That is because one of the purposes of Jesus’ live was to bring a new law. The laws of the Old Testament were used by the Pharisees to prove their righteousness. The scribes wrote volumes of rules that were not in the laws of Moses. The Pharisees claimed that they followed those rules and that it proved their self-righteousness. These laws were taken to the Nth degree. They were things like how much you could lift on the Sabbith, how many steps you could walk, what rooms in the house you could go in and many many things.
And stoning people to death for having sex? Was that added after the fact? If so, why is it still presented in the OT as coming directly from God? The contradictions between the old and New Testament have always seemed extremely severe and I've always wondered how Christians reconcile the two. Your perspective on this may very well be correct. It may also very well not be correct. It's never spelled out explicitly. The meaning is derived from interpretation. A Muslim could point out lots of things in the Christian bible that can be interpreted as violent and hateful. The fact that you personally don't interpret them that way and see them in a broader philosophical context can be (and undoubtedly is) also true of the way moderate Muslims interpret the Koran. This is why I don't think it's fair to paint Islam with the broad brush that you're using, unless you feel it's equally fair of them (or me) to do the same with the Christian faith.
I'm glad that you're so good natured about these discussions. I never mean to offend people or be mean spirited. I just enjoy challenging people's ideas and having mine challenged in return. I don't see you as an adversary either. I'm a firm believer that you can tell very little about a person from their faith. Their humanism is what matters most to me. In every religion, every nation, and every walk of life, there are wonderful people and awful ones and it's an individual thing far more than its a product of their particular flavor of god or politics.
