Gay rights within the template of religion proves flaws in "religion"

[Esquilax]

What are my standards for deciding? Okay
1) look at the most devoted Christian you know. Perhaps a priest or a layman?
Does he/ would he- defend rape, throw stones at a prostitute, beat his wife, EVEN if there was no law against it?

Whoa, whoa! Hold the phone!

So, your method for deciding what is and isn't christian behavior... is that you find a person who most exemplifies christian behavior, and see if they act in ways that are in keeping with christian behavior?

... And at no point in writing that sentence did you read back over it and see how completely circular that definition is?

if Christians don't do all that, they're not faithful. Because they're not following Christian law. But that's not the case. Would you say they aren't Christians? There is nothing wrong about any faith. It's the people on top who guide the people below them to do bad things in the name of religion.

Bull. Like I pointed out, you have no basis for deciding that any of the scriptural christian teachings actually come from Jesus; they're all anonymously written years after his death, so it's equally possible that those same "people on top" were the authors there, and in fact that's literally true, given that church leaders at one time voted to decide what was canonical scripture and what isn't. What you read in the bible today is solely the product of those "people on top" and not your messiah at all.

Beyond which, again, those scriptures are full of evil stuff too, like the repeated endorsements of slavery.

Now why do I believe in gospel accounts and letters 2000 years old? Because they not only showed what he did but also what others did for their belief in him. Who would die for something false?

Who would die for something false? Every martyr of every other religion in the world, in your view. That was easy.

(note I'm writing about before the new testament) they did die, and many Jews were Christian even before Paul went to Rome. You can't say that Acts didn't happen (Christianity had to have SOME beginning)

How do you know that the beginning of christianity is accurately represented in Acts? Oh, what's that? You don't?

Ps- and seriously, connecting present day christians to murderous christians in middle ages is like comparing modern romans to ancient romans who gathered to watch lions eat people up

So you're saying that christianity's objective, never changing morality, written by god... changed over time?