As a Christian, it is not unusual to encounter atheist and other unbelievers who know little to nothing about the Bible. A lot about what they know unfortunately comes from other unbelievers. Some of whom are intentionally trying to mislead people away from Christ.
Then you also have the unbelievers who are just looking hard to find reasons not to believe. Looking for excuses, any excuse not to believe. They will often even attack and argue with us believers, not because they think they can convince a believer, but because they’re trying to convince themselves Christianity is not true or that there is no God.
Recently I encountered a person on Twitter who waa dead set on trying to make the Bible teach hate. I would correct him on one thing he presented me with, something he thought would show the Bible teaches hate. Then when he was shown to be wrong, he would jump to another passage he thought would support his argument and I would need to correct him on that too.
I have seen this before. Someone just keeps tying say the Bible says something it does not, revealing how they never read or studied the Bible and are just looking for a reason to justify their anti-Christian position or other curent view. After all, it is easier to justify your own position if you demonize the others in order to convince yourself your position is right, true and just.
Though there probably are a few who legitimately know what they’re presenting is incorrect and do it nonetheless.
Anyway – He eventually tried to use Luke 19:27. Asking, “why would Jesus threaten execution if he did not mean “Hate”?” Then giving a quote completely out of context.
The thing that really got me, having me scratch my head was how in the same tweet recognizes that Jesus was telling a parable.
I mean that should have been a dead giveaway as to how Jesus was not saying to his follower to kill his enemies in front of him or kill them at all. Jesus was simply telling a story and saying this was what the character in the story is saying.
It would be like me reading a story from a book to my son, then saying the king in that story said, “Kill all the magical Furbies in front of me.” Is that what I said and actualy want? Or am I relaying what the king in this book said? Of course, I didn’t say that. The character in the story that I’m talking about did that.
However, it would seem this was something Mark Shasha failed to understand somehow. This despite how he at least knew it was a parable.
Before I continue, let’s look at what the parable I’m context.
“11 As they heard these things, he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. 12 He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return. 13 Calling ten of his servants,[a] he gave them ten minas,[b] and said to them, ‘Engage in business until I come.’ 14 But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We do not want this man to reign over us.’ 15 When he returned, having received the kingdom, he ordered these servants to whom he had given the money to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by doing business. 16 The first came before him, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made ten minas more.’ 17 And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant![c] Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’ 18 And the second came, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made five minas.’ 19 And he said to him, ‘And you are to be over five cities.’ 20 Then another came, saying, ‘Lord, here is your mina, which I kept laid away in a handkerchief; 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe man. You take what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.’ 22 He said to him, ‘I will condemn you with your own words, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?’ 24 And he said to those who stood by, ‘Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’ 25 And they said to him, ‘Lord, he has ten minas!’ 26 ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.’” Luke 19:11-27 (ESV)
After reading this parable in context, we also learn what this parable is about. Yes Parables have points. In this Parable however the point being made was an attempt to help his followers understand what going to happen, not their and then but in the future.
You see, as Jesus was approaching Jerusalem, his followers had this idea in their head that he was going go there to the throne and destroy all his enemies in their time. He basically is telling them their timeline for the events are not exactly accurate here.
He wasn’t going to crush his enemies he was going away for awhile. Letting them know that he would eventually be coming back and then during His Second Coming he would judge his followers and enemies.
Sure the King represents Jesus to a degree in this parable, however it is not Jesus Himself. Of course this is not the first time He made such comparisons with strange people in his stories. We have even had comparisons between God and atheist in a parable (Luke 18:1).
The parable here however, at least when we get the the part Mark is trying to use against the Bible, is the time when Jesus returns, his second coming where he is judging his enemies. He not saying man’s going going to be carrying out any of this, as we know, the Bible makes clear it’s not man, but Him and His angels that will be doing this work, not men.
So clearly this passage is not saying what he thinks. Where before Jesus returns his followers must go around and kill his enemies. This Parables ending is about how, when he returns people will be judged. As the Bible makes clear it is Jesus who has the authority to judge both believers and unbelievers alike.
As we read the Bible we learned what Jesus/God actually wants from us in the meantime. Love God, turn the other cheek, love your neighbor, and yes Love your enemies like it tells us in Matthew 5:44. Even feed your enemy (Romans 12:20). These are all his standing orders that Christians are to follow while he gone.
So my reaponce to him was a simple one. I asked Mark to ask himself, “why didn’t the apostles just start killing people in His name? What did they know that you don’t?”
they were simple question, revealing ones at that. If they we’re supposed to kill his enemies in front of him, why were they not doing? This should have been enough for him to realize that maybe he didn’t understand what he putting forth.
Unfortunately it was not enough or he simply ignored it. Again, putting forth another argument that makes it look like he either never read Bible or was intentionally misrepresent it.
Now because he claims he used to teach the Bible, I will take his word at it. Which consequently means it is highly likely he knows what he is presenting is false and is still presenting it anyways. Yes it doesn’t give specifics on who he thinks Petter killed.
However, I am taking a guess he referring to the claim that Petter killed Ananias and his wife Sapphira. as this is the commen claim. If so and thats who he is talking about. they had not been killed because of what Jesus said in the parable found in Luke.
I’m not even sure how Mark could even think their deaths back up his claim about the parable in Luke, as they are two diffrent and independent situation. And in the story of the two who died we are actualy given a reason why they died and it was not because of what Jesus said, it was their deceit and so God executed his judgment for their deceit. possibly carried out by Petter (we really don’t know. we just know thry died at his feet adter he spoke).
Nonetheless, After I attempted to respond to Mark again, I realized that a conversation with him would bear no good fruit, realizing this I decided to just simply to end the conversation with him. Notifying him that I will be making this blog post mentioning him in it.
I would however like to thank him, he had given me an excuse to talk about a commen anti-christian argument I have heard, Luke 19:27.