Is this a case of religion going to far?

[Slacker]

Today in history my teacher played us a song that some band from her church made about freeing the Dalit. In case you don't know what that is, the Dalit are a part of the Hinduism religion, and are considered "untouchable." These people are treated like pig filth, and given no contact with any humans and are considered two filthy and horrible to even hurt.

So she pops in the song, and I was utterly disgusted by some of the lyrics, which basically was a message to the prime minister that their religion was a lie, and GOD makes everyone free and equal.

I get that the way the Dalit are treated is bad and all, but honestly, it's their religion, and it's their business, not some crappy christian bands. Not to mention it's terribly ironic that they start out saying "GOD MAKES EVERYONE FREE" as they then procede to try to convert the ****ing prime minister...

Thoughts?

 

[DeusExMachina]

I'm not a big fan of theism in general so this doesn't make me too happy.

 

[Absinthe]

Religious people need to be put in correctional institutions, the same as every other person with dangerous delusions.

 

[delusional]

nooooooo i dont want to go to correctional institution.

 

[Absinthe]

It's okay. They give you candy and soft walls. It's like a fun park.

 

[smwScott]

All religions are mental disorders. Anyway, regardless of what people say, some religions are worse than others. Islam and Christianity are the worst, Hinduism can be pretty bad, and Buddhists are actually kinda cool, but still delusional.

But to answer your question, I see no problem with this band pointing out an injustice just because they're a Christian band. As far as it being "their religion, their business" I fail to see how that protects them from criticism or entitles them to respect.

**** cows.

 

[Slacker]

I have no problem with religion, being religious myself, but it's the fundamentalism crap that puts me over the edge. Gah.

 

[CptStern]

they should be put in leper camps


"alms for the poor guv'nah?"

"away with you, religious swine, lest my cane find your backside!"

 

[Icarusintel]

It's called the right to freedom of speech and religion. Which is the reason you're allowed to say what you have.

 

[CptStern]

away with you cur <thwack thwack!!>

 

[DeusExMachina]

I don't know why people group Buddhism with the other religions. I mean one, there is no supreme being involved to worship nor are they actively looking to convert people. It's more of a philosophy if you ask me.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

It's called the right to freedom of speech and religion.

It's called an employee of a public, taxpayer funded, secular school.


Anyways, the real question is "when is religion ever not going too far?"

Seriously. Once you start believing in ghosts and demons, you're already well over the edge

 

[delusional]

i wont stop people from expressing there opinions but when its in in state schools i dont think its right because your supposed to teach fact not opinion.
when people complain about stuff like the ten commandments in courts i really dont see how its offensive if the majority of the public has no problem.

 

[smwScott]

I don't know why people group Buddhism with the other religions. I mean one, there is no supreme being involved to worship nor are they actively looking to convert people. It's more of a philosophy if you ask me.

It's still a philisophy based on faith and dogma, which makes it a religion. The difference is that it's truly a lifestyle of peace and focuses on self-improvement through meditation. So it's better than the others, but there are ways to live the same type of lifestyle without subscribing to fairy tales.

Religions such as Christianity and Islam actively promote violence in their "divine texts" which is what makes them so flawed. All that bullshit centrists spew about how it's only extremists who mis-interpret the teachings ... is just that, bullshit. It's the religious moderates who simply selectively choose what they want to believe. At least the extremists aren't hypocrites, just stupid.

Eh ... went off on a random tangent.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

when people complain about stuff like the ten commandments in courts i really dont see how its offensive if the majority of the public has no problem.

The ten commandments are a set of biblical laws stating, among many other things, that muslims, buddhists and all other religious affiliations are to be put to death.
Same with artists, disobedient children, and more.

This huge monument to genocide was then hung in front of a taxpayer-funded building that represents not only the laws of United States government, but the society of the United States as a whole.

So the genocide-advocating majority have no problem with symbolizing a love of genocide.

The majority doesn't rule.
America has a constitution, and that prevents one group from gaining unreasonable favoritism over all others.
A large number of those taxpayers paying for the monument are among those it demands be killed.
I'm not even american or christian and I know this stuff. Come on.

