This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Can someone explain Psalm 137:9 to me?

#51bsballa09Posted 6/18/2011 6:45:34 PM
Now, TCs question has clearly been answered, and I don't want to get into this new debate but:

How are the teachings of Jesus still meaningful? We differ as much from Palestine, 33 AD as we do from the Jews in the OT. If relativism applies to the OT, then why not to the NT?

But Jesus was telling people how to act in first century Palestine

Um, what?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaea_(Roman_province)

Judea Province: 6 AD - 132 AD
#52anavriNPosted 6/20/2011 9:14:30 PM
Now, since you're a non-Christian, that answer may not be acceptable in the objective sense, because you don't believe in Jesus as your Lord and Savior. And that's fine. However, I do believe that this is an acceptable answer to the challenge of internal consistency within Christianity when it comes to evaluating OT/NT law. That is to say...while you may disagree with whether or not this is an acceptable way to judge Scriptural laws, you are at least disagreeing with an internally consistent worldview. The disagreement therefore lies in a difference of perspective/worldview, not an internal contradiction by one party.

I think this is an excellent observation to the discussion at hand. Thanks for the effort you put into your post.

While I may debate your comment about christianity being internally consistent, I do see your point about the switch from laws to relationship. The thing I still disagree about is whether or not this Mosaic law absolves the OT Jews from criticizing, regardless of whether someone adheres to objective or subjective morality.
---
§ 157. Der Gedanke an den Selbstmord ist ein starkes Trostmittel: mit ihm kommt man gut über manche böse Nacht hinweg.
#53noble bananaPosted 6/20/2011 9:24:09 PM
You should read 137:9 with 137:8 so you can know it's Babylon on the topic, you don't have to make something up.
---
GRANFALOON ROCKS!!!!
#54Julian_CaesarPosted 6/20/2011 9:55:58 PM
I think this is an excellent observation to the discussion at hand. Thanks for the effort you put into your post.

While I may debate your comment about christianity being internally consistent, I do see your point about the switch from laws to relationship. The thing I still disagree about is whether or not this Mosaic law absolves the OT Jews from criticizing, regardless of whether someone adheres to objective or subjective morality.


Thanks, I appreciate that.

And as far as the latter point...well I honestly haven't studied enough of the actual customs of the OT-era cultures to know what should or shouldn't be considered "acceptable." So I leave that discussion to those with better preparation.
---
"I don't think you can run a double-blind experiment with an omniscient being as the subject." -- kozlo100
#55Wu_ZonghaiPosted 6/21/2011 2:24:35 AM
The psalms were songs written for God, were they not?
---
At night, the trolls crawl out from their bridges to dance under the pale moon.