(83) In the Beginning: Creation vs Theistic Evolution

Watching the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham was not the most interesting debate in the world, although it was far better than any political debate.  One issue that Bill Nye kept bringing up was if creationism is valid then why do many Christians not believe in it.  Why do some Christians deny a literal Biblical account of creation and accept evolution, either the scientific model or what many call theistic evolution; the idea that God did create but used evolution as the means of getting to the human race.  Both are poppycock.  But Bill Nye is correct.  Many Christians flat out will not believe that evolution is false.  They believe that Jesus is the saviour but believe that the earth is old; proven by science and backed by scripture to be old.  The age of the earth is one of the biggest arguments between the two sides which from here on out will be known as YE (young earth) and OE (old earth).  YE says that the earth is 6000 years old.  OE says that the earth is 13.4 billion years old.

One major issue that causes the disagreement is the issue of the fall of man.  OE believes that death of living organisms have happened from the beginning.  They read into scripture that Genesis is not a literal meaning of creation but is just a modified story of God's evolutionary method.  They claim that the first few verses are actually billions of years and therefore death had to happen because nothing can live for billions of years.  They would also add that there may have been two types of man that had been created.  The first being man-like and that is why we have "neanderthal", "cro-magnon", and "homo erectus".  The second one being Adam.  They use as their foundation the two different stories in Genesis 1:27.

• 27  So God created humankind in his own image; in the image of God he created him:  male and female he created them.

and Genesis 2:7

• 7  Then Adonai, God, formed a person from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, so that he became a living being.

But the following explains the flaw in the idea that there were two creations: The Book of Genesis.  Do not misunderstand what these are saying.  There may be two stories but one creation.  When you read the whole passage from Genesis 1 notice it says in the "image" and "likeness", not to be exactly like God (spirit).  This explains that we were not created as spiritual beings without bodily form.  And from the whole passage in Genesis 2 we are actually created as physical beings.  Two stories, one creation.  We were made to interact with the earth with a body that can touch and were given bodily shells to house the same feelings God may have e.g., love in a heart, ideas in a brain, and so forth.  YE believes that death was not part of creation but part of man's choice in the Garden of Eden.  Death only came when man fell.

Here is why YE is more valid if you are a Christian:  Jesus came and died for everyone.  Why did He die?  Because man sinned and needed redemption to find his way back to God.  Man sinned because he showed disobedience to God's word.  Disobedience is what sin is.  If you disobey God, no matter what it is or what YOU believe, it is still sin and needs to be taken care of.  God walked with man (Adam) and talked with man.  He had a personal relationship with Him.  But when man disobeyed the relationship was destroyed.  Death had entered the genome of mankind.  Man's immortality in Paradise was lost.  His bloodline was ruined.  If the earth was old and death entered before sin then sin did not cause death and Genesis is a lie.  But since sin did bring death Jesus was needed to bring man back to God.  Sin brought death, Jesus brings life.  There was no death before man sinned.  Therefore there was no death in the first six days of creation.  So if there no was death in the first six days then these days could not equal 13.4 billion years.

This is not a Lesson about disproving or rejecting science, but evolution theory only.  Science is worthy to use and needed to discover.  But evolution theory in any account is not compatible with creation or reality.

(82) Ths Satanic Verses Part 2

Some new information on satan has been noted. In Hebrew, there is a name for satan; heylel. This is translated as "to shine as God". However this name is not a proper noun. It is more of a description in the Hebrew language. This has been translated into English and Latin as a proper noun and it probably should not have been. So the question remains , why did he lose his real name? To understand this we have to look at the history of his creation and purpose. Read Ezekiel 28:12-19.

Ezekiel says these things about him:

1. compares him to the King of Tyre
2. was a model of perfection
3. was full of wisdom and perfect in beauty
4. was in Eden
5. was created
6. was an anointed cherub
7. was blameless until wickedness set in
8. became filled with violence
9. heart became proud because of his beauty
10. wisdom became corrupted because of his splendor

Ezekiel compares satan with the king of Tyre. No one really knows who this king is but most who have studied this claim that it is talking about Hiram I. If this is the case it is an analogy that works. Tyre was a prosperous city. Hiram I allied himself with David and Solomon and even helped Israel build the Temple by supplying the cedar and pine. The city of Tyre was destroyed by Alexander the Great of Macedonia. The city came to an abrupt end. If this is supposed to be Hiram then the analogy could be that satan was allied with God but will his existence will come to an abrupt end as well.

He was a model of perfection. He was perfect in beauty and was full of wisdom. Perhaps it would have been better for him if he was full of beauty and perfect in wisdom. It was not due to his wisdom that he fell. He cherished his own beauty over his wisdom and became prideful.

