What is a Jew

[Pindar]

It's actually the crunch of a very long discussion.

Pindar believes in God and old testament, but don't see Creationism as a theory worth looking at. He judge that people belonging to a religion are not really members to the same religion if they don't fit a construct invented at the beginning of the very religion, this regardless the fact that most member of the religion actually do it the other way around.

My goodness!

"A light shineth in the dark and the darkness comprehendeth it not".

Nothing you describe above reflects my views. I haven't said anything about Creationism's worth. If someone wants to believe in Creationism bully for them. I simply pointed out it is not science and shouldn't be considered as such since it doesn't meet the criteria of science.

I have said nothing about any original intent clause for religiosity. I have argued that belief is a necessary condition to identify with a faith. I have also argued that the belief must be the base tenets that distinguish that faith from anything else in the world. For example: one can't say because they believe in their stamp collection they are therefore Muslim.

On the other side we have bmolsson, that doesn't believe in God, have a documentated membership in a religion, since he is a part of the society requiring this membership.

We have already determined that under the Indonesian Constitution with its religious freedom clause there is no requirement to be Muslim.

Pindar is a religious person that refuse to see the evolution of religion and it's role in society. He also mocks the result of the evolution and judge peoples be or not to be based on the fundamentalistic view that if you don't believe in the metaphysical deity, you can not be a part of any religion.

This is also a mischaracterization. A Christian by definition recognizes an 'evolution' in religion. This is expressed by the canon itself: the Old and New Testaments. I have said nothing that precludes a faith from change, but change doesn't mean the complete erasure of what allows the movement to be identified. There must be some base continuity so as to identify the thing: otherwise one is talking about two different objects.

I have never argued that belief in Deity is a qualifier for religion. I have argued that belief in Allah is a qualifier to be Muslim. This is based on the Shahada the first principle of Islam.

My position is simple: words and concepts have a base meaning and one is not a liberty to change them to mean anything they want: a book is not the planet Jupiter.