Replies

Leviticus 20:16.

Don’t get me wrong; just because they’re better at following their holy book than you are at following yours doesn’t make it right.

But let’s not pretend there’s a great big difference on this issue.

A)
I have read the Bible cover to cover more than once. Nowhere have I ever found a general injunction to aggressively seek out other cultures/nations and persecute them until they convert to Judaism (i.e., a Judaic equivalent to Jihad), nor a general injunction to persecute non-Jews outside of the confines of Israel/Judah for violating the Torah.

The Old Testament is about God’s Chosen People being called out to separate themselves from the pagan world, not to seek out and force the rest of the world to conform to Judaism.

As such, they were at times instructed to use violence in specific instances and for limited purposes, e.g., war over the Promised Land, but never as a general and lasting approach.

This same Old Testament does, in contrast, have the general and lasting proscription against murder: Thou shalt not kill. The Koran, which is replete with calls for general and lasting war against infidels throughout the world, only has a qualified such proscription, which in context, obviously allows for Jihad.

B)
This, as stated, is the Torah: Judaic Law. It applies to Judaism, the Old Covenant under Law. It does not apply to Christianity, the New Covenant under Grace.

Christians who truly follow “their holy book” - the Old and New Testaments taken as a whole and in context - are peaceable and tolerant, even if they vocally condemn as unnatural sin the act of homoeroticism - which is precisely why the secular left can attack them without fear: They are in fact following Christ’s example of hating the sin but not the sinner.

Your glib post was as ignorant as it was arrogant.

I suppose you consider yourself some kind of quasi-conservative. (Let me guess: libertarian? atheist?)

But let’s not pretend there’s a great big difference on this issue between you and any leftist who relies on the fallacy of moral/ethical/philosophical equivalence to avoid honest debate and to legitimize propaganda.