He was a cherub of God, not only an angel but an anointed angel. He had a very special place in heaven. Isaiah claims he was the brightest of all stars. Job 38:4-6 gives an analogy of angels being stars. Maybe he was the highest of all angels; higher than Michael and Gabriel. Maybe he would have been considered the highest in heaven 2nd only to the Trinity of God. Maybe all of the other angels were under him in the hierarchy. He was able to bring 1/3 of the angels with him in his fall.

His beauty and pride caused him to think he could be better than God. He became prideful due to his beauty and this corrupted his wisdom. Until this happened he was blameless. His pride made him wicked. His wickedness caused him to fall from God's grace.

 

He said he could be like God and tried to exalt himself over God. His throne is here on earth. God gave him the world. He is the "god" of this world. He is the prince of this world. This is why he could offer Christ all the kingdoms of the earth if He would have bowed to him because they were his to give. But greater is He who is in you than he who is in the world. Satan wants to destroy all of those who are not of this world, those who are born into Christ.

 

He was in Eden. He roamed the earth. God allowed him in Paradise. There is a neat study that says satan may have been a feminine figure since there is so much reference to beauty. This would make sense of why he (or she in this case) went to Eve first. They would have had something in common. Of course this is not the most popular of views.

 

His fall probably would have occurred sometime between creation and the first 100 years after creation. If he was in the Garden then he was already part of this world. We don't exactly know when the fall of man happened but when it did man had to procreate to keep mankind alive. Scripture says that Adam was 130 years old when he had Seth. Seth was born to replace the son that he had lost due to Cain murdering Abel. These two were probably grown men since both of them already had a trade of their own. Speculation says then they were nearing 30. If Adam was 130 when he had Seth then he was probably somewhere around 100 when he had Cain and Abel. This means the fall of man was before this and the fall of satan was before even this event. He has been trying to get others to fall ever since.

 

But satan still has to serve God, Job 2:6. His end is near, 2 Peter 2:4, Revelation 12:9, 20:10, Matthew 25:41. He has become corrupted. He has become a liar. He has become a murderer. He has become worthless in God's eyes. His name is no more.

 

When scripture tells us that pride comes before destruction we have the greatest of examples of what happens.

 

Note :  This was Thought X on www.ideasoftimreligion.blogspot.com.  It fits better here and was added as Feb, 5, 2014.

(81) The Satanic Verses Part 1

This is not a reference to Salman Rushdie. Here is a short lesson on who satan is.

Who was satan in the beginning? To understand this we must first know what he was. 2 Corinthians 11:14 says that he is "an angel of light". Was he an angel? We get the word angel from the Greeks; angelos, meaning messenger of God. If satan was an angel then he would be some kind of messenger. Examine more evidence of what angels are. Please remember to read more of the passages than just the one verse cited.

Colossians 1:16 says that angels are created beings.
Luke 1:19, 1:28, 2:10 give examples of angels bringing messages to people on the earth.
Luke 2:13-14, 15:10, 22:43, Revelation 5:12 are some scriptures that show angels worshiping God and rejoicing in His presence.
Hebrews 1:14 says that angels minister to God's people.
Acts 12:23 shows how angels are to carry out God's wrath upon the earth.

If satan was an angel he was supposed to be from the time he was created, a being who brought messages of hope, praised and worshiped God, ministered to the rest of creation and would one day help carry out God's wrath. However, the last one was only due to his own doing.

Maybe he was an angel, but why was he called satan then? The angels that we have in scripture (canon and non-canon) all have angelic names ending with the name of God. MichaEL. GabriEL. RaphaEL. UriEL. RemiEL. RaguEL. SariEL. Why if satan was an angel is his name different?

IT'S NOT HIS NAME! No where in the Bible is his name actually mentioned. The word satan comes the Hebrew word meaning "accuser". "Lucifer" as in the KJV in Isaiah 14:12 means "light bearer", or "morning star", i.e. Venus, the brightest of stars. Stars is a biblical analogy of angels in Revelation. "Devil" means slanderer. The Serpent, the Dragon, Beelzebub (lord of the flies) and Belial (worthless) are other names used for satan.

So working on these items, satan if he was an angel was the brightest of them all. He may have been the leader of all the angels as Isaiah put it (also Matthew 25:41). But somehow he lost his namesake. God somewhere wiped his name from existence. His name became worthless. He became no better than lord of the flies.

The greatest thing about this part of the story is he still has to serve God! Job 1:6, 2:1 say that satan comes before God and has to present himself. His authority is not his own. It is from God and God alone.

The question remains: Why did he lose his name?

Note:  This was Thought IX on www.ideasoftimreligion.blogspot.com.  It fits better here and was added as Feb. 4, 2014.  The comment section was also moved in case discussion needed it.