Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 The Bringer wrote:
And besides, you're wrong to says that human culture hasn't gravitated towards any religion, as Islam and Christianity are both the largest religion and share VERY similar roots.

And the third largest is Hinduism, that is REALLY EXTREMELY different from both Islam and Christianity. The simple fact of being polytheist is anathema to those two others. So your point doesn't seem that solid.

Christian... Live in a country were people killed each other for centuries over 'religion' (Northern Ireland) but knowing many of the protagonists they were never interests in God just in money, power and the usual crap people want. People have abused God forever and will continue to do it, probably guilty of it myself more than I care to admit.

Being a Christian to me isn't some mad crusade or weird life it's just normal life trying to connect each day with my creator who has given me so much. And in reality I'm not much good at it, but will keep at it because its pretty immense!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 The Bringer wrote:
And besides, you're wrong to says that human culture hasn't gravitated towards any religion, as Islam and Christianity are both the largest religion and share VERY similar roots.

And the third largest is Hinduism, that is REALLY EXTREMELY different from both Islam and Christianity. The simple fact of being polytheist is anathema to those two others. So your point doesn't seem that solid.

Even so, the whole dominance of religion thing is completely irrelevant.

 The Bringer wrote:
I give 1 case when the argument is wrong, and the statement is disproven. Besides, there are many other religions that involve divine revelation.

The point was "humans would create different religions after a reset button", you said "nuh-uh", and you think that's somehow disproving the point? What different religions have or don't have is irrelevant, they're not the same religion. Hell, Christianity isn't even consistent in its own beliefs, or you wouldn't have the crazy number of splinter groups out there.

Everything you have said so far is "suggests". There is nothing concrete, far from it. I make no assumption. I am merely giving reasons why the blanket statement given is false, and the reasoning flawed.

I accept there's nothing concrete (otherwise where would the need for debate be), but I'd rather have something logical supporting the point. And yes, you are making the assumption, your entire entire point of view presupposes that one religion is true, and guess what? It happens to be yours. You haven't given any reason why the 'blanket statement' is false other than you think it is. I refute your 'reasons' with "I don't care".

And besides, you're wrong to says that human culture hasn't gravitated towards any religion, as Islam and Christianity are both the largest religion and share VERY similar roots. You can trace their roots back to 2 brothers. Saying that humans don't tend to any "version" of a religion is natural for any religion. There are many uncertainties in Christianity, for example, and although they are not crucial it does lead to what you might call "versions" of Christianity.

No, I'm right in what I say. Islam has evolved from the other Abrahamic faiths, which is why I didn't include Islam in my list (I also grouped Judaism and Christianity and Greek and Roman gods for the same purpose). Human cultures that evolved independently, with no cross-cultural contamination or forced conversion have developed entirely different religions, even if some basic aspects (a creation myth, a single divine being, etc) are the same. Your claim of humans 'gravitating' towards one religion (Christianity) is easily explained by European global colonisation, forced conversion due to the Inquisition/Crusaders, Missionary work in the third world, so on. Hardly a 'natural gravitiation' of independent cultures towards one truth.

And just to be clear, I'm not talking about 'versions' of one faith, I'm talking about completely independent religions beliefs.

Does it look like I'm questioning this fact?

Not interested, included for comparitive purpose.

Edit: massive quote tag failures.

 Riquende wrote:

 The Bringer wrote:
I give 1 case when the argument is wrong, and the statement is disproven. Besides, there are many other religions that involve divine revelation.

The point was "humans would create different religions after a reset button", you said "nuh-uh", and you think that's somehow disproving the point? What different religions have or don't have is irrelevant, they're not the same religion.

Doesn't change the fact that all religions wouldn't necessarily be different. I would agree that any "wrong" religion would probably not exist in other realities/worlds.

 Riquende wrote:
Hell, Christianity isn't even consistent in its own beliefs, or you wouldn't have the crazy number of splinter groups out there.

Completely different matter. The reason Christianity has "splinter groups" is because there are only so many things you can tell people in a book... and these splinter groups arise for 2 reasons, either some groups don't take the Bible as collectively true, but rather pick and choose what they want to believe, or these people have disagreements over things the Bible does not specify, or does not specify clearly. Either way, Catholics and Protestants alike agree on most major points of the Bible. I've had a great deal of conversations with both sides, and they only disagree on minor matters, and often there is a great deal of misinformation that causes hostilities between them. (ie, Protestants claim that Catholics worship Mary, whereas Catholics would say they only revere her... etc.)

