Should British and American fighters...
11 February 2015, 01:46 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11 February 2015, 01:50 PM
#33
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11 February 2015, 02:49 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
OK you're just not getting the point are you?
Here's an example:
Scene A - Christian knocks on door holding a copy of the bible and a load of leaflets telling you about the coming of Christ and could talk the hind legs off a donkey. You shut the door saying no thanks and they walk off to the next house.
Scene B - Christian knocks on door holding a machete, an orange jumpsuit and a video camera. You open the door, say no thanks he comes in and cuts your head off and posts the footage on youtube telling the World about the coming of Christ.
Now which one of those would the majority of the World's population deem to be extremist?
It's not about what faith someone is it's about their actions in how they go about defending their faith. Brutally murdering innocent people as you rampage across 2 countries to setup a caliphate is not acceptable under any faith or any international laws.
Here's an example:
Scene A - Christian knocks on door holding a copy of the bible and a load of leaflets telling you about the coming of Christ and could talk the hind legs off a donkey. You shut the door saying no thanks and they walk off to the next house.
Scene B - Christian knocks on door holding a machete, an orange jumpsuit and a video camera. You open the door, say no thanks he comes in and cuts your head off and posts the footage on youtube telling the World about the coming of Christ.
Now which one of those would the majority of the World's population deem to be extremist?
It's not about what faith someone is it's about their actions in how they go about defending their faith. Brutally murdering innocent people as you rampage across 2 countries to setup a caliphate is not acceptable under any faith or any international laws.
But because in the past 70-80 years most in the west have turned from such ways, we now apparently have the moral high ground
11 February 2015, 02:56 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was considered acceptable by upholders of the various Christian faiths for centuries! To listen to some of the rhetoric pouring out of the American bible belt, it is still considered acceptable in some places
But because in the past 70-80 years most in the west have turned from such ways, we now apparently have the moral high ground
But because in the past 70-80 years most in the west have turned from such ways, we now apparently have the moral high ground
11 February 2015, 03:25 PM
#37
yes, I posted on the sheer abhorrence of mercenaries on another thread
I quoted the famous photographer Don Mccullin (responsible for some of the most haunting images ever)
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ph...r+don+mccullin
who whilst photographing white South African Mercenaries in the Biafran war, asked them "Why" - and they simply said "because they like killing blacks"
they really did unleash the "dogs of war" on the Iraqi people
I quoted the famous photographer Don Mccullin (responsible for some of the most haunting images ever)
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ph...r+don+mccullin
who whilst photographing white South African Mercenaries in the Biafran war, asked them "Why" - and they simply said "because they like killing blacks"
they really did unleash the "dogs of war" on the Iraqi people
As one who was there I can say that's a load of utter rubbish. As one of the 'dogs of war' supposedly running around shooting up the locals I can assure you we did nothing of the kind. Post war I worked in Iraq for a respected British company, where we provided training for the Iraqi police and military where none otherwise existed. Although we worked alongside them, had it been left to the coalition forces that job would never have been done. The security aspect was in place to prevent the Iraqi people from wrecking their own country (aided and abetted by Syrians and Iranians infiltrators who probably feared a coalition invasion might happen to their own country).
Please don't tar all 'mercenaries' with the same brush. Private military companies are for the most part well organised and regulated and its members are subject to the rule of law like everyone else.
11 February 2015, 03:39 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
As one who was there I can say that's a load of utter rubbish. As one of the 'dogs of war' supposedly running around shooting up the locals I can assure you we did nothing of the kind. Post war I worked in Iraq for a respected British company, where we provided training for the Iraqi police and military where none otherwise existed. Although we worked alongside them, had it been left to the coalition forces that job would never have been done. The security aspect was in place to prevent the Iraqi people from wrecking their own country (aided and abetted by Syrians and Iranians infiltrators who probably feared a coalition invasion might happen to their own country).
Please don't tar all 'mercenaries' with the same brush. Private military companies are for the most part well organised and regulated and its members are subject to the rule of law like everyone else.
