From: jtem01@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/13/26 6:53 PM, Mike wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   > Calling God a “king” does not match the normal,   
   > literal meaning of the word. A king is a human   
   > ruler   
      
   Not necessarily, back in ancient times.   
      
   People were regularly declared god kings. Lots of kings   
   claimed they were gods and needed to be worshiped. I   
   do believe that this had a lot to do with the Samaritan   
   Temple losing it's legitimacy, in the eyes of the devout.   
      
   NOTE:  LOTS and LOTS of confusing, contradicting info   
   here.   
      
   Most agree that it was Antiochus Epiphanes, the Seleucid   
   king, who desecrating the Samaritan Temple with the statue   
   of Zeus. But the man also declared himself divine! And,   
   according to tradition, he did a right royal job of   
   desecrating the Jerusalem Temple:  Robbing the treasures,   
   sacrificing a pig on an alter.   
      
   So the desecration of the Samaritan Temple doesn't actually   
   rob it of it's importance. Either there's some "Historical   
   Revisionism" by the bible writers, trying to strengthen their   
   claim to the "Real" temple, or the Samaritans were a little   
   too accepting of the Pagan trinkets....   
      
   Also:  History didn't exist back then. They were far   
   more concerned with writing HOW they wanted things to be   
   remembered, not how they actually were.   
      
   But, suffice it so say:  Plenty of kings proclaimed as &   
   worshiped as gods. Plenty.   
      
      
      
   --   
   https://jtem.tumblr.com/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)