 Riquende wrote:

Everything you have said so far is "suggests". There is nothing concrete, far from it. I make no assumption. I am merely giving reasons why the blanket statement given is false, and the reasoning flawed.

I accept there's nothing concrete (otherwise where would the need for debate be), but I'd rather have something logical supporting the point. And yes, you are making the assumption, your entire entire point of view presupposes that one religion is true, and guess what? It happens to be yours. You haven't given any reason why the 'blanket statement' is false other than you think it is. I refute your 'reasons' with "I don't care".

Who said I was a Christian? And no I'm not making any assumption or presupposition. Never did I say that there would be a religion that was the same, I simply said that you couldn't say that the only thing that would remain the same is science.

 Riquende wrote:
Your claim of humans 'gravitating' towards one religion (Christianity) is easily explained by European global colonisation, forced conversion due to the Inquisition/Crusaders, Missionary work in the third world, so on. Hardly a 'natural gravitiation' of independent cultures towards one truth.

I probably shouldn't have said anything about the world gravitating towards Christianity, because it certainly isn't the truth. However, I do find it interesting that a cult that started in the Roman Empire managed to survive severe oppression and spread West, coming to dominate many nations. Just something interesting.

Well, I agree with the view that christianity is inconsistent with its own beliefs, but the same accusation can be leveled against any faith. Taking a look at any sect, and inspecting it, will reveal contradictions or inconsistencies. My own puritanical attitude caused me to pretty much turn to Judaism, but once that line of reasoning started, it couldn't stop, and on a good day I'm agnostic, on a bad day fervently atheist. I mean, take the one silly thing of "thou shalt have no other gods before me", and yet look at all the patron saints and the prayers that contradict this commandment.

While it is interesting that Christianity spread through the romanempire, it has to do with roman theology. It also really doesn't help Christianity's credibility given that all of the major Christian holidays fall on pagan holidays, and use pagan symbols. The way Christianity worked was by subverting or incorporating other religious ideas into the lore, but that's not really a worthwhile diacussionto get into because given sufficient time each religion or faith consumes or borrows from a neighbour.

The Bringer wrote:Doesn't change the fact that all religions wouldn't necessarily be different. I would agree that any "wrong" religion would probably not exist in other realities/worlds.

I guess it's either we have hundreds of false religions and one true religion, or we have a hundred and one false religion. I know where my bet is going.

The Bringer wrote:some groups don't take the Bible as collectively true, but rather pick and choose what they want to believe

Kind of mandatory on a self-contradictory book.

 The Bringer wrote:
The reason Christianity has "splinter groups" is because there are only so many things you can tell people in a book...

The thing is, the Bible is supposed to be the word of God. If God decided to reveal himself and bring 'the truth' to his chosen people, you'd think he'd be a bit more specific about things to prevent people getting the interpretation wrong. But instead we have a book that is full of inconsistencies and contradictions and things that are flat out wrong that the whole thing is just unbelievable.

 Shredder wrote:

 The Bringer wrote:
The reason Christianity has "splinter groups" is because there are only so many things you can tell people in a book...

The thing is, the Bible is supposed to be the word of God. If God decided to reveal himself and bring 'the truth' to his chosen people, you'd think he'd be a bit more specific about things to prevent people getting the interpretation wrong. But instead we have a book that is full of inconsistencies and contradictions and things that are flat out wrong that the whole thing is just unbelievable.

Not to mention a heck of a lot of people arguing that, no, they are the chosen ones, not the others, and this without getting into which mem ers of a faith once getting past that islam/Christianity/Judaism stuff.... People arguning over who is more-chosen......

 poda_t wrote:

 Shredder wrote:

 The Bringer wrote:
The reason Christianity has "splinter groups" is because there are only so many things you can tell people in a book...

The thing is, the Bible is supposed to be the word of God. If God decided to reveal himself and bring 'the truth' to his chosen people, you'd think he'd be a bit more specific about things to prevent people getting the interpretation wrong. But instead we have a book that is full of inconsistencies and contradictions and things that are flat out wrong that the whole thing is just unbelievable.

Not to mention a heck of a lot of people arguing that, no, they are the chosen ones, not the others, and this without getting into which mem ers of a faith once getting past that islam/Christianity/Judaism stuff.... People arguning over who is more-chosen......

Yeah, you're right.

Oh, so you mean the religion that your parents belong to, the one that they brought you up into, the religion that happens to be the dominant religion in the region where you live, THAT religion just so happens to be the One True Religion? Wow, you really lucked out there! Imagine if you'd have been born somewhere else, or at a different time in history, you'd be worshiping the wrong god! Lucky you!

I can talk with 1 person, not 3.

So, the "Word of God"... the inconsistencies and contradictions you mention I am not aware off. There is a chart on the internet about 1000 contradictions in the Bible, I started working on them one-by-one, and the first 15 or so were so incorrect I didn't even both continuing working through everything... as to this day I'm not aware of any direct contradictions in the Bible. Perhaps the most controversial subject is that of Predestination vs. Free Will... but interestingly enough, the relation between the two doesn't change anything for Christians, it just is a topic that creates heated debates.

Just because people debate who "the chosen one" actually is, doesn't change the fact that one of them could be right.

Besides, this has strayed far from the original path. Is there any reason my original statement is wrong concerning Divine Revelation? If not I think we're done here.

I am a Christian, and I find the majority of Christians tend to be inconsistent with their own beliefs. Take for instance the aids outbreak in the 1980s, where the church should have stepped up and lovingly treated this new generation of plague sufferers. Instead the "Christian Right" used it as an opportunity to turn homosexuals into pariahs. This is a direct contradiction to the "commands of Christ." Since I am religiously conservative but "a-political" leaning towards libertarianism I find the political hijaking of the evangelical movement one of the most cynical things in modern experience. Don't take this to mean that I think Christians shouldn't have a voice in the public sphere, but rather I believe the Republican Party has cynically used the Church and faith for their political goals. Some Christians seem to think being a good christian is rooted in their politics, rather I think your politics should be guided by your worldview.

/ I am sure I will get incoming DAKKA for this post.

- J

Besides, this has strayed far from the original path. Is there any reason my original statement is wrong concerning Divine Revelation? If not I think we're done here.

I believe you first have to prove that there is a divine to be revealed before we can deal with that...

Sorry for removing your name from the quote - on my phone and it is a pita to correct

 The Bringer wrote:
So, the "Word of God"... the inconsistencies and contradictions you mention I am not aware off.

YMMV, but let's just take one example among many that itches me : what about that fine story when Mose get all the way up to mount Sinai, get some rules from God which explicitly mention “You shall not kill” (amongst yet again strangely specific and not especially ethical stuff like “You shall not work on Sunday” and “You shall honor your parents”, but no mention of rape or slavery, because I guess that's no big deal), goes back to his people… and get everyone who worshiped a golden calf, wait for it, …
KILLED !

This comic (that some people might find offensive because it's absolutely not respectful and very derisive, but the rudest word here is farted) is actually a good jab at the tenth commandments' strange specificity :
http://www.god-comics.com/?p=313


However, I follow the Bible on one thing. I don't cut my hairs. I might loose my superpowers !

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Actually, it says you shouldn't murder. Murder is killing based off of hatred, or some other sinful emotion. And so killing and murder are 2 different things.

Oh really, I'm glad killing people for heresy is something nice and healthy, and totally not based on hatred. You heard that my Boko Haram friends ? Keep blowing off Christians, it's definitely not a sinful motivation that is driving you, and you definitely are not committing murder, because Christians are, you now, heretics. I would have earned a nice Godwin point if Hitler actually cared about religion, but actually he didn't, he cared only for supposed races, and I don't know, but maybe his notion of eugenics via genocide are considered as more sinful that religious hatred.

I think I found a contradiction : isn't there something in the Bible about good being good, and not a heartless horrible bastard ?

Now, maybe you will tell me it's not okay anymore because Jesus.
Let's sum it up. So, before, God was already extremely good and totally not the cruelest bastard, but it was totally okay, and actually encouraged by God, to kill others for blasphemy or heresy, because some guy and some gal, a very very long time ago, decided that they would like to know the difference between good and evil (also known as the original sin, go figure). But then God became a man by impregnating a woman while still being God at the same time, and the human-that-was-God-while-not-being-God died, so now it's not okay anymore to kill people for heresy or blasphemy even though we still try to see the difference between good and evil (well, kind off) . Err, is there a contradiction in here ? Someone tell me, I'm too confused to think it through now.

