Home » Creation vs Evolution » The Clergy Letter Project

The Clergy Letter Project

The entire Clergy Letter Project (below) is what led to the celebration of evolution Sunday. It demonstrates the sad compromise that many churches are taking. The letter below reminds us of the words of Peter who says in 2 Peter 3:3-7:

“Knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.’ For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God,and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.” (2 Peter 3:3-3:7)

The article was retrieved August 20, 2006 from: http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/religion_science_collaboration.htm

An Open Letter Concerning Religion and Science

We’ve reached our goal of gathering 10,000 clergy signatures. 

Within the community of Christian believers there are areas of dispute and disagreement, including the proper way to interpret Holy Scripture. While virtually all Christians take the Bible seriously and hold it to be authoritative in matters of faith and practice, the overwhelming majority do not read the Bible literally, as they would a science textbook. Many of the beloved stories found in the Bible – the Creation, Adam and Eve, Noah and the ark – convey timeless truths about God, human beings, and the proper relationship between creator and creation expressed in the only form capable of transmitting these truths from generation to generation. Religious truth is of a different order from scientific truth. Its purpose is not to convey scientific information but to transform hearts.

We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth.

Signatures are current as of 18 August 2006
10,366 signatures collected to date

About Douglas


  1. Yeah! A celebration of rational thought and thinking! There are some intelligence in the clergy after all…

    • Hello JH, I see the Clergy Letter Project as a very sad testimony of how far professing Christians have fallen from the truth. Even Darwin himself admitted that he was speculating. It is funny how evolution has become such a religion with no facts to support it and yet clergy like above seem to think that it is an absolute fact. Consider that Darwin wrote, “I am quite conscious that my speculations run
      quite beyond the bounds of true science.” Quoted in N.C. Gillespie (1979:2) Charles
      Darwin and the Problem of Creation

      Then consider what L.H. Matthews wrote about Evolution of the Species: “The fact of evolution is the
      backbone of biology and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a
      science founded on unproven theory. 
      Is it then a science or a faith?  Belief
      in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special
      creation…” L. H. Matthews – Introduction to Darwin’s (1971 edition) Origin
      of the Species

      How can you praise the Clergy Letter project when it is such silliness which even Darwin and the guy writing the forward to his book state the opposite: evolution is not a fact – but is speculation?

      • You have really missed some development the last 150 years or so. Sad.

        • Hello JH,

          Well…I would love to hear of which examples you are specifically speaking about. There is no evidence in favor of macro-evolution. Since Darwin penned that statement, millions of fossils have been found, but none of them are
          “missing links” needed to substantiate his ideas.  This is not only according to young-earth
          arguments (consistent with six literal days of creation), but also according to
          numerous evolutionists. 


          The geological column, drawn in detailed tables in text
          books, is the basis of the dating of the evolutionary stages.  Ironically, this column, which is at the
          heart of the evolutionary time-scale, is merely a construct, a mental
          abstraction (Encyclopedia Britannica 1985: 779).  Derek Ager, past president of the British
          Geological Association notes: “Nowhere in the world is the record, or even part
          of it, anywhere near complete” (Ager 1993: 14). 


          The geological column is the primary way by which fossils
          and rocks are dated.  When a fossil is
          found, the rocks around it are checked to determine the age of the fossil and
          vice versa, when a particular rock is found, it is compared to the surrounding
          fossils to determine its age.  This type
          of circular reasoning is noted by several evolutionists.


          J. E. O’Rourke, in the American Journal of Science
          states: “The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more
          accurately” (O’Rourke, Volume 276: 51). 
          R. H. Rastal of Cambridge
          plainly acknowledges, “It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical
          standpoint geologists are here arguing in a circle.”  He then further defines what he means by
          circularity: ”The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of
          their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are
          determined by the organisms that they contain” 
          (Encyclopedia Britannica 1976: 168).


          evolutionist, Tom Kemp of Oxford,
          also is aware of the circular reasoning involved in the dating of the
          geological column.  He states: “A
          circular argument arises: Interpret the fossil record in the terms of a
          particular theory of evolution, inspect the interpretation, and note that it
          confirms the theory” (Kemp 1985: 67).


          D. B. Kitts of the University of Oklahoma stated regarding the circular
          foundation of the geological column in Evolution, Volume 28: “But the
          danger of circularity is still present. 
          The temporal ordering of biological events beyond the local section may critically
          involve paleontological correlation [the geological column]” (Kitts 1974:
          466).  Kitts goes on to say “for almost
          all contemporary paleontologists it [the geological column] rests upon the
          acceptance of the evolutionary hypothesis” (ibid).  

          If you are really interested in finding the truth both biblically and scientifically, I will send you my book free of charge or I can send you the e-book.  

          • Then you simply missed out in elementary biology classes. Sorry. Update yourself a bit and come back to the real world-

          • JH, The elementary biology classes are where the problem starts – they tell unsuspecting students half truths and because they are experts, the students don’t suspect anything. I see that you didn’t read what L.H. Matthews had to say – who was writing in the Darwin’s book itself. Does such a statement mean nothing to you? You see, once we get past elementary biology we begin to discover some things that don’t fit the standard paradigm. Modern biology is based on the presupposition that (macro) evolution is true. (I believe in adaptation or micro-evolution). 

          • sigh, if I had a dime for every… To begin with there is no such thing as micro and macro evolution. So you can start there. And while your at it, you can feel free to put forth your own theory of genetics. When you passed that hurdle and gotten it per reviewed and with repeatable experiment that fits with available facts, then, by all means please come back. Until then you simply have no case.

            There is a reason why theory of evolution has been the standard model, and that is the fact that it _works_. And the fact that it just have gone from strength to strength as we gained new insights in sciences which wheren’t even on the radar for Darwin and co. in Short please by all means, feel free to come up with your own theory, but for you to succeed you must do a better job than the current one.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: