Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Are American declining in moral?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="partinobodycular" data-source="post: 77634702" data-attributes="member: 435281"><p>Actually, yes it did. It explains how you reconcile the difference between the body and soul being destroyed on the one hand, and yet experiencing eternal punishment on the other. Unfortunately it raises another curious question. Because you seem to have reconciled them by altering the meaning of the word "destroy" to fit your preferred narrative. Which is odd, because earlier in this thread I questioned the use of the word "fear" in Psalm 103. If you want, I can go find biblical commentaries that will support alternate interpretations of the text.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I don't think 'fear' is really a translation error, instead I think it's a difference in cultural perspectives. Children in the ancient Middle East were likely raised believing that they should fear their father, (after all, in the OT he could have them stoned to death) I also believe that this attitude was then reflected in how they interpreted the relationship between themselves and God. But nowadays, rather than teaching children to fear their fathers, we teach them to respect their fathers, it's a matter of semantics perhaps, but a far more Christian ideal if you ask me... and that is how I think Psalm 103 should be interpreted.</p><p></p><p>My point being, if you want to change the meaning of 'destroy' to fit your own personal narrative, then I'm perfectly fine with that. But at least allow me the same freedom in questioning the use of the word 'fear' in Psalm 103.</p><p></p><p>Truthfully though, I think that when people begin to divide themselves over the meaning of a few words in a hard to decipher book, then they really have lost the gist of Micah 6:8. Instead, they've simply replaced one set of laws with a newer set of laws, and somehow believe that this constitutes a new covenant, when what it really means is that they've missed the point altogether.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="partinobodycular, post: 77634702, member: 435281"] Actually, yes it did. It explains how you reconcile the difference between the body and soul being destroyed on the one hand, and yet experiencing eternal punishment on the other. Unfortunately it raises another curious question. Because you seem to have reconciled them by altering the meaning of the word "destroy" to fit your preferred narrative. Which is odd, because earlier in this thread I questioned the use of the word "fear" in Psalm 103. If you want, I can go find biblical commentaries that will support alternate interpretations of the text. Personally, I don't think 'fear' is really a translation error, instead I think it's a difference in cultural perspectives. Children in the ancient Middle East were likely raised believing that they should fear their father, (after all, in the OT he could have them stoned to death) I also believe that this attitude was then reflected in how they interpreted the relationship between themselves and God. But nowadays, rather than teaching children to fear their fathers, we teach them to respect their fathers, it's a matter of semantics perhaps, but a far more Christian ideal if you ask me... and that is how I think Psalm 103 should be interpreted. My point being, if you want to change the meaning of 'destroy' to fit your own personal narrative, then I'm perfectly fine with that. But at least allow me the same freedom in questioning the use of the word 'fear' in Psalm 103. Truthfully though, I think that when people begin to divide themselves over the meaning of a few words in a hard to decipher book, then they really have lost the gist of Micah 6:8. Instead, they've simply replaced one set of laws with a newer set of laws, and somehow believe that this constitutes a new covenant, when what it really means is that they've missed the point altogether. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Are American declining in moral?
Top
Bottom