Say the anti-Christ was against "Evolution", would you tolerate him 'more'?

[Gottservant]

Hi there!

So the anti-Christ being Jewish, there is a strong possibility that he will not be in favour of "Evolution". As a Jew, he has the heritage of the Holocaust to bear in mind and there is a bitter wound there, one that is not going to be quickly forgotten. Is this a marvel? As Jesus said "Satan being against Satan, his kingdom will not stand" (gospels, from memory). The problem is, making friends with the anti-Christ is making friends with the world, and that makes us an enemy of God. So do you tolerate him? Is it possible to pick and choose what you like or don't like about him?

I say this, knowing that I am against Evolution. Knowing that I am against Evolution, does not make me feel enmity to the people of the world, it's just a fact, wanting to be more and more evolved, is a snare and I daresay many of the people of the world will fall by it - not because they are stupid, but because the Devil is cunning and can entice people to want to better themselves, even if it is at the cost of their humanity. Maybe the anti-Christ will begin to doubt that anyone is evolved? What will he do then? (This is a matter of intrigue for those that dwell in Heaven - bear in mind that the anti-Christ blasphemes such, some interpretting it the right way, some not).

There is power in a word, I think that is one of the more powerful lessons of considering whether someone in perdition receives comfort from something that goes into perdition - the anti-Christ as such goes into perdition, but so does the theory of Evolution. I think if anything the anti-Christ would be eager to receive word that Evolution has ground to a halt! After all, if we are by design and we know it, who can say "your evolution is lacking"!? My thinking is that it would do well to make "Evolution" less of a priority, and to allow our tolerance of the anti-Christ to grow, as he created way for Man to sieze upon sacrifice, not to save himself, but to praise God. This is foolish for men, but for children it is a sign that something is not right, with the fathers. That every man be convicted of sin, righteousness and judgment. Christians will be persecuted for this, but it's becoming sacrifice will be a great sign of the love of God.

I hope this doesn't worry you, that there is compromise in the world, just that you come to a need of maturity, if you haven't got it already!

God bless.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Hi there!

So the anti-Christ being Jewish, there is a strong possibility that he will not be in favour of "Evolution". As a Jew, he has the heritage of the Holocaust to bear in mind and there is a bitter wound there, one that is not going to be quickly forgotten. Is this a marvel? As Jesus said "Satan being against Satan, his kingdom will not stand" (gospels, from memory). The problem is, making friends with the anti-Christ is making friends with the world, and that makes us an enemy of God. So do you tolerate him? Is it possible to pick and choose what you like or don't like about him?

I say this, knowing that I am against Evolution. Knowing that I am against Evolution, does not make me feel enmity to the people of the world, it's just a fact, wanting to be more and more evolved, is a snare and I daresay many of the people of the world will fall by it - not because they are stupid, but because the Devil is cunning and can entice people to want to better themselves, even if it is at the cost of their humanity. Maybe the anti-Christ will begin to doubt that anyone is evolved? What will he do then? (This is a matter of intrigue for those that dwell in Heaven - bear in mind that the anti-Christ blasphemes such, some interpretting it the right way, some not).

There is power in a word, I think that is one of the more powerful lessons of considering whether someone in perdition receives comfort from something that goes into perdition - the anti-Christ as such goes into perdition, but so does the theory of Evolution. I think if anything the anti-Christ would be eager to receive word that Evolution has ground to a halt! After all, if we are by design and we know it, who can say "your evolution is lacking"!? My thinking is that it would do well to make "Evolution" less of a priority, and to allow our tolerance of the anti-Christ to grow, as he created way for Man to sieze upon sacrifice, not to save himself, but to praise God. This is foolish for men, but for children it is a sign that something is not right, with the fathers. That every man be convicted of sin, righteousness and judgment. Christians will be persecuted for this, but it's becoming sacrifice will be a great sign of the love of God.

I hope this doesn't worry you, that there is compromise in the world, just that you come to a need of maturity, if you haven't got it already!

God bless.

I don't understand the entire post, but there are several interesting ideas I would respond to. But 1st, let me say that I don't know that the Antichrist is taught in the Bible to be Jewish--it is a questionable matter, and certainly not dogma. 2nd, I don't agree that those who allow some Evolution in their Creationist beliefs are evil, or of the devil.

That being said, I know what you mean. Antichrist, like every other deceiver, holds to some truths. All people have to base their convictions on some truth, making half truths very dangerous. Since all people have some truth, those who deceive use the truths they hold to as a means of disguising the lies they tell.

If the Antichrist is "Creationist," I will nonetheless judge him on his moral behavior, on his spiritual fruit, rather than strictly on what he believes about science and a variety of facts. We can ignore his beliefs about Evolution and Creation and dwell upon his view of Christ and Christians. However, some of the worst deceivers claim to be "Christian," and actually pervert true spirituality with their teaching and practices.

