RESOURCES
5-144000
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
Y
Z
|
|
|
Hard Questions - Luke 19:27 - Will Yah'shua Slay His Enemies?
Posted by Lev/Christopher on December 1, 2008 at 7:21am
in Questions & Answers
"But to those enemies of mine (Yah'shua) who did not wish me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me" (Luke 19:27, ISRV).
For various versions and commentaries, see http://bible.cc/luke/19-27.htm
Does anyone have any idea who Yah'shua is talking about? Messianic commentaries ignore this passage and most antinomian ones gloss over it. The context is the Parable of the Talents. All the ISRV does is ask the question, in reference to it, "Are we allowing Yah'shua, the Sovereign, to reign over us?" (p.1008)
Here are a couple of "explanations" I have read from Christians and atheists:
It's clearly part of the parable, following a chiasmus-like structure. The 'reign over' structure is repeated at the start and the end.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-b...o.x=28&Go.y=10
11 Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately. 12 Therefore He said: "A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten *minas, and said to them, 'Do business till I come.' 14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him, saying, 'We will not have this man to reign over us.' ...
26 'For I say to you, that to everyone who has will be given; and from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. 27 But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.'"
It is so obvious that the nobleman is saying it, that it beggars belief that anyone would think that Jesus is telling his disciples to kill. Yet Luke 19:27 is trotted around on a number of websites with that implication.
Actaully the King in this story can also translated as a "nobleman" or "Rich man". If you know anything about christian theology you would know this story. Jesus seems to be illustrating that christians should not be afriad of him and to use their talents, as the three slaves in the story represent. One slave recieves 10 pieces of money (which represents talent or gifts or ability such as writing, singing, etc. etc.) another 5 and another 1. The 10 and 5 both double their money by investing and what not, while the one with 1 does nothing with his money (or talent) and the master is upset about it. He says something like "Even though you only have 1 you didn't use it, and hid it away. So I will take that away from you."
The things that are most strikng to me was the use of the word "Master" and "slave". Are we Jesus' pets or dogs? Of course we must also take this story into context as well, would slavery be considered a "bad thing" back in the ancient days? No, it would be a normal every day thing. Also a slave wasn't really a "slave", sometimes poor people would become salves for money, a place to sleep and food to eat. Some slaves where even treated as family back then. Also, in the story the master gives the slaves money to invest with, which shows some respect for them.
If this story was told in today's setting then I think it might be something like this:
One day a stock company boss had to leave on a business trip. He left 3 of his employees some things to invest with. Two of them took chances and doubled their original amount and another was too scared to do anything. When the Boss returned he gave the two a raise and fired the other one.
Another thing to take into consideration is that Jesus doesn't say he aproves or disaproves of this "kings" behaviour. As in us telling a story about jack the ripper, we are not saying go out and murder whores, we're juse making a point.
http://www.danielle-movie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1068
Want to see prime examples of atheist absurdity? Do a websearch for "Luke 19:27" and read what quite a few atheists have written about that verse:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/lk/index.html (the infamous "Skeptic's Annotated Bible") - In the parable of the talents, Jesus says that God takes what is not rightly his, and reaps what he didn't sow. The parable ends with the words of Jesus: "bring them [those who preferred not to be ruled by him] hither, and slay them before me."
http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/jesus.html (the "great" Freedom From Religion Foundation) - The birth of Jesus was heralded with "Peace on Earth," yet Jesus said..., "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27. In a parable, but spoken of favorably.)
http://www.bandoli.no/whyimmoral1.htm - He tells his disciples to turn the other cheek, but he also tells them to slay his enemies before him. (Luke 19:27)
http://www.stormy.org/bible.htm (a "book review" of the Bible) - The greatest mistake attributed to this "peace-loving Christ" is in the Book of Luke. For those brought up worshipping the Prince of Peace, Luke 19:27 comes as quite a shock. "But those mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them. bring hither, and slay them before me." (King James Version; all common translations agree he is describing the Divine Kingdom, how it's to be run. and how to deal with dissenters from authority.) For example, according to this passage, King George would have been justified in killing all the signers of the American Declaration of Independence. We have already seen that this brutality is consistent with the Old part of The Book. And just to make sure the point is very clear and understood, parts of this Luke parable are repeated in Matthew 25:14-30. [A one ounce Gold reward is offered to the first person who can successfully dispute this interpretation]
But apologists still say, "That's taken out of context." We judge communications and publications on the results: the proof is in the pudding--is it working? For many centuries, people have been misunderstanding. The Catholic Church and the Popes during the Inquisition, took Luke 19:27 very literally, and had dissenters cruelly, brutally murdered in public. Someone else who was confused by his biblical upbringing was Adolf Hitler.
http://www.geocities.com/anatheist2001/submonday22.htm ("Monday School - 'The Rational Corrective To Alll That Nonsense You Learned Yesterday!'" :rofl: ) - When I first quoted these words of Jesus, I was taken to task by several noteleavers. They thought that I'd taken these words completely out of context. They charged that Jesus was actually quoting somebody else and that we simply mustn't think that he would ever urge us to do anything as impolite as slay his enemies - oh, no no no!
