Evolution vs. Intelligent Design

[kiefers]

Quote:
Originally Posted by PEZenfuego http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/280#post_3491520
Building bridges is a metaphor for advancing the world. It was not meant to be taken at face-value and insinuate that scientists are responsible for literally building bridges.
I do believe that religious classes should be offered, but not forced. Whether we like it or not, Christianity is a part of our culture and learning about our culture (as well as other cultures) is important. And I see nothing wrong with teaching evolution in the classroom. I was taught about evolution since forth grade, but the word was avoided like the plague. It was subtle. Teaching a biology class without teaching evolution is silly. As is teaching creationism as a science. But religion is important and should be offered. I'd take a class on biblical literature if it was offered in high school. I will almost certainly take one here in college.
to some degree religion and science do co-inside, however, it's really how one interprets both sides.
Personally I love biology, and all the micro's and other ologies there is, so I can viualize their beginnings and ends, I went to christian schools growing up and can see the point that flower makes as well, So, I make the choice, (funny how I keep bringning this up), to beleive in both.
I could careless about Adam and Eve, the serpant, or if i came from a monkey. don't care. I am a walking bag of the four major elements, and live. So be it
I try very hard to follow gods laws and the laws of Ceaser both.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiefers http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491521
to some degree religion and science do co-inside, however, it's really how one interprets both sides.
Personally I love biology, and all the micro's and other ologies there is, so I can viualize their beginnings and ends, I went to christian schools growing up and can see the point that flower makes as well, So, I make the choice, (funny how I keep bringning this up), to beleive in both.
I could careless about Adam and Eve, the serpant, or if i came from a monkey. don't care. I am a walking bag of the four major elements, and live. So be it
I try very hard to follow gods laws and the laws of Ceaser both.
Et tu Brute?

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by PEZenfuego http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/280#post_3491520
Building bridges is a metaphor for advancing the world. It was not meant to be taken at face-value and insinuate that scientists are responsible for literally building bridges.
I do believe that religious classes should be offered, but not forced. Whether we like it or not, Christianity is a part of our culture and learning about our culture (as well as other cultures) is important. And I see nothing wrong with teaching evolution in the classroom. I was taught about evolution since forth grade, but the word was avoided like the plague. It was subtle. Teaching a biology class without teaching evolution is silly. As is teaching creationism as a science. But religion is important and should be offered. I'd take a class on biblical literature if it was offered in high school. I will almost certainly take one here in college.
Hi Pez, While building bridges can be a metaphor for advancing the world, and it's often said to take a leap of faith...the picture you posted was a slur. It meant that religion teaches people to be stupid and bury thier heads in the ground by closing their eyes. And that if you had any brains you would follow science, open your eyes and do something constructive.
Christianity may indeed be part of the culture...the people who originally set up our country didn't want the Catholic church in charge anymore, and gave the people the right to choose how they would worship. I used to be a Christian, I loved God and still do with a whole heart...when I discoverd Christianity was mingled with pagan beliefs ...I was mortified, since in scripture to do that was to spit in Gods face and insult him. I went searching for a religion that was more pure to what The Most Holy would be pleased with, and accept as true worship. After much soul searching and study (I even read the Quran)...I went with Judaism 100% That was 15 years ago.
I know I am considered a fanatic, and I take the stand that it's not about religion, but about knowing God...really knowing him. I take religion very seriously, it's my way of life and I'm obsessed with pleasing and getting to know The Creator. Most people have religion as self expression...some really love God and are every bit as fanatical as I am....all they know is Christianity and have no idea that pagan junk has been infused with it, some of those people are as mortified to find that out as I was. Others don't think God is all that picky, they worship him and believe in him and think he won't care.
Some people worship 100+ gods such as the Hindus, some worship a goddess like the wicca people. Some people have made atheism into a religion, and pursue that with a belly full of fire. Some are into Islam. Some people are still seeking, and have not made up thier minds on how to worship, but are sure God is out there somewhere. No matter what religion we follow or trust...LOL...we are all absolutly certain that our way is best, and correct above all others.
Since I personally consider Chrstianity to be evil, and others while Christian follow...Catholic, Baptist, Holiness penticostal, Methodist, Jehovah witness, new age, and a slew of other factions...then toss in Islam, atheism and wicca....all of them fight against each others beliefs. So you can't have a religion based class because nobody can agree on it. We already have teaching classes in every church and they are based on the religion of choice...so take your pick.
Religion absolutly does not belong in school. I don't want my grandkids even exposed to some of the (my precieved) junk people call religion, and believe me, all who really follow their religion feel the same way. The only ones who do want religion taught are the seekers...they want everything laid out on a table so they can decide. I am afraid the search for something as important as a lifetime dedication to God, is not that simple. What we select, and how dedicated we are about that selection, will shape our lives, and affect how our children think.
I persoanlly don't have a problem with biology being taught in the schools. There is nothing wrong with teaching about carbon dating and how old scientists think the world around us is. I don't mind them teaching about Darwin's THEORY...as long as they explain a theory is not so solid it can't be imporved on as knowledge increases. To say WE THINK it happened this way, is very different than teaching our children that it happened that way.

