Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 19 to 27 of 49

Thread: The Grand Design

  1. #19

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    Number of adherents per religion vs 7.1 billion people in the world:

    Christianity 2 billion
    Roman Catholicism: 1.1 billion
    Protestantism: 360 million
    Eastern Orthodoxy: 220 million
    Anglican: 84 million
    Other Christians: 280 million

    Islam 1.3 billion
    Sunnism: 940 million
    Shiism 120 million

    Hinduism 900 million

    Secular / Nonreligious / Agnostic / Atheist 850 million

    Buddhism 360 million

    Chinese traditional religion 225 million
    Not a single organized religion, includes elements of Taoism, Confucianism, and traditional nonscriptural religious observance.

    Primal indigenous
    150 million
    Not a single organized religion, includes a wide range of primarily Asian traditional or tribal religions, including Shamanism and Paganism.

    African Traditional and Diasporic
    95 million
    Not a single organized religion, this includes traditional African beliefs such as Yoruba as well as Diasporic beliefs such as Santeria and Vodoun.

    Sikhism 23 million

    Juche 19 million
    Not considered a religion by adherents. Juche is the political ideology taught by North Korean communists; some have argued it constitutes a religion.
    Spiritism 14 million
    Not a single organized religion, includes a variety of beliefs including some forms of Umbanda.

    Judaism 14 million

    Bah?'? Faith 6 million

    Jainism 5 million

    Shinto 4 million

    Cao Dai 3 million

    Tenrikyo 2.4 million

    Neopaganism 1 million

    Unitarian Universalism 800,000

    Rastafarianism 700,000
    Not an organized religion

    Scientology 600,000

    Zoroastrianism 150,000

  2. #20

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    Information showing that there are widely varying beliefs among Christians on Biblical innerrancy.

    The concept of inerrancy is one belief that dramatically demonstrates differences among various wings of Christianity:
    <!--msthemelist--><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><!--msthemelist--><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">Fundamentalist denominations, such as the Southern Baptist Convention, and other very conservative evangelical Protestant denominations generally teach a strict view on the inerrancy of the Bible. It is a belief that is tied with their understanding that God directly inspired its authors. The writers largely played the role of a secretary taking dictation.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">At the liberal end of the evangelical spectrum, inerrancy is interpreted less strictly. Their theologians deviate from the literal interpretation of the Bible in more cases. Biblical authors are seen as writing with their own style and content. Theologians have suggested that Biblical infallibility need not be total. It is of prime importance on matters relating to the deity of Christ and an individual's route to salvation. Historical, geographical and scientific details are of lesser consequence. Errors creeping into those areas could be admitted with little or no impact on the overall Christian message. Needless to say, this approach generates a lot of opposition with more conservative evangelicals.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">Mainline Protestant denominations tend to take either a liberal or conservative stance on inerrancy. This is also true among the membership of these groups. The conflict over inerrancy is currently generating a major divisions and massive conflict within their denominations over church policies such as: the ordination of homosexuals in committed relationships, and rituals which recognize same-sex relationships. There are also theological divisions over inerrancy itself, whether trusting Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation, the role of scientific findings in determining denominational policy, etc.

    Future schisms between liberal and conservative wings within leading mainline denominations are quite possible. They occurred in the 19th century over the morality of human slavery, and came close to happening during the 20th century over female ordination. A schism is currently underway within the worldwide Anglican Communion over homosexuality.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">Progressive Protestants: At the other extreme, most progressive Protestants have rejected the concept of inerrancy. They generally analyze the Bible as a historical document. Their authors' purpose was to promote their own beliefs and those of their faith group. The writers incorporated stories from nearby Pagan cultures, legends, myths, scientific errors, religious propaganda, and even material which was clearly against the will of God into their writing. Examples of the latter, in the area of women's rights alone, include stoning non-virgin brides to death, forcing widows to marry their husband's brother, forcing women to marry their rapists, burning alive some prostitutes, and requiring women suspected of adultery to endure a ritual in the Temple which, it was believed, would result in her death if she was guilty, and the death of her embryo or fetus is she was pregnant.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">Catholics: In contrast, the largest conservative Christian denomination -- the Roman Catholic Church -- had traditionally taught a belief in strict inerrancy of the Bible. However, this has recently been changed to include only passages related to faith, morals and salvation. More information.<!--msthemelist--></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

  3. #21

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    Here is more breakdown just for Catholics:

