On the origin of education: Evolution in British schools

[Final-Fan]

Kasz216 said:

Final-Fan said:
^ So you're saying we don't need judges to interpret the law except for really complicated laws (which religious texts certainly can't be accused of being ) and appellate courts.

Religious texts... if taken as literal aren't complicated.  It's just a plain story where stuff happnes.  This guy goes there, see's god.  God tells him to build a boat.  He does.... etc.

I mean what's there to it?

Well, it's been a long time since I read the Bible, and I didn't exactly read all of it, but aren't a lot of those moral stories?  So you have to take a lot of those stories and apply whatever lessons there are to your life OR GO TO HELL!!!!! j/k for a lot of people but not really for others.  

Anyway, considering how drastic the consequences of misinterpretation -- how absolute the judgement -- how inscrutable the judge -- I think it's very reasonable to want professional expertise to weigh in on even what seem like the simplest and most straightforward interpretations of the text (e.g., what the lessons are, exactly, and how to apply them in modern life).  (Of course, opinions vary on how "expert" the priests are, but that's a-whole-nother issue.) 

And what about the Jews, who still have to mess with all those Old Testament rules?  That's a mess and a half.  I thought that that was the cliche about why so many of them were lawyers -- because they were  already used to having to deal with God's laws?