Quote Originally Posted by luvfightgame


You're definitely not thick, just sarcastic in your comments. I could address the questions you posed, doubtful they will be to everyones satisfaction, but I can address them reasonably and with viable solutions to the problems. Again, I am certain not everyone would agree. As far as the allegorical, I beleive that it is very clear which are allegorical and which are to be taken literal. Of course it is a different topic, but again one I wouldn't mind debating. I think it requires it's own thread, and I won't open it, that way I won't be accused of "forcing my opinion on other people".

The statement about primitive societies is still an opinion. They accomplished some amazing feats for being technilogically limited, the pyramids, stonehenge, etc... The wonders of the world that are still visited today, and amazingly are still standing. Are you saying that the current legal system is more effective? Are you aware that over 2000 laws are passed per year? Do you really believe the current political system of rule is effective? Has it grown better, or gotten more corrupt? I think if you weight things on the same scale you will be very suprised....
I'm not trying to be sarcastic, this is an interesting conversation. So sorry if it comes over like that. The trouble with email and posting on forums is that you can't put inflexions and things into your words so it's easy to be taken the wrong way (and also to take things the wrong way). We will all have our beliefs about literal truths in the Bible, or not. You will have what you think are good answers to the questions I raised, and you will have your own view of what is literal or allegorical. I doubt anything i say will change your views, and I doubt whether anything you say will change mine. (That's why 'belief with the exclusion of all other possibilities' has caused so many wars!!!! To paraphrase George W. "You're either with me or against me" with religion, unfortunately.

I don't think I made my point about primitive society well: I don't think people were more stupid then, the things they did and the feats of engineering and invention are on a par with anything we do (in terms of incremental advance), I agree that laws today are not necessarily better (but would argue that there are less miscarriages of justice than in Solomon's time, say), I would agree that we are probably just as violent and bloodthirsty etc etc ........... but, more people are better educated today then they were in ancient times, we understand physics and sciences better (most people do not believe that a solar eclipse needs to be assuaged by blood sacrifice to make the sun come back), we have a more open and tolerant outlook. Most laws are enacted with at least a semblance of underlying justice (as opposed to burning someone because the 'test' said they were a witch). As a society, where we fundamentally differ from them is in access to information. Most westerners at least are less in thrall to 'holy men' because they can check out at least some facts and then try and make their mind up on limited evidence. That's what I mean by them being in a more prmitive society.

It would be interesting to come back in another 3000 years and see which of our fundamentally held modern 'truths' have been disproved or superceded in the intervening period. Perhaps the more educated humans of the future would not have fallen victim to the Audley Harrison myth?