Also <3 smw
That's exactly the case.

 

[Raziaar]

Religious people need to be put in correctional institutions, the same as every other person with dangerous delusions.

We're not all psycho you know. I'm a very nice, sane person. And fun to be around most of the time.


<eye twitch>

 

[Naudian]

The ten commandments are a set of biblical laws stating, among many other things, that muslims, buddhists and all other religious affiliations are to be put to death.
Same with artists, disobedient children, and more.

This huge monument to genocide was then hung in front of a taxpayer-funded building that represents not only the laws of United States government, but the society of the United States as a whole.

So the genocide-advocating majority have no problem with symbolizing a love of genocide.

The majority doesn't rule.
America has a constitution, and that prevents one group from gaining unreasonable favoritism over all others.
A large number of those taxpayers paying for the monument are among those it demands be killed.
I'm not even american or christian and I know this stuff. Come on.

I think I just learned stuff.

*bashes head on desk*

 

[delusional]

sophophobe

well i personaly have no problem with it mecha, i know what the constitution says though it doesnt say seperation of state and religion but "congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion..."
and it doesnt say you should kill people who break them, your supposed to try and convert non believers not kill them.
the majority does in fact rule but minorities have rights too.

 

[15357]

I like Confuciousnism more than other religions.

PERFECT LOYALTY! IMPIETY IS THE WORST CRIME OF ALL!

 

[The Monkey]

Why would she play some religioes propaganda in the classroom. Go to the principle tomorrow and have her fired.

 

[15357]

Why would she play some religioes propaganda in the classroom. Go to the principle tomorrow and have her fired.

Thats kinda ****ed up. She played a christian song and tried to spread 'the love', and now she has to get fired for that?


And what, "Go to the principle tommorow and have her fired."?

WTF?

 

[Jintor]

People teaching your children shouldn't be allowed to believe in anything! o_0

 

[The Monkey]

Thats kinda ****ed up. She played a christian song and tried to spread 'the love', and now she has to get fired for that?


And what, "Go to the principle tommorow and have her fired."?

WTF?

Teachers shouldn't play a song promoting one religion and bashing another. Schools should be secular and unbaised. It's fine by me if she want's to practise her religion in her free time, but not while at work teaching a bunch of kids/teens.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

well i personaly have no problem with it mecha, i know what the constitution says though it doesnt say seperation of state and religion but "congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion..."

In that case, you should also know that the Supreme Court of modern times has basically concluded that that section of the constitution logically extends to the point that government is to remain secular in all aspects, save for a handful of traditional (and controversial) cerimonies deemed "deistic".

Legal precedent shows us that monuments such as the ten commandments, being placed on taxpayer-funded public property, are strictly unconstitutional.

If one were to update the constitution's wording to reflect the widely acknowledged logical importance of a secular government, it would say that the government as a whole is to remain secular in all its actions.

and it doesnt say you should kill people who break them, your supposed to try and convert non believers not kill them.

Shouldn't you know by now that the peaceful bible is a myth that perverts the teachings of jesus and invalidates all of christianity?

The bible is very clear that people who don't willingly convert (AKA basically all of them) are to be put to death.
Please read the bible before posting things that are untrue.

the majority does in fact rule but minorities have rights too.

No minority or majority has the right to preferential treatment under the government unless they somehow logically require it to function normally in society.

The entire purpose of the constitution, and what the founding fathers were attempting to escape, was the unfair conditions of an unchecked majority rule.
Thus, limits are placed on the majority so that, although it has power equivalent to its size, it cannot infringe on others.
If the country had an islamic majority, the outrage would be tremendous if it were suddenly one nation under allah and the signs in front of all the courthouses said "infidels should be hanged".

Yet you have absolutely no problem with christians doing the exact same thing.

It's not nice to say that people who would squander their rights don't really deserve them, but I think that's the case.

 

[PvtRyan]

Isn't the caste system outlawed in nearly all countries including the big Hindu ones?

 

[FoB_Ed]

Shouldn't you know by now that the peaceful bible is a myth that perverts the teachings of jesus and invalidates all of christianity?

The bible is very clear that people who don't willingly convert (AKA basically all of them) are to be put to death.
Please read the bible before posting things that are untrue.

That's a lie. Jesus carries in His heart the kingdom of God which is love, joy, and peace in the Holy Spirit. He allowed himself to suffer violence to acheive God's purposes. Did Jesus make war against the gentiles? No. Instead he sent his apostles to minister to them so that they might be saved.

The Isrealites were told to do no harm to strangers in their midst.
"When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the Lord your God." Lev 19:33




Secondly, concerning the law,
" There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Romans 8:1-4

“For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” John 1:17

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven" -Matthew 5:17-20

Jesus is not speaking against observing all the requirements of the law, but against hypocritical, Pharisaical legalism. Such legalism was not the keeping of all details of the Law, but the hollow sham of keeping laws externally to gain merit before God while breaking them inwardly. It was following the letter of the law while ignoring its spirit. Jesus rebukes the Pharisees' interpretation of the Law and their view of righteousness by works. He preaches a righteousness that comes ONLY through faith in him and his work. You have to look at the verses in the context they're written in. Look at the verses that come before and after. He's talking all about the externalism of the Pharisees.

The idea that Christians are to enforce the law in accordance with the interpretation of the Pharisees of the day is to miss the entire point of Christ's life and justification by his blood.

"Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love" Galatians 5:2-7

The law does not provide us with salvation, but only true, trusting faith in Christ. "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins" John 8:23-24

 

[JNightshade]

Isn't the caste system outlawed in nearly all countries including the big Hindu ones?

I don't know about other countries, but from what I've heard, in India it's essentially denied. Not outlawed, but if you ask a public official about the caste system, they'll say "what caste system?". This is why such crimes continue- how can there be caste-based violence if the government refuses to admit that castes exist?

 

[Solaris]

Oh yes. Bible quote wars.
This will be interesting.

 

[kirovman]

http://thebricktestament.com/genesis/garden_of_eden/gn03_22-23.html

This is why God is the enemy of mankind! D:

 

[Mechagodzilla]

That's a lie.

See, the thing is that I am fairly careful to only say something is a lie when I am all but absolutely certain that it actually is.

In your case, we will see.
Your comments are listed in bold.

"Jesus carries in His heart the kingdom of God which is love, joy, and peace in the Holy Spirit."

Correct. However, I think you need to know specifically what the kingdom of god is.

The kingdom of god is specifically not only heaven, but also a future time during which the fulfilment of the abrahamic and davidic covenants turn the entirety of Earth into a heaven-like paradise ruled by a line of davidic kings.
Specifically, it is a description of events that will occur around the end times.

I've elaborated on this fact in this earlier thread, which I recommend that you read.

In this context, jesus carries "free samples" of the bliss of this future earthly paradise.

"He allowed himself to suffer violence to acheive God's purposes."

And what are these purposes? That's the topic at hand.
I'm always impressed by christians' ever-constant attempts to distract and confuse logical thought with tales of how much pain jesus had.
I just had a good cry, dried my eyes, and then came back to finish typing out information that's actually relevant.

"Did Jesus make war against the gentiles? No. Instead he sent his apostles to minister to them so that they might be saved."

Yes, the goal was conversion. Yes, jesus says to be loving to your enemies.
He still, however, demands that you kill those who do not convert.
If you convert them, they become christians so you don't have to kill them anymore.
It saves time and effort!

"The Isrealites were told to do no harm to strangers in their midst.
"When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the Lord your God." Lev 19:33"

This says to treat people from other countries well. It makes no reference whatsoever to religious affiliation (which you can be killed for).
If this were the case, it would render the entirety of leviticus and deuteronomy self-contradictory, which is impossible.

"Secondly, concerning the law,
" There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Romans 8:1-4"

Riiiight. Let's look at this in detail:

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

People who are in christ and walk after the spirit are exempt. The rest are not.
This seems to me to be a case of the rarely-used forgiveness clause that allows jesus and/or god to forgive the very most faithful on earth if they are sufficiently impressed by their piety.
Such a pious person is consistently defined, throughout both testaments, as a person who is an expert at the law and follows it to the best of their ability with pure faith.

