Religion

Belief in God, Devil, Heaven, Hell, Miracles, the Survival of the Soul, Jesus' Divinity, the Virgin Birth, and the Resurrection Are Down; Belief in Darwinism Is Up

The results of a new Harris Poll.

|

The UPI describes the results of a new Harris poll:

Betty stands athwart biology, yelling Stop.

Three-quarters of U.S. adults say they believe in God, down from 82 percent in 2005, 2007 and 2009, a Harris Poll indicates. The Harris Poll found 57 percent of U.S. adult say they believe in the virgin birth of Jesus, down from 60 percent in 2005, and 72 percent say they believe in miracles, down from 79 percent in 2005, while 68 percent say they believe in heaven, down from 75 percent. Sixty-eight percent say they believe Jesus is God or the son of God, down from 72 percent; and 65 percent say they believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, down from 70 percent.

Sixty-four percent say they believe in the survival of the soul after death, down from 69 percent in 2005; 58 percent say they believe in the devil, down from 62 percent; 58 percent say they believe in hell, down from 62 percent.

Forty-seven percent say they believe in Darwin's theory of evolution, compared to 42 percent in 2005.

Note that while Darwin's trendline is the only one moving upward, his number of believers is still lower than the figures posted by everything before it on that list. Darwinism does come in ahead of creationism, which according to Harris has captured the beliefs of just 36 percent of America's adults. Ghosts get 42 percent.

NEXT: LA Fire Department Changes Policy Regarding Response to Shootings

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. How exactly is the acknowledgement of evolution necessarily inconsistent with the belief in God?

    1. I don’t think it is.

      1. 75 percent and 47 percent. It obviously isn’t.

        1. What Jesse said.

      2. There is nothing more easily refuted than evolution. Not only has Fairhust already disproved evolution in a 500 page masterpiece, but darwin only ever witnessed adaptation which is nothing like evolution.

        Finally, the 4 chambered heart and vascular system has no natural selective mechanism to evolve.

        There is a reason the idea things evolved, was hypothesized in an era of hukan history when we ourselves think we are progressing.

        Evolution is puting man into creation.

        The heart and vascular system consists of 5 separate vessels and the 4 chambered heart and such like organs are found without common ancestry.

        The fact prokaryotes evolved into eikaryotes and is the supposed common ancestor of all eukaryotic life, happened only once in 3 billion years, while prokaryotes still lived, is proof that evolution could not have happened randomly therefore did not happen at all.

        And the faint sun paradox proves the sun was too faint to support life or liquid water as early as 2 billion years ago.

        Evolutionists are fucking stupid.

        1. Chuck Missler’s On Genesis is a physicists view of Genesis and explains very well how the Earth was created and science supports this.

          By saying everything is really old is a copout to explain things far beyond human understanding at this time.

          1. If everything were billions of years old then the universe is actually distorted.

            The galaxy is 100,000ly across but it is also rotating at an arc-distance of X.

            We perceive A and B as a strait line.

            But A is actually at A+X when B is our current location.

            Therefore the harmonious view of the galaxy is not possible because straight line we see is actually curved and is a line from A+X to B.

            I cant draw the diagram so sorry if my text explaination explains nothing….but because of this distortion the universe we see is not possible if it is very old.

    2. Because the fossil record which supports evolution is a timeline of several hundred million years. Some people think Yahweh created the world 6000 years ago. Somethings got to give.

      1. And if you keep the Biblical chronology, then you sort of have to assume that God is just fucking with us by putting those fossils in the ground.

        1. I definitely believe God put those fossils in place. But it’s the interests of Big Dinosaur that keep suppressing the truth.

          1. And the devil invented every field of science that proves the universe is billions of years old, which happens to be be virtually all of them.

            1. You are a troll.
              Mary?

              1. It’s all an anti-Christian conspiracy. We’ve been persecuted for 2,000 years or something. Now this “science” thingy is putting the last nail in the coffin.

