career advancement and in the potential financial rewards of being able to capitalize on this new understanding via patentable technology. The problem for your position is that there has not been any positive evidence offered to undermine the scientific theories you reject; theories you reject solely out of a perceived need to invariably defer to your a priori religious view.

          November 9, 2013 at 12:51 am |
        • Opposing View

          Sajj… In short, the entire bible was written in a mystery (from Genesis to Revelation). That means many of the scriptures you read has a secret meaning, a hidden meaning revealed only to the preacher and to those who are saved (unsaved people don't know those hidden secrets. They may read the bible, but is clueless about its secrets). And God intended it that way, because he didn't want no devil reading the bible and learning the truth. Instead, if you want to know the truth, you must get it from the preacher. But to answer your question, I will reveal a few…

          The scriptures say that God created the earth in 7 days. Another scripture says "one day with the Lord is as 1000 years with man" (2 Peter 3:8). That means 1 God day equals 1,000 man years. Thus, in reality, it took the eternal God, 7,000 man years to create the earth. Another important clue is that when God created the earth, he also slated the reign of mankind to only last for 7,000 year as well. Genesis describes the beginning of mankind, and Revelation describes the end of mankind, 7,000 years later. Since the end of mankind has not arrived yet (Judgment Day) we know that the earth itself couldn't possibly be more than 7,000 years old. That's just not possible. So just how old is it exactly? The answer is hidden in the book of John when Jesus was dealing with the man called Lazarus (who was a friend of Jesus) who had died. In John 11:14 Jesus makes the statement that Lazarus is dead. The mystery behind that statement is, the natural death of Lazarus represented the spiritual death of mankind, or Adam and Eve falling into sin in the Garden of Eden. When Adam himself sinned, all of mankind fell into sin because we all came out of Adam. But even after Jesus heard Lazarus was dead, he still did not go to Lazarus right away. Instead, he waited 4 whole days before he went to Lazarus. In John 11:17 it states – "when Jesus came, he found that (Lazarus) had lain in the grave four days already. Those 4 days represents 4 God days. It means Jesus Christ waited 4 whole God days, or 4,000 years before he came to earth to save man. Thus, mankind had been dead and stinking in sin for a total of 4,000 years since the Garden of Eden. Thus, 4,000 years had passed from the time of Genesis to the the arrival of Jesus Christ. And since we now know that 2,000 more years has also passed since the death of Jesus Christ (we're currently living in 2013 AD), that means a total of 6,013 years (more or less) has passed since God created the earth. That is a fact and not a wild guess. And is where that 6,000 year number comes from. We are currently living in the 6,000 year dispensation. Meaning, Judgment Day, and the end of the reign of mankind, will arrive in about another 1,000 years. You may not understand all this, and you may not want to accept it, but you can bet your bottom dollar it is the truth. And Judgment Day will bear it out…

          November 9, 2013 at 1:11 am |
        • HotAirAce

          OV, you need help. Dial 911 soonest.

          November 9, 2013 at 1:42 am |
        • Opposing View

          Redzoa…In short, that's because you are "blind", and are too blind to even realize you are blind (and blind men can't see a thing). Whereas, my eyes have been spiritually opened, and I see clearly and see things you can't see and don't see. For starters, there is no such thing as Evolution, and never was. That is one thing I know for a fact will be proven utterly false on Judgment Day. You scientist will be in total shock when you eventually find out just how much you're off base with your crazy ideas and theories. And if Evolution didn't occur, then all that talk about chromosomes don't mean a thing.

          You state there is little incentive to confirm what is already known. You mean, there is little incentive to try and "disprove" what is commonly known – because the whole scientific community would laugh you out of existence for even trying. Thus, nobody tries. And here lies another problem. Pick any scientist in the world, and I guarantee you you cannot find a single scientist whose work is not based upon or is not a derivative of the theories and work done by some other scientist of the past. To find the truth, it would be necessary for you to throw away all you know, or think you know, about anything, and to start over from scratch. To start from scratch with an entirely different perspective and a completely different angle (from a God angle). Doing so would be required to even "stumble" across the truth, let alone to scientifically figure it out. And I guarantee you you won't find a single scientist willing to do that. Because if it wasn't for what other scientists have already said and postulated and theorized about (the theories of Einstein for example) then any new scientists today wouldn't know where to begin and wouldn't know what to do. They're just following in the footsteps of others, and that is all they know how to do. And so long as you follow in the footsteps of others, then you'll never find the truth. Why? Because the very people you are following didn't have the truth either. You only "think" they had the truth. And that is the deception. Jesus said, "If the blind lead the blind, then both shall fall into the ditch." So if those people didn't have the truth as you think they did, then how could you possibly have the truth either if you're following in their footsteps and is doing work based on their principals?…

          November 9, 2013 at 1:59 am |
        • Uh Oh

          Opposing View,
          " And God intended it that way, because he didn't want no devil reading the bible and learning the truth. Instead, if you want to know the truth, you must get it from the preacher."

