Confidence in your beliefs.

The operative word in 1Peter is 'world', not 'earth'. The scriptures do not treat them as synonyms. See my post above and tell me if you would care to:

Who is the god of this world?

Believing in the christian God was so simple just a few hundred years back, all you had to do was follow the flock. Nowadays christians have to rationalize every single letter in the bible. Oh yes, it was truly easier in the good 'ol days

Quote:

Believing in the christian God was so simple just a few hundred years back, all you had to do was follow the flock. Nowadays christians have to rationalize every single letter in the bible. Oh yes, it was truly easier in the good 'ol days

coolwhip there aren't any new philosophies or beliefs or arguments about the bible, everything that is argued now has been argued for almost 2,000 yrs. most of the biggest debates within christianity started long ago.
arianism
calvinism
arminianism
etc etc........

And I would guess you deny and claims that organised religion is a good way of 'herding the sheep'?

Quote:

And I would guess you deny and claims that organised religion is a good way of 'herding the sheep'?

i didn't say anything for or against organized religion as being a tool to gather many. all i pointed out is that your statement is incorrect. there isn't one belief or argument today (within christianity) that is new. people questioned, rationalized and argued just after Christs ascended, and have been ever since.

Quote:

The operative word in 1Peter is 'world', not 'earth'. The scriptures do not treat them as synonyms. See my post above and tell me if you would care to:

Who is the god of this world?

ps 24:1 The earth is the LORD's, and the fullness thereof, the WORLD, and they that dwell therein.
ps 90:2 before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the WORLD, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.
your grasping at straws. world, earth etc....the fact is that God preordained Christ to die bf he made the world, and thus before he made man.
also neo are you going to ignore 2/3's of the bible, where God gave prophecies to be written down on events that would definitely take place in the future. Was he just guessing or lying? Neo the bible shows that God is omniscient, he isn't limited by man's feelings or beliefs. IF you believe God is limited in his knowledge, then you have to throw out the whole bible.

kate4christ03 wrote:

Quote:

And I would guess you deny and claims that organised religion is a good way of 'herding the sheep'?

i didn't say anything for or against organized religion as being a tool to gather many. all i pointed out is that your statement is incorrect. there isn't one belief or argument today (within christianity) that is new. people questioned, rationalized and argued just after Christs ascended, and have been ever since.

Actually, no. My point was that a few hundred years back very few people didn't question religion in the same way they do today (except for within intellectual societys, of which there also were fewer of).

But I guess I was wrong in any case. Because there is very little rationality in this thread.

Believing in the christian God was so simple just a few hundred years back, all you had to do was follow the flock. Nowadays christians have to rationalize every single letter in the bible. Oh yes, it was truly easier in the good 'ol days

Actually, no. My point was that a few hundred years back very few people didn't question religion in the same way they do today (except for within intellectual societys, of which there also were fewer of).

echi wrote:

Quote:

Did he know what he was creating, or didn't he? You can't have it both ways

echi foreknowledge and predestination [...] are two different things.

The bible shows us that God knew all before he created us, but he still gave freewill. This doesnt make us mindless robots subject to his whims, it just means that he is omniscient.

Quote:

Believing in the christian God was so simple just a few hundred years back, all you had to do was follow the flock. Nowadays christians have to rationalize every single letter in the bible. Oh yes, it was truly easier in the good 'ol days

Quote:

Actually, no. My point was that a few hundred years back very few people didn't question religion in the same way they do today (except for within intellectual societys, of which there also were fewer of).

(you didn't state that the first time)
my point was that each argument or debate within christianity is old. even the one neo and i are discussing. there is nothing new under the sun and there have always been people within christianity to question what is mainstream at the time. we are not all the mindless sheep the world makes us out to be.

kate4christ03 wrote:

echi wrote:

Quote:

Did he know what he was creating, or didn't he? You can't have it both ways

echi foreknowledge and predestination [...] are two different things.

Ordinarily, yes. But to a creator god they are not so different. That is unless you contend, as neo does, that God was/is purposefully reckless (at our expense, I might add). . .

kate4christ03 wrote:

Quote:

Believing in the christian God was so simple just a few hundred years back, all you had to do was follow the flock. Nowadays christians have to rationalize every single letter in the bible. Oh yes, it was truly easier in the good 'ol days

Quote:

Actually, no. My point was that a few hundred years back very few people didn't question religion in the same way they do today (except for within intellectual societys, of which there also were fewer of).

(you didn't state that the first time)
my point was that each argument or debate within christianity is old. even the one neo and i are discussing. there is nothing new under the sun and there have always been people within christianity to question what is mainstream at the time. we are not all the mindless sheep the world makes us out to be.

I think Coolwhip brings up a very interesting point. Certainly, Christians of all types have been arguing for a long time. But they haven't had to deal with such a great amount of scrutiny, esp. from outsiders, as they have in recent times. There are also relatively recent discoveries, such as the Nag Hammadi texts, which have helped to cast doubt on the very foundation of mainstream Christianity.

echi wrote:

kate4christ03 wrote:

echi foreknowledge and predestination [...] are two different things.

Ordinarily, yes. But to a creator god they are not so different. That is unless you contend, as neo does, that God was/is purposefully reckless (at our expense, I might add). . .

Not my contention at all. It is the logical extension of the false premise of necessary foreknowledge.

. . . But nowadays have neither Decretum Horrible nor Directorium Inquisitorium to guide us in our decision making.

Limited, no.
Forbearing, yes.
So the god of this world is _________? (2Corinthians 4:4)

Try not to confuse the Greek words for world with those of the Hebrews.

The 'world' (Greek, kosmos) as we know it did not come into existence until after Adam and Eve sinned. It is according to the prophecies in the 3rd chapter of Genesis that the current arrangement began.

neologist wrote:

echi wrote:

kate4christ03 wrote:

echi foreknowledge and predestination [...] are two different things.

Ordinarily, yes. But to a creator god they are not so different. That is unless you contend, as neo does, that God was/is purposefully reckless (at our expense, I might add). . .

Not my contention at all. It is the logical extension of the false premise of necessary foreknowledge.

If God's self-imposed ignorance has resulted in anyone's suffering then he has acted recklessly. Do you contend that God is or has been willfully ignorant?

. . . As for your judgment of whether God has been willfully ignorant, that is for you to decide. . .