 

[snakeblitz33]

Theories are theories because they can be improved upon or disproved. Not because they cant change at all.
I went to Christian schools growing up as well, and when one of my religion teachers told me I was going to Hell because i didnt have their belief system, i lost all respect for modern Christianity.
I dont think religion should be taught in public schools. Religion is up to the parents to teach their kids. If you want your kid to learn religion, send them to a private school affiliated with a church. But, even then, some of those private school and churh combos can become a compound and a little cultish. I just ,..... Ugh.

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBlitz33 http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491535
Theories are theories because they can be improved upon or disproved. Not because they cant change at all. The problem is that they are not telling the kids it's a theory, they are telling the kids that Darwin was correct and here is the timeline...then the monkey transforming into a man poster is shown...that is unacceptable to me.
I went to Christian schools growing up as well, and when one of my religion teachers told me I was going to Hell because i didnt have their belief system, i lost all respect for modern Christianity.
I dont think religion should be taught in public schools. Religion is up to the parents to teach their kids. If you want your kid to learn religion, send them to a private school affiliated with a church. But, even then, some of those private school and churh combos can become a compound and a little cultish. I just ,..... Ugh.
I could not agree more.
When my kids were in school the teacher went around the room asking each student to tell her what they got from Santa...when she got to my son he said "nothing, mom won't let him in the house"

I don't think it's fair to subject our kids to their Xmas nonsense either. My granddaughter came home with some oats the teacher mixed glitter in it to feed Santas reindeer...she sat up all night by the front room window, and cried because they never showed up. I told her they were not real but her teacher told her they were...teachers are the smartest people in the world to a child.

 

[pezenfuego]

That's because they are teaching science. What's wrong with teaching science in a science class? So you don't think a class on religion should be an optional elective?

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by PEZenfuego http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491539
That's because they are teaching science. What's wrong with teaching science in a science class? So you don't think a class on religion should be an optional elective?
Which religion? How many witch incantations would you want your child to learn? How about Islam and teaching them everyone else is an infidel.....Oh heres a great one...Holy Ghost filled speaking in tongues or you are doomed to be burned in hell fire forever...Maybe voodoo, you know cutting off the chickens feet and dancing into oblivion.
GASP!!!! Judaism, where Jesus is not a demigod (half god half man) and one of three gods that are actually one!!!
Darwins theory is no more solid science than religion is. He made a hypothesis that all living things stem from one common organism by chance...it has not been proven to be a stable reliable line of thought, it's riddled with holes...BIG HOLES. There is evolution, and that is a science on biology, and it has been proven that creatures have indeed evolved over time. People assume evolution and Darwin's theory are the same, they are not. Darwin and religion both claim the beginnig of all living things. True biology science does not assume anything, and it's only objective is to study what is already there.
The question of whether people came from a single organism by chance, or a single spoken word from God...is not science. IMO

 

[geridoc]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491540
Darwins theory is no more solid science than religion is. He made a hypothesis that all living things stem from one common organism by chance...it has not been proven to be a stable reliable line of thought, it's riddled with holes...BIG HOLES. There is evolution, and that is a science on biology, and it has been proven that creatures have indeed evolved over time. People assume evolution and Darwin's theory are the same, they are not. Darwin and religion both claim the beginnig of all living things. True biology science does not assume anything, and it's only objective is to study what is already there.
The question of whether people came from a single organism by chance, or a single spoken word from God...is not science. IMO
There is a very big difference between science and religion,one that you yourself have acknowledged in previous posts. Religion is unchanging, and requires no objective examination. You have said that these are your beliefs, and that is fine. OTOH, science is constantly changing as the result of challenges mounted by practitioners against the current interpretation of data. Additionally, religion does, as you say, deal with the beginning of all living things. Darwin's theory of evolution makes absolutely no claims about the beginnings of life - it is only an explanation of how all this diversity in living organisms arose. Could you please enlighten me about those big holes in evolution - I'm not denying the existence of gaps in our understanding, but most of those are pretty subtle (sympatric vs. allopatric speciation, for example, or the role of "dark matter" DNA), and really mainly concern research biologists. The main outline of evolution is on very solid ground, with no big holes that I am aware of.
Your last question, "whether people came from a single organism by chance, or a single spoken word from God...is not science" poses a false dichotomy. There are other possibilities (aliens, for example, or on a meteorite), but the scientific evidence favors all life having a common ancestor. A person's personal beliefs notwithstanding, that's the scientific evidence, and is open to reinterpretation should new evidence emerge. However, for more than 150 years people have been trying to disprove that idea, with no success.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491538
I could not agree more.
When my kids were in school the teacher went around the room asking each student to tell her what they got from Santa...when she got to my son he said "nothing, mom won't let him in the house"