So, in other words, the laws still apply and non-christians are still to be killed.

As for that last bit:
"...that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us..."
The purpose is to fulfill the law. However, that does not happen, as I pointed out earlier, until the end times.
Jesus himself says the laws are constant and immutable until that time.

Jesus is making the earthly paradise possible eventually.
In the mean time, you must follow the laws, as you have shown in the second-to-next quote.

"“For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” John 1:17"

Great, so now we have three things: law, grace and truth.
These things are not mutually exclusive.

""Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven" -Matthew 5:17-20"

Now let's look at this quote in detail.

-Jesus hasn't come to abolish the law.
-People must continue following the laws.
-The laws are effective until the end times.
-People who don't follow the laws will be "least" in the kingdom of heaven.
-People without faith go to hell.
-People who don't follow the laws and have faith are excluded from the kingdom of heaven (and thus go to hell).

"Jesus is not speaking against observing all the requirements of the law, but against hypocritical, Pharisaical legalism."

Correct.
He is NOT speaking out against the law, and he IS saying that people must be faithful.
You must follow the law and be faithful.

He preaches a righteousness that comes ONLY through faith in him and his work.

Wrong. There is no "only" anywhere in Jesus' teachings. Such mutual exclusivity between faith and works does not exist.
According to jesus, in the quotes you have provided, you must follow the law and have faith.

"You have to look at the verses in the context they're written in."

I have already made this exact same argument, with the exact same full-on context in about two or three threads now.
Don't underestimate me.
In fact, I have the advantage because I am examining the context of the entire bible as a logical framework, while you are attempting to prove me wrong by creating contradictions where none existed previously.

"The idea that Christians are to enforce the law in accordance with the interpretation of the Pharisees of the day is to miss the entire point of Christ's life and justification by his blood."

Where, at any point, did I say you have to follow them the way the fuckin' pharisees said?
I said, repeatedly, that JESUS demands you follow the laws. Which he does.

Straw man arguments aren't polite.

""Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love" Galatians 5:2-7"

The law does not provide us with salvation, but only true, trusting faith in Christ.

Uh-oh, It's Paul again!

In previous threads, I have pointed out that nearly all the self-contradictory aspects of Jesus' teachings are those preached by Paul long after the death and resurrection of Christ.
Simply put, Galatians and the rest are written by Paul.
Paul is not Jesus.

In all honesty, Paul wrote these lies to fool the true believers who followed Jesus' actual teachings - that the laws of moses are eternal.
Paul is obviously a false prophet because what he says contradicts the old testament. (According to God, you can identify a false prophet as someone who declares any of the laws somehow obsolete.)

Jesus says you must follow the laws.
Paul says you musn't.

Clearly Paul is a liar.

Sadly, every christian on earth worships paul instead of jesus. They pretend as though they are the same person.
So, through the actions of one man nearly 2000 years ago the will of christ has been completely subverted and his teachings effectively destroyed.
Luckily, the words still exist for people like myself to analyse so that the truth of christ can once again be heard.

And he says "kill jews".

""You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins" John 8:23-24"

Exactly. Faith + Law = Heaven.

So like I said: don't jump the gun on the L-bomb.
I never lie.

 

[delusional]

show me any verse where jesus says specifically says to kill someone for their sins and i'll concede mecha.
and about the kingdom of god you yourself said its not defined so all your doing is speculating, but if you think about why would he be telling people to repent when in their lifetimes they wont see the end times and yes it could be during end times but at the moment the kingdom of god is in heaven

 

[Mechagodzilla]

First off, the kingdom of god is not defined in the bible but, at the time of jesus's life on earth, people would have been well aware of the concept from hebrew scriptures.
There is essentially no disagreement in the assertion that it represents all that is under god's direct personal control.

As for the end times, Jesus repeatedly asserted in his teachings that the end times were to arrive extremely soon.
Perhaps they have been delayed since no-one on earth is worthy of going to heaven?

Whatever the case, Jesus emphasizes that the end times could occur at ANY MOMENT.

