Paul,

You wrote:

> I think characterizing scriptures as absurd, is
> overkill. I think some scriptures could very
> well have some validity if some ancient shepard
> had some kind of insight, it got written down
> capturing some of that insight by someone
> literate, hopefully before the message got too
> forgotten or changed, and that the written word
> didn't lose all of its meaning through all the
> translations and copying from then to now.
> There just might be some hint at truth, at
> least from the point of view of the shepard (or
> whomever) during the times in which he lived.

Fine. One could record for posterity's sake the rarely insightful, sometimes absurd, usually obvious thoughts of our ancestors. What do we do with them? Do we elevate them to the "words of God" and live our lives and establish laws by them or do we rely on the best that modern philosophers / ethicists / sociologists / psychologists / therapists can give us today?

I disapprove of suggesting that great truth exists in ancient scripture that can't be derived by human effort independent of God's help. We don't need to read the Bible or the Koran or any other ancient scripture to know what's right. If we're going to read anything, read reasonably modern works. If you want to know how men and women are different and should be treated differently then read works like "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus", not the Eden story, the Mosaic law, Saul /Paul's letters or other chauvenistic recommendations.

• You are right - paulm - April 23, 2001 - 19:24 UTC