Scripture says "in His Name, the Gentiles will trust" - what will 'Evolutionist Gentiles' trust in Jesus?

[Dash RipRock]

Jesus said "Behold I send you out as sheep among wolves" - He wouldn't say that, if wolves were eventually going to become sheep (because He said His word will never pass away).

The most dangerous wolves are the ones claiming to be Christian pastors and teachers who come in Jesus Name deceiving many as Jesus warned about in Mathew 24

At least we know people out in the world aren't claiming to be Christians leading people in to false teachings

Those that don't know God's Word are primed for deception.

 

[Gottservant]

There is a major oversight in the theory of Evolution: you don't merely need pressure to adapt, you can tease adaptation apart from a number of alternatives.

If there is a little adaptation here and a little adaptation there and they are related, discerning that adaptation that links both of them, can help you flourish (survive).

When Evolutionists say "mutations" add the necessary pressure, they are assuming pressure not teasing is the relevant principle.

 

[Gottservant]

There is an interesting dynamic when dealing with Evolutionists: at times I hate them and at times I love them. I never seem to make so much progress that it is only one way and not the other. Now, I don't know if this points to something spiritual, but in the Lord, you would expect the Lord to win (to have Evolutionists trust Him).

What power it is that Evolutionists think they need, I don't know - but save them from the hatred of the Church!

 

[Gottservant]

There is a sense in which different species can share similar adaptations. That affinity is empowering. The idea that species can morph into one another, is against this empowering (it is therefore against survival).

 

[Gottservant]

I am angry, actually. God never makess a leap of faith, based on appearances. Neither does He expect us to. How then can we conclude that monkeys being mammals (or whatever the argument is) means that we got our appearance from them?

 

[Gottservant]

It has come to my attention, that there is confusion about what God wants us to change.

No matter how we change, God has to want to abide in us, despite the change (selah).

When we do change, we have to repeat what we know, in order to vary it - so in essence, who we are can never ultimately leave us.

For some reason, Evolution has the effect of causing people to let go of questioning what their relationship is to God - that's how it appears, anyway! Like if I said "I don't think God would like, this particular change", people would look at me as if I was crazy (when they say crazy things about the past!)

 

[Gottservant]

Humanely speaking, I have come to understand that:

The more you trust going back in the History of Mankind, the more you are able to reach forward to Mankind's Future (selah)

In other words, believing that Man came from monkeys, hurts your ability to be more of a Man in future.

That's not wrong, if you think you are Man enough; but neither is that humble.

 

[Gottservant]

I feel like I should say, God sort of told me "modelling your response to Evolution, on the basis of the Holy Spirit (sin/righteousness/judgment) is a good thing".

When it comes to mutation (which we read 'sin'), being ready to move the mutation to elimination is a good thing.
When it comes to choice as to how to evolve (which we read' righteousness'), being sensible about what choice we have is righteous and holy.
When it comes to what we share about the future of our evolution (which we read 'judgment'), sharing the word that will come next is fitting and edifying and strengthening.

So it is not the case that becoming an Evolutionist means forgetting the conviction or instruction of the Holy Spirit is 'inevitable', but rather it needs to be put in scientific terms. People can't claim ignorance, because the 'register' of their beliefs have shifted to science. The Devil is no less interested in destroying men, because they have taken an anti-God creed or deny His Power. I guess what I am saying, is that we need to be vigilant and that the Lord is with us, in being against man becoming more and more ungodly.

Take it how you will.

 

[Gottservant]

Something constructive about adaptation: I believe there are things in the body that help adaptation along (and that it is these things - not mutations - that do much of the work of adaptation), and I believe there are things in the body, that help adaptation get back to where it was, when it was in strength (before mutations came along). There really is no need to suggest that the body needs pressure to adapt (from mutations, for example).

The picture I am giving here, is of adaptations growing and being shaped, in a way that serves design (or the image of it).

 

[Gottservant]

The alternative, if you are not adapting, is to suggest that you have enough adaptations as is?

In other words, not adapting X means that I believe I am more likely to survive keeping adaptation Y and Z.

