Jesus also said that he didn't come to change the laws of the prophets, so if he contradicted anything toward the end of the OT, he must've been a liar.
The "laws" are meant as the Ten Commandments only; it's clear from his conflict with the religious establishment that he's meant to have contradicted the rest.
Well, religious text is always taken relatively. For instance, take the Bible, and put it in the same situation as Iraq, and you'll have terrorist Christian groups doing the same. But Christian countries are at peace, their governments are very loose, and that is PRECISELY why you don't see such things. It's not to do with the religion, because any of the Abrahamic religions can be taken extremistly, it's to do with the environment that the religion is in. @James: homosexuals are not innocent. I said No killing of innocence is justifiable.
Pure and without wrongdoing. No Human is purely innocent, but you get that definition. Without the commiting of any crime.
So you can justify killing anyone, basically - even homosexuals, just for being homosexual. Must be nice to have the authority to decide what "wrongdoing" is, if that 's the only barrier to killing someone.
That is the problem with fundamentalists. They all consider themselves holier than thou. Nobody is capable of reaching the standards they set. Nobody can be holy enough. So it follows that anybody and everybody deserves the evil they deploy in the name of their god. Nobody is innocent. Everybody is guilty. Everybody deserves death.
That's the Sciforum's non-leftie experience in spades. Fundies dissing fundies. Holy evilness, Batman!