          Well, you've gone and done it now. Geez, you know that "Satan" reads these comments, don't you?! Cat's out of the bag, fer shure! And that wily "Satan", well, he's got you and your preacher's communications bugged too. If you think that you are protected by that lower case 't', you are mistaken. Boo!

          Actually, HotAirAce has good advice for you. You have exceeded the limits of sanity.

          November 9, 2013 at 2:09 am |
        • HotAirAce

          OV, there is some chance that you are correct – that all known science today is wrong and you are right. Now proving that all of science is wrong would be a huge task so I won't challenge you to do that. All I will ask is that you name a single subject you think science has gotten wrong and The Babble gets right, and then write a single article explaining in detail how your god is the best explanation and describing the experiments that you used, and that anyone else can use, to verify your hypotheses. Or alternatively, cite one existing article in a reputable scientific journal where some scientist has successfully proven some god was responsible for something. Just one article. How hard can that be? Should be easy, especially with you god's help. Unless it doesn't exist.

          November 9, 2013 at 2:21 am |
        • redzoa

          @Opposing View – You failed to reasonably address any of the specific points I made and it's very clear you haven't a clue about how the practice of science actually transpires. I provided an example of how scientists discovered a hitherto unknown mechanism which initially contradicted their expectations. They didn't reject the finding, rather they pursued it vigorously and the positive evidence they produced enhanced and improved our understanding as well provided a novel and beneficial technology. This is exactly the practice you claim science rejects out of hand and you failed to offer any cogent response.

          Furthermore, whether it's science or religion, they both rely largely on what came before, including your preferred position. You did not arrive at your preferred conclusion in a vacuum. You are not special. You are not privy to magical secrets simply because you desperately need to believe you are. You, like most theists, confuse your unsupported beliefs with actual knowledge and then in a classic example of theist ignorance and arrogance, declare your position is the "truth" without offering a single piece of evidence.

          The technology you use to post here is the product of science. It works despite your claims that science is an inherently flawed means to attain and apply knowledge. Contrast this demonstrable benefit and application of science to the senseless ramblings you post using this technology which have no value beyond the self-inflated value you personally ascribe to them within the context of your delusion of grandeur . . .

          November 9, 2013 at 6:20 pm |
        • Opposing View

          Redzoa… I didn't address your points because your so-called points are meaningless. If Evolution didn't occur, then any arguments made related to Evolution are not worth talking about...

          Secondly, I am indeed special, whether you think so or not. I am a saint of the most high God, and you're only a child of Lucifer. I am a spiritually seeing person and you are spiritually blind. I'm on my way to heaven while you're on your way to hell. I have the truth and all you have is nonsense, lies, and deceptions. Those are pretty big differences. Furthermore, I know a whole lot of things that you don't know. I know you love to speak evil of things you understand not, and that the things I know are backed up God. Whereas, the things you know are only backup by the world and devil, and will only lead your soul to hell…

          John 10:26 – But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep…

          1 Corinthians 2:14 – But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

          1 Corinthians 1:18 – For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

          November 9, 2013 at 9:05 pm |
        • Opposing View

          Uh Oh… The Atheist Rule #3: When all else fails, mock or speak evil of that which you don't understand….

          You know, if unbelievers like you would spend more time focusing on those things which are important (such as the earth being only 6000 years old), and less time blathering on about those things which aren't (whether Lucifer reads my comments or not), then believe it or not, even someone like you might have a chance to be saved…

          November 9, 2013 at 9:14 pm |
        • redzoa

          @Opposing View – As you've now had a few opportunities to provide some semblance of a response to the specific points I've previously made, I take this latest non-response as your concession that you have nothing intelligible to offer. However, credit where credit is due; I commend you on your ability to deftly combine vacuity and self-aggrandizement within each and every post you make. You are truly and literally incredible . . .

          November 9, 2013 at 11:26 pm |
        • Opposing View

          Redzoa… I stated, ..."I didn't address your points because your so-called points are meaningless."...

          So what part of that did you not understand? Or are you so unintelligent that you lack the ability to comprehend my words?...

          November 10, 2013 at 6:39 am |
        • redzoa

          @Opposing View – Again, what I read is that you have no actual response; therefore, again, I take this continued inability to respond as your concession that you have none to offer.

          November 11, 2013 at 2:52 am |
    • sajj

      >The scientific method has never proven the "big bang" or evolution.
      You're right, it's never proven them to be 100% true, but then again, that's not what science does. Science works with the best information that we have to formulate explanations based on EVIDENCE. This is very important when determining what is most likely to be true. Contrast this with the way that creationists deny countless lines of scientific evidence, instead basing their beliefs and understanding of reality on faith. Faith, of course, is the excuse people give when they do not actually have evidence.
      >It has proven that natural selection is untrue.
      Completely false. The entire field of biology and medicine depend on the theory of evolution by natural selection. Using genetic evidence, we have been able to determine that all species are derived from one common ancestor. We are able to map out a family tree of species using genetic evidence alone. Evolution has been 'proven' to the same level as atomic theory and the theory of relativity, and you'd be a fool to try and say that the scientific method has never proven those things either.
      >Many anecdotes of error in intepreting the fossil record have been published.
      Many errors have also been made in other scientific fields. People used to think that electrons had a fixed orbit around an atom's nucleus, but now we know that it's more like an "electron cloud" with no orbit. But this mistake, even though it was quite major, did not undermine atomic theory. Rather, it only strengthened it, because it allowed us to update the theory with newer, more accurate information. That's the beauty of science. Unlike religion, it does not cower in the face of new evidence. It is not afraid to update itself and adapt to gains in knowledge.
      >In over 100 years thousands of scientific experiments have been conducted to recreate the conditions scientists believe were conducive to the first single cell somehow growing into a life form.
      This has nothing to do with the big bang, or evolution.
      People used to think that lightning came from Zeus. They didn't have the technology or knowledge at the time to determine that lightning is actually the result of static electricity. However, they were still wrong about it being the result of Zeus. Their belief that Zeus caused lightning did nothing to advance their understanding of electricity or the way the world works. If anything, it only held them back.
      >Atheist's hide behind science that doesn't exist.
      Really? That's funny, because many intelligent Christians accept science as well. In fact, this trend of denying very basic tenets of science that are practically undeniable is purely an American phenomenon. Christians in other parts of the world have much less trouble reconciling their religious beliefs with reality. I think it is more of a cultural thing than one that is actually founded in religion.

      November 8, 2013 at 11:56 pm |
      • Opposing View

        If a blind person is arguing with a seeing person about whether there are clouds in the sky, who's the fool – the blind person who cannot see any clouds, or the seeing person who's wasting their time arguing with them? Answer: They both are fools…

        Proverbs 23:9 – Speak not in the ears of a fool: for he will despise the wisdom of thy words….

        November 10, 2013 at 6:51 am |
        • ET Iphone home

          Your analogy is flawed, like usual. Please direct me to a single person that has met god and had a conversation with him and isn't lying. If you are blind and everyone else can see, you have to trust everyone else. But if there's nothing to see and you are relying on nothing but somebody else's faith how can you compare it to sound that's tangible, observable and measurable like clouds in the sky? Who has done this with god?

          November 27, 2013 at 2:20 pm |
  15. LogicInStyle

    It's always rather sad when religious types continually resort to poor reasoning to reenforce their own delusions.

    November 8, 2013 at 1:56 pm |
  16. Felix Sinclair

    The comments amuse The Flying Spaghetti Monster.

    November 8, 2013 at 12:59 pm |

    "They refuse to look at the real world. They refuse to look at the evidence we have, and they offer none," Silverman said.
    "They might as well be saying, 'Thank Zeus you're wrong' or 'Thank Thor you're wrong.' "

    Have those false and imaginary gods "Zeus" or "Thor" ever done, or can they ever do,
    what one and only real GOD (=YHWH ELOHIM) has thus ACTUALLY done here now, Mr. Silverman?


    November 8, 2013 at 4:23 am |
    • Dude

      NO god has ACTUALLY done anything.

      November 8, 2013 at 3:57 pm |
  18. Dandy Dizmore

    Ever see the movie Dumb and Dumber? The creationists look up to those guys...

    November 8, 2013 at 1:34 am |
  19. Brian

    Oh great... Now we have youtube debates on billboards.

    November 7, 2013 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 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
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.