Its a glass half empty or a glass half full - question?

 

[Gottservant]

Something to note, belief in Jesus is always going to be easy - maybe Evolutionists will respect that?

 

[Gottservant]

It has got to the point, that I understand Evolution as a distinction of predator/prey - that predators evolve and prey creates.

However I cannot be coerced into believing that creatures function like butterflies - that they become one type of creature then another.
- or that mutations help or that fitness is the only test of survival or that there is only one way to adapt or that adapting has to happen on its own.

Essentially I believe in "uncoerced Evolution", that God does not place a burden on any creature to be something that it is not, nor can be - that every creature has a peace and an understanding that God has created it to be what it wants to be.

I appreciate your time considering these things.

 

[Gottservant]

Probably the most helpful thing I have learned is that the desire to command the outcome of a certain species' growth (to harness the potential of what a creature can become), rests on being ready to seize upon the change that most exemplifies progress toward that change.

You don't jump on the egg, for proof of evolution, you wait for the chicken to emerge.

Darwin's conjecture is that there is one way to seize upon the best change for every species - I think he overlooks that the tension between one species and another, is more important than the specific design of one particular species (that's not wrong, if you weaken your desire to act against species, but the more you lay claim to other species, the weaker your desire becomes).

I'm not sure what you make of this; do you follow something of what I have said?

 

[Gottservant]

I am not sure if I like this argument, but you can always say "If monkeys became men, because men were like monkeys; couldn't any species become men, in as much as men are like those species?"

It's not a gripping argument, because it leaves a vacuum - you need to point out "wouldn't men become more like men were, if manliness were a thing, not interspecies Evolution?" (then at least you are saying the focus should be on manliness?)

 

[Gottservant]

In answer to the thread title once again, something Evolutionists will have to come to terms with, is that whenever they return to Jesus, for whatever reason: they will always have to start out where they left off. This has the effect of causing them to recognise the Love Jesus has for them. If they could not recognise the Love of Jesus, they could excuse themselves - but now Jesus is paying attention!

 

[Windmill Charge]

whenever they return to Jesus, for whatever reason: they will always have to start out where they left off.

You are assuming that most people.e start with a relationship with Jesus.
In my experience most people only know Jesus as a swear word.

 

[David Lamb]

In answer to the thread title once again, something Evolutionists will have to come to terms with, is that whenever they return to Jesus, for whatever reason: they will always have to start out where they left off. This has the effect of causing them to recognise the Love Jesus has for them. If they could not recognise the Love of Jesus, they could excuse themselves - but now Jesus is paying attention!

Just checking - what do you mean by "return to Jesus?" The thread title doesn't mention backslidden Christians who are evolutionists and gentiles. I think it is incorrect to assume that they are Christians. If they are not Christians, then whatever their ethnic origin, and whatever their beliefs abut how the world and everything else came into existence, they need come to Jesus Christ, not return to Him.

 

[Gottservant]

@Windmill Charge @David Lamb

John 15:27 says "you also must bear witness, for you were with me from the beginning" (from memory)

If we are with Him, but we stray, it behoves us to return to Him (or wait for Him to find us)

 

[Gottservant]

maybe just to illustrate that the difference between Creation and Evolution is just a taste, I will make a distinction between predator and prey.

A predator homes in (that is, he seeks out prey where it can be found); whereas prey scans (that is, watches for where the next move should go to - pasture and such, possibly).

The point is, as a Man, you can act like a predator or prey - predators being strong, does not make being prey "wrong".

The strength of God is, Jesus is the Shepherd - so even being sheep (prey), we can trust God to protect us (and if we die or are eaten, we can trust God to bring us back to life)

 

[Windmill Charge]

@Windmill Charge @David Lamb

John 15:27 says "you also must bear witness, for you were with me from the beginning" (from memory)

If we are with Him, but we stray, it behoves us to return to Him (or wait for Him to find us)

A good example of taking a verse totally out of context.
This thread is about evolutionist, atheist coming to know God. you have quoted a verse that is addressed to believers and applied it to non believers.