yinyang

Anything but the most likely explanation. There are hundreds if not thousands of things that prove way beyond any reasonable doubt that the bible is man made. Thats it end of story. It is fallable. The words dont come from god. No person on this earth is any more qualified to say what god wants than anyone else.

You can do all the mental gymnastics you want, but by about a thousand orders of magnitude, the most likely explanation for the wording of the parable of the 10 minas, is that the writter was in a nasty mood.

If any xian is going to make any claim that the words in the bible have anything to do with gods will, and god is an all knowing all powerfull being, than you have to be prepared for what comes with that notion.

I, a mere human, can easily understand that people are products of their environment. Especially back in the time of the writting of this passage. In fact, those times were they way they were because of the crapy environment god supposedly put them in. Minimal information, minimal rule of law, poverty, disease etc. So this all knowing god with an ABSOLUTE knowledge of morality, and wisdom, ADDS to this sh!t stew by using the words "slay them before me". There are people today that would take those kinds of words and, i dont know, fly into a building or something. There are only about 2000 years of emperical evidence of devoted christians who, knew the original languages, and beleived with all their hearts that they understood, the will of god through the words in the bible, who used those kinds of words to justify chopping heads off and setting people on fire.

Afraid to go their? What jesus said? Maybe you should re-read the OP. It is precisley what is written about what jesus allegedly said that I opened with.
Not to mention, this whole discussion is about a NT parable. My god man, you have posts that contradict your very words all around you, and your debating a 2000 year old parable.:rolling:

reniaa

Alright what about jesus sermon on the mount what do you think on that?

You guys have had to squeeze a parable far beyond it's original meaning to make it sound nasty when all it's saying is be responsible with what your given.

yinyang

I have no problem with the idea that he NT is generally, pretty peaceful esp when compared to many other texts. But xians claim that the bible is the word of god. If it is, he wouldn't be dumb enough to include the plethora, not just one parable, of disgusting violence and intolerance that is EXPLICITLY included. The old testament counts by the way. Just because most/all xians say it doesn't is laughable. Jesus doesn't dispute it, at least not consistently, and the jews still think its ok, but of course they don't know what their talking about either do they?

If its not the word of god, its just some stuff some men wrote, no women by the way, just men. It is therefore no more important than anything anyone else has written.

I haven't changed any meaning by the way. You have decided that the meaning is different than the most likely interpretation. I don't pretend to "KNOW" the meaning of the parable. It is possible, that the parable was meant literally, or was about some contemporary despot or was, by a massive stretch of imagination, ironic. If any of these are the case, than the author is just inept, and therefore most likely NOT divinely inspired. The parable is meaningless as hyperbole unless it relates to something in the real world of the intended audience. And there is absolutely no indication of irony, as someone earlier intimated.

All you have to do with 99% of religious arguments is put it in secular terms. If you were writing a book on philosophy, would you ever include the language " bring those that don't want to be ruled by me and slay them"? I sure hope not. Especially if your audience was a bunch of middle eastern uneducated devotees. I hope your answer would be no fkn way. Thats my answer. There is no justification for it. It is insane.

WVIncagold

not afraid to go there at all. Your problem is with your own religious cult not us. You Incorporated and stole the Jewish god and made it a part of your world view so you have to take all its baggage that comes with it. Besides suggardaddy argues on the prophesies being his main focus and that is how you get to Jesus. If the Christians totally divorced themselves from the stolen Jewish god then they would not have to defend what makes up allot of their bible. But since you try to link him to the stolen Jewish god your always going to have to deal with the baggage that god brings with it.

reniaa

you talk like it's a recent thing this was all thousands of years ago and jews who deny Christianity are still waiting for the messiah the OT predicts.

Johnny Skeptic

Micah 5:2 says "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." If the Jews believed that the messiah would become ruler of Israel in this life, which I believe that they did, God deceived them.

Although Christians blame the Jews for not knowing who Jesus was, if Micah had said that the messiah would become ruler of a heavenly kingdom, and that he would heal people, and that he would be crucified and rise from the dead in three days, and that Pontius Pilate would become governor of Palestine, there are not any doubts whatsoever that a lot more Jews would have accepted Jesus. Why would Jews have rejected a messiah like that? If Jesus had never left the earth after he rose from the dead, and had always been available to have discussions with people and perform miracles all over the world, there would be far fewer debates today about the existence of the God of the Bible.

No Christian can intelligently that God wants people to believe that he can predict the future. Since a God would not have any trouble at all convincing everyone that he is able to predict the future, you obviously do not have any idea whatsoever what you is talking about. One advantage of being a God is that you are able to accomplish whatever you want to accomplish.

WishboneDawn

It's ridiculous to frame this is as Christians stealing the Jewish gods. I shows a real misunderstanding of how societies and movements evolve.

WishboneDawn

Wait a minute, if you're going to point out that it's inappropriate to look at the gospels through modern eyes then it should follow that it's inappropriate to look at the OT throught later Christian eyes and that's exactly what you're doing if you you're making claims about predictions in the OT. The OT is a Hebrew text after all.

Amaleq13

On the contrary, it is quite clear that Christianity has "appropriated" Hebrew Scripture and "reinterpreted" it so that an executed failure can be considered the Messiah and Christians can be considered the "chosen ones" of God.

Unless one has faith in the "reinterpretation", it is entirely accurate to describe this as theft.

Sheshbazzar

But the problem with the parable reniaa, is NOT with how this "King" treats or rewards his own willing servants, in fact it is not the servants that he is angry with that he desires to see executed in front of him,
but rather those innocent citizens who do not accept nor serve him, and who DO NOT want him to rule over them as their king.
(And why would they? given that he has repeatedly had his supporters go out and commit mass murders in his name, and subjugate men everywhere with terror and tyranny? )

Certain citizens, fully fed up with being subjected to this tyranny, and with submitting to the unjust whims and decrees of that kings underlings, when the opportunity presented itself, did seek to separate themselves from that old evil, tyrannical, and unjust system.
Desiring freedom, even to the laying down of their lives in pursuit of that freedom from tyranny, and its attendant injustices, did agreed to, and consent to this premise;
Therefore, when a king, ruler, tyrant, or the political underlings of any such claimant, should attempt to set forth any claims of possession greater authority, "in the Name of" whatever 'name" they might be in servitude to, These citizens, as champions of individual liberty and freedom, do declare unto all powers both in heaven and earth, that "WE THE PEOPLE" submit ourselves ONLY to such form of government as is "FOR THE PEOPLE, AND BY THE PEOPLE", and for the express benefit of "THE PEOPLE', providing for each and every citizen an unimpeded right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, with freedom from fear of reprisal by 'other" governments.
No King, no Ruler, no Tyrannical despot, nor his underlings, whether in anger or in revenge, shall ever by any claim of a "right", rightfully perform, or cause to be performed mass executions upon innocent victims whose "crime" consisted of resisting tyranny.

Reniaa, the gawd, and that government you are giving lip service to, is by its own record, one that has far more in common with old Saddam's methods and practices, than with any democracy.
Come now, "mass executions" of entire countries while the conquering "King" and his sycophants stand by observing and gloating over his power?
sick, sick, sick.