I don't think it's fair to subject our kids to their Xmas nonsense either. My granddaughter came home with some oats the teacher mixed glitter in it to feed Santas reindeer...she sat up all night by the front room window, and cried because they never showed up. I told her they were not real but her teacher told her they were...teachers are the smartest people in the world to a child.
Santa Claus is nothing more than the "commercialization" of Christ's (aka Jesus') birth. Public education may reference this "person" because Christmas is celebrated more on a national level due to most of the major religions in this country believing in that hoiliday. How many public school systems do you know that have Hanukkah Breaks?

 

[beth]

Like it or not, accept it or not, evolution is considered fact and science, so it will be taught in school right along side other science classes. Any faith or belief system is not going to change that.
Religion does not belong in school except to study it academically and intellectually. Parents are free to send their kids to a private religious school, or, better, teach them what they feel is best about religion along with attending the congregation of their choice. That is the proper avenue for children to learn about faith and a personal belief system. Activities in school could occur among students of like mind, who wish to meet and share their faith together at set times that have nothing to do with formal educational schooling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491532
Christianity may indeed be part of the culture...the people who originally set up our country didn't want the Catholic church in charge anymore, and gave the people the right to choose how they would worship. I used to be a Christian, I loved God and still do with a whole heart...when I discoverd Christianity was mingled with pagan beliefs ...I was mortified, since in scripture to do that was to spit in Gods face and insult him. I went searching for a religion that was more pure to what The Most Holy would be pleased with, and accept as true worship. After much soul searching and study (I even read the Quran)...I went with Judaism 100% That was 15 years ago.
Also, the Founding Fathers setting up our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution were not anti-Catholic. The The Declaration and Constitution has nothing to do with not wanting the Catholic Church to not be in charge, since it never was in charge in this country and hadn't been in charge in England for hundreds of years. In fact, our Founding Fathers set about getting help with our independence from a Catholic nation--France.
Thomas Jefferson, who penned the Declaration of Independence was actually a deist--believing in a God, but not the god of the traditional Bible who performed supernatural things. (Jefferson actually wrote his own bible that excluded all the supernatural). The most famous part of our Declaration did not at all contain any reference to a "creator". The creator mention was edited in by the Congress after Jefferson completed his draft. His original text read:
All men are created equal and independent. From the equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable.
Jefferson was not at all happy about the edit.
Bottom line, the Declaration and the Constitution were not written to reinforce or validate any religion or belief system. Our Founding Fathers did not set out to set up a Christian nation or any kind of faith-based nation. Contrarily, they wanted to keep that from happening at all costs.
Also, there are archaeologists and historian who convincingly tie many of the Hebrew stories in the Bible to ancient pagan mythologies. LOL So, the Christians are not alone with ties to paganism.

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491547
Santa Claus is nothing more than the "commercialization" of Christ's (aka Jesus') birth. Public education may reference this "person" because Christmas is celebrated more on a national level due to most of the major religions in this country believing in that hoiliday. How many public school systems do you know that have Hanukkah Breaks?
Exactly...but it has no place in the school system, yet my kids had to color and count the bulbs on the Xmas tree, they had to sing xmas songs on stage...my kids had to just stand there and not sing. The kids made Santa cut outs to place on the poster board...I complained to the school...it's part of the curriculum they get in a packet for the kids to go thru.... For my grandkids since I refused to allow it to go on....I had to get out my own art program, and make an equal work sheet for each of the unacceptable ones in the packet that I could accept. I had my kids count and color dreidels and cut out manorahs for the poster board. How many parents are able to do that? It was redicules.
Personally...I think they should give us (at the work place, and schools) X number of Holiday time....then let us choose which we want to celibrate. Workers should not be subjected to having to dress up like gouls on halloween, or elves during Xmas time at work.

