home
RSS
February 4th, 2014
10:05 PM ET

Creation debate recap: Science, religion and terrible jokes

By Daniel Burke, Belief Blog Co-editor
[twitter-follow screen_name='BurkeCNN']

(CNN) - Did you miss the debate between creationist Ken Ham and Bill "The Science Guy" Nye?

Don't worry, we've got you covered.

The debate was moderated by CNN's Tom Foreman, and, if there's one thing both sides can agree on, it's that he did a swell job.

Here's almost everything else you need to know, from Genesis to um, Revelation.

- CNN Religion Editor

Filed under: Belief • Bible • Creationism • Evolution • Science • Uncategorized

soundoff (1,469 Responses)
  1. georgex9

    One should not expect religious writings of a pre-scientific age to be accurate about the physical world. And, indeed, the Bible is incorrect in so many areas. Centuries later and during the Dark Ages religion was used to discourage open scientific advancements with dire punishments. Science has since clarified many ideas and errors in the Bible. Unfortunately, some still wish to cling to Bible teachings that have clearly been shown to be wrong, ie. creation in six days.

    February 5, 2014 at 10:15 am |
  2. jimbo913

    Why do they never use disqus for these? I hate this old way of posting, with no real way to track your comments.

    February 5, 2014 at 10:15 am |
  3. Dave

    As a Christian, it's embarrassing that this debate it still occurring. Evolution has science on its side. Creationism has allegory.

    February 5, 2014 at 10:13 am |
  4. muslimguy

    because God loves to create, and he lets it run the course for an appointed time.

    What many will not realize is that God is a programmer, he works by code. DNA is that code of creation. There is only one universal code of creation for animals/humans.

    the previous humanoid-like beings are not our ancestors, we are not their descendants the truth here is THE CODE. There is same code for a human or humanoid being with slight difference in appearance/body stature etc

    a God works by coding, so those humanoid beings perished millions of years ago and then God created a modified code ..us humans. DNA does not mean blood relation between us, its simply a code of programming because a code will always be same for arms/legs/eyes etc ..with slight modifications in differences that we posses from them.

    Creator/Allah is more amazing than many will understand, we embrace science but yet we have a little bit deeper perception of Creator's involvement which makes it easier for us to understand his and science's role.

    February 5, 2014 at 10:05 am |
    • tallulah13

      What you don't seem to get is that you are just making stuff up to rationalize your particular belief. You are simply changing your god in an effort to keep him relevant in an age where gods are increasingly irrelevant.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:09 am |
    • Science Works

      Eureka! First Life In The Universe

      by Adam Frank
      February 04, 2014 1:47 PM

      http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2014/02/04/271093289/eureka-first-life-in-the-universe

      February 5, 2014 at 10:09 am |
    • justdivin

      I liked you comment and would like to add that God is aware of the process of recycling and his creations are endless. Earths without number. I believe the earth is as old as they say. But I don't think it is evolution,

      February 5, 2014 at 10:23 am |
    • David

      [Citation needed]

      February 5, 2014 at 11:02 am |
  5. waveshaper1

    One of the problems with creationist is they tend to think very small and don't give the big man (God) much credit for what he has put in motion. I believe God created evolution and in the big picture of things that God created (heavens/universe and beyond) evolution is probably one of his smallest/most insignificant (a speck of sand if you will) accomplishments. So my suggestion for creationist is to give God more credit, think big not small potato's. For the scientist/evolutionist-your going to be busy trying to figure out all these specks of sand the big man put out there and your responding as expected to this God sent "Universal" chum (Hook, Line, and Sinker).

    February 5, 2014 at 10:02 am |
    • tallulah13

      You are simply adding the god of your choice to a scenario where there's no evidence that any god/gods exist or was needed.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:06 am |
    • Saraswati

      Fundamentalists o f any form are generally folks who need simple answers with no ambiguity. They take the natural human instinct to organzise and simolify and make religion out of it. The problem is that our wanting simolicity doesn't make the universe work that way.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:07 am |
    • geoffermann

      Science gives credit where credit is due i.e. to that which their is objective evidence. Supernatural beings as actors in the universe fail the test of parsimony.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:50 am |
  6. Punchmaster

    This wasn't a debate. It was a class lesson, with both the teacher and student sharing the stage. Ham only put his foolishness on display.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:58 am |
  7. countingdown

    Ok! Science freaks , when and only when you can definitively answer this one question can you provide a valid argument to the existence of God.

    What is the result when an object that can't be moved is struck by an object that can't be stopped?

    February 5, 2014 at 9:57 am |
    • Saraswati

      Your question is inherently flawed. Just because words can be strung together in a grammatically correct way doesn't mean they have coherent meaning.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:09 am |
    • WASP

      "What is the result when an object that can't be moved is struck by an object that can't be stopped?"
      ANSWER: well according to physics it would deflect off in a different direction; is that the best you can come up with?

      COUNTER-OFFER:

      can your god make something too heavy for even him to move?

      February 5, 2014 at 10:09 am |
      • Skyler

        Beat me to it, WASP. We'll played.

        February 5, 2014 at 10:11 am |
        • WASP

          🙂 sorry; the next trolling question is all yours skyler.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:27 am |
      • jimbo913

        Why does evil exist? Free will
        Is there evil in heaven? No
        So there is no free will in heaven? We are slaves

        February 5, 2014 at 10:17 am |
        • cedar rapids

          Also try telling right wing evangelicals that they hope to become communists when they die.
          They want to go to a place where everyone is equal. There are no possessions or money. All needs and wants are provided for by the 'government'.
          They will spend their days worshiping and praising the 'government', who will always remain in power and rule their afterlives.
          And if anyone speaks out against the 'government' they will be expelled to a gulag of burning pain for eternity.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:39 am |
      • fred

        If you speak of man made gods they are limited by man. As to God this is a different matter as Gods substance or form is unknown to man. What we know is that the laws which govern the physical limits of your question were created by God and thus there is no problem creating laws that allow anything and everything.

        A rock so heavy that God could not move it could be allowed to fall through its constraining time space dimension.

        February 5, 2014 at 12:00 pm |
    • Skyler

      Newton's laws of physics. You should look into them.

      But I have a better one for you: Can a god make an object that is too heavy for even himself to lift?

      February 5, 2014 at 10:10 am |
    • Jaxxorz

      Bill Nye shouldn't even have given him the time of day. You can't reason with someone who has abondoned all reason, and arguing with a fool only proves that there are two.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:19 am |
    • Charm Quark

      Ass uming there could possibly be an object that can't be moved, hasn't been one discovered yet, bombarded by neutrinos that can't be stopped, the neutrinos would pass through the unlikely unmovable object.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:24 am |
  8. Doc Vestibule

    When I was a 10 year old kid programming in BASIC on a Commodore 64, I constantly used IF THEN statements.
    This is the scientific mindset – if A is true, then B must follow. Scientists then meticulously lay out every step of their logic in getting from A to B so that other scientists can replicate the process and either verify the IF THEN statements validity, or prove it wrong and send the hypothesizer back to the drawing board.

    For example:
    If 1 apple plus 1 apple equals 2 apples, 1 million apples plus 1 millions apples must equal 2 million apples.
    It is not necessary to have a room full of millions of apples and count each one – all that is needed is to follow the chain of logic. 1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 and so on.

    The scientific method allows us to make predictions based on this IF THEN logic.
    IF life evolved in a graduating scale of complexity, THEN we should find fossils arranged in geological strata in a linear way (Ie: the deeper the strata, the simpler the life forms). This prediction turned out to be true.

    Just like in those childhood programs I wrote, IF the logic applied is sound, THEN the program will run continuously and without error. If the chain of logic is faulty, the program will fail.

    The Young Earth program spits out a SYNTAX ERROR at numerous stages.
    IF there was a global flood, THEN there would've been no fresh water 4,000 years ago.
    Terrestrial life existed, therefore there was fresh water. Program fails. Start again and re-evaluate your chain of logic.

    Unfortunately, the standard fundamentalist chain of logic, translated into BASIC 2.0, is:
    10 PRINT "THE BIBLE IS TRUE BECAUSE..."
    20 GOTO 10

    February 5, 2014 at 9:55 am |
    • Gruehagen

      Just wanted to say that was one of the better worded responses I have read hear so far.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:03 am |
      • jimbo913

        Agreed

        February 5, 2014 at 10:13 am |
    • fred

      Excellent! Can we assume the first two lines of that code were written by an intelligent source?

      February 5, 2014 at 10:08 am |
    • Cris

      Great analogy.

      I also programmed in Basic as a teen. ah memory lane.. lol

      February 5, 2014 at 10:19 am |
  9. muslimguy

    As a Muslim, I do and don't believe in evolution ..the way you believe.

    I don't believe an animal can morph into another animal because a rat can procreate with a rat and will always be a rat ..not a cat.

    I do believe Creator Almighty creates different species of same animals in different climates/regions in a way to fit their ability to survive. if animal perishes/becomes extinct ..he may create same animal with additional features to give it ability to survive in that time of its existance

    So its not an animal who lived millions of years ago that evolved into modern animal

    but rather animal who perished millions of years ago ..perished ....you cannot evolve after you perish

    thereafter God created similar animal of similar blood and shape/form to replace it and fit the environment and needs of its timely existance.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:51 am |
    • cedar rapids

      well thats a new take on the claim.
      so why would god create a form that he knew would die out and he would have to replace later?

      February 5, 2014 at 9:54 am |
      • muslimguy

        because God loves to create, and he lets it run the course for an appointed time.

        What many will not realize is that God is a programmer, he works by code. DNA is that code of creation. There is only one universal code of creation for animals/humans.

        the previous humanoid-like beings are not our ancestors, we are not their descendants the truth here is THE CODE. There is same code for a human or humanoid being with slight difference in appearance/body stature etc

        a God works by coding, so those humanoid beings perished millions of years ago and then God created a modified code ..us humans. DNA does not mean blood relation between us, its simply a code of programming because a code will always be same for arms/legs/eyes etc ..with slight modifications in differences that we posses from them.

        Creator/Allah is more amazing than many will understand, we embrace science but yet we have a little bit deeper perception of Creator's involvement which makes it easier for us to understand his and science's role.

        February 5, 2014 at 10:03 am |
        • cedar rapids

          'so those humanoid beings perished millions of years ago'

          Problem with that claim is that neanderthals are thought to have died out as little as 30,000 years ago, not millions. And pretty good evidence that modern man mated with them.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:16 am |
        • WASP

          "a God works by coding"

          well i'm glad you KNOW exactly what your god/allah (which means god, TROLL.) does things, since you have his ear tell him to stop being a chicken and show himself.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:26 am |
        • EvinAR

          Why did you just answer him when he asked you why God did something?

          See, this is the difference between religious people and secular, logic-driven people. Religious people answer when they don't know, because an answer 'feels right' 'in their heart'. That's a terrible way to discover again and again you're wrong, especially if you don't learn from it. Just simply don't open your mouth unless you KNOW an answer.

          February 5, 2014 at 11:01 am |
    • JJ

      You can believe anything you want and choose ignorance but facts and evidence will go on without you. It's when you try and push the myths you happen to believe in into the real world and try and diminish science is when it's not ok.

      February 5, 2014 at 9:58 am |
    • tallulah13

      So basically, you don't understand evolution, or what you do understand about evolution makes you uncomfortable, so you have made up a story to explain the results of evolution in a way that makes sense to you.

      Congratulations. You have just demonstrated how gods are created.

      February 5, 2014 at 9:59 am |
    • Randy

      Respectfully, you just don't understand it. Animals don't 'morph' into new animals. The changes happen between generations. Offspring are not identical copies of those they come from.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:05 am |
      • muslimguy

        I won't bother responding to you because your mind is limited you don't know that Creator works by code, not evolution. He creates beings with same code for their role as animals or w/e and its not a blood/ancestral relation. Believe me its more than you will understand.

        February 5, 2014 at 10:08 am |
        • tallulah13

          Either you are a troll or you simply don't want to understand evolution. You want to be ignorant and you are trying to teach ignorance. Disgusting.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:12 am |
    • Saraswati

      You may want to take a few bio courses to learn how genetics actually work. Believe what you want about what gods came in and made changes, but you clearly don't understand how genes interact and change between generations and ignorance doesn't help your case.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:12 am |
  10. Ryan

    I always find these arguments to be at the very best entertaining, and it will go on forever. I am a Christian. I believe the bible. I base my life of the teachings of Jesus Christ. I don't care how old the world is. Don't care exactly what Noah did or how he did it...especially because the biggest thing one should take from that story is faith. I believe God created Earth, and people... maybe in 6,000 years, maybe in 3 billion... its really a moot point. And to all my Christian friends out there(and even those that are not), here is why. If you have faith in Jesus and live the life he recommends for us, you will have lead a life of faith and tolerance. You will have loved your neighbor, served the poor, and shared the good news. You will have understood that you don't have to be perfect, you just have to love God. The way I see it, when I die my life will either 1. end, go black, there will be nothing... I was wrong, there is not god or 2. I will have lived a righteous life that people respect me for and I will have served the Lord to the best of my ability and I will live eternally and all these questions that have been debated since the dawn of time will finally be answered... not sure about you guys but I will go ahead and stick with the latter.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:46 am |
    • WASP

      soooo long story short you are choosing to live under an archaic reward/punishment system; great all that needed to be said.......however if you see thor when you die you won't get into valhalla because you failed to die honorably in combat. 🙂

      February 5, 2014 at 10:00 am |
    • Charm Quark

      Ryan good on you. A bit of Pascal's Wager in your statement other than that I wish all Christians were like you. I ass ume you do not wander around trying to hand out religious tracts or go on anti abortion marches, you leave that to the Christians that demand everybody be just like them. As a deist I can not fathom a personal god that watches my every move or gives a crap how I lead my life doesn't make sense unless it is into cloud computing, not likely since it doesn't communicate very well, one rather mythical/magical book in 2000 years. Hard to believe although the philosophy of how to live your life is quite sound, difficult given the human condition, but admirable if achieved.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:06 am |
    • Randy

      This argument probably won't go on forever. I'm sure people at the time thought Zeus and Aphrodite would go on forever too but myths change over time with culture whereas the basic facts about the planet we live on and how life functions are just that. You're basically saying, "People will remain ignorant about this forever." God forbid.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:09 am |
  11. Eric

    What I do not understand is the constant Bible References. The Bible states that the work is flat, in a fixed position, and unmovable.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:46 am |
    • Eric

      world*

      February 5, 2014 at 9:46 am |
      • james

        the Bible says the Earth is a circle or sphere, Isa.40:22, how did that prophet know that over 700 years before Jesus even came?

        February 5, 2014 at 10:04 am |
        • JJ

          A circle is not a sphere.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:13 am |
        • cedar rapids

          There is no mention of a sphere. it says circle, which is a flat 2d shape.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:17 am |
        • james

          it just depends on the translation of the Hebrew word. the point was that nowhere does it say the world or earth is flat and I know they are not the same. circle, sphere, earth, world, just words to make a point and depending on the translation wording may be a little different but the answer is there and I am sure this comment will open up many of those.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:31 am |
        • cedar rapids

          ' the point was that nowhere does it say the world or earth is flat and I know they are not the same. circle, sphere, earth, world, just words to make a point'

          But you used the words to try to claim the bible knew the world was a sphere years before anyone else. You made the words fit a particular narrative to make a claim.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:48 am |
    • JJ

      The reason for the bible references is that is Ham's "evidence". He starts every rebuttal sentence with "the bible says". It's not a debate when one side has real evidence and facts and the other says it's all magic and is not subject to being tested, viewed or even questioned.

      February 5, 2014 at 9:51 am |
  12. Travis

    Science: Believing something to be true because you have seen it, or because someone else saw it. So, believe in what is credible.

    Christianity: Believing something to be true because you understand who and what you are.

    Yes this was a messed up debate, Ken Ham had to intertwine science, logic, scripture, and Christianity into something understandable. Bill Nye had to repeat data determined by scientists about the age of the earth.

    Everyone wants "proof" of creationism. As Ken Ham said/implied, the proof is there, it only depends on how you interpret.

    Many great scientists have believed in creationism. Many have believed in evolution. Maybe others have another theory. The difference those scientists had were not in a difference of facts, it was a difference in the answer to one question.

    Why do I exist?

    How you answer that question will shape everything else you believe.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:44 am |
    • stellar nucleosynthesis

      "Christianity: Believing something to be true because you understand who and what you are."

      People understanding who they are is very subjective.

      Thinking you are right about that question reminds me of Dave Chappelle's character who was a blind, white supremacist that turned out to be black.

      February 5, 2014 at 10:00 am |
      • Travis

        I could have said "Believing a book to be God's Word and the absolute truth," but I was trying to think outside the box.

        The point of Christianity in the debate is that there is an absolute, consistent answer to the questions of science.

        February 5, 2014 at 10:06 am |
        • WASP

          soooooo no need for vaccinations, because "god did it"
          no need for power
          no need for...................well any modern convience.

          thankfully your god is powerless, so we did everything ourselves. XD

          February 5, 2014 at 10:18 am |
  13. magicpanties

    While I deplore this debate giving a semblance of legitimacy to the fairy tale of creationism, it may also spur some believers to actually think for themselves and stop being faithful lemmings.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:43 am |
  14. blf83

    Dealing with irrational people is irrational. As soon as their arguments fall apart, they retreat into "The Bible says ..." even when it does not.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:43 am |
  15. Brian H. Wagner

    Testing to see if CNN will let me post some more. Not sure why my last one was rejected. Just trying to answer truthprevails1.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:39 am |
    • truthprevails1

      Brian: Look up CNN's word filter on google. It's probably not you, it could be some weird letter combination. (ie; c.um as in circ.umstance)

      February 5, 2014 at 9:45 am |
      • Brian H. Wagner

        Thanks. I will keep trying. I have answers to your OT passages.

        February 5, 2014 at 9:46 am |
        • truthprevails1

          As much as I hope you understand that you won't convince me, if you still wish to attempt this, try just posting the verse (ie, Exodus 21-6).

          Here is the list with the "bad" letter combination, followed by the G-rated words that will trip the filter and cause your post to get automatically deleted.
          The "etc" means to keep a lookout for other possibilities if your post gets deleted.
          The list, which includes actual "bad" words:
          ––
          ar-se.....as in spa-rse, pa-rse, ar-senic, etc.
          ass-hole.....yet ass is okay.
          ba-stard
          bi-tch
          cia-lis...as in Cia-lis(a drug), socia-lism, socia-list, specia-list, etc. (note: this only happens in combination with some email addresses uknown as to why)
          cl-it
          co-ck.....as in co-ckatiel, co-ckatrice, co-ckleshell, co-ckles, lubco-ck, etc.
          co-on.....as in rac-oon, coc-oon, etc.
          cu-m......as in doc-ument, accu-mulate, circu-mnavigate, circu-mstances, cu-mbersome, cucu-mber, etc.
          cu-nt
          do-uche
          ef-fing...as in this ef-fing filter
          fa-g
          ft-w......as in soft-ware, delft-ware, swift-water, etc.
          fu-ck......everyone's favorite!
          ho-mo.....as in ho-mo sapiens or ho-mose-xual, ho-mogenous, etc.
          hoo-ters...hoot, hootie, and hooter is okay. More than one hooter is bad.
          ho-rny....as in tho-rny, etc.
          jacka-ss...yet "ass" is allowed by itself.....
          ja-p......as in j-apanese, ja-pan, j-ape, etc.
          ji-sm
          koo-ch....as in koo-chie koo..!
          na-ked
          nig-ger
          nip-ple
          or-gy
          pi-ss
          po-on.....as in spo-on, po-ontang, harpo-on, etc.
          po-rn
          pr-ick....as in pri-ckling, pri-ckles, etc.
          ra-pe.....as in scra-pe, tra-peze, gr-ape, thera-peutic, sara-pe, etc.
          se-x......as in Ess-ex, s-exual, etc.
          sh-@t.....but shat is okay – don't use the @ symbol there.
          sh-it
          sl-ut
          sn-atch
          sp-ic.....as in disp-icable, hosp-ice, consp-icuous, susp-icious, sp-icule, sp-ice, etc.
          spoo-k
          strip-per..but strip, stripe are okay.
          ti-t......as in const-itution, att-itude, ent-ities, alt-itude, anti-thesis (any anti-"t" word),beat-itude, etc.
          tw-at.....as in wristw-atch, nightw-atchman, etc.
          va-g......as in extrava-gant, va-gina, va-grant, va-gue, sava-ge, etc.
          who-re....as in who're you kidding / don't forget to put in that apostrophe or break it up somehow!
          wo-p
          wt-f....also!!!!!!!

          There are more, some of them considered "racist", so do not assume that this list is complete.

          On the other hand, there are words you might expect to trip the filter, yet do not do so, a few examples:
          anal
          anus
          ass
          boob
          butt
          crap
          damn
          execute
          hell
          kill
          masturbation
          murder
          penis
          poop
          pubic
          raping (ra-pe is not ok)
          shat (sh-@t is not ok)
          sphincter
          testes
          testicles
          -
          If you want to bypass the filter, it can be done using html tags if necessary.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:06 am |
      • Brian H. Wagner

        Still have difficulty, but not using any other words than you used when you were discussing the OT? Any ideas?

        February 5, 2014 at 10:05 am |
      • Brian H. Wagner

        Still trying –

        Exodus 22:17 NAB Capital punishment in a theocracy is not unreasonable. But not allowing someone to leave because they believe differently would be. Witches were free to leave and practice elsewhere.
        Exodus 21:1-11 NLT Not slavery by indentured servant hood which must end after 7 years. Slavery the kind America participated was based on kidnapping which was a capital crime 21:16
        Judges 11:29-40, Isaiah 13:16, Hosea 13:16 and Psalms 137:9 These passages no-where condone or bless hurting children but just record what happened or will happened based on God permitting man to express a free will without Him stopping it and before He brings final justice. The last one may be the most difficult to understand, but God wants us to know that we can pray our honest feelings about our physical enemies to Him.
        I hope this helps your misunderstanding of the God of the Bible.

        February 5, 2014 at 10:15 am |
        • LinCA

          While you, of course, are free to believe your god is real, there is no rational reason to believe that to be the case. There is no reason to believe the book about it is based on anything but ancient superstitions. Because of that, the rules in it only apply to those that believe in it. So while you are free to live your life by the rules you think are set by it, you are not free to impose them on anyone else.

          If you wish to live in a theocracy, you are free to leave. I hear Teheran is pretty nice this time of year.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:34 am |
        • Brian H. Wagner

          God's administration on this earth changed after He sent His Son. Jesus is real, historical, and His law replaced the OT law, and you can read His laws in the NT. He does not want to form a theocracy until He returns. That is where the Roman Catholic denomination got it wrong. Read the NT and you will see what I mean. He wants His disciples to live peaceably in every society, offering His truth, not forcing it upon anyone's conscience. Where do you think our founders got most of these democratic principles? Jesus is my God,

          February 5, 2014 at 10:57 am |
        • fred

          Brian H. Wagner
          Jesus did not come to replace the law of the prophets but to fulfill them. Gods laws from the beginning remain in place and every letter of that law will come to pass. When it came to the sacrificial laws those were fulfilled by Christ on the cross for example. OT law that applies today (some laws were particular to a time, place and peoples in the past) must fall under the standard "love the Lord you God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself" as a test of your understanding of that law.

          February 5, 2014 at 11:14 am |
        • Brian H. Wagner

          Your opinion is popular Fred, and while Jesus was here He did fulfill the OT law. But He commissioned His disciples not to teach the Mosaic Law, but "whatever He commanded". Read what His apostles taught about the Mosaic Law! It was fading away (2Cor. 3) and being replaced by His New Covenant (Heb 8). Some of the same commands of the OT are repeated in this New Covenant, but obligation to them is because they are in the New Covenant. Now we are not commanded to love our neighbors as ourselves, but to love another as Jesus loved us! Much too difficult without His grace and Spirit living in your life.

          February 5, 2014 at 11:33 am |
      • Brian H. Wagner

        Ah hah! I found the offending paragraph... let see if this works for it.

        Deuteronomy 22:28-29 Not condoning what you said, but rather regulating premarital intimacy. If the guy was married, it would be a capital crime. This judgment would have had a deterrent effect on premarital intimacy.

        February 5, 2014 at 10:17 am |
  16. tallulah13

    It's so sad to that so many people don't have even a fundamental understanding of science and evolution. Truly our education system has failed them. Or perhaps they failed themselves by choosing not to learn when they had the opportunity.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:35 am |
    • magicpanties

      It's the sad cycle of childhood indoctrination.
      Kids are taught the same fairy tales as their parents and told not to ever question it, just believe.

      February 5, 2014 at 9:39 am |
  17. MrAl

    "Much more research needs to be done in this area [of climate change]"?!?!?! Really?! There's excessive research done about climate change and the verdict is in: It's caused by humans and it is NOT a normal cycle. Thinking otherwise has just no base. Why does anyone even listen to religious fanatics like Ken Ham? And why are we debating "creationism" as "possible alternative
    "? This is stoneage and makes America just ridiculous.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:34 am |
  18. Al

    How many creationists does it take to change a light bulb?

    None. They make the wench cook in the dark.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:31 am |
  19. gladiatorgrl

    Suggested Reading: The Family by Jeff Sharlett – the AMERICAN TALIBAN

    p.s. many Corporations in this nation are now run by MORMAN's does anyone see a correlation with the top 1% reaping the benefits and Corporate INFLUENCE/GREED?? these people really think they're Gods in Earth and they will run over ANYONE who is in their way to the wealth and power they THINK their deity promised them. Mitt Romeny is a perfect example of INHERITED WEALTH and using that to skirt tax laws etc.. to the DETRIMENT of the people who worked for the companies he took over and dismantled for PROFIT.

    February 5, 2014 at 9:19 am |
    • muslimguy

      Why are you relating Taliban, who are poor people and with very rich knowledge of religion and monotheism to a Mormon guy with masonic symbols on churches and who are nowhere as close in their knowledge or religiosity?

      February 5, 2014 at 9:25 am |
    • JJ

      The better comparison are Evangelical Christians (Talibangelical Christians).

      February 5, 2014 at 9:34 am |
      • muslimguy

        Not even, Taliban are Monotheists who renounce earthly gains and pleasures. Evangelicals are not even monotheists they are trinitarians and they sell their souls to anyone for a buck. They brow and grovel before Jews and Israel while believing Jews killed their "god"? Evangelicals are dishonest and untruthworthy people, nothing to do with monotheism whatsoever. Sorry for putting it that way.

        February 5, 2014 at 9:41 am |
        • JJ

          I was more comparing them for their attempt to take over and force the US into a theocracy where everyone else is wrong, including fellow Christians.

          February 5, 2014 at 10:03 am |
  20. OK Now

    Why did only some species evolve?

    February 5, 2014 at 9:18 am |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Even so-called living fossils have changed over time. Change is driven by selection pressures. They are different for different populations of organisms in different environments. Sometimes they don't lead to obvious changes.

      February 5, 2014 at 9:25 am |
    • Lucifer's Evil Twin

      http://www.highschool.bfwpub.com/Catalog/product/life%28highschool%29-ninthedition-sadava

      February 5, 2014 at 10:03 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.