Please don't tar all 'mercenaries' with the same brush. Private military companies are for the most part well organised and regulated and its members are subject to the rule of law like everyone else.
how many mercenaries operating in Iraq have been convicted of any crime - outside of Iraq
11 February 2015, 03:48 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
As soon as human rights laws were born then every corner of the World came under scrutiny. Applying such laws is another matter obviously, North Korea being the prime example.
11 February 2015, 04:20 PM
#40
And do you know (or care) how many pmcs died while working in Iraq? Some were killed by Iraqis they were training, others ambushed by supposedly friendly Iraqi police as they travelled to their work places. Others were blown up by suicide bombers. Many more were killed in RTAs. But perhaps you think they deserved to die.
There is no doubt that the Iraq war was a major mistake and the real criminals have never been brought to book, nor will they ever be. But don't knock those who are prepared to step forward to do a job most people, for good reason, avoid like the plague.
11 February 2015, 04:32 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moral high ground? I think it's progress of civilisation and realising barbarity has no place in a modern World.
As soon as human rights laws were born then every corner of the World came under scrutiny. Applying such laws is another matter obviously, North Korea being the prime example.
As soon as human rights laws were born then every corner of the World came under scrutiny. Applying such laws is another matter obviously, North Korea being the prime example.
11 February 2015, 05:06 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
well 17 innocent Iraqis died at the hands of Mercenaries in 2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_Baghdad_shootings
plenty more here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_documents_leak
The New York Times said the reports contain evidence of many abuses, including civilian deaths, committed by contractors. The New York Times points out some specific reports, such as one which says "after the IED strike a witness reports the Blackwater employees fired indiscriminately at the scene."[17] In another event on 14 May 2005, an American unit "observed a Blackwater PSD shoot up a civ vehicle" killing a father and wounding his wife and daughter.[17]
On May 30, 2007, Blackwater employees shot an Iraqi civilian said to have been "driving too close" to a State Department convoy that was being escorted by Blackwater contractors.[125]
On February 16, 2005, four Blackwater guards escorting a U.S. State Department convoy in Iraq fired 70 rounds into a car. The guards stated that they felt threatened when the driver ignored orders to stop as he approached the convoy. The fate of the car's driver was unknown because the convoy did not stop after the shooting. An investigation by the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service concluded that the shooting was not justified and that the Blackwater employees provided false statements to investigators. The statements claimed that one of the Blackwater vehicles had been hit by insurgent gunfire, but the investigation concluded that one of the Blackwater guards had actually fired into his own vehicle by accident. John Frese, the U.S. embassy in Iraq's top security official, declined to punish Blackwater or the security guards because he believed any disciplinary actions would lower the morale of the Blackwater contractors.[119]
certainly kept themselves busy
plenty of source/referenced information here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academi...-CNN_World-126
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_Baghdad_shootings
plenty more here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_documents_leak
The New York Times said the reports contain evidence of many abuses, including civilian deaths, committed by contractors. The New York Times points out some specific reports, such as one which says "after the IED strike a witness reports the Blackwater employees fired indiscriminately at the scene."[17] In another event on 14 May 2005, an American unit "observed a Blackwater PSD shoot up a civ vehicle" killing a father and wounding his wife and daughter.[17]
On May 30, 2007, Blackwater employees shot an Iraqi civilian said to have been "driving too close" to a State Department convoy that was being escorted by Blackwater contractors.[125]
On February 16, 2005, four Blackwater guards escorting a U.S. State Department convoy in Iraq fired 70 rounds into a car. The guards stated that they felt threatened when the driver ignored orders to stop as he approached the convoy. The fate of the car's driver was unknown because the convoy did not stop after the shooting. An investigation by the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service concluded that the shooting was not justified and that the Blackwater employees provided false statements to investigators. The statements claimed that one of the Blackwater vehicles had been hit by insurgent gunfire, but the investigation concluded that one of the Blackwater guards had actually fired into his own vehicle by accident. John Frese, the U.S. embassy in Iraq's top security official, declined to punish Blackwater or the security guards because he believed any disciplinary actions would lower the morale of the Blackwater contractors.[119]
certainly kept themselves busy
plenty of source/referenced information here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academi...-CNN_World-126
11 February 2015, 05:40 PM
#45
well 17 innocent Iraqis died at the hands of Mercenaries in 2007
Blackwater Baghdad shootings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
plenty more here
Iraq War documents leak - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The New York Times said the reports contain evidence of many abuses, including civilian deaths, committed by contractors. The New York Times points out some specific reports, such as one which says "after the IED strike a witness reports the Blackwater employees fired indiscriminately at the scene."[17] In another event on 14 May 2005, an American unit "observed a Blackwater PSD shoot up a civ vehicle" killing a father and wounding his wife and daughter.[17]
On May 30, 2007, Blackwater employees shot an Iraqi civilian said to have been "driving too close" to a State Department convoy that was being escorted by Blackwater contractors.[125]
On February 16, 2005, four Blackwater guards escorting a U.S. State Department convoy in Iraq fired 70 rounds into a car. The guards stated that they felt threatened when the driver ignored orders to stop as he approached the convoy. The fate of the car's driver was unknown because the convoy did not stop after the shooting. An investigation by the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service concluded that the shooting was not justified and that the Blackwater employees provided false statements to investigators. The statements claimed that one of the Blackwater vehicles had been hit by insurgent gunfire, but the investigation concluded that one of the Blackwater guards had actually fired into his own vehicle by accident. John Frese, the U.S. embassy in Iraq's top security official, declined to punish Blackwater or the security guards because he believed any disciplinary actions would lower the morale of the Blackwater contractors.[119]
certainly kept themselves busy
plenty of source/referenced information here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academi...-CNN_World-126
Blackwater Baghdad shootings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
plenty more here
Iraq War documents leak - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The New York Times said the reports contain evidence of many abuses, including civilian deaths, committed by contractors. The New York Times points out some specific reports, such as one which says "after the IED strike a witness reports the Blackwater employees fired indiscriminately at the scene."[17] In another event on 14 May 2005, an American unit "observed a Blackwater PSD shoot up a civ vehicle" killing a father and wounding his wife and daughter.[17]
On May 30, 2007, Blackwater employees shot an Iraqi civilian said to have been "driving too close" to a State Department convoy that was being escorted by Blackwater contractors.[125]
On February 16, 2005, four Blackwater guards escorting a U.S. State Department convoy in Iraq fired 70 rounds into a car. The guards stated that they felt threatened when the driver ignored orders to stop as he approached the convoy. The fate of the car's driver was unknown because the convoy did not stop after the shooting. An investigation by the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service concluded that the shooting was not justified and that the Blackwater employees provided false statements to investigators. The statements claimed that one of the Blackwater vehicles had been hit by insurgent gunfire, but the investigation concluded that one of the Blackwater guards had actually fired into his own vehicle by accident. John Frese, the U.S. embassy in Iraq's top security official, declined to punish Blackwater or the security guards because he believed any disciplinary actions would lower the morale of the Blackwater contractors.[119]
certainly kept themselves busy
plenty of source/referenced information here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academi...-CNN_World-126
Blackwater was heavily backed by the US administration (the real criminals) and its shameful antics were far away from what went on in most pmcs. My company was involved solely in training and securing sites but it still lost a number of people in the process. But we signed up knowing that could happen.
Initially there was very good money to be made from this work and this attracted the very best personnel, many of whom dropped out of British Army SF to take up the lucrative offers. This brought a high standard of expertise and discipline to the job. Unfortunately as time went by standards in certain companies were lowered and the dross started to filter through, real low lifes in some cases. At this time I took my leave. A very similar process occurred in Afghanistan.
However, as has been noted many times before, sitting in judgement on such things from a safe distance is very easy, not so easy when you're actively involved.
11 February 2015, 06:31 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
I am sure some people went there with noble motives, and some because the like war and conflict, and strutting around with guns
unfortunaly the Iraqi's had little choice in the matter
unfortunaly the Iraqi's had little choice in the matter
11 February 2015, 08:55 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
I did not mean anything personal on you Paben (or your colleagues) - I am sure you set out to help, and things can't have been easy - it must have been a very difficult time
as with most things it is the minority that do the most damage, often in inverse proportion to there actual numbers
I just do feel for the ordinary Iraqi - just trying to live amongst the carnage
as with most things it is the minority that do the most damage, often in inverse proportion to there actual numbers
I just do feel for the ordinary Iraqi - just trying to live amongst the carnage
11 February 2015, 10:26 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
I didn't say there was, but I doubt you'll find anything written in the Quran to justify the atrocities being perpetrated in the name of Islam either?
