Fifty Questions That Christians Can't Answer

[Puck]

Furthermore, verses 28 through 34 clearly denotes that Jesus is also a horse thief. Awesome.

28 And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.

29 And it came to pass, when he was come nigh to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount called the mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples,

30 Saying, Go ye into the village over against you; in the which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither.

31 And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him.

32 And they that were sent went their way, and found even as he had said unto them.

33 And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt?

34 And they said, The Lord hath need of him.

[Rhizomorph13]

Lol, they were commandeering the colt for God! That isn't theft, just, uh, redistribution. I forgot about that passage, but remeber now that when I read it, I was very confused.

[fr0d0]

In Vs 26 it says 'he' replied - clearly still relating the story of the king. Colt story...

[Puck]

26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

In Vs 26 it says 'he' replied - clearly still relating the story of the king.

Hmmmmm.... yeah, I'm not seeing that. Don't you just love the convenient versatility of different versions?

Furthermore, if you are talking about the 'he' in this portion of verse 26.....

"even that he hath shall be taken away from him."

.......you are far off base as the 'he' is referring to followers of god as the parable relates to them.

[fr0d0]

He's clearly still speaking as the king no matter what version.

Here's my new personal fave:

29 - Why is there no evidence of any of the miracles performed by God? None whatsoever.

QFT

[Puck]

He's clearly still speaking as the king no matter what version.

Clearly? I think I have clearly outlined that he was not.

[fr0d0]

Ok. From vs 24 KJV:

24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.

25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)

26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

28 And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.

In Vs 24 this is clearly the king speaking yes? v26 continues the kings speech.

Looking it up in the NIV

24"Then he said to those standing by, 'Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.'

25" 'Sir,' they said, 'he already has ten!'

26"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. 27But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me."

The Triumphal Entry

28After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.

...The context is still clear in that it's the king still speaking.

But what about the meaning of the parable? Of course it would be fantasy to suggest the Jesus here was condoning murder. If you understood Christian theology you would know that death here is in reference to spiritual death. God in Christ offers spiritual life from spiritual death. If you choose ill health over life then sure, you're gonna get death. It's all about this other concept you have a problem with.. that God doesn't create for us a perfect existence lacking pain and suffering. You'd accuse me of being a fantacist while you want to throw away this physical reality because it's somehow 'imperfect'.

[leo-rcc]

Checking Luke 19 in the biblegateway with 3 versions, I have to agree with Fr0d0 that Jesus is still speaking as the king in the parable of the minas. Even the Dutch version agrees.

edit: Fr0d0 beat me to it.

[Puck]

24"Then he said to those standing by, 'Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.'

25" 'Sir,' they said, 'he already has ten!'

26"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. 27But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me."

The Triumphal Entry

28After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.

I agree, as it reads in this version, it does seem as though it is a continuation of the king's words. The KJV, however, does not read as such. As shown below:

15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.

17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.

18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.

19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.

20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:

21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.

22 And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:

23 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?

24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.

25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)

Enter Jesus' interpretation of the parable to his disciples as it relates to them and the followers of god.

26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

28 And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.

29 And it came to pass, when he was come nigh to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount called the mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples,

30 Saying, Go ye into the village over against you; in the which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither.

31 And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him.

32 And they that were sent went their way, and found even as he had said unto them.

33 And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt?

34 And they said, The Lord hath need of him.

As this passage from the KJV reads, it is clear that Jesus' words began at verse 26. The only thing that would change this is knowing who the 'he' is referring to in verse 28. If it is referring to the king in the parable, I concede to your contention. If it is referring to Jesus, however, you will have to concede to this passage in its literal form, at least in the KJV.

If you understood Christian theology you would know that death here is in reference to spiritual death.

This argument makes no sense if we are talking about a command issued by Jesus to slay non-believers. I understand all too well the metaphorical spiritual death, but if they are non-believers, then it would stand to reason that they are already spiritually dead and, therefore, there would be no need for slaying, right? In a literal sense, that would be like saying, "They are dead, so go kill them."

It's all about this other concept you have a problem with.. that God doesn't create for us a perfect existence lacking pain and suffering.

First of all, I thought all of god's creations were perfect. I suppose perfect is a rather subjective term here, huh? Open to interpretation just like the rest of the story? Secondly, I thought he did create a perfect place for us, heaven, which is devoid of pain and suffering. Do you see where I am going with this? Yet another christian connundrum. Why would he create this alternate perfect place for christians when he, being omnipotent, can make it happen here at any time? Oh, I forgot, the prophecy/game of good and evil must play out simply because "it was written." It is quite the farce in my mind.

[fr0d0]

As this passage from the KJV reads, it is clear that Jesus' words began at verse 26. The only thing that would change this is knowing who the 'he' is referring to in verse 28. If it is referring to the king in the parable, I concede to your contention. If it is referring to Jesus, however, you will have to concede to this passage in its literal form, at least in the KJV.

That still isn't conclusive. I read that as Jesus' own words beginning at v28. The NIV being the most accurate translation to date should relate the original text most closely. Looking at the passage as a whole I'd suggest this is the only plausible translation.

This argument makes no sense if we are talking about a command issued by Jesus to slay non-believers. I understand all too well the metaphorical spiritual death, but if they are non-believers, then it would stand to reason that they are already spiritually dead and, therefore, there would be no need for slaying, right? In a literal sense, that would be like saying, "They are dead, so go kill them."

He isn't speaking about people who haven't heard but those who do nothing about their faith, specifically, in this instance.

It's all about this other concept you have a problem with.. that God doesn't create for us a perfect existence lacking pain and suffering.

First of all, I thought all of god's creations were perfect. I suppose perfect is a rather subjective term here, huh? Open to interpretation just like the rest of the story?

How can all of Gods' creations be perfect? Only God is perfect.

Secondly, I thought he did create a perfect place for us, heaven, which is devoid of pain and suffering.

Heaven is primarily referenced as a place on earth - for you and I right here & right now.

Do you see where I am going with this? Yet another christian connundrum. Why would he create this alternate perfect place for christians when he, being omnipotent, can make it happen here at any time?

He does make it happen here. It's only your resistance to him that is preventing you from enjoying it.

Oh, I forgot, the prophecy/game of good and evil must play out simply because "it was written." It is quite the farce in my mind.

It would seem that you are quite far off in your basic understanding of the subject. The nature of good and evil isn't a prophesy but an observation of human nature.