I have been told that Luke 19:27 is basically a justification of religious war and killing non believers! :eek:
No. Start at verse 11 and read the REST of the passage. It’s a warning of what GOD will do for those referenced in verse 14, who rejected God/Christ.
Most people misread this parable. The ‘master’ is satan, and his servants are demons.
Yeah, put it in context of the entire passage. It is about God’s sovereignty, not ours.
“Now as for those enemies of mine who did not want me as their king, bring them here and slay them before me.”
Verse 27 is part of the parable of the talents:
While they were listening to him speak, he proceeded to tell a parable because he was near Jerusalem and they thought that the kingdom of God would appear there immediately. (Luke 19:11)
The rewarding of the faithful servants and the slaying of the king’s enemies after his return represents divine judgement after the second coming. Here are the footnotes in the New American Bible about the parable:
The story about the rejected king may have originated with a contemporary historical event. … As the story is used by Luke, however, it furnishes a correction to the expectation of the imminent end of the age and of the establishment of the kingdom in Jerusalem (Lk 19:11). Jesus is not on his way to Jerusalem to receive the kingly power; for that, he must go away and only after returning from the distant country (a reference to the parousia) will reward and judgment take place.
If I’m concerned about someone’s spiritual welfare, killing them is the exact opposite of what I’m supposed to do. Luke 19:27 is a warning, not a command.
You’ve been told wrong.
You can use verses in the Bible to prove anything. I would read the context first (preferably the whole chapter) before getting too upset about it.
In this case, the context is pretty obvious – God is the King and any punishment is done by him, at the time of judgement (not here on Earth).
Thats the one thing that irks me about the bible, even after considering the whole chapter sometimes, depending on what someone is trying to ‘prove or justify’, just about anything COULD be used to whatever end you like.
Seems like if the intent was to have as many people as possible accept and abide by Gods laws, the bible would be VERY CLEARLY written and it would be noted if its literal, metaphorical, symbolic, etc etc…that way, NO ONE could twist anything around or argue different opinions.
In most of the important cases, I expect it is as clear as can be reasonably expected for a book. Unfortunately, even with very explicitly laid out language, *someone *could twist it to mean something else.
Furthermore, language changes with time and the Bible is, what? Two millennia old now? (At least, the younger parts are.) The language couldn’t possibly be protected from *some *distortion without an active miracle from God (and even then that would honestly be more trouble than its worth to have an eternally unchanging language). Furthermore, if it did have notes on the sides saying what is literal, metaphorical, symbolic, etc, you could still argue about what exactly the metaphor meant. Is it a reflection of the true nature of heaven? How much truth can we glean from a metaphor about metaphysical reality? Even “literal” can change slightly as methods of recording information change. Some parts of the Bible are out of order, based on our modern methodology, but chronological order was not necessarily required when recording historical events at that time. (So many Biblical authors simply put events in whatever order best suited their teaching.)
Fortunately, with careful study and time, I find that most Christians who study the Bible, though divided in minor issues, are drawn together towards unity on major ones. With the help of textual study of the original language, archeological study of Bible times, and other resources, our generation is still enabled to understand and interpret an age-old text with accuracy – and you have to admit, that’s pretty neat.
We are divided, yes, but the absolutes that unite us are as clear as ever. Even when we disagree, there is almost always common ground.