Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mjbeam · 01-03-2004, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
The original scripture by the authors of the Bible. I'm fully aware that requires faith since those copies don't exist anymore, but you can't get any more accurate copies than the Bible has. No other work in history has been preserved as well as the Bible.

So do you think that these verses were accurately translated:

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.

Acts 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

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

-mjbeam

Picture · 01-03-2004, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wayne Delia
Lovely. But the question is not "how did the plants grow?" (although that is the basis of another whopper of a Bible creation contradiction, since plants are photosynthetic and the source for photosynthesis (the sun) had not yet been created). Instead, the question is why does Genesis 2 indicate that man was created at a time when there were no plants in the ground, while Genesis 1 says all plants were created on Day 3 andman was created on Day 6.

WMD

If the plants were watered by the mist in KJV, then they would have grown when man arrived, would they not???

And an answer to you light/sun problems: Okay, on day one, God made light, and on day four God made the Sun and the Moon and the stars... ...okay, so how did the light work?

I think God made the light and then assigned the light (greater=sun and lesser=moon) to the two "bodies", that is the sun and the moon and now we have them the way they work now. Plausible conjecture?

Magus55 · 01-03-2004, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mjbeam
So do you think that these verses were accurately translated:

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.

Acts 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

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

-mjbeam

Why do you ask?

mjbeam · 01-03-2004, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
Why do you ask?

Because they are contradictory statements.

-mjbeam

Picture · 01-03-2004, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mjbeam
So do you think that these verses were accurately translated:

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.

Acts 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

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

-mjbeam

These verses are talking about the heart as well. I think (but am not sure) that the saying "Lord, Lord" is like your dog coming up to you and wagging his tail. WHy does he stay around, because you are a source of food, of something he wants. These poeple Matt 7:21 is talking about are those people that are in by for the milk money. Does that sound plausible?

The other verses are just what they say: a person calling on the Lord to save them is saved.

But that's just what I think...

Magus55 · 01-03-2004, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mjbeam
Because they are contradictory statements.

-mjbeam

No they aren't. You are taking them out of context.

Magus55 · 01-03-2004, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Picture
These verses are talking about the heart as well. I think (but am not sure) that the saying "Lord, Lord" is like your dog coming up to you and wagging his tail. WHy does he stay around, because you are a source of food, of something he wants. These poeple Matt 7:21 is talking about are those people that are in by for the milk money. Does that sound plausible?

The other verses are just what they say: a person calling on the Lord to save them is saved.

But that's just what I think...

You're right. Matt 7:21 is referring to those who are Christian by name. They say they believe in the Lord and go to church, but they don't actually devote their life to Christ, and believe on His name. Many people claim to be Christian because its the "political" thing to do. But not all of them truly believe in the Lord. Which is who that passage is referring to.

Romans refers to those who truly believe Jesus died for their sins, rose from the grave and is their Savior. They gave their life to Him, and are Christian by faith, not by political title.

mjbeam · 01-03-2004, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
No they aren't. You are taking them out of context.

How do you figure?

-mjbeam

mjbeam · 01-03-2004, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
You're right. Matt 7:21 is referring to those who are Christian by name. They say they believe in the Lord and go to church, but they don't actually devote their life to Christ, and believe on His name. Many people claim to be Christian because its the "political" thing to do. But not all of them truly believe in the Lord. Which is who that passage is referring to.

Romans refers to those who truly believe Jesus died for their sins, rose from the grave and is their Savior. They gave their life to Him, and are Christian by faith, not by political title.

Romans 10:13 is too clear to be taken out of context:

"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

There is no wiggle room here. Anyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved. This directly contradicts Matthew.

-mjbeam

Asha'man · 01-03-2004, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Picture
I think God made the light and then assigned the light (greater=sun and lesser=moon) to the two "bodies", that is the sun and the moon and now we have them the way they work now. Plausible conjecture?

I've got bad news for you. The moon does not produce any light. It's a rock, that happens to sit in the sunlight most of the time.

Strange, calling the moon a "light" is exactly the sort of ignorant assumption that I would expect from a bronze age goat herder, and entirely unlike the wisdom I would expect from a supernatural entity.

Or, perhaps these desert dwellers didn't have the language to properly describe a rock sitting in the sun?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.