ryguy wrote:Well...it depends on what exactly you are agreeing to accept, I think? I took a quick look at the Book of the Law today (a few copies are floating around the Internet), and compared it to the bible. And if you assume that both books are offered to humanity by entities - the apparent contradictions between the two are shocking. I draw no judgement here...but are we talking about the same Book of the Law?
Well, I am not sure how you can compare them when you remember that:
1) By design, the Church editors of the Bible purposefully excised any and all mystical material from it. (Separation of Canonical texts from Apocryphal). Hence, none of the types of things that would actually REQUIRE some level of interpretation made it off the cutting room floor.
2) To combat anyone in the future seeking to perform similar editing of the Book Of The Law, Crowely (or was it AIWASS?) specifically stated that the book should always include the original handwritten version, as channelled.
3) The OTO not only allows each individual to interpret the Book Of The Law (BOTL), but they encourage it. Whereas in the Church they tend to only want members of the clergy to comment and/or interpret what the Bible is really saying.
So for these reasons alone, I find it hard to make a one-for-one comparison. But I do agree that the excerpts you pull out are "shocking" to say the least. But your first citation is a synchronistically interesting one, as it has a lot of meaning and background for me...
Book of Law: "25. Divide, add, multiply, and understand. "
The Christian bible: "“Trust in the Lord with all your heart; and don't lean on your own understanding. In all things acknowledge him, and he shall direct your way. [Proverbs 3:5, 6]”
This is a great example of where interpretation (and the potential for SPECIFIC messages being targeted to SPECIFIC people) comes into play. The verse from BOTL that you quote above is the one, single quote in the whole book that actually resulted in a major spiritual (and technical) epiphany for me back in the 1986 timeframe. As I mentioned, I was well into studies of Artificial Intelligence back then, and there was an interesting part of the book Godel, Escher, Bach that was talking about terminating vs. non-terminating algorithms and deterministic vs. non-deterministic algos. The discussion in GEB caused me to do some numerical investigations into an integer-based indexing and search algorithm for relating concepts to one another. The algos I was developing used all integer operations and only involved divide (by 2), add (by 1), and multiply (by 3) operations to form the hash algorithm. I found this algo to be VERY powerful in ordering and finding specific relationships between common concepts. It has since been incorporated into a lot of my professional work.
Well, in the middle of doing this AI work was when I started reading BOTL. When I got to the verse you cite above was when I first felt a very "big" spiritual experience like an "a ha"... but bigger. It definitely felt like a "message from beyond" that was saying "You got it". Basically, it was the connection that what this verse was saying had a very specific meaning to me and my AI work. It actually describes what I was doing... by using nothing more than divide (by 2), add (by 1), and multiply (by 3) in dual recursive algorithms, I was able to build a program that exhibited relative knowledge (i.e. promoted understanding by relating one concept to others).
So this very experience convinced me just how important it is for ANY "holy tome" to be open for interpretation by commoners... and this reinforced to me why the OTO's practice of encouraging personal interpretations is so very important. This is a case where most people would not get much from this verse. Rather, the verse has a specific, contextual meaning to someone that was to come later and read it. It is very much an energetic interaction.
So in closing, I think it should be obvious that no one expects anyone to accept the BOTL in its literal sense all the time. Whereas, there are different schools of thought (and Church Law) that says the Bible IS to be taken literally in many cases. Again, this means it is dubious to think you could directly compare them.
BTW, here is another passage from BOTL that I know is speaking to someone, specifically. For many years I thought it was to me, but I am not so sure now. But it is certainly speaking to someone...
Chapter III
75. Aye! listen to the numbers & the words:
76. 4 6 3 8 A B K 2 4 A L G M O R 3 Y X 24 89 R P S T O V A L. What meaneth this, o prophet? Thou knowest not; nor shalt thou know ever. There cometh one to follow thee: he shall expound it. But remember, o chose none, to be me; to follow the love of Nu in the star-lit heaven; to look forth upon men, to tell them this glad word.
Wow....
Agreed!

BOTL pulls no punches, does it?
Ray