The “cutting your hair will cost you your superpowers, growing them back will give you your powers back” part was easier to follower, and quite cooler. I'm really surprised neither DC nor Marvel used Samson in one of their superheroes' stable. Could make for some cool story. Samson versus The Barber !!!

Just a few inconsistencies within Genesis:

Genesis 1:11-12 and 1:26-27 Trees came before Adam.
Genesis 2:4-9 Trees came after Adam.

Genesis 1:20-21 and 26-27 Birds were created before Adam.
Genesis 2:7 and 2:19 Birds were created after Adam.

Genesis 1:24-27 Animals were created before Adam.
Genesis 2:7 and 2:19 Animals were created after Adam.

Genesis 1:26-27 Adam and Eve were created at the same time.
Genesis 2:7 and 2:21-22 Adam was created first, woman sometime later.

There are plenty more.

Question, did you actually read the Bible? Or did you pick that off of some website.

Genesis 1:11...27 - God planted seeds in the Earth
Genssis 2:4-9 - Adam was created, then God watered the earth and plants grew.

The problem is that people like you don't even read the Bible, or lack the understanding to properly read it, and you go through the Bible verse by verse making up contradictions that don't exist, but hey, if you "find" enough contradictions I will never be able to address all of them... and thus the Bible must be false.

EDIT - Rudeness, I've been having a bad day altogether, it shouldn't be reflected in my posts.

 The Bringer wrote:
idiots like you

Reported...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shredder wrote:
Just a few inconsistencies within Genesis:

Genesis 1:11-12 and 1:26-27 Trees came before Adam.
Genesis 2:4-9 Trees came after Adam.

Genesis 1:20-21 and 26-27 Birds were created before Adam.
Genesis 2:7 and 2:19 Birds were created after Adam.

Genesis 1:24-27 Animals were created before Adam.
Genesis 2:7 and 2:19 Animals were created after Adam.

Genesis 1:26-27 Adam and Eve were created at the same time.
Genesis 2:7 and 2:21-22 Adam was created first, woman sometime later.

There are plenty more.

I think I addressed this at one point earlier in this thread. And of course this is a personal opinion.

Genesis 1 doesn't ever mention Adam, or the Garden of Eden. According to it God created the earth and humans.
Genesis 2 deals with the creation of Adam and the creation of the Garden of Eden.

Basically in Genesis 1 God creates everything, let's it chill, doesn't mingle.
Then he decides to show himself to man and begin a relationship with them. He creates Adam and places him in the Garden and in order to prove to him that he actually really is the God that made everything he creates "again" in front of Adam. Adam and Eve were not the first humans to walk on the earth, all those people were created in Genesis 1. Adam and Eve were the first humans to walk in the knowledge of God. That's why there were people for their kids to shag up with after they got kicked out.

Now keep in mind that I am not speaking with any kind of "This is what God says" kind of authority, nor do I claim that I have uncovered the only true interpretation. This is just my personal observation that I am sharing.

Sorry for loosing my cool, there is no excuse for it.

I challenge any 1 of you to list the 5 of the most glaring inconsistencies in the Bible, and I will challenge them, but no more.

 The Bringer wrote:
Sorry for loosing my cool, there is no excuse for it.

Don't worry about it, I can understand it, when someone is questioning something you strongly believe in, you can get very emotional about it.
But that's what discussions like this are for, asking questions and pointing out misunderstandings and learning more about what and why people believe what they do.

But to answer your question, yes, I did get that list off a website for convenience, and while I admit to not having read all of the Bible yet (I do plan on getting round to it) I have read through Genesis.

 The Bringer wrote:
I challenge any 1 of you to list the 5 of the most glaring inconsistencies in the Bible, and I will challenge them, but no more.

I'm sorry, but if killing people over divergence of religious believes is not murder or even hateful to you, I can quite see how you can deny any inconsistencies in the Bible.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 The Bringer wrote:
I challenge any 1 of you to list the 5 of the most glaring inconsistencies in the Bible, and I will challenge them, but no more.

I'm sorry, but if killing people over divergence of religious believes is not murder or even hateful to you, I can quite see how you can deny any inconsistencies in the Bible.

I don't think that religious differences is a reason a justifiable reason to kill others. Give me specific cases. Today, sometimes "Christians" will do things such as bombing abortion clinics, I think this is entirely unjustified, and there is not 1 reason that the Bible supports such actions.

