Talk:Parable of the Talents

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] VfD outcome

Per the VfD discussion now archived at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The Talents, this article will be retained but moved to the new title Parable of the talents. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 03:53, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] contradiction

does anybody else see how this verse contradicts the message of "the first shall be last and the last shall be first" ? and also the idea of salvation through christ? and almost everything else jesus taught? shouldn't there be something about that in the commentary?

• Not I; looks to me rather like a condemnation of the man's actions, and a warning to those who would work for those usurers - if you don't meet their inflated expectations, they'll throw you out despite how righteous your actions are. Alternately, it could merely be a statement on how turning something valuable into more of the same, through diligence rather than sloth, can lead to rewards. It's hard to say without proper context. Theogrin (talk) 16:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

unsound argument by Herzog

I tried to amend the section on "The parable as social critique" because Herzog's conclusion is not theologically sound if one believes that the place of "wailing and gnashing of teeth" is hell/hades (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell). I edited the page, however, it was deleted because it was not "verifiable", though I don't understand how pure logic needs verification. (It is a shame that logical counters by non-experts in the field are not made available to the public when reading Wikipedia articles, and undoubtedly few people venture to read the discussion pages of articles when gathering information.) However, I would like to point out that according to Herzog's interpretation as suggested by this Wikipedia article, the good Christian who disobeyed the landowner would be going to hell (see Matthew 25: 30). This conclusion disagrees completely with the tenets of Christianity, in that a true Christian would never go to hell. I do agree somewhat with Theogrin that this parable is "merely be a statement on how turning something valuable into more of the same, through diligence rather than sloth, can lead to rewards." (Sidewalkchalkedblocks (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC))