Thursday, July 2, 2009
A Response by Volborg
My dear shite eating Nephew,
As is to be expected, you have also usurped the word of God, to twist it to your nefarious deeds. I have asked for a response to your prattling words from the one religious authority I think all of Unkerlant will agree with, The Emperors most trusted confidant, His Most Humble Servant of God, Unkerlants Arch-Bishop of Koenigstadt. He had the following response:
“ My dear Arch-Duchess, I have reviewed the letter the foreign usurper and attempted murderer of our beloved Karl Franz III, your nephew, the despicable Ruprect, and I have the following response.
As you know, I am a humble servant of the emperor, and we are all humble servants of the Lord, our God. I am also THE ruling member of the Church’s circle on the validity of the historical texts and the Vice chairman on archival and antiquities research. And as such am a recognized authority in the Church on such things as have been stated in the aforementioned letter.
In regards to the letters of Saint Paul to Timothy, it is commonly known in the church, although as I am told by the Cardinal Wilhelm in Borogravia the common thing in church there is the always absent Ruprect, that the letters are not written by our beloved Paul, but one of his admirers. There are many reasons they are believed to be false, for example, the Greek used by the author or authors of the Pastoral Epistles (Timothy I &II), finding that over 1/3 of their vocabulary is not used anywhere else in the Pauline epistles; more than 1/5 is not used anywhere else in the New Testament, while 2/3 of the non-Pauline vocabulary are used by second century Christian writers. The evidence of teaching as of style and vocabulary is strongly against Paul’s authorship, nor are these arguments seriously weakened by any supposition that the epistles were written late in Paul’s lifetime and to meet a new type of situation. The three epistles show such a unity of thought and expression that they must be the work of one man, but for the author we must look rather to one of Paul’s admirers than to Paul himself.
Additionally, as evidence that I Timothy is not Pauline, the freedom granted [women] in the aspostolic age to exercise the gifts of the Spirit, [and] Paul's insistence that in Christ there is neither male nor female, [which] had brought them into quick and widespread public activity, and therefore are counter to all of Paul teachings that we know are valid and true. I would also point out that the reasoning in I Timothy (the fall was Eve's fault) is non-Pauline: “Paul himself prefers to assign blame to Adam (as a counterpart to Christ – see Rom [Romans] 5:12-21; I Cor [Corinthians] 15: 45-49…).
And as such is demostrated above, The Church’s view on these letters are that they are non-Pauline and a work of an admirer of Saint Paul’s and therefore as used by your nephew, are not the Word of GOD, and therefore are an affront to his true words and the great teachings of the Saint Paul.
It would also be my opinion that your nephew simply means to stir his own piss pot in hopes of rallying anyone who is easily led astray from the true teachings of Our Savior.
Your humble servant and of HIS LORD, OUR GOD,
Arch-Bishop of Koenigstadt”
I therefore have this to say to my nephew. Leave the land of Unkerlant and reasoned thought to the adults. Go play with your armies against the Turks. For every ounce of blood spilled by your hand will be an ounce of Unkerlantian blood, worth one thousand times the bracken that runs in your veins. And for every drop of blood spilled by you, I shall extract a gallon of your foreign blood to feed the fish farms in Graveholm.