4d4m got the joke
But jokes aside....
The Bible is a demonstration of why we cherish a democracy because no, one, single entity will ever be able to handle every single situation correctly.
This is why the Biblical parables often times seem to sneak in some really horrid suggestions among the otherwise good ones.
The Bible is a salad picking of ideals from many different sources at that time. They were packaged and associated with one organization who upheld those ideals but some of the ideals were flawed.
The church, as it stands today, serves as test and demonstration that an governing force requires many people from many viewpoints and life situations to establish fair and realistic laws and policies (and...no...Earth is completely dysfunctional because most of it's inhabitants are not intellectually, psychologically or emotional mature and developed enough to fairly managed the democracy they desperately struggle with.)
Now, to answer the question, some of the Bible's parables seem like bad ones depending on the context in which you associate the metaphor offered.
The one in particular about a 'narrow path' addresses all of us and whether or not we shall achieve 'heaven' on this Earth.
We won't; the nameless majority, that large herd of sheepies, are selfish.
Every day they make choices and decisions that effect many people diversely but those choices and decisions are so small it is never apparent to the nameless majority as to how critical those choices can be.
Here are some examples:
-If everyone chose to eat less meat there would be less wastage at the grocery and less animals INTENTIONALLY brought into existence to butcher and then toss in a bin at the end of the day.
-If people were to adopt instead of insisting on spawning their own blood there wouldn't be an overpopulation issue.
-If wealthy parents didn't force their kids to take labor jobs and, instead, allow them to use their advantage to study and learn new skills then there would be more jobs available for poor families who would desperately need them.
These are just a few of many examples discovered when one begins to consider others around them and choose to be more conservative, not 'more conservative' in their charity, but more conservative in their carbon footprints and how much wastage they enable in a world where there truly are people who starve to death and perish from lack of shelter.
Not a bad view, but remember that poverty is a thing that is imposed by the tax system. Governments have to bear the burden of that immorality.
You might say that poverty is imposed on us so that the religious could show their better morals, but fail miserably.