> > because he tried to save them, was crucified by the lion; but who left
> > the promise of the good sheep going to Paradise, in which there's no
> > lions..." Then another bird added: "Very clever. Likewise, we'll
> > organize them to denounce the abuses against the poor little animals
> > in 'other' jungles..."
> and still the only human in this drama is the shepherd.
>
> your little allegory seems to imply that
> the only human which, in likeness, must be a
> Godlike figure, was killed and killed forever,
> and has no say-so in the 'jungle' world
> after he was killed.
>
> just leaves promises for animals to use
> in a clever manner against each other.
>
> your little story paints man, the shepherd,
> in a way that is exactly false when compared
> to the way things actually happen on this planet.
>
> the ingenuity of man places him at
> a supreme advantage over the animals.
Not only over other animals but also over themselves, as it seems we
are living under the "law of the jungle"...
> in like manner, the far reaching sight of God
> and far superior Mind of Christ would simply
> level the human population with a breath.
>
> leaves no room for the disastrously
> nonsensical implications of this
> little allegory.
>
> no human device will ever ever ever
> overthrow the design and purpose of God.
>
> period.
>
> egomania notwithstanding.
Kings, Presidents, Dictators and even Popes seem to suffer from
"egomaniac desease" as they act like gods, do they not?
> > Meanwhile, an Owl who had been observing the problems of the jungle,
> > and who had been invited by mistake, spoke this way: "The lion was
> > able to kill the Shepherd because the little animals did nothing. Why
> > not organize them to save them from the lion?"
> this Owl is -not- an omniscient being
> who subsists on it's own will.
>
> at least, no Owl that lives on the
> earth goes long without food or drink
And so do the Human Lions, though there's little chance of they ever
going hungry or thirsty...

> and so, if this Owl is entirely different
> from its animal namesake, then the entire
> 'allegory' is a useless exercise if obfuscation.
>
> if, however, this Owl is at
> all like its animal namesake,
>
> then this Owl would be succeptible
> to capture, training and taming
> by a Shepherd.
The only animal worth it of taming is the Lion, as he's the only one
preying on the little animals, it seems to me...
> if this shepherd was killed for any reason,
>
> this shepherd was killed for a reason that
> this shepherd devised and carried out as
> this shepherd had planned in advance.
>
> these vultures lions and owls do not plan
> in advance as well as the Godlike figure
> of the shepherd.
>
> at best, an owl or a lion or a vulture
> can only see into the very near future,
> as far ahead as a mouse in the grass
> which will adequately generate enough
> sustenance to last a brief period
>
> whereas a Shepherd can see much further
> ahead and make much more distant plans,
> even so far as to capture beasts and
> place them at his own disposal.
>
> even so far as to supercede
> any form of natural death,
>
> a thing which the owl the lion
> and the vultures can never do.
>
> the egomania of the Owl is his downfall.
>
> he deems himself as superior to his Maker.
The Owl ain't in no high place worth it of downfall. The Owl is a good
independent observant of the jungle. No need to plot against him, if
you know what I mean...
> little knowing realizing nor understanding that
> this "Shepherd" did not remain in the grave but
> lives still inasmuch as God cannot die.
>
> this Shepherd did not so much die for the
> the human population as this Shepherd lived
> as one of them, for them.
>
> the atoning bloodletting did not -interfere-
> with the far reaching plans of the Shepherd,
>
> the atoning bloodletting simply initiated
> the completion of the first stages of
> these far reaching plans.
>
> a thing no owl can see from its little
> perch before it fall in the dust.
The Owl got no fear, as he knows in Paradise there's no lion. His only
concern is having to put up with the lion everyday the way the other
little animals do. "It ain't no life worth living," he says.
> > And that's how the Vultures organized from then
> > on the little animals of the jungle--to defend
> > them from the subversive owls...
> if these subversive owls must be disemboweled
> so as to read their entrails, in all likelihood,
> the only relevant data that will be gathered
> up is that these owls served no useful purpose
> and did more to harm themselves than they
> ever did good or bad to any sheep.
Are some planning the dismemberment and dissection--or should I say
"Crucifixion"--of the Owl? The Owl says the sheep were meant to be
free not to live in herd, but there's no danger in that, is it?
> God is not overthrown, nor can God be overthrown.
>
> and Owls must search for mice.
The Owl knows the problem lies, not with the mice, but with the Lion.
No wonder Paradise is pictured with a tamed Lion...
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote