The relevance of my point about the reality of God is that you suggested that because you believed in God you could dismiss all of the consequent arguments:
I never said anything of the like. I merely pointed out that just as both yourself, and others, have dismissed a religion as merely midieval writings, and used that as a foundation to express other points, that I could
just as well use the premise that God is real as a foundation to express my points. Using the same formula you've used, I could dismiss your arguments, but it would evidently be based on my own personal opinions on a subject that can't be proven either way,
My rambles about Pork and other issues make the point that those texts aren't... ... but are far more than that, with detailed prohibitions on what to eat, who to have sex with, and punishments based prejudice and a world view that encompassed wife beating, child killing, slavery. The moral and ethical bits that are relevant to a modern society could be written on the back of your hand and are human not religious in nature.
Your rambles on pork are not a proof that there isn't a God. Just a ramble on what you consider is an absurd ruling within specific religions. And moral and ethical laws would
precisely discuss issues as to whom we have sex with. As far as child killing and slavery, if you think Islam condones those actions feel free to pm the subsequent verses. I'm assuming you've probably read a bit on the religion and aren't just throwing up illinformed facts to try to make your argument stronger.
And of course they aren't... ...because when they were written there weren't any. As far as religion was concerned, science was about honouring God's creation, not overturning it.
And how exactly does science over turn God's creation? Unless you really believe that the theory of evolution has been scientifically proven, in which case I must have missed the memo, kindly pm me the link to that research as well.
And yes, it is precisely because those texts are ancient and primitive that they allow ISIS and the like to use them to justify the horrors they are committing.
The likes of ISIS use verses to justify their atrocities simply because they're able to get away with it. Because people choose to accept their explanations and justifications as factual evidence about a religion, as opposed to a weak attempt to justify ethnic clensing. Obviously, those that know a little more about the religion can clearly see the likes of ISIS have no merits in making those claims. And again, they're masquerading under the banner of "the Will of Allah", I strongly believe that there are far more elements in play that create these sorts of terrorist groups than it simply being a case of Muslims interpreting the religion the wrong way.