As for "conceding", who gives a shit?
Your baseless faith changes nothing about what the bible actually says, and Jesus the son of god says that you must follow the old testament exactly until the end of the world.

So there you go. He makes it extremely clear.
Those who don't follow the old testament are least in the kingdom of heaven and go to hell.
He actively and unconditionally rewards killing right there.

I just proved something. Here is where you give a logical rebuttal.

Not more of the same "you can't prove me wrong because I believe in something invisible" bullshit.
We're talking about the bible and that's what jesus says in the bible.

I'm not trying to force you to concede.
I'm trying to find the most intelligent responses to my theory so that I may test and strengthen it.

If you don't want to provide an intelligent response, then get out of the way.

 

[Neo_Kuja]

You know, I'm always amazed that Mecha puts his statements out so clearly and logically, and the opposing arguments seem to focus on only a few of his points, and do so in an under-handed fashion claiming context as their main argument.

Still, it makes for entertaining reading.

 

[delusional]

theres a limit to how much i can type on a psp since i have no computer, so i cant argue everything he posts cuz his posts are long.
show me a verse where jesus specifically says to kill someone for breaking a law, and dont say jesus says to abide by the laws because they are supposed to be followed but saying to follow laws doesnt necesarily mean to keep the punishments of those who break the laws.
which is primarily where disagree with you when you keep saying jesus openly accepts genocide in this world

 

[Mechagodzilla]

show me a verse where jesus specifically says to kill someone for breaking a law, and dont say jesus says to abide by the laws because they are supposed to be followed but saying to follow laws doesnt necesarily mean to keep the punishments of those who break the laws.

What? That's completely and utterly false and I am sure you know it.

Jesus said that humans must follow EVERY SINGLE WORD of the law.
That includes the following:

'If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not listen to the voice of his father or his mother [...] all the men of the town must then stone him to death. You must banish this evil from among you.'
Deuteronomy 21:18-21

Do you disagree? That's not allowed either.

'If anyone should think to himself, "I will do well enough if I follow the dictates of my heart," Yahweh will not pardon him. His wrath shall burn against him.''
Deuteronomy 29:19-20

Well maybe Jesus's laws are new and completely replace the old ones?

'The Law is permanent for all future generations. You must add nothing to what I command you, nor subtract anything from it, but keep the commandments of Yahweh your God just as I lay them down for you.'
Numbers 15:15, Deuteronomy 4:2

Maybe Jesus has superceded or replaced god?

'If a prophet arises among you offering some sign or wonder, and if he then tells you to follow other gods and worship them, do not listen to that prophet's words. Yahweh your God is testing you to find out if you love him with all your heart and soul. That prophet must be put to death. You must banish this evil from among you.'
Deut. 13:1-6

You'll note that the bible has totally covered its ass there.
The wording of the bible makes it clear that it is impossible to be a christian without following the laws.

Going to heaven means killing a lot of people (approximately two-thirds of the Earth's population).

which is primarily where disagree with you when you keep saying jesus openly accepts genocide in this world

You are simply making up things that jesus never said, and that is simply not cool - let alone an effective argument.

"Maybe jesus wanted us to follow the laws in spirit even though he never said any such thing?"

How about maybe jesus said you pulled that anti-fact right out of your ass?
Basing an argument on nothing but wishful thinking is a logical fallacy that wastes everyone's time.
I'm looking for reasonable and intelligent responses.

Jesus and god Himself both say, on record, that you must kill as many religious minorities as possible until you die (or the end of the world, whichever comes first).

Otherwise, you are declared evil and sent to hell to be tortured for eternity.

 

[15357]

'If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not listen to the voice of his father or his mother [...] all the men of the town must then stone him to death. You must banish this evil from among you.'

I concur. Impiety is the worst crime that one can commit.










No, j/k. Death is too harsh.

 

[delusional]

you have not answered my question, did jesus specifically say to punish those who disobeyed these laws and kill religious minorities?
jesus brought about a new covenent where law isnt in the scripture, but in their hearts. because punishing those who didnt follow the laws never worked because people still sinned, it was a failed deterrent.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jeremiah 31:31-34;&version31;

 

[DaMaN]

you have not answered my question, did jesus specifically say to punish those who disobeyed these laws and kill religious minorities?
jesus brought about a new covenent where law isnt in the scripture, but in their hearts. because punishing those who didnt follow the laws never worked because people still sinned, it was a failed deterrent.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jeremiah 31:31-34;&version31;

Umm... it seems that Mecha's answered it several times...

Jesus said that humans must follow EVERY SINGLE WORD of the law.
That includes the following:

'If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not listen to the voice of his father or his mother [...] all the men of the town must then stone him to death. You must banish this evil from among you.'
Deuteronomy 21:18-21

Do you disagree? That's not allowed either.

'If anyone should think to himself, "I will do well enough if I follow the dictates of my heart," Yahweh will not pardon him. His wrath shall burn against him.''
Deuteronomy 29:19-20

Well maybe Jesus's laws are new and completely replace the old ones?

'The Law is permanent for all future generations. You must add nothing to what I command you, nor subtract anything from it, but keep the commandments of Yahweh your God just as I lay them down for you.'
Numbers 15:15, Deuteronomy 4:2

Maybe Jesus has superceded or replaced god?

'If a prophet arises among you offering some sign or wonder, and if he then tells you to follow other gods and worship them, do not listen to that prophet's words. Yahweh your God is testing you to find out if you love him with all your heart and soul. That prophet must be put to death. You must banish this evil from among you.'
Deut. 13:1-6

You'll note that the bible has totally covered its ass there.
The wording of the bible makes it clear that it is impossible to be a christian without following the laws.

Going to heaven means killing a lot of people (approximately two-thirds of the Earth's population).

Jesus said "Follow the old laws". The old laws say "kill people". Hence, Jesus says "Kill people". Period. If A implies B and B implies C, A implies C. Logic. Though it's not common in the Bible, it works wonders in real life.


Remainder of Mecha's post quoted due to applicability.

You are simply making up things that jesus never said, and that is simply not cool - let alone an effective argument.

"Maybe jesus wanted us to follow the laws in spirit even though he never said any such thing?"

How about maybe jesus said you pulled that anti-fact right out of your ass?
Basing an argument on nothing but wishful thinking is a logical fallacy that wastes everyone's time.
I'm looking for reasonable and intelligent responses.

Jesus and god Himself both say, on record, that you must kill as many religious minorities as possible until you die (or the end of the world, whichever comes first).

Otherwise, you are declared evil and sent to hell to be tortured for eternity.

 

[Absinthe]

you have not answered my question, did jesus specifically say to punish those who disobeyed these laws and kill religious minorities?

Wow, you're really gettind desparate here.

Supposing Jesus doesn't give the explicit command to kill somebody, we can still use deductive reasoning to conclude the following.

A) God's word is infallible and can never be changed.
B) Jesus never contradicts the God's word with the New Testament
C) Jesus commands people to continue following the original commands.

Therefore, following A, B, and C, Jesus (being God incarnate according to Christianity) is still commanding people to kill. Kill and love at the same time, ridiculously so.

Let's try it with a different example.

A) I have nothing on my head.
B) Cheese is on the moon.

Therefore, there is no cheese on my head!

See the similarity? The beauty of deductive reasoning is the ability to infer conclusions through different statements in the absence of a direct one. You should try it some time.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

you have not answered my question, did jesus specifically say to punish those who disobeyed these laws and kill religious minorities?
jesus brought about a new covenent where law isnt in the scripture, but in their hearts. because punishing those who didnt follow the laws never worked because people still sinned, it was a failed deterrent.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jeremiah 31:31-34;&version31;

Yeaah, I think the bulk of this post has been dealt with.
So let's look at the quote you've provided.

-Those are the words of the prophet Jeremiah.
-Jeremiah is not Jesus.

-Therefore those are not the words of Jesus.

-Jeremiah is a prophet who contradicts the laws of god.
-Only false prophets contradict the law.

-Therefore Jeremiah is a false prophet.

See, once again people are worshipping Jeremiah and Paul instead of Jesus Christ.
Would that make them idolators (and thus punishable by death)?