Christians?

Wut

 

@[member="marvajuana"] very good point.
Historically, there have been many interpretations for the Bible, namely, Literal, Metaphysical, Ethical, Poetical/mythological, and something to do with art and mysticism. The literal interpretation was often thrown out right away back in the olden days in Europe and favoured a more metaphysical approach which allowed for theology. But then that was taken up by reformation because the former was twisting the words and making that which was into that which it was not. It became un-Biblical. So the literal was in favour because that was the word and it corresponded to Logos. However, this has been adopted very badly, it too has become twisted as this book, this myth-legend seriously lacks normative guidance and logic seems absent within it. There is no way one can live by the words of the Bible, it doesn't even tell one how to pray.
All primitive societies and communal groups around biblical times shared similar myths and stories, I think it was an attempt to find meaning and order in this world we live, and we still cannot get it right, I call for a new Bible for a new world, one which includes weed of course!

 

 
Come on BnH, you know most Christians know very little about their most sacred book.  If you could obtain an honest poll from Christians concerning your post, I bet you'd find that most of them were unaware of that quoted scripture you used and know basically knowing about the First Nicene Council.   Organized religion keeps its followers as ignorant as possible. 

 

 
I don't know many Sikhs and haven't seen evidence that they majority of them are quite ignorant about their religion.  So, no, I wouldn't necessarily come to that conclusion about Sikhs.