> From: Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > From: "The Fool" > > > > From: Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > From: "The Fool"
> > > > > > > http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/okeefe032603.html > > > > --- > > > > Christ demanded: "But those mine enemies, > > > > which would not that I should reign over them, > > > > bring hither, and slay them before me." --Luke 19:27 > > > > > > Why do you think that falsehoods will advance your cause? > > > > What falsehoods? > > That Christ demanded that. He told a story; he is not the king in the > story. A. This statement is made after he has finished the story. B. This verse does not fit with story that he had just told. C. Even if one were to think this is part of that story then This fits a pattern in the parables, that Christ supposedly said, where a king / ruler (who is representing Christ) goes away and comes back, or is away and comes back, and then rewards a select few and punishes / kills the rest. Lets examine it. The king (Christ) gives out money (gospel etc.) to various slaves (disciples) and goes away for a long time (dies), then comes back some time in the future (second coming) after securing his kingdom (that 'kingdom of god'), returns and judges what the slaves (Christians / disciples) have done with the money (gospel), the slaves (Christians) who had made the most (spread of the gospel / followers) and rewards these slaves (Christians), while the slaves (Christians) who made nothing (in an endorsement of usury that ye olde god of yore had firmly declared illegal and immoral) is punished, and everyone (non Christians) who don't support the king (Christ) are killed (Armageddon). Christ is very much the king in this story. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
