How I follow religion - 2

The first thing I want to add here is an example for what I said there about the level of proof requirement.If you tell me that I am in a land owned by you then I could accept restricting myself just in case you are right. But if you tell me to evict someone else from that land then I would require a full proof that it is your land. 

The second thing I want to say is that I simply moved to the final argument there sooner and was not conceding that there is a requirement to implement such ruling at our time according to the religion. On the contrary, the same religion that to the other side calls on them to do such acts significantly intensifies my refusal of violating the principles of justice with such action. In fact even with actions that are much less serious than taking the life of someone for no harm done to anybody, my fear of violating justice goes hand in hand with my fear of the consequences the religion put on such violation and I hardly think of these two separately.

So how could I make such argument even assuming the other side stands on something that really existed in the religion? Because the other side has left the moral security and guidance of holding on  to the core and instead attached itself to the confusing, fragmented and beyond comparison in being less established and supported parts.

Even at time when there existed a representation for God through the prophet people were not asked to do things that violates the principles of justice and religious orders were in line with   such   

principles.The religion appear to not just strongly calls on what we inside see as just and good but actually depends on recognition of that. So after all that you want me to accept to be as far as such action (even if by just accepting it) would put me far from what the principles of justice inside me calls for in time when there is only the on ink on paper on which I base my belief?

Also, how could you apply the same punishment that ,supposedly, existed at the time of the prophet on someone who did not see the same level of proof given at the time of the prophet? Can you give the same level of proof the messenger from God can? In other words, since if there is a rule calling for such action then it was made at a time when there is full certainty that this rule is from God through the proof given through the presence of the prophet, how could you assume that level of certainty is not a requirement that should be fulfilled before carrying on that rule?