Eli

That’s what makes it a parable that it applies to both the Noble man and to Jesus. If it was just about the Noble man then it would just be a story.

The judgment is going to take place at the end of this world and I agree it is not going to be much fun.

trendkill

I can understand how it might look like that, but in parables and fables, characters in the story often give the moral explicitly.

I explained that last post. The next sentence is actually a dead giveaway that the parable is not over, because it refers to characters from the parable (the "citizens" who refused the reign of the nobleman).

Furthermore, even if you assume it is Jesus giving an order to the rich man and the assembled crowd, it makes no sense. Picture it--he's just finished a story about making the most of what you're given. Then he casually goes "oh, by the way, could you guys bring everyone who doesn't want me, Jesus, to rule over them here right now, and kill them in front of me? Thanks". And not only that, but in the next line, he leaves town (presumably without witnessing the slaughter that he asked for, since no mention is made of one occurring). :huh: Makes no sense whatsoever.

Well, obviously it's not nice, but that's how these parables often go. They tend to include the end of the world, when people are judged and the wicked who didn't take the advice are destroyed. The point is, it's not an order for followers of Jesus to kill someone.

Amaleq13

Not at the time it was allegedly spoken but, apparently, it will be an order given to followers at the time of the Final Judgment.

Enda80

Hey, since Jesus was supposed to have supernatural cosmic awareness, isn't it possible that he was talking about an actual incident that had occurred at some point in Earth's past?

Diogenes the Cynic

Even if we want to say that God will order people to kill unbelievers in the end times, it's still an order to kill unbelievers so it's no less repugnant.

I think it's instructive, though, that Christians find ways to defang this verse and spin it so that it's not a command to violence. I say that because those who point at similar kinds of statements in the Koran are usually unwilling to listen to Muslim interpretations which similarly defang the text. Neither text has any moral high ground. Both say things which are equally violent or equally misunderstood depending on individual ineterpretation. It's not fair pool for Christians to be able to interpret their way out of corners without allowing Muslims the same courtesy.

DISSIDENT AGGRESSOR

trendkill

The parable's meaning is not that God will order people to kill each other in the end times. The reason the nobleman orders people to do his killing for him is that that is how noblemen operate. God, obviously, does not need anyone to do his judging for him. The nobleman kills his rebellious subjects, as God will kill his rebellious children. That's the extent of the parallel.

I think it's annoying that atheists won't let this verse go, when it's clearly not a command to anyone to commit violence. If Jesus actually ordered someone killed, I'd like to know about it. These attempts to spin a parable that mentions the final judgment into an order to kill unbelievers aren't helping me argue against Christianity at all.

Diogenes the Cynic

The tagline of the story is clearly "God" ordering his subjects to kill unbelievers. He isn't saying that he will do it, he's ordering humans to do it.

I also don't especially see a reason to assume he meant to wait until the final judgement.

And my greater intention was not to argue whether it really is or is not a command to violence but that the verses which are cherry picked from the Koran to demonize Islam are subject to the same exegesis and interpretation as the Bible. Neither scripture is any better or worse than the other. They can both be spun by believers or enemies to fit a preconceived agenda.

Amaleq13

So you don't think the nobleman in the parable represents Jesus and/or God?

IOW, you disagree with Eli's interpretation?:
What is the meaning of the parable then?

fta

An entire herd of innocent swine doesn't count?