In article nfKEc.7736$%_6.7019@attbi_s01, John Watson wrote:


Good. At least you are at the point where you recognize that it
was just a story, and that Jesus, in his allegory was not
speaking literally. Nice first step.

Why are Christians always so arrogant, cocky and just plain nasty to people
who don't accept their fairy tale as fact?

Well I'm not going to play your little game, you don't make the rules.


In other words, your bigoted representation is wrong, and you
cannot back it up.


The fact of the matter is that passage was used by Christians to murder
millions of innocent men, women and children.



Well, then, you will have no problem showing a modern mainstream
Protestant denomination that interprets the parable the way
you say they do. Here, one more time:

Name one mainstream Baptist theologian or denomination that does:
Name one mainstream Methodist theologian or denomination that does:
Name one mainstream Presbyterian theologian or denomination that does:
Name one mainstream Anglican theologian or denomination that does:
Name one mainstream Lutheran theologian or denomination that does:

Putting the burden of proof on me to show that mainstream Protestants didn't
endorse it, doesn't change the fact that it did happen.


In fact, asking you to prove your bizarre claims is exactly appropriate.
You have been making bigoted statements about Christianity, you have
been making broad generalizations about what Christians believe. It
is entirely reasonable to ask that you back up your claim. You
have provided an interpretation of a parable and represented it as
the "Christian" view. The burden of proof is *yours* to show that
it is.

You are probably a Baptist with an agenda that includes bashing Catholics
and will probably try to blame them for all of the Christian atrocities.

A Christian is a Christian is a Christian, I don't care which cult they
identify with or endorse.


No, most bigots cannot see outside their stereotyped generalizations.
That's rather the point.


billo