                1. Science makes Baby Jesus colicky.

      2. Some people think Yahweh created the world 6000 years ago.

        I don’t get Biblical literalists. So much of the language and imagery in the bible is obviously symbolic.

        1. Like the part where god said it’s totally cool to sell your daughter into slavery. Obviously that was an allegory for…erm… babysitting or something. fytw!

            1. I’ll cite, sure. You’re affirming the validity of this book and don’t know what’s in it? Sort of a Nancy Pelosi approach to supernatural beliefs, but to each his own.

              Exodus 21:7

              I can find some passages where your god overtly legitimizes rape and genocide too. Maybe even genocidal baby rape, who knows? It’s just full of moral life lessons for you to rationalize and cherry-pick.

              1. Old Testament pertains to Jews not Christians, unless one is Messianic Jew.

                1. If the OT only pertains to Jews and not modern Christians then why the emphasis on the 10 commandments?

                2. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” (Matthew 5:17-18)

                3. OK, cool. Then let’s get rid of the Garden of Eden and Origina Sin. Oops. No more Sacrifice and Redemption. Oops. No more Jesus. Oops. No more iron age fairy tale. Doh!

            2. Oh, neato. You quoted a book that’s a couple thousand years old with no documented original author. Clearly, some supernatural being must have written it down and made that a decree.

              1. Oh, neato. You quoted a book that’s a couple thousand years old with no documented original author. Clearly, some supernatural being must have written it down and made that a decree.

                lol yes I quoted a factually invalid tome with questionable authorship, aka the Bible.

                I certainly don’t believe a supernatural being wrote anything down. I’ll leave that kind of stuff to you and your irrational ilk.

                1. “I certainly don’t believe a supernatural being wrote anything down. I’ll leave that kind of stuff to you and your irrational ilk.”

                  Me and my ilk are Agnostic and not Christian. You realize Charles Darwin was a pretty devout member of the Church of England, right?

                  1. Yep. Where did I say or imply anything about Charles Darwin? You have been straw-manning me up and down this thread. Albeit my greatest mistake was assuming that were a Christian because you’re so eager to shift the burden of proof and defend Christianity.

                  2. You realize Charles Darwin was a pretty devout member of the Church of England, right?

                    Not after his trip on the Beagle and the formulation of his theories on natural selection.

            3. 5 minutes on the site and i can already tell Sy is a dirty, dirty, ignorant troll.

              why do you guys feed him?

              -FFM

              1. ^good question

          1. Just don’t sell Liam Neeson’s daughter into slavery. Trust me.

            1. or Harrison Ford for that matter…

          2. I’m no historian, but I suspect that you were expected to sell them off as servants because neither you nor they had any marketable skills, and selling them into indentured servitude was the more attractive alternative to homelessness?

            1. That’s a good rationalization for selling your daughter into sex slavery. Do you have good rationalization for biblical genocide too?

              If it the lack of moral scruples was a product of the time and should thus be overlooked, then why use that outdated book as a moral code for the modern the world? You can’t have it both ways.

              1. You are presuming that the daughters are being sold into sex slavery. I am not.

                I don’t view the moral climate as a “lack of moral scruples” as you do. I see it merely as different morals. I know that you probably know everything, and you are the most just and wise human on earth, and only people born after some arbitrary date can be that as well, but there are actually entirely other cultures that exist and have existed, and they might well want to treat their people fairly as well, and they just have different ways of going about it. If you weren’t a bigot, you’d be able to see that other cultures can get some things wrong and other things right. They might get more things right than we do, it’s hard to tell. The bible, as I understand it, is heavily a book about morals. If you want to read it as evil rape morals, you can, but my guess is that you’re probably missing something if that’s what you see. I doubt the bible is meant to instruct parents to sell their daughters to rapists. Is there a tiny chance that the bible is talking essentially about arranged marriages and/or arranged family structures?

                You and I obviously grew up in a culture where outright slavery is abhorred, but that is a new concept. Note: you are reading what I wrote on a device made in conditions that could easily be much worse than the slavery the bible describes. You get your ironic holier-than-thou attitude from the fact that you don’t have to look your slaves in the face.

        2. So much of the language and imagery in the bible is like 7th-hand and has been translated, with questionable veracity, 3 or 4 times.

          1. Yep. With each translation losing original idioms or meaning, and each new author making their own edits.

            1. So we can agree all that Judeo-Christian stuff is nonsense, good.

              1. I agree 100%. But this idea that being a practicing Jewish or Christian means that you can’t have a “scientific mind” is patently false. And this idea that being religious means you have to be a creationist is irrational.

                1. I didn’t say that. There have been plenty of theist scientists. But as I’ve already said, the ones who are open minded enough to accept evidence that conflicts with their supernatural beliefs, they are cherry-pickers. Which is great. I wish more Muslims, Christians and Jews were cherry-pickers. They’re preferable to the alternative.

                  But cherry-picking carries certain intellectual hazards, which cast further doubt as to the veracity of their supernatural claims.

                  1. FS, I didn’t say “all of the language is symbolic,” I implied a lot of it was. That’s because it is.

                    Also, I’m an atheist. And what Sy said @ 2:15.

                    1. Ignore it. It’s a troll. Learn from my misgivings.

                    2. Ignore it. It’s a troll. Learn from my misgivings

                      He’s apt to learn so much from your ad Hominem approach to debate.

                    3. FS, I didn’t say “all of the language is symbolic,” I implied a lot of it was. That’s because it is.

                      I never said that. You’re misquoting.

                  2. Wow, you’re so incredibly wise. So much smarter than those idiotic religious people, who are such a plague on humanity. One thing I hate about them is how they rail against groups of people, projecting their own baggage and proving that they’re really just filled with hate, and they need to feel righteous by attacking the people who don’t look at the world in their own dogmatic way. Sure, none of them are doing it here, only YOU are doing it here, but they’re out there, those hypocrites…

                    1. Do you feel persecuted?

                2. Being religious by definition does mean that you’re accepting supernatural claims as true. There are plenty of Christian scientists but that’s not to say that Christianity is conducive to science and learning.

                  Christians by and large believe in their creation myths and defend those myths against any evidence to the contrary. To say creationists are vastly in the minority is unquestionably false. Look at the statistics. Most Christians look at atheists as lower than rapists and less trustworthy in promoting morality than the Taliban. Most self-identified Christians disavow evolution. Something like 50% of the US favors creationism as a superior explanation to evolution.

                  Don’t try to paint ‘religious people’ as being the epitome of reasonable. Truth is, the reasonable ones are welcome exceptions to the rule, not the norm.

                  1. ^^ this.

                    you cant believe your imaginary friend is real and claim you have a scientific mind. you can still do science, but if you had a true scientific mind, you wouldnt have imaginary friends to begin with.

                    the “norm” is mouth breathing, low IQ, “i cant deal w/ life so i need someone to tell me im awesome 24/7 even if i rape puppies to death because my mother molested my anus like it was going out of style” types.

                    they are everywhere, and they dont know SHIT about science, not a damn thing.

                    -FFM

      3. The Catholic schools I went to taught that Genesis is largely allegory.

        In high school, my biology teacher taught evolution, as described by Darwin and didn’t get into Theological questions. My theology teachers in high school taught that Gensis is allegory and that God guided evolution.

        By the way, I never heard Intelligent Design called as such until after I got out of high school.

        1. I should add two things. The reason given by my teachers in high school for for Genesis being allegory is the number of translations and copying, and that errors have certainly creeped in. I never got the impression that what was taught at my schools were outside the mainstream of Catholic thought at the time.

    3. I have always thought that the God who sets up the universe in such a way that life and all of the other amazing things in the universe just happen through mechanical processes is much more impressive than the God who has to micromanage and interfere in every little thing.
      Unless you believe that every word of the Bible is exactly literally true, I don’t know why anyone would think that there is an inherent opposition of religion and science.

      1. in many ways, this becomes its own version of Team. Man has free will and a conscience to separate him from other creatures. Isaac Newton believed that science did more to prove the existence of a god than the other way around.

      2. A scientific mind does not accept supernatural claims at face value. Religions do. There is inherent difference in that one is predicated on reason and the other on superstition.

    4. This baffles me.

      Natural selection describes a phenomenon. It’s indisputably true that culling organisms that can’t hack it in their environment will load the dice in favor of the genes of organisms that *can* hack it producing the next generation.

      It in no way prevents a Creator from bringing the universe into being, or creating mankind.

      I have noticed with scientific illiterates, ‘evolution’ has become a label for not believing in a universe created by conscious will; the illiterates really don’t understand what natural selection is or how it functions. So depending on what they believe in, they either are fer or agin’ ‘Evolution’.

    5. It’s inconsistent with creationism, to be sure, but I don’t see any problems otherwise.

    6. As an atheist, I’ve often wondered the same thing, but you’d be better off asking the legions of Young Earth Creationists. There’s no shortage of Christians that claim you can only believe in the evidence of the natural world, or the bible, but not both.

      But they do make a good point. The only Christians who are open-minded enough to accept scientific evidence even when it conflicts with their supernatural beliefs, are themselves cherry-pickers. But being a irrational cherry-picker is still more reasonable than an irrational zealot.

      1. Show us on the doll where the Priests touched you..

        1. Apparently not the same place where they touched you. Do your loins throb as you take Jesus inside of you?

          1. I don’t believe in him, so that doesn’t work. Kinda like vampires, you have to invite them in or something.

            1. Jehovah’s Witnesses you mean.

              1. No, a pressure washer works just fine for that.

    7. Because what you mean by God is not necessarily what *I* mean.

      If you’re using God as a name for some entity that created the universe, that’s one thing – evolution isn’t necessarily incompatible with that.

      If you’re using the word for the Christian god and all the attributes that word denotes then yes – evolution is very incompatible with Christianity (Pope’s proclamations to the contrary notwithstanding).

      Bible gives a very specific description of the creation of the universe, origin of life and man which evolutionary theory (and all physical evidence) contradicts.

      *Some* Christians get around this by claiming that those portions of the bible are ‘allegorical’ and not to be read literally. The only problem then is how you distinguish between the stuff that’s ‘allegory’ and the stuff that’s ‘word of God’?

      1. The Bible doesn’t say that the Bible is the word of God and completely true and correct about everything. That’s just how some people have interpreted it. There is no real inconsistency in being a believer and also thinking that the Bible is largely or even entirely allegorical or symbolic.

        1. Yes there is – you can say that the bible teaches moral truth and I’d accept that (though it teaches some pretty bad morals IMO) but its hard for me to imagine actually believing in the Christian god when the book’s descriptions of reality diverge so much from observed reality.

          If *some* of the book is allegorical/symbolic, then why isn’t God?

    8. The acknowledgement of both is definitely not necessarily inconsistent. However, evolution provides a powerful explanation for how incredible complexity can arise from a combination of small, random changes and gene/population/natural selection over long periods of time. It provides an explanation that needs no outside guiding omnipresent force to work.

      Someone who accepts that may start to wonder why we have good explanations for how pockets of complexity in the universe gradually build, but no explanation for how infinite God complexity just exists outside of that. They might also consider that if we can explain the workings of the natural world without the intervention of a god, then there either might not be a god, or if there is a “god,” it does not mean anything since it does not do anything.

    9. How exactly is the acknowledgement of evolution necessarily inconsistent with the belief in God?

      That would depend on which version of god(s) you prefer.

    10. There is nothing more easily refuted than evolution. Not only has Fairhust already disproved evolution in a 500 page masterpiece, but darwin only ever witnessed adaptation which is nothing like evolution.