 

[pezenfuego]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491540
Which religion? How many witch incantations would you want your child to learn? How about Islam and teaching them everyone else is an infidel.....Oh heres a great one...Holy Ghost filled speaking in tongues or you are doomed to be burned in hell fire forever...Maybe voodoo, you know cutting off the chickens feet and dancing into oblivion.
GASP!!!! Judaism, where Jesus is not a demigod (half god half man) and one of three gods that are actually one!!!
Darwins theory is no more solid science than religion is What is your basis for saying this? How can you believe this to be true? He made a hypothesis The Theory of Evolution is not a hypothesis that all living things stem from one common organism by chance The whole point is that chance is not involved
...it has not been proven to be a stable reliable line of thought, it's riddled with holes...BIG HOLES Please explain these big holes because none of the arguments against evolution that I have seen yet can be considered a big hole/aren't in line with what is expected. There is evolution, and that is a science on biology, and it has been proven that creatures have indeed evolved over time. People assume evolution and Darwin's theory are the same, they are not Charles Darwin's ideas about descent with modification are the basis for our current theory of evolution. It was a beginning and as we learned more, it expanded. It continues to expand. Darwin and religion both claim the beginnig of all living things. (This is called abiogenesis and the theory of evolution does not touch on it in the slightest. True biology science does not assume anything, and it's only objective is to study what is already there. This is wrong. Theory and experimentation are equally important. Without theories, we don't know where to look or what to look for. Without experimentation we can't validate or invalidate theories.
The question of whether people came from a single organism by chance, or a single spoken word from God...is not science. IMO
EDIT: I was talking about studying religion as a whole, not specific ones. Although to focus on those that are more prominent in our culture and our world is not a bad idea. I am not talking about teaching these as alternatives to science. School is all about taking people from varied backgrounds and "getting them on the same page" so to speak. If everyone understood what religion says and what evolution says, there would be a lot fewer debates. The sheer amount of misinformation and misunderstandings about evolution and religion is something that, in my opinion, should be fixed. Christianity has Pagan roots, like you mentioned. How many Christians do you think know this? How many do you think should know this? Churches are great, but their focus is not usually academic in nature and they do not teach multiple religions (with the exception of UU churches and the like).
I also think that this a mole hill.

 

[pezenfuego]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491550
Exactly...but it has no place in the school system, yet my kids had to color and count the bulbs on the Xmas tree, they had to sing xmas songs on stage...my kids had to just stand there and not sing. The kids made Santa cut outs to place on the poster board...I complained to the school...it's part of the curriculum they get in a packet for the kids to go thru.... For my grandkids since I refused to allow it to go on....I had to get out my own art program, and make an equal work sheet for each of the unacceptable ones in the packet that I could accept. I had my kids count and color dreidels and cut out manorahs for the poster board. How many parents are able to do that? It was redicules.
Personally...I think they should give us (at the work place, and schools) X number of Holiday time....then let us choose which we want to celibrate. Workers should not be subjected to having to dress up like gouls on halloween, or elves during Xmas time at work.
I agree with you on this one.

 

[darthtang aw]

I went to Christian schools growing up as well, and when one of my religion teachers told me I was going to Hell because i didnt have their belief system, i lost all respect for modern Christianity.
What were they supposed to tell you? That when you die leprechauns take you to Mt. Olympis if you don't believe, and that there you will do jumping jacks with fairies to gain entrance to Heaven? Their teaching structure dictates non believers go to hell. Thus, this is what they teach.