I do think that we should recognize Divine Design in everything, including the universe, the world, and Man himself. These things were not the product of chance, but rather, reflect the truths of Scriptures. God's nature, as expressed in Scriptures, is consistent with what we see in our world, both good and evil. God has given Man free choice, and it has resulted in a mixed blessing--a Sinful World coupled with Christian Redemption.

We should not get too distracted over matters of speculative scientific dogma. We just have to separate what is established law and what is hypothesis. And we have to recognize that God is not subject to the Laws of Nature that He Himself created!

 

[Gottservant]

We should not get too distracted over matters of speculative scientific dogma. We just have to separate what is established law and what is hypothesis. And we have to recognize that God is not subject to the Laws of Nature that He Himself created!

You had me hooked, until you tried to get God a pass on His own Laws.

But I think there is a compromise: you could say God is only as subject to the Laws of Nature He created, as He wants to be.

Other than that you make some wonderful points (that I hope others read).

 

[Randy Kluth]

You had me hooked, until you tried to get God a pass on His own Laws.

But I think there is a compromise: you could say God is only as subject to the Laws of Nature He created, as He wants to be.

Other than that you make some wonderful points (that I hope others read).

I was just avoiding any possible confusion some may have with respect to Pantheism. By definition, God doesn't operate by the laws of Nature, but rather, by His own will. If He chooses to, He can have Christ live as a man within the laws of Nature, or he may produce supernatural miracles.

By definition God is supernatural. That means He has a supra-natural capacity. He does not have to live on earth, subject to the laws of gravity. He doesn't have to operate within the speeds of Nature, such as light speed, etc.

But I complete agree if you're stating that God must live within the laws of what defines Him as God. He must have a loving character. He must be true to His word, etc. etc.

 

[Gottservant]

I was just avoiding any possible confusion some may have with respect to Pantheism. By definition, God doesn't operate by the laws of Nature, but rather, by His own will. If He chooses to, He can have Christ live as a man within the laws of Nature, or he may produce supernatural miracles.

By definition God is supernatural. That means He has a supra-natural capacity. He does not have to live on earth, subject to the laws of gravity. He doesn't have to operate within the speeds of Nature, such as light speed, etc.

But I complete agree if you're stating that God must live within the laws of what defines Him as God. He must have a loving character. He must be true to His word, etc. etc.

We are half way to agreeing, I think that is a good thing.

I used to have a problem with the idea "that God knows you better than you know yourself"; I was like 'how can you know me better than me, I'm me!" and I was so adamant I started to think God would say "You're right I don't know you better than yourself, I don't want to know you when you don't want to be known". Then in the end, I started to wish God knew me better than He used to and it stopped mattering so much how much He wanted to know - I was ready to tell Him everything.

Then again I had a problem with people calling Jesus "God" until one day the Holy Spirit clarified the statement, as Jesus was God "crucified" and that made a lot of sense.

So it is with God creating Laws He is not subject to, there is more to the story. I think the more God bends the rules, the more He regrets the Law - but then if He is God why would He do what He regrets? So then it is an appearance that He has done a miracle, but there is some Lawful foundation that explains what people were expecting and what they saw. That might be easier for you to understand, but to me there is more at stake: the Devil is the author of confusion, so to me allowing supra-lawful miracles does him a service that should not be done. Like when people say "it is easier for a camel to go through a needle and thread than for a rich man to enter Heaven" when what was meant was the "gate called a needle" for which the camel had to unpack to get through. Is Jesus saying "I can create a supra-lawful miracle of a camel going through a needle and thread" no! It's a total misapprehension of what was meant.

Maybe you can help me, if you give it some more thought - that would be a small miracle, right there!

Thanks for your time.

 

[Randy Kluth]

We are half way to agreeing, I think that is a good thing.

I used to have a problem with the idea "that God knows you better than you know yourself"; I was like 'how can you know me better than me, I'm me!" and I was so adamant I started to think God would say "You're right I don't know you better than yourself, I don't want to know you when you don't want to be known". Then in the end, I started to wish God knew me better than He used to and it stopped mattering so much how much He wanted to know - I was ready to tell Him everything.

Then again I had a problem with people calling Jesus "God" until one day the Holy Spirit clarified the statement, as Jesus was God "crucified" and that made a lot of sense.

So it is with God creating Laws He is not subject to, there is more to the story. I think the more God bends the rules, the more He regrets the Law - but then if He is God why would He do what He regrets? So then it is an appearance that He has done a miracle, but there is some Lawful foundation that explains what people were expecting and what they saw. That might be easier for you to understand, but to me there is more at stake: the Devil is the author of confusion, so to me allowing supra-lawful miracles does him a service that should not be done. Like when people say "it is easier for a camel to go through a needle and thread than for a rich man to enter Heaven" when what was meant was the "gate called a needle" for which the camel had to unpack to get through. Is Jesus saying "I can create a supra-lawful miracle of a camel going through a needle and thread" no! It's a total misapprehension of what was meant.

Maybe you can help me, if you give it some more thought - that would be a small miracle, right there!

Thanks for your time.

You seem to have a great heart, and that matters more than understanding. To get beyond the natural laws we, as men, live by you would have to think "outside of the box," to think as if you were God Himself.

It's not that we can actually think like God thinks, but that we can conceive of how God must think being the author of Natural Law. If we have to, as men, live by the laws of gravity, then God must live by rules we know nothing about, since He is much more than Man. Since He created Man, He can reveal Himself as a man, but He is before Man. As such, He is not subject to gravity.

I think what you're saying is that to define God He must have some rule He lives by. Otherwise, He is incomprehensible--so unpredictable as to be beyond all comprehension.

But as I said before, His character to us is established. He has given us His word that that is who He is. So that is at least one rule He consistently lives by. But it is not subject to gravity. His word is sensible to us. But we'll never get so far into it as to comprehend God's limits. From our point of view, He has no limitation.

God normally expects us, as men, to live within the Natural Law that He has given us on earth. But God has shown, at times, that He wishes to shatter Natural Law by performing miracles. We don't have to know how He does it. We just have to believe that as the author of Natural Law He has other means at His disposal, namely His word.

 

[Gottservant]

Thanks, but we've all been prey to the Devil before, it makes more sense to say that God wants to obey natural law, rather than bend it in a way that some are lost.

What does God get bending natural law? Only that He has to start all over again, once He decides to obey natural law after all?

God is not a time waster, a distracter, a punitiver.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Thanks, but we've all been pray to the Devil before, it makes more sense to say that God wants to obey natural law, rather than bend it in a way that some are lost.

What does God get bending natural law? Only that He has to start all over again, once He decides to obey natural law after all?

God is not a time waster, a distracter, a punitiver.

I have no idea what you mean? None of this has a thing with being "prey to the Devil!" And God *wanting* to obey Natural Law has nothing to do with acting outside of Natural Law, or what you call "bending it."

I'll say it one last time. God is not subject to Natural Law--if He obeys it at all it is a self-imposed position, such as when He became a man. God does not have to obey Natural Law, since that would mean He is a finite Being, and that the universe is bigger than He is.

 

[Gottservant]

I have no idea what you mean? None of this has a thing with being "prey to the Devil!" And God *wanting* to obey Natural Law has nothing to do with acting outside of Natural Law, or what you call "bending it."

I'll say it one last time. God is not subject to Natural Law--if He obeys it at all it is a self-imposed position, such as when He became a man. God does not have to obey Natural Law, since that would mean He is a finite Being, and that the universe is bigger than He is.

I'm not trying to drag out a fight, its just the golden rule: I would not want anyone to expect me to change natural law, so I don't expect God to.

What you are saying is that "God can create a law, that allows Him to operate outside the Law: He doesn't, but He could"

 

[Randy Kluth]

I'm not trying to drag out a fight, its just the golden rule: I would not want anyone to expect me to change natural law, so I don't expect God to.

What you are saying is that "God can create a law, that allows Him to operate outside the Law: He doesn't, but He could"

Are you arguing that God cannot or did not work miracles? The entire Bible is premised upon the idea that God has done and still does miracles at His will.

This indicates that God imposes laws upon the universe descriptive of His own will, and not because He Himself is subject to them. God imposes Natural Law upon us, but not upon Himself. That is just normally the environment in which we see Him operate on our behalf until He wishes to operate differently. Natural Law is what we should normally expect to see until we see that He wishes to operate outside of it.

In world history we cannot see that Natural Law determines what takes place and develops. It is a moral relationship between Man and God that determines how God directs history to evolve in the context of His predetermined plan. In this sense, God has subjected Himself willfully to Man's free choice, which results in predictable outcomes. Yet it does not mean Natural Law is imposing any outcome. It is God's judgment that imposes outcomes.

 

[Gottservant]

You're being sensible, you're just not getting that I don't expect God to operate outside "natural law".

 

[Randy Kluth]

You're being sensible, you're just not getting that I don't expect God to operate outside "natural law".

But you're not answering the question: Does God not work miracles? If so, then He is operating outside of Natural Law.

 

[Gottservant]

But you're not answering the question: Does God not work miracles? If so, then He is operating outside of Natural Law.

Take the pillar of fire and cloud that went ahead of the Israelites in the wilderness: was that made of candy and jelly beans, or was it made of cloud and some sort of lightning? You obviously choose the latter. Now was it miraculous? Absolutely, praise God for the miraculous. But do we have to deny our sense of reality to understand it? No.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Take the pillar of fire and cloud that went ahead of the Israelites in the wilderness: was that made of candy and jelly beans, or was it made of cloud and some sort of lightning? You obviously choose the latter. Now was it miraculous? Absolutely, praise God for the miraculous. But do we have to deny our sense of reality to understand it? No.

That seems a stretch or some kind of rationalization. Did God have to make the universe from some preexistent substance? No. Did He have to utilize existing materials in order to remold them? No. I'm not sure what you're trying to say?

I'm not in the least "denying reality" when I say God can create things out of nothing, and do miracles of creative healing. God is the Reality who orchestrates things from a place we know nothing about and can know little about.

Rom 9.20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”

Or we might say this, "Lord, how did you make things like this?" We just don't know. He has His own infinite resources, and we are only finite beings trying to understand things from our own frame of reference.

 

[Gottservant]

That seems a stretch or some kind of rationalization. Did God have to make the universe from some preexistent substance? No. Did He have to utilize existing materials in order to remold them? No. I'm not sure what you're trying to say?

I'm not in the least "denying reality" when I say God can create things out of nothing, and do miracles of creative healing. God is the Reality who orchestrates things from a place we know nothing about and can know little about.

That's the point, (when God created) God spoke. If God wanted to operate outside Natural Law, He would have to speak differently.

What does the Holy Spirit say "wait, until I have arranged Natural Law the right way"?

 

[Randy Kluth]

That's the point, (when God created) God spoke. If God wanted to operate outside Natural Law, He would have to speak differently.

What does the Holy Spirit say "wait, until I have arranged Natural Law the right way"?

You are using a different sense of "Natural Law" then than I am? By Natural Law I'm speaking of the conventional order of Nature, including things like gravity and physical laws that govern substances and elements.

You seem to be including "God's Word" in Natural Law. And that doesn't at all define Natural Law for me. God's Word is rational and conveys meaning to finite beings. But God's Word is also transcendent and speaks things above our comprehension. That's why we can't understand how miracles take place.

An example of Natural Law to me would be something taking place in Nature by cause and effect. An apple falls off the tree, and gravity pulls it to the ground. A miracle would be an iron axe floating on top of the water.

 

[Gottservant]

You are using a different sense of "Natural Law" then than I am? By Natural Law I'm speaking of the conventional order of Nature, including things like gravity and physical laws that govern substances and elements.

You seem to be including "God's Word" in Natural Law. And that doesn't at all define Natural Law for me. God's Word is rational and conveys meaning to finite beings. But God's Word is also transcendent and speaks things above our comprehension. That's why we can't understand how miracles take place.

An example of Natural Law to me would be something taking place in Nature by cause and effect. An apple falls off the tree, and gravity pulls it to the ground. A miracle would be an iron axe floating on top of the water.

Yes, but the iron axe was clearly raised by a current of water. It's weight didn't change, that's what I am saying.

The pitfall of my attitude is that I don't rely on God for miracles, the strength of my attitude is that I don't rely on God for miracles.

I feel like this conversation has been used by the Holy Spirit, to clarify where I stand: thankyou.

 

[David in NJ]

I'm not trying to drag out a fight, its just the golden rule: I would not want anyone to expect me to change natural law, so I don't expect God to.

What you are saying is that "God can create a law, that allows Him to operate outside the Law: He doesn't, but He could"

Randy Kluth is spot-on, on this subject of God/Supernatural vs Creation/Natural

Just ask yourself - How can the Creator be under the Laws of the creation unless HE permits it to be.

Did Jesus have a physical body of flesh and feel pain and blood come out of His wounds? = YES

Did Jesus walk on water and rebuke the storm whereby it obeyed Him? = YES

 

[Gottservant]

Randy Kluth is spot-on, on this subject of God/Supernatural vs Creation/Natural

Just ask yourself - How can the Creator be under the Laws of the creation unless HE permits it to be.

God's power is to Create and Destroy. He can't first destroy Natural Law, to Create Foreign Law, without contradicting Himself.

Did Jesus have a physical body of flesh and feel pain and blood come out of His wounds? = YES

Did Jesus walk on water and rebuke the storm whereby it obeyed Him? = YES

Indeed why did He not introduce a New Law, when He came into this world?

 

[David in NJ]

God's power is to Create and Destroy. He can't first destroy Natural Law, to Create Foreign Law, without contradicting Himself.



Indeed why did He not introduce a New Law, when He came into this world?

Your assessment here is earthbound and therefore limited.

Peace