Never mind that it's not clear that he was, in fact, quoting anybody else. Never mind that - if he was quoting someone else - he certainly seems to have been quoting them approvingly.
Pretty pathetic, really. One has to wonder if these hacks could get through life if they took everything so hyper-literally and out-of-context as they do this verse from one of Jesus' parables (which they obviously don't understand the meaning of).
Always best to put these parables in context, for the benefit of atheists :-
Just before the parable starts in Luke 19, we have in verse 11 'While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once.'
So the parable was taught to allay misconception that the kingdom was going to appear at once. So simple for atheists to understand!
So how does the parable help atheists to learn when the kingdom was going to appear?
And the parable is about a man of high rank (Jesus) who was going to a country far away (death) to be made king (resurrected), after which he was coming home (second coming inaugurating the kingdom of god).
So the wicked king in the story , who says "bring them [those who preferred not to be ruled by him] hither, and slay them before me." is Jesus.
Atheists should read Matthew Henry's Commentary. I know John Ransom (not his real name, of course) likes Matthew Henry
'In the sentence passed upon them at his return: Those mine enemies bring hither, v. 27. When his faithful subjects are preferred and rewarded, then he will take vengeance on his enemies, and particularly on the Jewish nation, the doom of which is here read. When Christ had set up his gospel kingdom, and thereby put reputation upon the gospel ministry, then he comes to reckon with the Jews......The wrath of Christ came upon them to the uttermost , and their destruction redounded very much to the honour of Christ and the peace of the church.'
Clearly the wicked king who will take vengeance on the Jews is Christ himself, according to Matthew Henry's Commentary (not a work written by atheists, of course)
See the rest of http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/archive/index.php/t-1524.html for all the arguments offered.
The Bible According To DeVaney
Luke 19:27
The Controversial Luke 19:27
by Gary DeVaney
Question from a radio talk-show host: What is the one Bible chapter and verse that you think best sums up the Bible?
Gary DeVaney: I view that would be Luke 19:27.
Q: Why?
In Luke 19:27, Jesus Christ describes Himself only to His disciples. This parable reads that if you do not accept this (un-named) parable character as your King, you are to be brought before Him and slain. This parallels the dogma of salvation whereby if you don't accept Jesus Christ as your savior, you will suffer "Eternal-Torment" in Hell.
Luke 19:27 best expresses the murderous attitude and the evil, blackmail threat of Jesus Christ and His God.
Luke 19:27 explains that if you don't obey Jesus Christ and make Him your authority / King, you are to be slain. Luke 19:27 documents Jesus Christ as being a tyrannical terrorist to human beings and that the New Testament continues to qualify as a terrorist handbook.
Many debates have taken issue with Luke 19:27.
If there is an error or a lack of homework concerning Luke 19:27 - let’s examine it.
Upon request of His disciples in Matthew 13:36, Jesus spoke in parables.
What is a "parable" according to the dictionary?
Parable: A short, simple story from which a moral lesson can be drawn. It is usually an allegory. To represent, by fiction, a fable. To compare.
Luke 19:27 Jesus Christ said to His disciples: "But those, mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. KJV
What happened to Jesus' teaching to: "Love thy enemy?"
Luke 19:27 Jesus said: "And, as for those who would not have Me be King over them, bring them before Me and slay them."
(A composite of Catholic and other Luke 19:27 versions of scripture.)
Who is speaking to His disciples in Luke 19:27? It is Jesus Christ - is it not? Yes.
If not, who, by name, do you say is speaking?
Jesus, to explain Himself, uses a parable of a "noble-man", who is expanding his kingdom. Wasn't Jesus expanding His kingdom? If that is not the case, what is the purpose of Jesus' parable? What other individual, by name, does the New Testament promote to be expanding his kingdom within the context of this specific parable?
If these C&Vs confuse truth-seekers, what grade does Jesus get as a teacher?
Review: Did Jesus Christ speak in parables? Yes.
Why did Jesus use parables?
A myth is a human attempt to explain our world by means of a fictional story. Jesus used myths to teach and describe Himself to His disciples as to who He was and what He and His agenda was about. Jesus used fictitious stories, myths, parables, and allegories to explain Himself to the World. Jesus also used these fictitious stories to explain what He required from His disciples and from all mankind.
What moral lesson did Jesus teach in Luke 19:27?
Voltaire wrote: "Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world."
Voltaire, Sir - that took balls!
Jesus' moral parable explains to you that if you don't allow Jesus Christ to be your King, authority, ruler, over you, you are to be slain.
Jesus' parallel lesson in Luke 19:27 is: If you don't accept Jesus Christ as your savior, you will suffer eternal torment. What moral lessons! What an evil tyrant! What a monster!
Redundantly, Luke 19:27 parallels what eternal-salvation or eternal-damnation is about. If you don't obey and serve God and accept Jesus Christ as your savior - instead of being slain - you will suffer eternal-damnation.
What was Jesus’ specific moral point of the parable? It was to teach you that if you do not follow, serve and obey Jesus / God, you would suffer eternal-damnation. That’s even more disgusting and cruel than just slaying you.
What Christian would say that Jesus is not God? If you claim that Jesus Christ is NOT God - are you sure you are a true, believing Christian?
Then Jesus states His "evil" agenda to His disciples in:
Mark 4:11-12 Jesus said: ... But, to those outside everything comes in parables so that they look and see but not perceive and hear and listen but do not understand, in order that thy may not be converted and be forgotten.
Knowing that Jesus Christ said this, and that Jesus did not want many people saved, do you feel more like you do now than you did before?
Judgment day is when God judges if you have served Him on His terms during your life on Earth. God's judgment determines if you will be "saved" to then serve, grovel, worship and praise at the feet of God and Jesus 24/7 for eternity.
Those who are not "saved" will suffer eternal-torment according to the book of Revelation. However, Ezekiel 25 indicates that after Jesus comes back at the "end-time" and slaughters all humanity and then after the thousand year "millennium" followed by "Judgment-Day", if not selected by God, you will expire, as Satan expires, by turning into ashes from within.
God is documented to kill millions of human beings in the Old Testament because they did not obey and act as if God was King over them. (See: "The God Murders" on this website) If Jesus is God, the statement fits. The unnamed nobleman / king is Jesus Christ, Himself. God was angry when the Israelites choose a human king over them - as God wanted to be King over them.
If you don’t convert to Christianity and, in essence, make Jesus Christ king over you, you will go to Hell. The parable fits Jesus being the unnamed nobleman / King. What other known king could it be? Every C&V points to Jesus Christ and no one else.
Christianity demands one God, one Savior and a new Christian "One World Order".
I’ve debated these factors before and welcome anyone to refute each and every point by C&V documentation.
What is Jesus Christ's point - if He is not describing Himself and what He expects?
I view that Jesus Christ stated this parable about Himself. It dramatically displays the cruelty that He, as God, projects for those God sends to Hell-Fire / Eternal-Damnation or expiration. That is the parallel agenda that makes it a documented parable.
Who else would you want the king to be - and why? If the king described is unknown or not important - than the parable is wasted - and Jesus proves to be a confusing and poor teacher. It has to be describing Jesus Christ to have contextual meaning.
Gloria Steinem: "By the year 2000, we will, I hope, raise our children to believe in human potential, not God."
http://www.thegodmurders.com/id118.html
Punishment for His Enemies (19:27)
"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them -- bring them here and kill them in front of me." (19:27)
This seems pretty strong. The word translated "kill" is Greek katasphazo, "slaughter, strike down."[19] The listeners in Jericho recalled how King Archelaus slaughtered his enemies, and recognized how the parable was true to life.
You are not God's enemy when you fail. He loves you. He is there to encourage you to try again as he did Peter (John 21:15-17). But you are God's enemy when you set your will against his and refuse to use productively what he has given you. That is a dangerous place in which to stand, as an enemy of God.
Ultimately, this parable is not about the present. It is eschatological and applies to the time of Christ's Return. If you sense in yourself laziness or rebelliousness against God, there's still time to repent and change your heart -- but you can only count on "today" in which to do that.
http://www.jesuswalk.com/lessons/19_11-27.htm
What do you think?
-
Reply by Jacqui on December 2, 2008 at 6:15am
-
-
-
Reply by Jacqui on December 2, 2008 at 6:20am
-
-
-
Reply by Lev/Christopher on December 6, 2008 at 7:56am
-
-
-
Reply by Jacqui on December 8, 2008 at 5:37am
-
-
|
This page was created on 5 May 2010
Updated on 5 May 2010
Copyright © 1987-2010 NCCG - All Rights Reserved
|
|