What I said was brutal conquests have been perpetrated in the name of Christianity for centuries, the crusades, the inquisition, South America, etc.
What I said was brutal conquests have been perpetrated in the name of Christianity for centuries, the crusades, the inquisition, South America, etc.
11 February 2015, 10:35 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Moral high ground? I think it's progress of civilisation and realising barbarity has no place in a modern World.
As soon as human rights laws were born then every corner of the World came under scrutiny. Applying such laws is another matter obviously, North Korea being the prime example.
As soon as human rights laws were born then every corner of the World came under scrutiny. Applying such laws is another matter obviously, North Korea being the prime example.
11 February 2015, 10:54 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Well first off the the clear distinction between right and wrong. You think ISIS should just be left to carry on murdering innocent people because Iraq isn't part of 'the West'? You think what ISIS does is just the culture in Iraq and Syria or the whole Middle East? I don't think those in Iraq and Syria who are suffering at the hands of ISIS would agree with that sentiment.
11 February 2015, 11:02 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't say there was, but I doubt you'll find anything written in the Quran to justify the atrocities being perpetrated in the name of Islam either?
What I said was brutal conquests have been perpetrated in the name of Christianity for centuries, the crusades, the inquisition, South America, etc.
What I said was brutal conquests have been perpetrated in the name of Christianity for centuries, the crusades, the inquisition, South America, etc.
http://quran.com/8/12
Last edited by JTaylor; 11 February 2015 at 11:15 PM.
12 February 2015, 10:08 AM
#53
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Old Testament is full of examples of how to mistreat people, and Jesus makes it quite clear that the OT is relevant and should be followed to the letter.
Of course, the issue is not what someone who may or may not have existed said, or what they were, but rather that like all religions, they are man made, written by men, reflect the desires of them and the times they lived in, and are designed to control and subjugate.
Unfortunately, some people like to use the backdrop of a dvine being to lend authority to such things, whereas in reality, they are just bad people, or brainwashed, and think they are doing the right thing.
Of course, the issue is not what someone who may or may not have existed said, or what they were, but rather that like all religions, they are man made, written by men, reflect the desires of them and the times they lived in, and are designed to control and subjugate.
Unfortunately, some people like to use the backdrop of a dvine being to lend authority to such things, whereas in reality, they are just bad people, or brainwashed, and think they are doing the right thing.
12 February 2015, 10:54 AM
#54
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Old Testament is full of examples of how to mistreat people, and Jesus makes it quite clear that the OT is relevant and should be followed to the letter.
Of course, the issue is not what someone who may or may not have existed said, or what they were, but rather that like all religions, they are man made, written by men, reflect the desires of them and the times they lived in, and are designed to control and subjugate.
Unfortunately, some people like to use the backdrop of a dvine being to lend authority to such things, whereas in reality, they are just bad people, or brainwashed, and think they are doing the right thing.
Of course, the issue is not what someone who may or may not have existed said, or what they were, but rather that like all religions, they are man made, written by men, reflect the desires of them and the times they lived in, and are designed to control and subjugate.
Unfortunately, some people like to use the backdrop of a dvine being to lend authority to such things, whereas in reality, they are just bad people, or brainwashed, and think they are doing the right thing.
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (NIV, Matthew 5:17–18)
Everything was accomplished when Jesus died on the cross.
The teachings of Jesus, the Council of Jerusalem, and other New Testament teachings (John 1:16-17, Acts 13:39, Romans 2:25-29, 8:1-4, 1 Corinthians 9:19-21, Galatians 2:15-16, Ephesians 2:15) make it clear that Christians are not required to follow the Old Testament regulations about crime and punishment, warfare, slavery, diet, circumcision, animal sacrifices, feast days, Sabbath observance, ritual cleanliness and so on. To say they are to be followed "to the letter" is to tell an untruth.
