Sounds like? The phrase is also used within the bible in a context indicating two BEINGS becoming one.
Actually we do. From Wikipedia: "The Epistle to the Romans or Letter to the Romans, often shortened to Romans, is the sixth book in the New Testament. Biblical scholars agree that it was composed by the Apostle Paul to explain that salvation is offered through the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is the longest of the Pauline epistles." Even if we didn't know its authorship, it wouldn't follow that it was therefore not part of inspired scripture.
I honestly don't recall if the idiom is from the period the translation was done, or the translation was a literal translation of an idiom of Biblical times. However, since it appears across large expanses of biblical times, I suspect the former. I have long felt that there is no way the Bible is free of errors. I do hold that enough remains and will continue to remain intact such that it can guide with the aid of the Holy Spirit. But the various translations are proof enough that there will be errors and mistranslations.
course in Biblical times they stoned people, sometimes for nothing more then picking up sticks on the wrong day of the week, today we think that is evil.... and we think religious freedom is good.... so probably not the best book to use for creating modern laws
Two flesh becoming one does sound like sex but another example of biblical terminology demonstrates how meaning of the ancient greek can be gleefully distorted to fit a particular theological view or bias. I get tired of referring back to 1st Timothy Ch:1.V:10 ( suggested by many authorities as not even by Paul) but it shines a light on the central problem of claiming any particular translation of the Gospels, let alone the OT, is the innerant Word of God. Today’s scholars of ancient Greek take the meaning of Arsenokiotis (1st Timothy Ch:1.V:10) from various contexts it was used in a the time to arrive at a meaning something like ‘A person who uses personal relationships for material gain’ one even suggesting the modern equivalent would be ‘pimp’. Not so long ago, in biblical terms, various translations have rendered Arsenokiotis as ‘Sodomite’, ‘Homosexual’, ‘Pervert’ etc.
Do you have proof that it isn't an accurate representation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles Romans is undisputedly Paul.
A good question. That passage can easily be applied by anyone to anyone else that they feel doesn't agree with them. I could as easily hold that you are sent strong delusion as you can claim of me. Ultimately we have to trust in the Deity we choose to follow, and their Agents and hope we choose right.
According to some Christians even Catholic and Protestant and Methodist among others will also be toast because they are not that particular brand of Christianity.
Why do you fear that? If anything organized Religion has become less and less involved in state power.
I like to think of it this way, if the atheists are right then we all end up in the same place. However, if the Christians are right, we end up in vastly different places.
Why? A passing acquaintance with history and time spent in the Middle East. You can only witness so many beheadings before you become wary of anyone who imagines God is on their side.
You’re right, I have a bad habit of confusing Romans with Ephesians, 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus etc However, the usage of the term ‘undisputedly’ is going a bit too far despite a majority of biblical scholars assertions.
And yet, if you believe differently than he does then you are not a "true Christian" and are going to hell. And I hear that way too often, from "you weren't baptized in my church therefore you weren't really baptized" to "no true Christian can support gays".