From: enometh@meer.net   
      
   * ( "Robert<_^_.robert@mu.way>") <10h7gns$ebl8$1@dont-email.me> :   
   Wrote on Mon, 08 Dec 2025 13:42:20 -0800:   
      
   [...]   
   > He was speaking of humility of the individual to such events, and it was a   
   > teaching on that subject of humility as taught in V11 then in V12, he also   
   > spoke to the Pharisee that invited him of who should be invited to a feast of   
   > celebration so that the one who invites the guests may receive a blessing and   
   > be recompensed at the resurrection of the Just. Meaning of course, those who   
   > wear the robes of the Righteousness of the Heavenly Father.   
      
   A few weeks ago the local church here hosted a guest pastor (an   
   indian-origin person from sac) who was from a pentecostal organization   
   preached a christian charter of dominion on Gen.1:28 which included the   
   church members "knowing their place" in the hierarchy.   
      
   > Then at verse 15 one of the ones who was listening to the discourse popped up   
   > and said, “Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God” V15,   
   > then Jesus spoke to him and taught on a certain man who made a great supper   
   > and invited many, the man being one of note. Therein he speaks of the   
   > so-called Christian who was too busy in the affairs of this life to pay   
   > attention to God the Father, as he should, and totally disregarded the   
   > teaching to “look up” as our redemption drawers near, because they were   
   > too busy with life and the things of the desire of the flesh. Thus the 50%   
   > that are left behind during the Great Resurrection if those in Christ Jesus.   
   > Those who at the very last moment suddenly realized that they were not   
   > operating in or with the power of the Holy Spirit and were all flummoxed of   
   > how to receive Him and dwell in the power since they were so earthbound with   
   > hardened hearts that it was difficult to break out of that shell. They   
   > realized this a moment too late, and were not counted worthy to escape the   
   > destruction that was soon to come, yet they pounded on the door of God,   
   > crying out to “let me in”. But the door was shut.   
      
   It is likely the parable of the wedding guest was repeated on many   
   occassions and the record in Matthew may have been from a different   
   context.   
      
   [...]   
   >> In my case I cannot intepret the parables that use money and banking to   
   >> convey a message as anything but satitical! Lazarus and Dives is satire   
   >> on the the high priest family of Annas (the five brothers-in-law of   
   >> Caiaphas, all saduccess).   
      
   > I never heard of any parable of Lazarus and Dives. I could not find any   
   > reference to “dives” in the NT either. So I did an online search using   
   > that phrase and up popped the monkey, WIKI. ;) It referenced Luke 16. Is that   
   > what you are speaking of? If so then what tie in does the parable of the   
   > dishonest Manager have to due with Lazarus and the rich man?   
      
   I think Dives = fancy word for the Rich Man.   The dishonest Steward I   
   have to gloss over as a banking parable, as it stands.   
      
   [...]   
   > V 13 is the summation of the parable of the the dishonest manager and was a   
   > the clarity also of the fact that one cannot serve the flesh and God, ie as   
   > walking in the flesh or walking in the Spirit.   
   > You are correct in that the definition of the clothing was not spoken of at   
   > that time, and after all it is a parable of a future event. However, we, who   
   > have all come to the Father God through Jesus the Christ since his   
   > resurrection are given the understanding of being clothed in the   
   > Righteousness of the Heavenly Father. Clothed with a white raiment, made   
   > white as we have been washed in the Blood of Jesus. Rev 3:5 as well as   
   > described frequently throughout the NT.   
   >>   
   >> He's speechless because he think of the justification for the   
   >> question. If He was some poor unworthy who was picked up, without   
   >> clothes or any merit, and asked to come, and came as he was, and then   
   >> the King asks him that question, he would be speechless. This is how I   
   >> read it the first time I read it.   
   >   
   > I have come to realize, recently, that the scripture regarding his   
   > speechlessness, what that he was made speechless. Which is what that word   
   > ’speechless’ described in the original language. Now it could be that he   
   > was made speechless as he understanding was made clear to him that he was   
   > walking in his own righteousness, as he was totally lacking the righteousness   
   > of God which is a gift of God to those that believe and operate in   
      
   [...]   
   >> Or, .... God forbid ... it may confirm some calvinistic double   
   >> predestination of those called but not chosen. The Sauls and the   
   >> Judases who are destined to be betrayed.   
   >   
   > When it comes to Calvinism, there are, as if understand it, two forms of it.   
   > One that is the actual teachings of Calvin, and the other, a degradation of   
   > his teaching to teach that no matter what a man does he is either going to   
   > get into heaven, or not, and it matters not what he does.   
      
   This is an important point,  which I am wont to miss.   
      
   I see the latter version of the doctrine as the basis for "reformation   
   banking" which presently is the financial basis ushering in the global   
   kingdom of the antichrist.   
      
   > Similar in fact to   
   > the teachings of some that God is Love, and therefore there is no eternal   
   > death and torment for the unjust, but that everyone goes to heaven. If that   
   > were to be the case then God would be unjust.   
      
   [...]   
   >> or busy serving satan and his money laundering angels under a christian   
   >> narrative, this is explicit in the parables of The Sheep and The Goats.   
   >> There may be a calvinistic twist here too,   
   >   
   > Well that certainly is a mix of theological perspectives of men. I do not see   
   > anything Calvinistic, but then I am not really familiar with Calvinism. With   
   > Predestination, I am somewhat familiar with that topic. Basically it is   
   > speaking of those that commit their lives for or against God are then placing   
   > their lives into a predestinated path, one that they are willing to follow.   
   > Of course both can be rejected by man, to their betterment or detriment. The   
   > Heavenly Father a plan that is of God, or the god of this world, a plan laid   
   > out for them and those that serve him in opposing the thing things of the   
   > Heavenly Father, like those that are laid out in the Koran against the   
   > followers of the Messiah, and or the Jew.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)