LEGO,

<<"Absolutists" are a personality type equating to fanatics.>>

There you go with another of your absolutes. You make accusations against Christian absolutists but yours is a self-defeating tactic as you practise the very thing you accuse others of doing.

<<The basis of the Christian faith are the pacifist teachings of a Jewish philosopher named Jacob bar Joseph, (also known as "Jesus Christ").>>

This demonstrates your selective reading of the NT. One of the fundamentals of the Christian faith is not pacifist teaching but the death of Jesus for the sins of the world. See John 3:16, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+3%3A16&version=NLT

<<Mennonites take the pacific teachings of Jacob bar Joseph....>>
I know Mennonites and other Anabaptists but they have no such beliefs gained from 'pacific teachings'!

<<they (Mennonites) still don't put supposed "witches" or homosexuals to death, just because God told them to do it. So even fundamentalists can reject Absolutist, fanatical thinking in some respects.>>

Neither do today's Christians because we live under the New Covenant and not the Old Covenant for Israel as a nation. Your biblical understanding in this area is deficient. Why don't you read what the Qu'ran says to do to homosexuals today?

<<Since I don't know any Christians, I can't really speak for what a modern Christian believes>>

THERE WE HAVE IT. You're speaking from lack of knowledge of contemporary Christians and Christianity. No wonder you present these straw man fallacies about Christian theology on OLO.

<<Most Christians rationalise around those absolutist teachings or instructions which are almost universally considered wrong in modern society>>

Do Christians rationalise around it being right to murder, lie, steal, commit adultery, rape, engage in sexual fornication, dishonouring parents, taking God's name in vain, and idolatry??

<<They don't believe that the universe was created in six days, they think that it is just a quaint legend.>>

How would you know when you've stated in your post: <<Since I don't know any Christians, I can't really speak for what a modern Christian believes.>>

So where are your ideas about Christianity coming from? Out of your fertile imagination or from your antagonism towards God?

Strange how Lego is probably one of the most rational posters on olo. It just shows that when someone becomes a Christophobe they really do become irrational.

Oh, rubbish Ozspen. Your premise is, that simply naming anything is absolutist. Calling a vegetarian a vegetarian is not absolutist. "Absolutist" personalities are just another named personality classification like "introverted" or "extroverted."

I didn't bother tossing your laughable "logic" about witches back in your face because it is pointless. If you refuse to admit that any God who orders the genocide of men, women and children (even "their beasts of the field") is certainly not a God of love and compassion, then your critical analysis circuits are so out of whack that they are vestigial or non existent. You have implied that you do not even believe in evolution. 2019AD, and you still can't get your head around what is a universally accepted scientific fact. The debate around evolution was won more than 100 years ago and since that time almost everything we have learned in biology, microbiology, geology and paleontology has reinforced that fact. It is fair to assume that you are a fundamentalist, at the very least.

On the subject of what Christians rationalize around, they don't have to rationalize around most of the offences you named, because they are already considered offences today. As to graven images, you will have to ask the Catholics how they rationalize around that one. Although from memory, even the Prots are not averse to displaying images of what they think the man who was titled "Jesus Christ" looked like, in paintings and stained glass windows. If Christian clergymen were Absolutists like the Muslim mullahs are on that score, there would be no graven images in any church.

Lastly, you say that since I am not a Christian, then I can't comment on what modern Christian believe. That is like saying that since Runner, LEGO or Ozspen are not Muslims, they can't comment on what modern Muslims believe. Polls investigating Muslim opinions have revealed something like half of them are fundamentalists or fanatics. Since Christianity has evolved into a much more saner religion, I would opine that the proportion of fundamentalists and fanatics in Christianity is much smaller.

Present company excluded.

'The debate around evolution was won more than 100 years ago and since that time almost everything we have learned in biology, microbiology, geology and paleontology has reinforced that fact. It is fair to assume that you are a fundamentalist, at the very least.'

absolute crpp. And the science is settled on gw eh Lego. Evolution has as many holes as man made gw. The science is not settled despite your flawed faith.

You don't accept evolution either, Runner? Jesus Christ, no wonder the churches are empty, and you can't attract the young.

I have debated opponents before who simply refuse to acknowledge self evident facts, and who do everything they can to deny, deny, deny, and muddy the water. Such people are completely dishonest because they know that they are wrong, but to them, their ideology is far more important than plain truth.

I would not level that charge at you or Ozspen though. You and Ozspen are as honest as the day is long. It is just that you have this absolute faith in complete nonsense because you think that believing such nonsense will allow you to live forever. But regardless of whether difficult opponents are honest or dishonest, the best way to deal with either group is pretty standard.

You stop appealing to their ability to reason one on one, and instead, you pretend that you are in a hall full of impartial observers, and let the audience (or the readers) be the judge.

If you refuse to understand that a God who orders the genocide of an entire tribe of people, including children, babies, and even their "beasts of the field" is not a God of love at all, then a room full of impartial observers would laugh you off the stage. So too, Ozspen's implication that real witches do, or did, exist, would have them rolling in the aisles.

Ozspen's peculiar logic that it was OK for God to "order the Jews" to execute witches, therefore absolves the Christians of the blame for murdering tens of thousands of innocent Christian women for the next 1600 years, would not go over too well with an audience, either. Unless you can convince the audience that the holy instructions in the OT relate solely to Jews and not Christians. That would open a can or worms. Since God told the Jews that homosexuality was wrong, and (to the best of my knowledge) Jesus said diddly squat about homosexuals, then non Jewish homosexuality could be OK with God.

LEGO,

<<I would not level that charge at you or Ozspen though. You and Ozspen are as honest as the day is long. It is just that you have this absolute faith in complete nonsense because you think that believing such nonsense will allow you to live forever.>>

I have absolute faith in the absolute facts of the existence of God and Jesus' death, burial and resurrection to save all sinners who will seek God's forgiveness for their sins and repent. My faith has its foundation built on FACTS and not 'complete nonsense', no matter what your worldview causes you to believe.

<<Unless you can convince the audience that the holy instructions in the OT relate solely to Jews and not Christians. That would open a can or worms.>>

The Bible was written by men under God's inspiration over a 1,500 year time span. During this time, God dealt with His people in diverse ways. What the Bible says to the Israelites living under judges and kings is different from God's requirements for Christians under the NT.

To put to death homosexuals, children who curse parents, witches and adulterers were for a time in the history of Israel. Those arrangements have changed radically since Jesus Christ came into the world.

Let's check out the OT instructions of the death penalty for homosexuality. See Leviticus 20:13, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Lev+20%3A13&version=NLT.

What is the context? 'The LORD said to Moses, “Give the people of Israel these instructions, which apply both to native Israelites and to the foreigners living in Israel...."' (Lev 20:1). There is not a word that it applies to Christians. They didn't exist at that time.

Heb 9:12 demonstrate Christ's blood sacrifice on Golgotha demonstrated the end of the OT regime and what it had pointed to - Christ - who was God's 'final unrepeatable sacrifice for sins.... the wonder of Christ, who unleashed these massive changes in the world.'.

Massive changes included doing away with the death penalty for homosexuality, adultery, etc.

(continued)