mjbeam

Nice try, but you still haven't explained this verse:

Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.


-mjbeam

Kosh

Once again, he retreats into spouting dogma when he can't argue...

Magus55

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Rom 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.


Does Romans 10:9 say you can just call Jesus' name, or does it say believe He was raised from the dead?

Matthew 7 just says calling Lord Lord, or in other words, just paying lip service. It says nothing about believing He was raised from the dead or believing with ones heart. That is the difference.

mjbeam

That is a list of multiple ways to be saved.

1. Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

2. Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Uhoh, those two verses say that you just have to believe that God hath raised him from the dead, but Matthew says...

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

This says you have to do god's will too. It just gets worse and worse.

Let's try something that is a little harder to dance around, integer numbers:

2 Samuel, chapter 8
1: And after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them: and David took Metheg-ammah out of the hand of the Philistines.
2: And he smote Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground; even with two lines measured he to put to death, and with one full line to keep alive. And so the Moabites became David's servants, and brought gifts.
3: David smote also Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates.
4: And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: and David houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them for an hundred chariots.
5: And when the Syrians of Damascus came to succour Hadadezer king of Zobah, David slew of the Syrians two and twenty thousand men.

and...

1 Chronicles, chapter 18
1: Now after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them, and took Gath and her towns out of the hand of the Philistines.
2: And he smote Moab; and the Moabites became David's servants, and brought gifts.
3: And David smote Hadarezer king of Zobah unto Hamath, as he went to stablish his dominion by the river Euphrates.
4: And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: David also houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them an hundred chariots.
5: And when the Syrians of Damascus came to help Hadarezer king of Zobah, David slew of the Syrians two and twenty thousand men.

Inerrant?


-mjbeam

Magus55

No there is only one way to be saved. What do you think God's will is? For us to believe that Jesus died and rose from the dead to atone for the worlds sins. That is the only way to be saved.

I told you I don't consider the translations to be absolutely perfect. That was most likely a copyist error. The difference between one zero in Hebrew, is 2 tiny little dots over the Hebrew letter. Very easy to miss.

mjbeam

Doing something and believing something are not the same thing, even in bible speak.
Well, I would hope that god could handle it. If god allows copy errors then how can the document be trusted? How do we know that someone didn't slip a whole book in there. Maybe even the verse where god moons Moses didn't really happen.


-mjbeam

Krosis

I feel like I'm in a tennis match here..

<whack!> yes it is..
<whack!> no it isn't..
<whack!> yes it is..

-K

Ion

I think that someone did slip a whole book of the Bible in there:

in Genesis 1:31 in page 1 of the Bible, just after 'God' made the world from scratch with its consequences, I read:

"Then God saw that everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good..."

Yet -in contradiction with this "...very good..." creation- what follows in the Bible is a cacophony thru 822 pages of no good things:

'Satan', murders, rapes, punishments, etc., they are all no good things made by this "...very good..." creation.

There is a contradiction in this.

It seems to me that some superstitious barbarians from 2000 years ago did slip a whole book of the Bible in there.

And it seems to me that gullible superstitious today, believe in the Bible anyway.

Ellis14

As above: if we can't say what parts have or haven't been translated correctly, we can safely say nothing at all about the bible.

Let's try this one:

2 Kg.8:25:
"In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign."

compared with:

2 Kg.9:29:
"And in the eleventh year of Joram the son of Ahab began Ahaziah to reign."

Also, how old was Ahaziah when he began to reign as king?

2 Kg.8:26:
"Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign."

2 Chr.22:2
"Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign."

If mere humans can spot these enormous gaffes, why can't God? Did he leave them in to test our faith? Is it a translating error? What do apologists have to say about these contradictions?

Amaleq13

This would be a much more credible claim if it could be found explicitly described throughout this allegedly divinely inspired text. As it stands, Christians are forced to argue that this is "hidden" within the ancient texts. Rather an odd way to ensure belief, IMHO.

Of course, even if this concept was explicitly and consistently described throughout the texts, it seems to be an arbitrary and logically flawed basis for obtaining salvation.

The concept of an atoning sacrifice is rationally incoherent. In other words, it cannot be defended or explained by a rational argument but must be assumed on faith. If you have that sort of capacity for faith, the gruesome specifics of the belief are entirely unnecessary and disturbing in their implications as an arbitrary choice.