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491549
Also, the Founding Fathers setting up our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution were not anti-Catholic. The The Declaration and Constitution has nothing to do with not wanting the Catholic Church to not be in charge, since it never was in charge in this country and hadn't been in charge in England for hundreds of years. In fact, our Founding Fathers set about getting help with our independence from a Catholic nation--France.
Thomas Jefferson, who penned the Declaration of Independence was actually a deist--believing in a God, but not the god of the traditional Bible who performed supernatural things. (Jefferson actually wrote his own bible that excluded all the supernatural). The most famous part of our Declaration did not at all contain any reference to a "creator". The creator mention was edited in by the Congress after Jefferson completed his draft. His original text read:
All men are created equal and independent. From the equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable.
Jefferson was not at all happy about the edit.
Bottom line, the Declaration and the Constitution were not written to reinforce or validate any religion or belief system. Our Founding Fathers did not set out to set up a Christian nation or any kind of faith-based nation. Contrarily, they wanted to keep that from happening at all costs.
Also, there are archaeologists and historian who convincingly tie many of the Hebrew stories in the Bible to ancient pagan mythologies. LOL So, the Christians are not alone with ties to paganism.
There are quite a few things in Judaism that stem from the pagan Egyptian gods, they had the same problem with the people turning to falshood as the "Hebrew stories" in the books clearly tell, so being co-mingled is nothing new, nor has God's opinion on it changed.
...I choose Judaism because we are encouraged to think and not follow blindly, we are expected to study and make a decision based on scripture, not on the leader of the pack. There are plenty of Jews who eat pork and seafood as well. The laws remain the same, how we live our lives and how strict we follow the law, even going overboard is a personal decision. In Chritianity everyone is supposed to follow the leader, and not so much as argue a point. That's why there are so many factions of the religion.
Judaism is not segmented, there are folks who get together and follow the law as they deem fit. Orthidox likes the overboard...do the law and a little extra to be sure. Conservatives say... follow the laws the best you can, make your best effort. Reformed say...LOL...do what you want, anything is better than nothing. There is no arument between the groups, the laws and rules are the same, just the people are different on how strict they follow.
In Christianity...they fight over everything...even if there are one, two or three gods. As a Christian I believed Jesus was the son of God, and sent from him, that there was only ONE God. I was kicked out of that church because they belived Jesus was God himself. If I differed in opinion with any church group I was sent packing. I was also accused of being a Jehovah witness too. I covered my head because that's what I understood I should do from reading the books...I was told by one church leader that he knew I would be trouble right away when I walked in with my head covered, they kicked me out of that church for being, too get this....too JEWISHY.. That was before I even knew what Jewish was. That's when I woke up and realized that if you actually follow the book, you seem "Jewishy" to other Christians...DUH
I agree the constitution had little next to nothing to say on religion except to make it clear a person has the right to choose, and the Country would not dictate a religion. HOWEVER...like it or not our government system is super mingled with the Bible: The judge (God), 12 jurors(12 apostles or in Judaism ...12 patriarchs), prosecuter (the devil in Judaism...the adversary) Defending lawyer (Jesus, or in Judaism....one righteous person to speak for you) ...all to decide the fate of the accused. So we certainly do not have a Country that has seperated church from state.The majority of our Country is based on the Romans who also had, The Senate, the President(Emporor), the governors over each section, the mayor as overseer of the cities....even having military garrisons....all fashioned after the Romans. The Romans also allowed a choice of what god you wanted to pray to if any. So it's all Bible isn't it?

 

[beaslbob]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBlitz33 http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491535
Theories are theories because they can be improved upon or disproved. Not because they cant change at all.
...
One of the creationist arguments is the evolution is "just a theory".
what that argument ignores is that in science a theory is a generally accepted explanation of something. IE a proven hypothesis.
as opposed to the lay type theory which is more like conjecture or in the scientific world an hypothesis.
Sure theories like hypothesis in science can be modified, proven or disproven. that is the scientific method. But as a scientific theory it is a generally accepted explanation of something.

 

[darthtang aw]

  .  In Chritianity everyone is supposed to follow the leader, and not so much as argue a point. That's why there are so many factions of the religion.
This isn't exactly true. I know several Christian Churches that have no "leader". All are considered Brothers or Bretheren and each can speak at anytime about various subjects. They also encourage scripture debate concerning the meaning. However this is out of the norm for Most of Christianity. But Christianity in General does not always have one leader.