 The Bringer wrote:
there is not 1 reason that the Bible supports such actions.

You may think that but clearly many others disagree with you, some violently. It is also interesting that depending on which branch of Christianity you opt for, "the bible" can have different books/texts contained within it - I'm sure you are also aware of a number of times in history where an individual or group decided to cut out or add in different books or sections of text from "the bible",

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 The Bringer wrote:
there is not 1 reason that the Bible supports such actions.

You may think that but clearly many others disagree with you, some violently. It is also interesting that depending on which branch of Christianity you opt for, "the bible" can have different books/texts contained within it - I'm sure you are also aware of a number of times in history where an individual or group decided to cut out or add in different books or sections of text from "the bible",

I am well aware. Imagine it from a Christians perspective, you have to figure out what is the inspired word of God, and what isn't... it took a few Church councils to decide which texts they thought would be safe to include in the conglomeration we know as the Bible. I would like you to give an argument for why the Bible justifies murder of non-Christians, its very hard to figure out an argument and then build a counter-argument.

And for anyone else listing contradictions in the Bible, please clearly lay out your argument including verse references if you feel like anything is ambiguous.

 The Bringer wrote:
Imagine it from a Christians perspective, you have to figure out what is the inspired word of God, and what isn't... it took a few Church councils to decide which texts they thought would be safe to include in the conglomeration we know as the Bible.

Well, it is a good job that people can determine what is and isn't the word of god so accurately. Though the fact that different bibles have different texts kind of indicates that it is not quite so cut and dry... or none of it is the word of god

I would like you to give an argument for why the Bible justifies murder of non-Christians, its very hard to figure out an argument and then build a counter-argument.

I don't recall ever saying anything on that topic

Though as I don't use the bible to guide anything I do, I could not say how or why Christians justify doing anything they do, let alone being complete gits to their fellow human beings. Certainly through history religious people of many stripes have used their beliefs to do some truely horrible things.

And for anyone else listing contradictions in the Bible, please clearly lay out your argument including verse references if you feel like anything is ambiguous.

I'm still more interested in establishing if it is worth doing that - please provide proof that there is something divine. Without that there is no point looking at the bible or any other religious text since it is just a man made work of fiction.

Edit: fixed quotes

The Bringer wrote:I don't think that religious differences is a reason a justifiable reason to kill others. Give me specific cases.

I already did. It just so happened you either missed the message or didn't care to answer. But I can do it again, if need be. But really, the first example is very interesting in how you seemed to defend the idea that killing people for worshiping a golden calf was not a contradiction toward the Thou shalt not “[kill] based off of hatred, or some other sinful emotion” commandment. Is it a contradiction, or is it not ?

Let's be clear here. I obviously don't suspect you of wanting to kill or harm anyone for religious divergence. I'm just a bit bewildered by your propensity to defend this kind of things in the Bible's myth. That'll likely never translate into any support in actual, non-mythological times (you don't support crusades, do you ?), but it's still a disturbing first step. Especially given I've already blasphemed god's name, and I don't like being stoned.

On a (slightly) lighter note, Leviticus 24:17 always remind me of this classic French comic :
http://rakotoarison.over-blog.com/article-27251921.html
Captions are mostly “Anyone killing someone else voluntarily will be executed”.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, it's quite funny how the Tau player is defending religion while the Sister player is attacking it when the Tau are the faction which get all sci-fi political utopia/dystopia theme (which usually don't include any kind of religion, if not outright banishing it) while the Sisters… well, are pretty religious somehow .
Might be because grimdark oblige, it the worst of religion and the worst of sci-fi atheistic political dystopia .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

I would like you to give an argument for why the Bible justifies murder of non-Christians, its very hard to figure out an argument and then build a counter-argument.

I don't recall ever saying anything on that topic

Poor bringer was clearly directing that toward me. We are many all arguing with him altogether with different arguments each, it's not easy for him.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

The Bringer wrote:I don't think that religious differences is a reason a justifiable reason to kill others. Give me specific cases.

I already did. It just so happened you either missed the message or didn't care to answer. But I can do it again, if need be. But really, the first example is very interesting in how you seemed to defend the idea that killing people for worshiping a golden calf was not a contradiction toward the Thou shalt not “[kill] based off of hatred, or some other sinful emotion” commandment. Is it a contradiction, or is it not ?

