Well, the difference with science/law text and the bible is that
like u said, the textbooks are updated to suit the time, while the
bible is not updated, but is interpreted to suit current time. So
thats where the differences lie. While u cant use the old and
outdated science text book to interprete current updated methods,
the bible can. Thats where the mystery lies. The Almighty is all
knowing, hence its logical that he doesnt give u a 21century book
at a 1000bc timeline.
If its such useless marketing material, it wouldnt be a
blockbuster book. 6,000,000,000 copies sold and counting, the first
half's great - a real page turner choke-full of monsters, demons,
devils, smiting, plagues, trials at the hand of an unsympathetic
God, burning bushes and even a spot of nudity. The 2nd half however
loses its momentum, it all gets a bit worthy. Good cliffhanger at
the end though.
As the 10 commandents, its worded as simple as it can get.
But as i said before, its extremely hard to actually follow it,
takes man of great faith and principe; and if compare it to laws of
sg, u break the law, u get punished for it.. IF u get caught. Break
the 10 commandments, its not a matter of if.. its a WILL get
caught. And that fear of divine punishment , is more scary then
that of earthly punishments. If u truly fear the divine, earthly
rules will be much easier to follow.As for Joshua, You shall not
murder... doesnt mean u cant kill. Its like how u cant murder in
self-defence , u kill. U have to understand that Joshua lived in
the old testament, and God then, has shown that providing miracles,
speaking to the people, telling to do things that can only take
20th century science to explain proves again that we men, forget.
Easily.
And as for the whether restricts ur autonomy.. i seem to recall
something about chewing gum. But it was amended. ;p While the
bible, yes its ambigous, but the core principle is still the same,
no amendment needed.
The bible itself is also old and outdated. It does not address
the multi-racial and multi-religious environments that we are now
in. And it can only be updated with holy intervention (when's the
last time that it happened?).
"its logical that he doesnt give u a 21century book at a 1000bc
timeline."... It'll be probably more logical if He gives us
something like the Sun Tze's Art of War. Short, concise, easily
understood and and a lot more enduring. A law book will do too.
------------
2nd para: "If its such useless marketing material, it wouldnt be
a blockbuster book. 6,000,000,000 copies sold and counting..."
3rd para: "As the 10 commandents, its worded as simple as it can
get. But as i said before, its extremely hard to actually
follow it, takes man of great faith and principles..."
from your 2nd para, the 6 billion figure is another "meaningless
marketing material". Firstly, it probably has to include all past
figures (from ancient times til now) and is difficult to quantify,
and 2ndly, I bet that any modern primary school text in China can
easily surpass that readership in a few short yrs.
And correct me again if i am wrong, you seem to be contradicting
yourself. Your 2nd para is saying that it is wonderful that 6
billion copies were sold, but your 3rd para is telling me that the
6 billion figure means nothing, as "its extremely hard to actually
follow it, takes man of great faith and principles". So do you
agree with my point about the 6 billion figure, "Written over
more than 1,500 years by vastly different writers", is just
"useless marketing material" that should not have been raised to
add confusion to any discussion?
Your 3rd para is saying that it's ok to kill in self-defence.
Did Joshua kill in self-defence or to rob another tribe of their
land? And how do you justify self-defence in the killing of women,
children and babies?
As for that chewing gum law, it was enacted coz some
ir-responsible folks like to stick their used chewing gums
everywhere, and caused a nuisance to society (be considerate to the
cleaners who are usu poor old and uneducated folks). I'm sure
there's something in the bible about care and consideration for the
less fortunate. But it's apparently so outdated, ambiguous,
misunderstood, poorly taught to Christians that an atheist like
myself have to make it more obvious.