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491557
What were they supposed to tell you? That when you die leprechauns take you to Mt. Olympis if you don't believe, and that there you will do jumping jacks with fairies to gain entrance to Heaven? Their teaching structure dictates non believers go to hell. Thus, this is what they teach.
That's the problem. HELL is a prime example of why I left the church....In truth according to the very same books where the Christians got that idea.....all living breathing humans will go to hell, saved or not until death is overcome and is no more. That is because the word hell means the grave.
It is appointed to men to die and after that the judgement..... therefore everyone who ever died has gone to hell. The concept of the firey hell that burns forever is reserved for the anti-christ, his prophet and followers...not for every single person who dies and does not believe. The place of punishment is a totally different word and it is not appointed for every non-believer.
Ge-Hennom is a place of everlasting punishment but it is not hell, although the translators of the Greek bunched the two together. Hell in Hebrew...is Sheol, the place of the dead.
So in the end they may as well teach that leprechauns take you to Mt Olympus...because according to the books, they both hold the same amount of truth....
There is a story I was told once, the Rabbi who told me the story said it remined him of Christains.......a great king was walking thru the forest and he sees an arrow in the dead center of a bulls-eye...as he walks he keeps seeing all these arrows...dead center each time in the bulls-eye, and he thought to himself, such a fine marksman, I should have him in my army to teach my archers...He came upon a fellow resting against a tree taking a nap, by his side were arrows and a bow...The king woke him up and asked him if those were his arrows in the bulls-eye all along the path. "Yes" the man answered...so the king told him he had never seen such a marksman and he wanted him to join his army and teach his archers. The man began to laugh and told the king he would not want him, and he was not the man for the job..."you see Sire" he said, "I shot the arrow THEN drew the bulls-eye around it"
Having a predetermined idea of what they believe is why Christians have so many different factions of their faith...A person will believe something, and twist and mangle the books to match what they believe, ignoring the passages that blow their beliefs out of the water, they come up with something totally off the wall that matches their personal beliefs, and go build a new religion on it.

 

[darthtang aw]

Having a predetermined idea of what they believe is why Christians have so many different factions of their faith...A person will believe something, and twist and mangle the books to match what they believe, ignoring the passages that blow their beliefs out of the water, they come up with something totally off the wall that matches their personal beliefs, and go build a new religion on it.
This is where you are wrong, the sole reason for so many factions is Power. Plain and simple. Why subject myself to another man when I can gain followers myself and be the "leader". It has nothing to do with predetermined ending. It has everything to do with Power, Money, Greed, and so on. Look at the Vatican...how many times has the Pope changed the Catholics religious stance on matters of contention? All because the followers would leave if they had not. Now how many factions of the Catholic religion have there become, because man wants something that more suits him inside the catholic religion. I am not bashing the Catholic religion...But they were a good example to use to further my point.
Most Christiansd can't even inter[pret or quote the bible properly.
However comparing the Jewish faith and Christianity are like comparing apples and Oranges. Christianity is based off of New Testament and the Old Testament just tracks the History leading up to the Birth of Christ. All laws and regulations laid down in the Old Testament are null and void due to the teachings of Jesus. If I am correct...The jewish faith operates under the "old" laws and completely discounts the new Testament. So a side by side comparrison is not ideal. as The both have different rules.
Thus the definition of Hell is coming from two separate works as well.

 

[flower]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/392782/evolution-vs-intelligent-design/300#post_3491585
This is where you are wrong, the sole reason for so many factions is Power. Plain and simple. Why subject myself to another man when I can gain followers myself and be the "leader". It has nothing to do with predetermined ending. It has everything to do with Power, Money, Greed, and so on. Look at the Vatican...how many times has the Pope changed the Catholics religious stance on matters of contention? All because the followers would leave if they had not. Now how many factions of the Catholic religion have there become, because man wants something that more suits him inside the catholic religion. I am not bashing the Catholic religion...But they were a good example to use to further my point.
Most Christiansd can't even inter[pret or quote the bible properly....you could not be any more correct!
However comparing the Jewish faith and Christianity are like comparing apples and Oranges. Christianity is based off of New Testament and the Old Testament just tracks the History leading up to the Birth of Christ. All laws and regulations laid down in the Old Testament are null and void due to the teachings of Jesus. If I am correct...The jewish faith operates under the "old" laws and completely discounts the new Testament. So a side by side comparrison is not ideal. as The both have different rules.
Thus the definition of Hell is coming from two separate works as well. You are not correct, I got the definition ...see below in red

First and foremost, since you have not studied the Faith of Isreal, you don't know or realize that the OLD and NEW are not what you think. Jesus did not render the Old to be nul and void...that is another take it run Christian concept. That debate however ....LOL...is so long and red hot in controversy, it can't be discussed here. Folks have been fighting over that twisted concept since Emperor Constantine assumed his sun god and Jesus were the same fellow, and thus founded modern Christianity that actually believes that to this day, an idea birthed 325 years after the apostles were long gone from the earth
... I quoted the definition of hell from the Strongs concordance, a man of Christian faith was the translator... for the very reason that you wouldn't listen to a Jewish point of view...the concept of the word hell simply meaning the word grave is 100% NEW TESTAMENT. #86 of Strongs GREEK taken from the new testament says the word hell, means the grave. So I am not comparing apples to oranges. I am telling you that Christians who think all non-believers are going to hell to burn for ever and ever are 100% New testament in error. That belief has absolutly no bases from scripture, not even in the New testament.