Christians should not be involved in politics.

When I say "massive religious movements", I am referring to universalizing religions. These are religions that have supporters in every country who actively try seeking out new members. By definition they seek power. They are literally going door to door asking for people to join their ranks. Power in numbers is power nonetheless. A principal Christian value is that one should love his neighbor as he loves himself. To fulfill this idea, Christians have to be involved in politics. In creating food drives and providing economic and political support to countries in need, they are directly involved in politics. There is no other realistic source of arranging such organizations on a scale that would make a difference. I will ignore the point about whether or not Christians are bound to the laws of the Old Testament, because that is a different argument. However, for my position, Christians are bound by neither testament nor by any omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent God. I don't see how Christian revivals and movements like Martin Luther's Protestant Reformation have anything to do with the involvement in politics, which is only a matter of the basis of all Christian doctrine, the bible. Perhaps if you quoted a second source from one of these movements it would add to the argument. I did not say that all outliers should be regarded in every experiment. I was making the point that in a sample of many religious people, some will have slightly differing opinions. If one has an extreme opinion on a certain topic, such as suicide bombing in the Zen Buddhism community, then should we consider that an interpretation of their doctrine which can be discarded by the majority, or the true ideas of Buddha that the entire community should take part in? Leviticus also states that a man should not lie with another man as he would with a woman. Does this mean that shrimp and gay marriage are both OK? What about homosexuals eating shrimp? Where do you draw the line as to which laws in the old testament Christians are no longer bound to? The claim that the validity of the bible is not questionable is absolutely absurd. Historically, since the beginning of man, the absolute worst source of information is eye-witness testimony. Most biblical scholars believe that the original New Testament was written in Greek. The biblical Dead Sea Scrolls were only found of the old testament. It was in Hebrew. As you have clearly stated, "Christians are no longer bound to the laws of the Old Testament." How can you validate a point about the New Testament using evidence of ancient Hebrew texts of the Old Testament, while also saying that the old testament laws no longer apply to Christians? That is absolutely absurd. I close with this: "If the word of God is truly alive and active, that means that it can never be outdated or irrelevant like Con has suggested. Therefore, these verses should still be applied today." I like that you added an "if". I'd say that your doubt is a point for me rather than against. The word of God is not truly alive and active, but that is a different argument. The afterthought preceded by "therefore" implies that you are saying this: The word of God might be alive and active, which means that it might not be outdated or irrelevant, ergo the Bible is law (just not the old testament).