Sorry, I skimmed through your post because your ideas were all over the place and I didn't want to bother to make sense of it all.

Also the Israelites were not killed for worshiping a golden calf iirc, they were simply punished.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Let's be clear here. I obviously don't suspect you of wanting to kill or harm anyone for religious divergence. I'm just a bit bewildered by your propensity to defend this kind of things in the Bible's myth. That'll likely never translate into any support in actual, non-mythological times (you don't support crusades, do you ?), but it's still a disturbing first step. Especially given I've already blasphemed god's name, and I don't like being stoned.

You have too understand two things here, the Levitical Laws applied to God's people and God's people only. Therefore you should not be stoned for blasphemy. Secondly. the Levitical Laws are part of the Old Covenant and were replaced by the New Covenant, so they don't apply anymore.

EDIT:

Concerning "He who kills a man shall surely be put to death" - I went back and read the Greek, and the Greek word used in this passage is actually φονεύσει, which translates to kill/murder. The "put to death" is the Greek word θανατώνω, which means to kill/execute. Often times seeming contradictions like these arise from mis-translations/unclear translations.

 The Bringer wrote:
Also the Israelites were not killed for worshiping a golden calf iirc, they were simply punished.

Okay, I'm really sorry I don't understand ancient Greek, even though I had course for 3 years (I was a bad student, and I forgot everything extremely fast), so I must rely on translation.
This translation seem to imply they were killed. Like, really. How does the original phrase it ?

 The Bringer wrote:
You have too understand two things here, the Levitical Laws applied to God's people and God's people only. Therefore you should not be stoned for blasphemy.

I'm pretty sorry, but first this whole emphasis on the fact it applies to everybody including the stranger seems to imply otherwise. Second… by God's people, do you mean Jews ? Because it just so happen that by Judaic laws, I am a Jew. Third, should I feel relieved that this horrible thing applies only to Jews ? Do that make it in any way better ? Sounds to me like it's yet another discrimination, and quite worse actually.

 The Bringer wrote:
Secondly. the Levitical Laws are part of the Old Covenant and were replaced by the New Covenant, so they don't apply anymore.

Yep, already mentioned that earlier :

Now, maybe you will tell me it's not okay anymore because Jesus.
Let's sum it up. So, before, God was already extremely good and totally not the cruelest bastard, but it was totally okay, and actually encouraged by God, to kill others for blasphemy or heresy, because some guy and some gal, a very very long time ago, decided that they would like to know the difference between good and evil (also known as the original sin, go figure). But then God became a man by impregnating a woman while still being God at the same time, and the human-that-was-God-while-not-being-God died, so now it's not okay anymore to kill people for heresy or blasphemy even though we still try to see the difference between good and evil (well, kind off) . Err, is there a contradiction in here ? Someone tell me, I'm too confused to think it through now.

Would you tell me it was okay back then ? Would you care to explain how some guy dying on a cross made a difference on what is morally wrong and what is morally right ?

 The Bringer wrote:
Concerning "He who kills a man shall surely be put to death" - I went back and read the Greek, and the Greek word used in this passage is actually φονεύσει, which translates to kill/murder. The "put to death" is the Greek word θανατώνω, which means to kill/execute. Often times seeming contradictions like these arise from mis-translations/unclear translations.

It was a joke. A pun. I thought it was obvious, really. A reason to link to some silly cartoon which doesn't reference Christianity anywhere.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

I'm pretty sorry, but first this whole emphasis on the fact it applies to everybody including the stranger seems to imply otherwise.

Leviticus was part of a covenant with the Jews, which Jews don't consider to be binding on the rest of humanity. There is nothing more to say about this. I wish I had references, but historically I know this is true.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Second… by God's people, do you mean Jews ? Because it just so happen that by Judaic laws, I am a Jew. Third, should I feel relieved that this horrible thing applies only to Jews ? Do that make it in any way better ? Sounds to me like it's yet another discrimination, and quite worse actually.

My bad, kind of funny mistake though.

And no, its not discrimination, it was self imposed in a sense by the Jews. Basically, the Jews more than any other group of people had seen the hand of God working in the world. They had seen miracle after miracle, and they were God's "chosen people."... of course they were held to a higher standard.

EDIT: Wait, are you a Jew? I don't know what you mean that by Judaic Law you are a Jew.