    The term "inerrancy" is not used by the Roman Catholics church as often as it is used among conservative Protestants. However, the concept of inerrancy pays a major role in many of their beliefs about the Bible.
    The teachings of the Church have evolved over the years. In recent decades, Catholic sources have given conflicting views about biblical inerrancy:
    <!--msthemelist--><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><!--msthemelist--><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">Absolute inerrancy: Some Catholic theologians have claimed that, in its original autograph version, the Bible is inerrant -- without error. This appears to be the consensus of popes, of most of the Catholic scholars and of other church leaders until the mid 20<SUP>th</SUP> century. This belief developed naturally from their conviction that God inspired the authors of the Bible. If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">Limited inerrancy: Other Catholics teach a more recent concept: that the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events. This belief had its origins in the church with the writings of Richard Simon (1638 - 1712) who rejected Moses as author of the Pentateuch. He partly inspired the literary-criticism method of analyzing biblical passages which became influential among some 19<SUP>th</SUP> century Christians.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">No inerrancy: Still other Catholic theologians and scholars have deviated entirely from the church's official teaching. They agree with liberal Protestants in rejecting the inerrancy of the Bible. They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc. Of these intellectuals, Dominic Crossan is one of the most popular Catholic writers among the general public.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

  4. #22

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    This breaks it down more for Protestants:

    The concept of inerrancy is one belief that dramatically demonstrates differences among various wings of Christianity:
    <!--msthemelist--><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><!--msthemelist--><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">Fundamentalist denominations, such as the Southern Baptist Convention, and other very conservative evangelical Protestant denominations generally teach a strict view on the inerrancy of the Bible. It is a belief that is tied with their understanding that God directly inspired its authors. The writers largely played the role of a secretary taking dictation.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">At the liberal end of the evangelical spectrum, inerrancy is interpreted less strictly. Their theologians deviate from the literal interpretation of the Bible in more cases. Biblical authors are seen as writing with their own style and content. Theologians have suggested that Biblical infallibility need not be total. It is of prime importance on matters relating to the deity of Christ and an individual's route to salvation. Historical, geographical and scientific details are of lesser consequence. Errors creeping into those areas could be admitted with little or no impact on the overall Christian message. Needless to say, this approach generates a lot of opposition with more conservative evangelicals.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">At the other extreme, most progressive Protestants have rejected the concept of inerrancy. They generally analyze the Bible as a historical document. Their authors' purpose was to promote their own beliefs and those of their faith group. The writers incorporated stories from nearby Pagan cultures, legends, myths, scientific errors, religious propaganda, and even material which was clearly against the will of God into their writing. Examples of the latter, in the area of women's rights alone, include stoning non-virgin brides to death, forcing widows to marry their husband's brother, forcing women to marry their rapists, burning alive some prostitutes, and requiring women suspected of adultery to endure a ritual in the Temple which, it was believed, would result in her death if she was guilty, and the death of her embryo or fetus is she was pregnant.
    <!--msthemelist--></TD></TR><!--msthemelist--><TR><TD vAlign=baseline width=42></TD><TD vAlign=top width="100%">Individual mainline Protestant Christians tend to take either a liberal or conservative stance on inerrancy. This is currently generating a major divisions and massive conflict within their denominations over church policies such as: the ordination of homosexuals in committed relationships, and rituals which recognize same-sex relationships. There are also theological divisions over inerrancy itself, whether trusting Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation, etc.

    Future schisms between liberal and conservative wings within leading mainline denominations are quite possible. They occurred in the 19th century over the morality of human slavery, and came close to happening during the 20th century over female ordination. A schism is currently underway within the worldwide Anglican Communion over homosexuality.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

  5. #23

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    As can be seen by the information in the above posts the beliefs of Christians are not as "monolythic as some would seem to "imply." Many take a very progressive view to the Bible and to "salvation." Same can be said for Jews and Muslims.

  6. #24

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    Quote Originally Posted by coachsparky View Post
    See my response above.
    Your responses are nonsense.

    Time for you to start getting involved in the wrestling discussion more..

  7. #25

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    Quote Originally Posted by Schlottke View Post
    Your responses are nonsense.

    Time for you to start getting involved in the wrestling discussion more..
    My responses are factual. Facts usually are not considered nonsense and nice attack coming from your fine upstanding moderator there Schlottke, you should take here behind the woodshed.

    To let her get away with that clear unadulterated attack and to suspend someone for 7 days for a non-attack is clearly hypocritical.

  8. #26
    Olympic Champ r.payton@att.net's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Danville .Indiana
    Posts
    8,718

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    coachsparky-
    Are you a DEIST or a CHRISTIAN ? If dEIST i can somewhat follow your reasoning, if CHRISTIAN I have a hard time following your discourse .

  9. #27

    Default Re: The Grand Design

    Quote Originally Posted by coachsparky View Post
    My responses are factual. Facts usually are not considered nonsense and nice attack coming from your fine upstanding moderator there Schlottke, you should take here behind the woodshed.

    To let her get away with that clear unadulterated attack and to suspend someone for 7 days for a non-attack is clearly hypocritical.
    The facts you present are then misinterpreted.. lol.

    Don't tell me how to run a community - last I checked we're good at it.

    Start posting and contributing to the wrestling sections.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •