Yeah, I understand that, but translating it as "kingdom" implies that we are merely the subjects when the other passages I cited suggest we have a measure of royal authority and responsibility.
I was challenged recently on the translation to which I subscribe of Revelation 1:6. I hold to the KJV and YLT which both say "kings and priests" as opposed to the more (and more recently) popular "kingdom of priests" or "kingdom, priests". In comparing Rev. 1:6 with 5:10 and thr phrasibg of 1 Peter 2:9, the passage is clearly suggesting we, Christians, are given both ruling and sacerdotal authority and responsibility. Thus, "kings and priests" is appropriate and not to be dismissed as a proper translation.
> Notice that these pastors would never tell parents to submit to their children nor would they dare upset hierarchy within businesses, state, and military, but that is the absurd logical conclusion for treating 5:21 as a universal command for each and every believer without any context.
Thank you for affirming this. I was thinking about this whole matter before reading your reply, and I came to the same conclusion.
This Dalrock guy's posts are a gold mine! I plan to look into this further.
That said, I have a question for you: you have expressed at least a dismissal of the "mutual submission" attitude many pastors have when it comes to marriage. Could you (as briefly as possible) give your analysis and correction of this attitude as it pertains to Ephesians 5:21-33? I see it as "submission of a wife to her husband looks like obedience and following his lead as the Church does to Christ, and submission of a husband to his wife looks like self-sacrificing love as Christ did for the Church"; could you correct and/or temper that?
I remember seeing a copypasta somewhere (Reddit, I think?) about how screwed a man is when he is before a judge in a case involving divorce or domestic violence (I forget which). It was long, and I think it even talked about how men were disadvantaged in the early 20th century (like 1900s to 1910s) because judges favored women in general. Anyone have any leads on that or something similar? Statistics would be a plus.
This article makes a very compelling argument for the virtues/benefits of National Socialism to European nations and has convinced me of the ideology's diametric opposition to Enlightenment liberalism. My major qualm with this author's position and rhetoric is the ostensible snubbing of Christians at the very end and his lack of address regarding the role of National Socialism for the Kingdom of God.
The whole aesthetic looks different. It used to be a few different shades of purple; now it's all monochrome black and white. Also, a window used to appear when I selected to reply to a post, but now the main page goes blurry and the reply appears in an overlay (pic related).
Finished EarthBound for, like, the fourth or fifth time!
The game still has a ton of charm and is much, much easier than I remember it. I realized that Nintendo made an RPG that is stimulating and fun to play by tweaking the combat and overworld movement in unique ways. SaGa and Final Fantasy had the overworld enemies and Active Time Battles respectively, but EarthBound took what worked of those and made them better with the green/red swirl mechanic for sneaking up on enemies and the rotating HP numbers as a timer. The combat visuals are still amazing and delightful. It was absolute genius to make the final boss a background thus equating him and his evil influence over people and objects with the backgrounds when fighting them.
Playing it emulated helped speed things up with battles and movement and such. The game could have been the base for so many future games, and the engine could have been a base for so much more. It's such a shame the sequel was such a disappointment.
Overall 8/10. The charm, the visual appeal, and the base engine have all aged very well.