By what power does Satan raise the antichrist from the dead?

[scorpia]

Re: By what power does Satan raise the antichrist from the d

You are just conceptualizing God and not learning directly from God. Even though evil things come from God, we are forwarned by God to refrain from doing evil things so that the Lord God may see our obedience or disobedience to Him should we follow or not follow His command vis a vis our own free will. God does not help an evil person do evil things but God uses evil things to punish, to make a wake up call, to warn, etc. those who sinned against God. [/color]

If God has a hand in promoting evil, then that is wrong! If God uses evil things to punish, it's wrong! I personally don't believe that God does,

God made evil things to be in this world of ours but God does not promote evil things to anyone of us but rather tells us to refrain from doing evil things. God uses evil things as punishment to the wicked ones. There is a big difference between promoting evil things and using evil things to punish or as punishment, isn't it? If it is wrong to you, then what is right to you and from whom did you learn that right one for you/or should I say in your perception?

but if you think so, then I guess you are seeing God differently than me.

God is real and alive and may I ask you how do you see God? How do you believe God?

 

[Ambient]

Here's the thing, it make absolutely NO sense to create something evil, but then tell everyone not to partake in it!! It's like an auto manufacturer that knowingly creates a "lemon", yet tells everyone not to buy THIS car because "I promise you, it will leave you dead on the side of the road!" Whether or not some are stupid enough to buy THIS car is beside the point. For THIS car to even be made is wrong of the auto manufacturer. I choose to buy from the auto maker that produces quality products.

I'm not judging God. I'm judging the CONCEPT of God as portraid by men in religious texts that became Canon in the 2nd century! I see many of these texts as the invention of men, and them "speaking for God", so to speak. And because men have flaws, those flaws show up in what they write. Vengence, the "OK" to conquer other cultures, the whole "chosen race" thing that says you're better then other races, etc. We only SAY that these are from God because one writer stated that all scripture is "inpired of God". Yet, the writer didn't have our Canon in hand, and even if he did, we interpret that to mean perhaps something that isn't even true. There may have been many places where the writer was indirectly seeing something from God, but I don't see the whole Bible as strictly coming from God, and I don't see most of the "harsh things", the laws in Leviticus, Deuteronomy, etc, as anything but from men, moreso, a few select men trying to have power over the people, getting them to do their wishes. It's a common story that has played out ever since man has had the ability to do so, and continues today!

 

[unred typo]

Ambient wrote: Here's the thing, it make absolutely NO sense to create something evil, but then tell everyone not to partake in it!! It's like an auto manufacturer that knowingly creates a "lemon", yet tells everyone not to buy THIS car because "I promise you, it will leave you dead on the side of the road!" Whether or not some are stupid enough to buy THIS car is beside the point. For THIS car to even be made is wrong of the auto manufacturer. I choose to buy from the auto maker that produces quality products. [/A]

God created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in order to test Adam and Eve, to see if even with the threat of death, they would choose to disobey. He already had a plan in mind of how to reverse the curse, at great cost and pain to himself, btw.


Ambient wrote: I'm not judging God. I'm judging the CONCEPT of God as portraid by men in religious texts that became Canon in the 2nd century! I see many of these texts as the invention of men, and them "speaking for God", so to speak. And because men have flaws, those flaws show up in what they write. Vengence, the "OK" to conquer other cultures, the whole "chosen race" thing that says you're better then other races, etc. We only SAY that these are from God because one writer stated that all scripture is "inpired of God". Yet, the writer didn't have our Canon in hand, and even if he did, we interpret that to mean perhaps something that isn't even true. There may have been many places where the writer was indirectly seeing something from God, but I don't see the whole Bible as strictly coming from God, and I don't see most of the "harsh things", the laws in Leviticus, Deuteronomy, etc, as anything but from men, moreso, a few select men trying to have power over the people, getting them to do their wishes. It's a common story that has played out ever since man has had the ability to do so, and continues today![/A]

You say you’re not judging God, but if the scriptures you refer to are not the inventions of men, you are judging him. As for the annihilation of nations ordered by God, this is God’s call. He gave us life, he can take it away. That one thing is more sure than taxes. Everyone is going to die unless they are alive when the Lord returns. When a person dies is up to God, whether it is at birth or a hundred and ten. He alone can create life and he alone has the right to decide when to take it away. You are correct that Vengeance belongs to the Lord and many have falsely claimed that right in God’s name. Those who do so will pay for this crime. Justice will be sure and unbiased. God has given those who rule over nations the right of judging criminals, even capital punishment for murderers in order to protect the innocent from evil men and to maintain the stability of society. Those in power will answer for their decisions.

The book of Romans gives some insight into the choosing of God’s people and the purposes of it. Romans 3:2 says they were chosen to keep the oracles of God. Romans 3:29 says he was not just the God of the Jews but also the Gentiles (all non-Jews). It really doesn’t mean they are better than others, just that they have been elected to be a witness for God. It is a responsibility that they will be held accountable for. God will judge every person by their deeds, and he is not influenced by a person’s wealth, popularity, position in life, or whether they were a Jew or Gentile. Romans 2:6 - 10.

 

[Bick]

By what power does Satan raise the anti-Christ?

I will give my views as I understand the Scriptures:

The first and foremost premise: God is the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe.

Now, concerning the "Beast" (the anti-christ) being healed of a deadly wound and being given power by the dragon (Satan)---God allowed it.

The second beast out of the earth (the false prophet), will perform great signs to deceive the inhabitants of the earth so they will worship the first beast; and the second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast----again, God allowed it. See Rev.13

In questions like these and others, the answers are not going to come by human reasoning.

God has a plan for all humanity and during the ages past, and the one we are in, there is evil, heartache, wars, man's inhumanity to man, etc, and death. The darkest time of Man's Day will be the end of this age, the end of the tribulation. Then, the Son of Righteousness will descend from heaven, rescue righteous Israelites, and establish His Messianic Kingdom.

One must read Romans 9-11, as a start, to see that salvation is all from God, nothing from ourselves. God says "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."

And in 9:16: "IT DOES NOT, THEREFORE, DEPEND ON MAN'S DESIRE OR EFFORT, BUT ON GOD'S MERCY."

All for now, Bick

 

[unred typo]

Bick wrote: One must read Romans 9-11, as a start, to see that salvation is all from God, nothing from ourselves. God says "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."

And in 9:16: "IT DOES NOT, THEREFORE, DEPEND ON MAN'S DESIRE OR EFFORT, BUT ON GOD'S MERCY."[/B]

Those chapters aren’t about salvation. They’re about election to a special position. They’re about being given a unique place of blessing and responsibility or punishment as an example for others to see that God is in control. Paul is careful to say that being God’s chosen did not guarantee a place in heaven.

It does show that God’s chosen people were given this position of honor to be the tribe of the human family that God’s only begotten son would be born to, and not because of their works, but because of Abraham‘s faith and the promises made to him. It was an honor and a privilege they were born into by God‘s choice of Abraham, not their own works. Romans 10:12 states there is no difference between Jew and Gentile, God is merciful to all those repentant ones who call on him for salvation.

God does allow evil, as you say. There would be no choosing between good and evil if all were good. God allows evil to test us and to teach us. The test is to see which we will choose, and the lessons are to show us the consequences of choosing evil and the blessings of choosing good. He wants us to learn to hate evil but some embrace it and become examples to others not to do that by the things they suffer. God chooses who will be examples and who get to watch what happens to those who choose evil. He can see our hearts and judge who would be most likely to repent and who might as well die because they have irreparably hardened their hearts to do evil. :robot:

 

[Ambient]

God created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in order to test Adam and Eve, to see if even with the threat of death, they would choose to disobey. He already had a plan in mind of how to reverse the curse, at great cost and pain to himself, btw.

Yes. The "tree of knowledge". So, it was an experiment, even though the outcome was well known? To test a person means you wouldn't know how it would turn out. We know this to not be the case. It was predetermined that man would fail, and the pieces were put into place for them to play out. A tree that would damn them, and (even though they were supposed to be in a "perfect paradise") somehow an agent of evil (some snake with legs) to deceive them. :-?

You say you’re not judging God, but if the scriptures you refer to are not the inventions of men, you are judging him. As for the annihilation of nations ordered by God, this is God’s call. He gave us life, he can take it away. That one thing is more sure than taxes. Everyone is going to die unless they are alive when the Lord returns. When a person dies is up to God, whether it is at birth or a hundred and ten. He alone can create life and he alone has the right to decide when to take it away. You are correct that Vengeance belongs to the Lord and many have falsely claimed that right in God’s name. Those who do so will pay for this crime. Justice will be sure and unbiased. God has given those who rule over nations the right of judging criminals, even capital punishment for murderers in order to protect the innocent from evil men and to maintain the stability of society. Those in power will answer for their decisions.

So because a Being is able to create life, it's also able to destroy it at it's whim? It isn't immoral to create life. There is no commandments against it. There IS one about destroying life. Many of those killed WERE, in fact, innocent people. That they MAY have grown up in disbelief in God is beside the point. No mercy upon them doesn't sound like God to me. It DOES, however, sound like the pettiness and the inner horrors perpetrated by man since the dawn of time. To punish the wrong do-er is necessary in a society. However, the person MUST be guilty, and be made known of their fault. And only the most heinous crimes are given to the possibility of "capital punishment", and I'm not even sure I agree with that stand.

 

[unred typo]

Ambient wrote: Yes. The "tree of knowledge". So, it was an experiment, even though the outcome was well known? To test a person means you wouldn't know how it would turn out. We know this to not be the case. It was predetermined that man would fail, and the pieces were put into place for them to play out. A tree that would damn them, and (even though they were supposed to be in a "perfect paradise") somehow an agent of evil (some snake with legs) to deceive them. [/A]

The possibility was well known. You don’t give your children a choice between a banana and an orange unless you are prepared to give them either, do you? God was intelligent enough to know that when he gave man free will to choose to obey or not, that he may choose to disobey. Because he also loved the creatures he created, he designed a plan to save them from evil if they chose to do evil instead of obeying him.

It was a serpent, btw. Serpents may have been more like some kind of dragon and lost their legs and the ability to walk upright. We can only speculate.

Ambient wrote: So because a Being is able to create life, it's also able to destroy it at it's whim? It isn't immoral to create life. There is no commandments against it. There IS one about destroying life. Many of those killed WERE, in fact, innocent people. That they MAY have grown up in disbelief in God is beside the point. No mercy upon them doesn't sound like God to me. It DOES, however, sound like the pettiness and the inner horrors perpetrated by man since the dawn of time. To punish the wrong do-er is necessary in a society. However, the person MUST be guilty, and be made known of their fault. And only the most heinous crimes are given to the possibility of "capital punishment", and I'm not even sure I agree with that stand.[/A]

There is only one Being capable of creating life. That is God. We have the ability to sustain the life of the body somewhat but only God can create life and restore life from death after the soul has left the body. I believe the case of the beast coming back to life will be a ‘lying wonder’. God has the right to terminate a person’s existence on earth and to bring the innocent ones to heaven. Do you have a problem with that? I bet he knows what he’s doing and why. He doesn’t allow man to take the life of man in an act of murder. When he commands it, it isn’t murder, it’s judgment. If, as you believe, these exterminations of entire cities and peoples was not God’s command, these men are liars and murderers and God will judge them.

:o

 

[Ambient]

The possibility was well known. You don’t give your children a choice between a banana and an orange unless you are prepared to give them either, do you? God was intelligent enough to know that when he gave man free will to choose to obey or not, that he may choose to disobey. Because he also loved the creatures he created, he designed a plan to save them from evil if they chose to do evil instead of obeying him.

A more correct example would be a banana and a bottle of strychnine. And for a father to offer both to his children, giving them the choice of the two is parental abuse.

It was a serpent, btw. Serpents may have been more like some kind of dragon and lost their legs and the ability to walk upright. We can only speculate.

I've never heard that before. But for what reason did they loose their legs?

There is only one Being capable of creating life. That is God. We have the ability to sustain the life of the body somewhat but only God can create life and restore life from death after the soul has left the body. I believe the case of the beast coming back to life will be a ‘lying wonder’. God has the right to terminate a person’s existence on earth and to bring the innocent ones to heaven. Do you have a problem with that? I bet he knows what he’s doing and why. He doesn’t allow man to take the life of man in an act of murder. When he commands it, it isn’t murder, it’s judgment. If, as you believe, these exterminations of entire cities and peoples was not God’s command, these men are liars and murderers and God will judge them.

:o

This is a true statement. IF what I state is the case, the men who ordered this (in the name of God) will have to account for their actions.

 

[Gabbylittleangel]

It was a serpent, btw. Serpents may have been more like some kind of dragon and lost their legs and the ability to walk upright. We can only speculate.

I've never heard that before. But for what reason did they loose their legs?

Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou [art] cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

 

[Ambient]

It was a serpent, btw. Serpents may have been more like some kind of dragon and lost their legs and the ability to walk upright. We can only speculate.

I've never heard that before. But for what reason did they loose their legs?

Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou [art] cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

For what purpose? Are we to believe that it was an actual snake, and that all snakes are evil, thus cursed to "crawl on their belly"? Never seen a snake eat dirt either.

By the way, the snake isn't the only creature that crawls on it's belly. :-?

 

[unred typo]

Ambient wrote: A more correct example would be a banana and a bottle of strychnine. And for a father to offer both to his children, giving them the choice of the two is parental abuse. [/A]

Adam and Eve were not children. They were created as adults complete with brains, speech, and reasoning powers equal to or beyond ours. You also have the choice between a banana and a bottle of strychnine. Which do you usually choose? You seem to be quick to judge the God of the Bible. Do you send your children to public school at the tender age of 5 or 6 where they are influenced to take or even offered drugs that may kill them or ruin them for life?

Ambient wrote: I've never heard that before. But for what reason did they (the serpent) loose their legs? [/A]

I told you it was speculation. It doesn’t really say all serpents lost their legs, or even that this particular one did. I made that up as a possible explanation. It was a punishment for the serpent who allowed Satan to use his mouth to tempt Eve. Obviously, it was a humiliation to go from upright to crawling on your belly, whether you had lost your legs or if you had the ability to keep your body raised above the ground, like a cobra can. If God made a change to his actual anatomy and genes so that all his descendants would suffer this, I don’t know.


Ambient wrote: For what purpose? Are we to believe that it was an actual snake, and that all snakes are evil, thus cursed to "crawl on their belly"? Never seen a snake eat dirt either. [/A]

I believe it was an actual serpent. You can believe what you wish. It doesn’t say all snakes are evil or that any snakes are evil, actually. They are equated with evil as a symbol and said to be wise. I think that would be because some are poisonous and deadly. The serpent in the garden was said to be ‘more subtil than any beast God had made’ and snakes know how to hypnotize their prey, but I‘m not positive the serpent in the garden was a snake or became one. What do you think?
The snake that catches it’s prey on the ground consumes dust with every meal. Have you watched the more graphic nature shows that show snakes swallowing a mouse or toad? The animal being swallowed does seem to wallow in the dust quite badly before going down. :o


Ambient wrote: By the way, the snake isn't the only creature that crawls on it's belly.[/A]

It doesn’t say that it was a snake or that it is the only creature to crawl on it’s belly, you are correct. Like I said, it is open for speculation there.

.

 

[Ambient]

Adam and Eve were not children. They were created as adults complete with brains, speech, and reasoning powers equal to or beyond ours. You also have the choice between a banana and a bottle of strychnine. Which do you usually choose? You seem to be quick to judge the God of the Bible. Do you send your children to public school at the tender age of 5 or 6 where they are influenced to take or even offered drugs that may kill them or ruin them for life?

Hmmm, . . . seems to me that if it was ACTUALLY that clear cut, they would not have chosen the "strychnine". Else, they were fundamentally flawed with a severe case of gullibility and stupidity. To listen to some created creature over God is the epitome of stupidity ESPECIALLY when you have God right there in the same place, with nothing of "just faith" to go on.

By the way, I don't question God. I question the interpretations and translations of men that are common in biblical texts. I don't see every word as the literal words of God.

 

[unred typo]

Ambient wrote: Hmmm, . . . seems to me that if it was ACTUALLY that clear cut, they would not have chosen the "strychnine". Else, they were fundamentally flawed with a severe case of gullibility and stupidity. To listen to some created creature over God is the epitome of stupidity ESPECIALLY when you have God right there in the same place, with nothing of "just faith" to go on.

By the way, I don't question God. I question the interpretations and translations of men that are common in biblical texts. I don't see every word as the literal words of God.[/A]

The enticement of being like God knowing good and evil and the fact that Eve doubted God would really add to the allure of the beautiful fruit. How many people, knowing the possibly deadly consequences of drugs or alcohol still opt for the experience of a temporary ‘high’? I don’t see this as much different. Obviously, God wanted to test them to see how gullible and stupid they really could be. From then on, it would be a lesson to show them how stupid and gullible they had been and to impress indelibly on their brains that they should choose good, not evil. Interestingly, we don’t have any more stories about their continuance in sin. By their own choice they learned what evil was and they saw the consequences of disobeying God firsthand.
I didn’t say you questioned God, btw. I said you judged the God of the Bible. I realize you don’t equate the two. Every word of our Bibles can’t be the literal words of God since it is a translation of a translation. If it were the actual words of God it would be infallible. Anything made by man could be flawed I suppose but the Bible is not without the Holy Spirit to interpret if a person is willing to listen and able to comprehend.

.

 

[Ambient]

Ambient wrote: Hmmm, . . . seems to me that if it was ACTUALLY that clear cut, they would not have chosen the "strychnine". Else, they were fundamentally flawed with a severe case of gullibility and stupidity. To listen to some created creature over God is the epitome of stupidity ESPECIALLY when you have God right there in the same place, with nothing of "just faith" to go on.