This isn't to say that Christians are to relax their moral standards, indeed it's fair to say that we are called to even greater self-discipline. Additionally, Christians should still look at Old Testament scripture for spiritual guidance (2 Timothy 3:16-17), but when there appears to be conflict between Old Testament laws and New Testament teaching, we are to follow the New Testament owing to the principle of abrogation.
12 February 2015, 12:09 PM
#55
Well first off the the clear distinction between right and wrong. You think ISIS should just be left to carry on murdering innocent people because Iraq isn't part of 'the West'? You think what ISIS does is just the culture in Iraq and Syria or the whole Middle East? I don't think those in Iraq and Syria who are suffering at the hands of ISIS would agree with that sentiment.
12 February 2015, 12:36 PM
#56
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid."
Also, the notion of "until all is accomplished" is ambiguous. There seems to be quite a bit of disagreement about what he meant (which is the main crux of the problem, after all).
Or "Whoever curses mother or father shall die", or "But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me"?
Hardly friendly are they?
I'm sure you will try to explain them away, showing them to be benign, but that is your interpretation, and that is your right, just as it is the right of certin Muslims to interpret the Quran either as a violent, or peaceful book.
Ain't interpretation great? You can just make sh*t up to suit your personal views
Also, the notion of "until all is accomplished" is ambiguous. There seems to be quite a bit of disagreement about what he meant (which is the main crux of the problem, after all).
Or "Whoever curses mother or father shall die", or "But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me"?
Hardly friendly are they?
I'm sure you will try to explain them away, showing them to be benign, but that is your interpretation, and that is your right, just as it is the right of certin Muslims to interpret the Quran either as a violent, or peaceful book.
Ain't interpretation great? You can just make sh*t up to suit your personal views
12 February 2015, 01:06 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
The Government say there are around 500 British ISIS fighters, though the Labour MP, Khalid Mahmood, puts the figure closer to 2000. How do you think it fits in with Muslims in the UK and UK citizens in general to see our Government order British troops and ground forces to fight and kill, who are essentially, our own British citizens and friends and families of British Muslims?
12 February 2015, 01:54 PM
#58
12 February 2015, 02:25 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
If they are part of an extremist or terrorist organisation the nationality of those participants is irrelevant. Or are you suggesting ISIS members who are British should not be targetted?
What does it matter what nationality a terrorist is? What matters is that UK nationals were radicalised in the first place and that needs to be stopped as much as it can be.
What does it matter what nationality a terrorist is? What matters is that UK nationals were radicalised in the first place and that needs to be stopped as much as it can be.
12 February 2015, 02:34 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And in context:
15 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’[a] and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[b] 5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ 6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8 “‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’[c]”
10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen and understand. 11 What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.”
3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’[a] and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[b] 5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ 6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8 “‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’[c]”
10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen and understand. 11 What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.”
Luke 19:11-27 ESV wrote:
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. He said therefore, "A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return. Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten minas, and said to them, 'Engage in business until I come.' But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, 'We do not want this man to reign over us.' 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. The first came before him, saying, 'Lord, your mina has made ten minas more.' And he said to him, 'Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.' And the second came, saying, 'Lord, your mina has made five minas.' And he said to him, 'And you are to be over five cities.' Then another came, saying, 'Lord, here is your mina, which I kept laid away in a handkerchief; 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.' 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? Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?' And he said to those who stood by, 'Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.' And they said to him, 'Lord, he has ten minas!' '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. But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me."
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. He said therefore, "A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return. Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten minas, and said to them, 'Engage in business until I come.' But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, 'We do not want this man to reign over us.' 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. The first came before him, saying, 'Lord, your mina has made ten minas more.' And he said to him, 'Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.' And the second came, saying, 'Lord, your mina has made five minas.' And he said to him, 'And you are to be over five cities.' Then another came, saying, 'Lord, here is your mina, which I kept laid away in a handkerchief; 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.' 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? Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?' And he said to those who stood by, 'Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.' And they said to him, 'Lord, he has ten minas!' '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. But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me."
When in context yes, they are. Like a father giving advice to his children using illustrations and examples.
Perhaps we should all become automata. Slaves.
Last edited by JTaylor; 12 February 2015 at 02:46 PM.