      Finally, the 4 chambered heart and vascular system has no natural selective mechanism to evolve.

      There is a reason the idea things evolved, was hypothesized in an era of hukan history when we ourselves think we are progressing.

      Evolution is puting man into creation.

      The heart and vascular system consists of 5 separate vessels and the 4 chambered heart and such like organs are found without common ancestry.

      The fact prokaryotes evolved into eikaryotes and is the supposed common ancestor of all eukaryotic life, happened only once in 3 billion years, while prokaryotes still lived, is proof that evolution could not have happened randomly therefore did not happen at all.

      And the faint sun paradox proves the sun was too faint to support life or liquid water as early as 2 billion years ago.

      Evolutionists are fucking stupid.

  2. I believe I’ll have another beer….

    /vacation

  3. Darwinism does come in ahead of creationism, which according to Harris has captured the beliefs of just 36 percent of America’s adults. Ghosts get 42 percent.

    Now, listen: ghosts are fucking real, man.

    1. Carl: You’re the Ghost of Christmas Past…right?

      Cybernetic Ghost: That is correct.

      Carl: Okay, well…I mean, you know that it’s February…right?

      Cybernetic Ghost: [pause] I am a robot.

      Carl: Well, you know, obviously. What are you, stupid?

      Cybernetic Ghost: [stutters] I will see you in December, tomorrow!

      Carl: Okay, whatever there, just lock your door on the way-

      Cybernetic Ghost: [breaks through the wall] Do what?

      Carl: Nevermind, just leave!

      1. +10000 years ago in the future

  4. New poll: Betty or Veronica?

      1. I now have new reading material.

          1. “Hey, baby, can I stick it in your piehole?”

      2. I like the way you think, though I prefer her friend Patty Melt.

  5. “Evolution” has become nothing more than a rallying cry for idiots that have a raging hardon against Christians. They don’t understand evolution beyond “Charles Darwin invented evolution when he dug up a monkey skeleton in Africa. #sciencesezso”.

    1. Yeah, I’d wager that a large percentage of those who claim to believe in evolution disbelieve in some of its trivial consequences.

    2. Here I thought Christians got the raging hardon against anyone who makes any claims contrary to their antiquated supernatural beliefs. Tis true, science was invented by Devil, just like dinosaur bones and all rocks older than 6,000 years…

      1. I’ve had Jewish and Christian microbiology professors who have no problem bringing up their religious backgrounds in lecture. Sorry to bust your fucked up narrative.

        1. So… creationists don’t exist? Sorry, didn’t mean to persecute you.

          1. PFFFT. yeah, that’s totally ME making sweeping generalizations there.. Don’t be a moron and assume everyone with religious leanings is a) christian and b) a creationist

            1. You’ve got a point that there’s retarded christians out there that believe that shit but they are in the minority by a large fucking margin. Either way, your idea that one cannot hold metaphysical beliefs while pursuing physical knowledge is pretty untrue:
              “Science has nothing to do with Christ, except insofar as the habit of scientific research makes a man cautious in admitting evidence. For myself, I do not believe that there ever has been any revelation. As for a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting vague probabilities.” -Charles Darwin

              1. Where did I say you can’t can’t hold ‘metaphysical beliefs’ and pursue physical knowledge? The Pope pursues physical knowledge every time he open his eyes.

                But holding supernatural beliefs to a higher standard and by requiring disbelievers to bear the burden of proof is not rational. By all means, don’t pass off metaphysical beliefs as if they were factual things and then I’ll accept that Christians are just sooo tolerant.

                1. “But holding supernatural beliefs to a higher standard and by requiring disbelievers to bear the burden of proof is not rational.”

                  I’m curious to see where it is you’re meeting all of these people who are both christian and creationists.. because I imagine your experience is pretty abnormal. There’s a lot of people that take that shit literally but by no means is it a majority.

                  1. I’m curious to see where it is you’re meeting all of these people who are both christian and creationists… There’s a lot of people that take that shit literally but by no means is it a majority.

                    Want to know where it is that I meet so many Christian creationists? Walk outside of that bubble you’ve constructed and there you will find the world. That’s the place.

                    In U.S., 46% Hold Creationist View of Human Origins
                    http://www.gallup.com/poll/155…..igins.aspx

                    http://www.usnews.com/news/blo…..-evolution

                  2. @Sy:

                    There’s a lot of people that take that shit literally but by no means is it a majority.

                    The burden of proof is on you. Provide statistical evidence of this minority of creationists within Christianity. Or strawman me again, whichever you prefer (and we both know what you prefer)

                2. Where did I say you can’t can’t hold ‘metaphysical beliefs’ and pursue physical knowledge?

                  Right here:
                  “A scientific mind does not accept supernatural claims at face value. Religions do.”

                  Well, I’m done proving you wrong for the day. You might want to actually read up on the writings and lives of the greatest scientific minds of the past several centuries. Then again, your head my explode from realizing how many of them believed in that icky God concept.

                  1. That’s not what I said at all. I love that you show your straw-man strategy plain as day and then immediately claim victory.

                    “A Fox News poll released Wednesday found 77 percent of voters believe prayers can help someone heal from an injury or illness…”

                    “Those groups most likely to believe prayer literally heals include those who regularly attend religious services (93 percent), white evangelical Christians (91 percent), blacks (89 percent), conservatives (85 percent), and those who are part of the Tea Party movement (84 percent).”

                    http://www.foxnews.com/politic…..eationism/

                    1. Have some more links showing how utterly wrong you are

                      (2003 but demonstrative of your lack of majority)
                      http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08…..r-not.html

                      “Among white evangelical Christians, 67 percent believe in creationism, 4 percent evolution, and 24 percent accept both.”

                      http://www.outsidethebeltway.c…..eationism/

                      I’d be happy to find you more links. Where do you get the idea that the majority of Christians don’t believe in the supremacy of their creation myth over evidence based alternatives? I imagine your experience is the abnormal one considering such high proportions of believers are creationists and disavow evolution. One might even be able to say the term vast majority would apply.

            2. “Evolution” has become nothing more than a rallying cry for idiots that have a raging hardon against Christians.

              You have to admit, that’s a pretty sweeping generalization.

  6. After 8 years under BOOOOOOSH and 5 years under the Obama regime, I’m convinced there is no God.
    [except for The Obama]

  7. Mikhail Kalashnikov, the man who designed the AK47 assault rifle that bears his name, has died at the age of 94, Russian officials say.

    1. Although honoured by the state, Kalashnikov made little money from his gun.blockquote

      Yeah, imagine that – guy working in a communist ‘utopia’ doesn’t see much personal reward for his effort.

  8. Apatheism: The only way to go. IOW, shut the fuck up, both of you obnoxious cunts.

  9. Belief in God, Devil, Heaven, Hell, Miracles, the Survival of the Soul, Jesus’ Divinity, the Virgin Birth, and the Resurrection Are Down; Belief in Darwinism Is Up

    I don’t know what “Darwinism” is or means. Is it like Scientology? I only know of natural selection and I don’t go around calling it Russelism (for Alfred Russel Wallace) or Darwinism.

    1. Just call it called “Free Society-ism”. Because it’s religion for those types.

      1. So using evidence and reason to arrive at conclusions is religion. But accepting supernatural claims and shifting the burden of proof for said claims, well that’s just damned reasonable.

        1. #FreeSocietysaysso

        2. You’re like a living version of the first paragraph of a middle school science textbook. Dude. Stop creaming your pants over evidence based science and its triumph over “supernatural myths”. Did it ever occur to you that you have been conditioned to see the world this way? Instead of continuing on your crusade, I challenge you to look for some of the gaping flaws in the ideology that you were raised to regurgitate all over this forum. Consider how similar your dogma is to that of the religious people that you’re so superior to. Seriously consider it.