By the way, I don't question God. I question the interpretations and translations of men that are common in biblical texts. I don't see every word as the literal words of God.[/A]

The enticement of being like God knowing good and evil and the fact that Eve doubted God would really add to the allure of the beautiful fruit. How many people, knowing the possibly deadly consequences of drugs or alcohol still opt for the experience of a temporary ‘high’? I don’t see this as much different. Obviously, God wanted to test them to see how gullible and stupid they really could be. From then on, it would be a lesson to show them how stupid and gullible they had been and to impress indelibly on their brains that they should choose good, not evil. Interestingly, we don’t have any more stories about their continuance in sin. By their own choice they learned what evil was and they saw the consequences of disobeying God firsthand.
I didn’t say you questioned God, btw. I said you judged the God of the Bible. I realize you don’t equate the two. Every word of our Bibles can’t be the literal words of God since it is a translation of a translation. If it were the actual words of God it would be infallible. Anything made by man could be flawed I suppose but the Bible is not without the Holy Spirit to interpret if a person is willing to listen and able to comprehend.

.

Hence, why I say that Adam and Eve would have been created as UNperfect beings. Perfection would not be so easily undermined. This is an example of why I see this story as NOT literal, but a story that gives an analogy of how men go against God's directives, to their own ruin.

 

[unred typo]

Ambient wrote:
Hence, why I say that Adam and Eve would have been created as UNperfect beings. Perfection would not be so easily undermined. This is an example of why I see this story as NOT literal, but a story that gives an analogy of how men go against God's directives, to their own ruin.[/A]

The Bible doesn’t say they were perfect. It says that God saw all that he had created and pronounced it “goodâ€Â. If they were perfect, incapable of sinning or disobeying God, they would be God. God always obeys God. They were flesh and blood beings with human weaknesses and free to choose to love and obey God or not. If the story were just an analogy, there wouldn't be a continuous lineage between Adam and Jesus Christ recorded. If you will notice, there is no break where the writer says, ok, that is why we should obey God, now the real actual events were like this…. It makes no sense as an analogy and why not just tell what really happened? Do you really think God would give us a story about man’s creation comparable to ‘how the elephant got his trunk’ fable? If you can’t believe those first chapters of Genesis, how can you believe anything God does supernaturally? How do you determine what is possible and what isn’t for God? :-?

 

[Ambient]

I don't know how to answer your questions. I've been struggling with that for well over a year now. Science has done it's part in contributing to this, evidences that clearly go against what was written thousands of years ago. What I have chosen to do is to take those areas and realize that THEY aren't the main idea of the book. They aren't the center focus. These other subjects may have to go unanswered in this life, at least for me.

 

[MrVersatile48]

Last thought B4 I fly away to catch a GREAT late pm/eve on Christian TV... :P


Do see 7pm - Where Fact Meets Fiction - @ Dumb Dunce Dan Brown.. :robot:

& his fishy Da Vinci Cod.. :


smells more like mouldy mackerel to me... :o



Back to link... 8-)

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=24248

Enjoy! :D

Ian :-D

 

[MrVersatile48]

It's @ http://www.ucb.TV - 7pm

 

[unred typo]

Ambient wrote:
I don't know how to answer your questions. I've been struggling with that for well over a year now. Science has done it's part in contributing to this, evidences that clearly go against what was written thousands of years ago. What I have chosen to do is to take those areas and realize that THEY aren't the main idea of the book. They aren't the center focus. These other subjects may have to go unanswered in this life, at least for me.[/A]


When you analyze what the ‘old earth’ view actually has for evidence, you will notice that everything revolves around dating methods that can’t be proven. They can only prove that IF there has been nothing for the last few hundreds/ thousands/ millions/ billions of years that effected the carbon/ radium/ whatever element isotope they are counting, or if nothing has ever happened that they cannot guess accurately, the age of their sample can be determined, more or less, within a few million years. In theory, it sounds plausible, but in real fact, it can’t be proven that something hasn’t totally skewed the numbers. Even recorded history is not reliable.

But just as the antichrist will used for the purpose he has been allowed to accomplish, we all are allowed to live and show what motivates us, whether good or evil. Science has only been employed to make godlessness a plausible choice for those who want to believe God doesn’t exist so they can truly enjoy their sin without guilt. That doesn’t mean that good people haven’t been sucked in.

I do empathize with your confusion. I wouldn’t struggle with it at all though if I were you. What happened even a few thousand years ago has little bearing on your day to day life or the tests and trials you encounter. What Jesus teaches has everything to do with your daily struggles, however. If you’re not walking in love and godliness, you will go extinct, and it will effect your entire eternity, and I doubt Science will even blink. :robot: :o 8-)