I suppose some of what you say may be true, like about everyone believing in the same god, just with different names. However, believing in God is not enough. James 2:19 says, "You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!"

Even if we all do believe in the same God, the only way to heaven is believing that Jesus died for your sins and asking him for forgiveness. If you do that, it doesn't really matter what you call your God.

There are a couple reasons for the wide variety of religions. First off, I believe that Adam (as in Adam and Eve) was a Christian in that he understood the fall and knew that God would send a savior to atone for the sins of the world. So I believe that Christianity was the original religion after the fall. IE Older than judaism. I believe that all the other religions except for judaism were 1 of 2 things. Either they were introduced as a counterfeit to the original, or they were from someone who had no access to the full truth, doing the very best they could. The Law of Moses and the ensuing Judaism were introduced by God as a preparatory Gospel intended to prepare the Jews to accept Jesus in his first coming.

If there were no sin in the world until Adam & Eve ate the Forbidden Fruit, then there was no Christ to save the world from it. So, how could Christianity be older than Judaism?

Of course, it's not rejected by all scientists, only the ones that believe in evolution. You could just as easily say that evolution doesn't belong in a science book because it is rejected by Christian scientists.

One thing I would like to remark here is that you don't have to believe in evolution to be a scientist, but some churches pressure you into denouncing it because "it contrasts with the faith".

I rest my case

One thing I would like to remark here is that you don't have to believe in evolution to be a scientist, but some churches pressure you into denouncing it because "it contrasts with the faith".

I rest my case

Rest your case?????? You haven't even defended or backed up anything youve said. Are you just going to ignore all the points put forth that you can't refute? Are you trolling, or discussing?

But not all churches. And not all Christians. I follow the intelligent design theory. I agree that you can't prove the existence of God (and based on principles of faith, you really aren't supposed to), and I'll also agree that the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. IMHO, God is THE ultimate scientist. I realize that atheists will laugh at that, but through my eyes, I can't study the complexities of an atom, or the conception of the universe, or other scientific miracles, without thinking that there must have been SOMEONE who planned all this out.

Of course, it's not rejected by all scientists, only the ones that believe in evolution. You could just as easily say that evolution doesn't belong in a science book because it is rejected by Christian scientists.

I'm going to ignore that

I still hold that evolution is not as scientifically sound as most of you think, however, I think that adaptation and other priciples encorporated with evolution have a sound base. Be this all as it may, I do not see what is wrong with taking a week in a biology class to point out some issues with some of the processes (like evolution) and talk about the idea of there being a force or presence that is responsible for life on Earth and the order of the universe. I don't think that anybody is arguing that the Book of Genisis should be taught to a class, but that Intelligent Design should be an option for discussion in a class about how things came to be. Why is this a problem?

Because your education needs to consist of things you can verify. Teachers can tell you "1+1=2", and you will be able to verify it, but they can tell you about ID and no verification is possible. If a child accepts this theory without attempting to analyse it, the way is paved for accepting OTHER philosophies in the future without stopping for a sec to see if it's sound. This leads to the child being succeptable to groups that wish to floor world democracy, and I don't think I need to name these people.

For this reason, ID needs to be taught in theology class, or as I would prefer, together with all religions, in a mythology class.

We're not talking about math. We are talking about evolution. Has evolution been verified?

Well, even if you can prove that evolution is possible, there is no way to prove that we evolved from anything, unless you go back in time.

Well, even if you can prove that evolution is possible, there is no way to prove that we evolved from anything, unless you go back in time.

That is just evidence. There is no actual proof unless someone actually saw us evolve.

Yes. Indeed it has. Cast your eyes upon the skeletal remains of early man. If you don't call THAT evidence then.... the discussions is irrelivant, cause you're never going to get it then.

I still hold that evolution is not as scientifically sound as most of you think, however, I think that adaptation and other priciples encorporated with evolution have a sound base. Be this all as it may, I do not see what is wrong with taking a week in a biology class to point out some issues with some of the processes (like evolution) and talk about the idea of there being a force or presence that is responsible for life on Earth and the order of the universe. I don't think that anybody is arguing that the Book of Genisis should be taught to a class, but that Intelligent Design should be an option for discussion in a class about how things came to be. Why is this a problem?

Because there is absolutely no scientific evidence. Evolution is, in fact, one of the most intricate and detailed scientific theories out there. Even the M-theory of string energies, which is now accepted to be true, does not have nearly the amount of evidence that has been found to favor evolution. There are fossils showing chronological changes in the physical structure, biological similarities (ie enzymes made of the same amino acids and similar nucleic make-ups of genetic strains), Darwin's observations (which only have been added to since he published his theory), and more currently (say the past 2000 years), the evolution of the human mind to comprehend and use technologies to aid in ease of living. Either way, (back to the fossils) the reason ID exists is because there have been gaps of time periods where no fossils or archeological evidence has been found. For all we know, the missing link could be under the ocean. But the fact is, ID has no scientific grounds, other than "possible until proven otherwise."
Take ether, for example. A long time ago people knew that there was this big, black thing in the sky (outer space), through which light and energy could propagate. So, they assumed it was filled with a substance they called ether that allowed for this propagation, like how water allows sound to move very easily. But we know this to be false, proven eventually by science. Just because it makes sense doens't mean it to be scientific fact.