          1. Someone who promotes reason is the one who has been conditioned to see the world a certain way? Not the ones who are instilled with religious superstition from a young age?

            The scientific method is not an ideology. It’s a protocol for rationally analyzing information.

            1. What part of the scientific method dictates that you visit discussion threads to boastfully attack vast segments of the population?

            2. I can far far better reason that Christ is the Lord than you can reason that God is anything other than what the Bible witnesses and testifies.

    2. I don’t know what “Darwinism” is or means.

      Yes you do. You just prefer a different term. So do I. Evolution implies moving toward some specific outcome and Darwinism implies that Darwin figured it all out.

      1. Re: Zeb,

        Yes you do.

        I am wondering why would the poll or Reason place different religious beliefs alongside natural selection. Considering that natural selection is a scientific theory presumably impervious to a popularity test (in the way that the validity of the theory is not contingent to how many people believe in it), why would it be necessary to ask people if they believe in natural selection?

        1. The write-up of the poll said “Darwin’s theory of evolution,” so “Darwinism” is what I wrote. As you surely know, there are other theories of evolution.

  10. Three-quarters of U.S. adults say they believe in God, down from 82 percent in 2005, 2007 and 2009, a Harris Poll indicates.

    I guess it is firtunate that the belief in God does not preclude a person from harboring a belief in the State. If the two were mutually-exclusive, the so-called War on Christmas (which is in reality a kind of guerrilla war on Christianity itself) would be a harmless office prank compared to what would come from the media and the bureaucracy.

  11. All this discussion is missing a very important element: How many believe in voodoo?

    1. Look, I go to you. I stick up for you. But you don’t help me now.

      I say “Fuck you,” Jobu. I do it myself.

  12. If you ask Sy, he’ll tell you that the “vast fucking majority” of Voodoo practitioners don’t believe in magic or witchcraft. Ask him for evidence or provide him with counter evidence and he’ll claim victory and vanish like a fart in the wind.

  13. What about the level of belief in man-made climate change, despite the lack of evidence?

    1. At least that debate is capable of being empirically settled.

  14. somewhere someone w/ a pabst and a nascar game on is screaming “THESE POLLS ARE AN ATTACK ON CHRISTIANITY”.

    my reply: “i should be mining on jupiter”

    only in the sick, twisted mind of the religious does reasoning and truth = oppression.

    -FFM

    1. Didn’t you know? Christians have been constantly persecuted. You know like when atheists ruled Europe for close to two-thousand years torturing innocent believers…oh wait

      1. Catholics suppressed the Bible and the true Church so dont go claiming them to have acted as Christians tho there were certainly Christians within Catholicism they had little temporal power.

    2. Christianity is a religion built upon and using reason and the only way to examine Christianity is judicially as if in a trial with examination and cross-examination.

      I can far better reason and defend my faith than you can your blind belief in man, creation and your flawed scientific myths.

      Just realize that as a person arguing against God using science, you are only a lay person who has very little understanding if any at all about how the universe works.

      But I can apply the same scientific method to the Bible and prove it is a revealed truth full of prophecy and complete from beginning to end with no discrepancy.

  15. The mathematicians Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, co-authors of “Evolution from Space” wrote (after acknowledging that they had been atheists all their lives):
    “Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect DELIBERATE… It is therefore, almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligences… even to the limit of God.”

    William West has written, “More recent evidence does not just indicate fine tuning, but fine tuning on a staggering scale — an infinitesimal, mind-bending level of tuning. In short, if the values for any of a range of fundamental physical constants, like gravity or fundamental particles, had been different by one part in trillions upon trillions there would be no stars, planets or life…”

    So science itself shows that there is no conceivable possibility that there is no God. In other words, it is absurd not to believe in intelligent design and creation. Atheism is intellectual infantilism.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.