Christianity is the lesser evil of all religions and beliefs

As was done in Spain, where as I wrote one of the decrees was entirely on religious grounds, heretics were burnt just because of religion, you cannot have it both ways!

 

Saying the same thing over and over are not debating skills either.
You have been proven wrong, even by your own source.
Claiming there are more violent passages in the bible than the Qur'an, and claiming that is a comparison is Christian,
is misleading.

The violent passages in the bible are in the Jewish OT.
Even your own source points that out.

The Qur'an is only 14% of Islamic text.
The main violence is in the teachings and deeds of Muhammed.


Repeating the same thing over and over, even though you were proven wrong, does not make you right.

 

No I provided source after source that you simply could not rebut, and actually when faced with the sort of misinformation you are peddling then sticking to the point and repeating it over and over again is a legitimate debate tactic.
So again the Holy text of Christianity is the Holy Bible which includes the old and New testaments. This is a sourced fact unlike your un sourced opinion based on no understanding.

 

The cathars were rich and had loaned the church money.

 

Spin it any way you like. your own source broke down what is Jewish and what is Christian.
The laws changed with the coming of Christ, and the new testament, creating a new religion, Christianity.
The old is just a history book, and the laws are no longer used to govern the people.

 

Paul/Saul wrote most of the NT.

 

No spin required, I have sourced it over and over again the Christian Bible includes both the Old and New testaments, your highly individual and incorrect interpretation is followed by no one but extreme right wing Christians and the Nazi GDC. You are simply incorrect and can provide no source to back up your falsifications, none!

 

The witch burnings of the middle ages all over Germany and Western Europe were condoned by the church.

 

Attempting at misleading info again.
We know the bible contains both the old and new.
You can say it all you want, as you have been doing, we know that.
But even your own source broke down what is Jewish, and what is Christian.
I have provided biblical text explaining it.
And your own source explained it.
Nothing else can be said, because we know what will happen.
You will keep repeating the same BS, and to be honest,
this is getting to childish for my tastes.

 

The church, not the religion.

 

No it is your unsourced opinion that argues with the concept of ONE CHRISTIAN BIBLE, containing the Old and New Testaments The Christian bible is all Christian how surprising!

 

At least be honest about it.

I have provided biblical text to prove my point.
Even you provided a breakdown on what is jewish and what is Christian..
There is nothing left to say.

 

LOLOL

Malleus Maleficarum - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_Maleficarum

Overview
The Malleus Maleficarum, usually translated as the Hammer of Witches, is the best known and the most thorough treatise on witchcraft. It was written by the discredited Catholic clergyman Heinrich Kramer (under his Latinized name Henricus Institoris) and first published in the German city of Speyer in 1487.

It endorses extermination of witches and for this purpose develops a detailed legal and theological theory. It was a bestseller, second only to the Bible in terms of sales for almost 200 years. The top theologians of the Inquisition at the Faculty of Cologne condemned the book as recommending unethical and illegal proced…

 

Jesus didn't start a new religion.

 

This pretty much proves my point.

 

He didn't start it.
It was started after him.
Christianity as we know it, is about 360 AD.

 

That is right nothing proves your point!

 

Saul/Paul never met Jesus... nor did Luke or Mark.

Mark was a disciple of St. Peter and wrote he what heard from Peter.

Luke was a disciple of St. Paul and wrote what he heard from Paul.

Jesus never intended to start a new religion.. He was warning the Jews against their in-fighting with each other AND the Roman occupation. He was trying to teach non-violent resistance.

 

He was the bronze age hippie.

 

It's why I blocked him in the other thread. He didn't have any point to make, just kept repeating the same mindless mantra over and over and over and over and over...

As a former Christian, I can tell you, yasureoktoo is correct. The "Bible" for Christians means the New Testament. The Old Testament is purely included for the sake of completeness, not because it holds any bearing on how to live life as a Christian. The "Law" in the Old Testament includes 613 specific commandments to the Jews. Christians consider exactly ten of these (the Ten Commandments) to be binding on them.

Click here for the Pocket New Testament... all the Christian really needs.

 

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Some hippie!

 

.

 

I don't think so... At least the Sermon on the Mount does not support that notion. He was political in that he also understood how egregious the Roman occupation was.

 

Exactly the same here, you cannot cope with people who stick to the point, provide sources and do not fall for deflection techniques. All a Christian needs is his Bible, full stop.

 

"Sword" in scripture is usually a euphemism for "word".