Poll finds more Americans believe in devil than Darwin
.
DALLAS (Reuters) - More Americans believe in a literal hell and the devil than Darwin's theory of evolution, according to a new Harris poll released on Thursday.
It is the latest survey to highlight America's deep level of religiosity, a cultural trait that sets it apart from much of the developed world.
It also helps explain many of its political battles which Europeans find bewildering, such as efforts to have "Intelligent Design" theory -- which holds life is too complex to have evolved by chance -- taught in schools alongside evolution.
My, my, my!
Read the rest here ...
23 comments:
Oh please you are just doing this to depress me....
IT
I find it more amazing that so many alleged Christians don't believe in him.
But then he likes it that way; makes it easier for him to work.
The Pilgrim
The same people also believe in witches.
I find it depressing that so many believe in the Devil, because that belief morphs all too easily into, "don't blame me, the Devil made me do it". C'mon, folks, we're supposed to be monotheists, not Zoroastrians or Gnostics.
NancyP
IT - surely this is news to rejoice in, not to be depressed about. If only peoples lives were more godly to conform to their beliefs. And Pilgrim - I hope that all Christians are mindful of Satan's existence, but don't believe in him in the same way we are to believe in the Lord Jesus.
It makes me wonder how the question of believing in the devil was framed and how people interpreted the question. Does believe "in" mean to know about, or putting trust in or having faith in. There is a vast difference between believe "in" and believe "about".
pilgrim,
I was always taught that the devil was a woman, or at least took the shape of one.
But you say him and he. Maybe, as daffy duck liked to say, its a question of "pwo-noun twouble" :-)
Anyway, I believe in ole beelzebub myself--a highly evolved creature to have lasted this long, if you ask me. Darwin had it nailed!
Silly pilgrim; it's not THAT you believe; it's WHAT you believe.
Susan,
So . . . you are a priest. Do you believe in Heaven? How can there be a Heaven if there is not a Hell? How can there be light if there is not darkness?
Actually, I believe in God and pretty much leave the details to Her.
But I did preach a sermon on going to heaven not long ago ... sermon was called "Jesus Saves" ... and it pretty much sums up my theology of afterlife. Check it out and let me know what you think.
I don't care whether or not you "believe" in Satan. That's a religious issue.
But to not "believe" in Darwin is waving the flag of ignorance. (And not an "either or" issue, either!)
For one thing, there is incontrovertible truth that Darwin actually existed.
What do we expect when we have candidates for president proudly proclaim that they do not believe in evolution. SHAMEFUL.
IT
NancyP said:
"I find it depressing that so many believe in the Devil..."
You might want to check scripture, if your Bishop doesn't object. Jesus had no compunctions about accepting the reality of -- and even interacting with -- Satan.
And Susan said:
"Actually, I believe in God and pretty much leave the details to Her."
And you do realize how far beyond the pale of Christianity that statement places you.
--The Pilgrim
Thanks, Pilgrim, for contextualizing my Christianity for me. Very helpful -- and how nice for you to have the power to declare where others fall in regards to "the pale."
Just out of curiosity, which part of my statement puts me beyond it ... the part about believing in God or the part about leaving the details to Her?
Happy Advent.
Pilgrim, I only believe in God. The devil is a dirty old turd. To say that you believe in him is to give him too much credit. At your baptism, did you not turn your back on Satan? Giving him the time of day only puffs up his ego and gives him more power. That is why Jesus rebukes him--he never says to him, "I believe in you."
I'm trying to figure out the conflict between the concepts of the existence of Satan and the principles of evolution.
As far as intelligent design goes, I'll support teaching it in schools when it has some scientific rigor behind it, which so far it lacks.
Dear Susan - following your reference to your sermon "Jesus saves" which I have read again; you seem to spend much more time bagging the substitutionary atonement than you do building any other reasonable explanation of how Jesus saves which takes all the Biblical evidence seriously. Remember, I asked you to explain this point further in an earlier post which has disappeared off the screen - exactly how does Jesus' death on the cross save me from fear of embracing life in all its fullness as you seem to claim in your sermon - and I am still waiting for your explanation.
As for finding a theology of the after life in that same sermon, I think you are deluding yourself. Apart from a few scant references to human attempts to create a heaven on earth by feeding the poor etc, which seems to fall far short of the glorious portrait of heaven revealed to us in the Bible of a completed construct given to us freely by God untainted by sin or evil.
If that sermon sums up your theology of the after life as you claimed it does, then it is evident to me that you have no theology of the afterlife worth any sacrifice in this life.
brian ... sorry to disappoint. I, of course, differ -- believing that the Year of the Lord's Favor Jesus proclaimed in his first sermon in Nazareth is indeed "worth" sacrificing to partner with God in making come on earth as it is in heaven.
I suppose my question is if there's no devil, what do we need saving from?
A small "geek" objection:
No fair using the noble mascot of the Univ of Calif., Berkeley's BSD Unix as the devil.
He's not a devil, he's a dæmon. Something very different ;)
Darwin didn't believe in his theory near the end of his life, so why should anybody else?
So, Susan,
Are you reducing Jesus to a mere social worker? Sure let's us off the hook for many things.
Dear Susan, while I do agree that there are things we ought to do as Christians in this life in our own lives; the Bible also points us to a reality beyond this life which far exceeds this life; and that I believe is the "after life". That is what I am waiting for you to give more explanation of. You seem to hang a lot on only 2 verses in Luke 4:18-19, while ignoring much other Biblical material in composing your theology of the after life. In any case, the point of Luke 4:18-19 is not so much to engage us in God's mission (that is referred to elsewhere) but to point to the fact of who this man is standing before them in the synagogue, and that in him and with his presence all the Scriptures are fulfilled.
Again, while our work on earth of doing charitable work for the poor, the hungry, the oppressed and so on is worthy; we will never produce heaven on earth in all its fulness, and our attempts at building heaven on earth will always fall far short of the glory of God and the final state of things.
Susan said...
"Thanks, Pilgrim, for contextualizing my Christianity for me. Very helpful -- and how nice for you to have the power to declare where others fall in regards to "the pale."
No no no. Not me. This is the context in which TEC has placed itself by its own actions. I don't, can't and won't make that judgement. I do look around and see what the overwhelming majority of Christians in the world are saying and doing, however. Christendom did not consign TEC to a place outside its borders, TEC looked at the line in the sand (the same line that has been in the same place for 2,000 years), and knowingly, willingly stepped across. No one dragged you over the line, no one drew it around you while you weren't looking. If the overwhelming majority of Christians consider you "beyond the pale," it is because you have said "this is where we stand." Everything else is Christendom acknowledging your choice and taking appropriate actions.
The Pilgrim
allen ... no, actually, no I'm not.
brian ... i'm kind of up to my alb in advent at the moment so the best i can do is quote a colleague who once said his idea of being a Christian was following a Jesus who talked a LOT less about getting to heaven than he did about getting heaven to earth.
i'm sticking with "if we think the point of getting to heaven is getting to heaven then we've missed the point of getting to heaven."
and now, back to all-advent-all-the-time
Allen,
Actually, the whole story of Darwin recanting his views on evolution is nothing more than urban myth. Not even Answers in Genesis is inclined to give the tale any credibility.
Post a Comment