The usual Christian argument is that Old Testament laws don't apply anymore because Jesus came by and taught people forgiveness and mercy.

I take issue with that argument though. I'll quote from a post I wrote a while back:

--------------------------------

Firstly, Jesus was very specific in saying that he is not advocating that humanity depart from Old Testament law and follow a new law. He said at the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)

Jesus said also:

The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing their way into it. It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. (Luke 16:16-17)

Yes, Jesus (and John the Baptist) brought forth new information, but they are by no means abolishing the laws of the Old Testament.

[...]

Thirdly, if one is to say that the moral teachings of the Old Testament are no longer relevant, because they are based on ancient laws and not on more modern, "correct" concepts of morality, why is the Old Testament still part of the Bible? Why is it still regarded the immutable word of God? Why hasn't it been relegated to a dusty corner, as nothing more than an amusing insight into the iniquities of the ancient world? Are Christians supposed to study the OT just to see how cruel God used to be before the coming of Jesus?

I submit that the God of pre-Christianity and early Christianity was every bit as cruel as the OT says he was. He is not a deity of eternal perfection, but one whose morality was strictly bound to the time when he was first worshipped - a time when people accepted slavery, female inferiority, etc. Jesus was better in his advocacy of love and forgiveness, but he too held many of the moral views of his age, which we now find immoral. The attempts of modern Christians to rewrite their religion and make it sound morally acceptable to 21st century folks either makes Christianity an internally inconsistent religion, or changes it so much that they can barely be called Christians.

--------------------------------

Another point not in the snippet above is that it's not only the Old Testament that has such harsh laws. The New Testament affirms the institution of slavery, among other nasty things.

Christian dogmatic hypocrisy at it's finest.

But think about it this way... Do you really want all the Christians to follow all of that horseshit in their book that tells them to stone adulterers, kill witches, and treat women like property?

Those who follow The Bible (all of it) are true Christians. Many of the Christians today realize that The Bible is full of irrational, hateful, and quite awful things. They try to rationalize an already irrational religion by viewing Jesus's actions through a silly pipe dream. The fact is, to believe in Jesus The Bible tells we must also believe in his teachings and beliefs. While Jesus did not directly condemn homosexuality and all of the other primitive condemnations in the old testament, he inherited the punishment for original sin. Homosexuality and all of the other condemnations some Christians of today ignore were part of the inherited original sin that Jesus was sacrificed for. Also, God is still a monster because he wants to try to sentence his creations to an infinite punishment for finite sin, and some of those sins we have been able to deem as scientifically good for us.

I have also experienced frustration with Catholicism. They realize the majority of The Bible is hateful trash, yet they still cling to Christianity. Many of them posit an imperfect, logical god to believe in. But by doing that they lose all foundation that standard Christianity has, and they are still just trying to rationalize something ancient and irrational.

Or is it fair to judge an entire group based on the actions of a select few who are identified with a stereotype?

Let's identify a group with the label "leaders." Now there's a culpable sect. Leadership has been the cause of all wars and genocides.

Any problem you could blame on religion, it seems like could just as easily be attributed to leaders.

Ask yourself, should we blame our problems more on the commanders, or those obedient to them? What I find is that pointing the blame outward and away from ourselves is a universal tendency shared regardless of the essentially meaningless "religious" or "secular" classifications.

It's all a weak attempt to avoid personal responsibility.

These days, most Christians do not interpret the Bible literally and that is how it should be. The Reverand at my Church even says this.

There is a easy answer to everything. Don't believe in a religion. Quality of live= increase by approximately 783 percent

Why do atheist continually dwell on something they claim doesn't even exist? Sure looks like God is important to them or they wouldn't keep trying to bring him down all the time. The true extremist is found not in their words, but in their actions.

The Old Testament was done away with at the Advent of Christ.

The Old Testament should no longer be in print: Jesus Himself said it was abolished, so why debate it? It is done away with.

Only the New Testament is in effect now.

Sorry parts of the opening statement were a little confusing, I was rather intoxicated when I created the debate. Re-read this morning like 'huh?'.

I believe you have already told us the answer to 'Are Extreme Religious People True Followers of Faith?'.

All that is needed to deduce the answer is to pull apart the question. The question has 'extreme religious people' inside it. So obviously these people are very religious and support God. If people are extremely religious and do what the Bible says then how can they not be the true followers of faith?

This is a closed question and I would be surprised if someone disputed this argument.

The true followers of faith need not always be the right ones to look up to. Certain extremists are just living up to the name. Nothing is ever correct. Not even the Holy books. There is no need to be blind and lame followers. That is just stupid.