Spaceship Theology – Part I
by Ike Fehr
When Erich Von Daniken’s books first came out I read them as fiction, however, his frequent references to the Scriptures caused me to wonder if there was some truth to his writings. I have made the study of the Bible the main thrust in my life and so his ideas appealed to me. Then, years later, along came World Mysteries with a whole, new set of studies and insights, which verified the idea that the Bible actually endorses the wild speculations of Von Daniken and others in his train of thought. I freely admit that much of my thinking is based on ideas I have gleaned from World Mysteries. I also quote from its authors, hopefully always giving the proper credit.
In writing this blog I am not pretending that I can defend everything that I write here. My purpose is to ask some of those questions that church leaders do not want us to ask, because these questions do not succumb to their memorized answers. The problem is, their “stock” answers do not even begin to delve into the depth of the questions which have been raised by modern students in the various fields of study.
J. Robert Oppenheimer said, There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. Source: World Mysteries blog
I plan to have a new post for every issue of World Mysteries news for a number of months and I will keep the posts short, so that, hopefully, you will not lose interest. I have called my blog Spaceship Theology because it is a study of Biblical material from the point of view that super human beings came from another planet, maybe planets, to start and maintain life on this globe of ours. These super human beings are known as saucerians because they came in vehicles commonly known as flying saucers.
It is to be expected that the majority of religious or scientific people will not accept spaceship Theology. This is because it is contrary to their religious beliefs or because the existence of spaceships is still unproven to most people’s satisfaction. This is nothing to be alarmed at, for, neither, did the religious people accept Christ when he came as the Messiah, nor did the scholars believe Columbus when he said the world was round.
The following posts are distinctly unscientific and make no effort to verify or explain the existence or the presence of spaceships. It takes, as fact, their verity and presence as the basis on which to stand.
Whether it is right or wrong, Spaceship Theology, as a teaching, has come to visit the modern church, and the church must eventually take a serious look at it. Clearly, these ideas disagree with the teachings of the church, but many are not contrary to the teachings of the Bible. Let us dare set aside the trite answers the church has taught us and let us be willing to ask dangerous questions and express viewpoints other than we have learned from church leaders.
The following is a statement made by Charles Hunting in a radio talk show in 1988 on WKIS, Florida.
But I think I’ve gained a great empathy for people who stop thinking for themselves and start believing what they hear, have heard, and are hearing over and over again. People can believe almost anything. … We have learned so much by habit pattern, and thinking in that habit pattern makes the world a lot simpler to live in. Source: http://www.hwarmstrong.com/hunting.htm
The path of progress in these posts should flow like this:
- The Setting
- The Premises
- The Akashic Field
- The Plurality of the Gods
- The Huminoid Gods
- The Creation of Humankind
- The Biblical Cast of Characters
The bottom line is, if you believe the Bible to be the Word of God, read it carefully, with an open mind and trust it. Do not trust what you read in these posts. Do not trust your preacher or priest. Find out, for yourself what the Bible really says. I did and have been so very, very surprised at the results.
In these posts Bible quotations are printed in red.
Quotations from other writers are in blue and
my own quotes and paraphrases are printed in purple.
So please come along with me; in the next post I will lay the foundation for what I plan to do and in the post after that we will start studying the Bible, beginning with a new premise.
It is obvious to anyone who has studied the Bible, even a little, that not everything in the Bible can be taken at face value. For example, God is said to be spirit but the Bible also speaks of Him as having physical attributes. Why not, for a fresh outlook, let us emphasize the physical attributes, and ascribe the true, Biblical meaning to the spiritual aspect as shown in the phrase, God is spirit. John 4:24. We will get to that Bible verse later on.
The intelligent beings from another planet developed scientifically and became astronauts. Being curious, like humans are, (for we are created in their image), they needed a habitable planet to use as a laboratory. After arriving on earth, they started life in its lower order, which in time evolved, into higher forms. At certain intervals, the gods must leave the earth (if, for no other reason than to keep from aging at earth’s tremendous pace). If this idea sounds too preposterous to accept, notice that Psalm 47:5 says, God has gone up with a shout, the Lord with the sound of a trumpet.
Perhaps they went back to their home planet, the tenth, (some say the twelfth), in our solar system, which many astronomers now agree, over the course of three thousand six hundred earth years, orbits much closer to earth than it does the rest of the time. That planet, known as Nibiru, is believed to pass between Mars and Saturn on its very elliptical course around the sun. Some also believe that there used to be a planet where the rings of Saturn’s now are and that on one of its passes Nibiru crashed into that planet and fragmented it. That planet’s name was Tiamat. A large section of Tiamat was flung into a circular orbit around the sun and it became the planet we lovingly call, Earth.
The account of the creation of mankind began when the Anunnaki/Elohim (Those who from Heavens to Earth came) “splashed down” at the Persian Gulf. The Sumerians believed that these “gods” came all the way from the outer edge of our solar system. It is a well-documented fact that the Sumerians believed that their “gods” practiced a two-way travel from their heavenly abode to Earth. The olden writings also indicated the familiarity of this people on the celestial system such us our sun and the planets in our solar system. The Sumerians always depicted in their pictograph writings an extra planet called Nibiru- the abode of the Annunnaki race. This massive planet often referred to as the “Winged Planet” or “Woodworm” possesses an elliptical orbit that crosses our very own home every 3,600 years (Sar). Its expected comeback is in less than 120 years. (From Creation of Mankind – Sitchin’s View — World Mysteries Blog)
In the preceding paragraph one of the names of the planet is given as, woodworm, as far as I can gather, that should probably have been written as, wormwood, as it is in other articles about this subject.
After having been gone for hundreds of thousands of earth years they came back to earth; they investigated to ascertain how the experiments have progressed. They find a humanoid animal without the ability to reason, so the astronauts ‘revamp’ the animal. The Bible says, God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. Gen. 2:7. This statement is not made about any other animal, although they also breathe. Notice, also that man existed before he became a living soul. First, he was an animal, then a living soul. After man became a living soul, he looked, and for the first time with understanding, sees that there is an astronaut near him. Of course, he does not understand what is happening, but to his infant reasoning, this saucerian appears to be all knowing and all-powerful. The human begins to understand that he owes his very existence to the supernatural beings and so he worships them as gods.
The early humans were absolutely over-whelmed by the saucerians and their capabilities. The people were superstitious, and superstition leads to religion. It seems only natural that in their superstitious fervor they would worship these beings as the gods who, according to their immature thinking level, also had made the world and the universe.
In speaking of God, one is tempted to put on a cloak of reverence for fear that God’s dignity be stepped on. Surely, one cannot come to honest answers if one does not face the questions squarely. Just as surely, the gods are able to protect themselves from the errors of those who, in all sincerity seek Him. Without any disrespect intended to Jehovah, these posts dare to challenge the church’s statements and beliefs concerning “the Almighty”.
It is easy to see the idea of comparison throughout the Bible. If we do not allow the theory of comparisons to exist, we face impossible contradictions in the Bible. One example will suffice to prove the point, You who laid the foundations of the earth, So that it should not be moved forever. Psalms 104:5. Contrast this with, For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Matthew 5:18. However, if we think of these contrasting words, in terms of comparison, there is no problem. For if the earth lasted only a mere 100 million years, any poet or songwriter would be forgiven if he wrote that the earth will last forever.
In speaking of the attributes of God, it is also well to think of the terms in comparison. For example, when the Bible writers recorded the events, which had been orally passed on for hundreds, or thousands, of years they still spoke of the astronauts with awe and wonder. They gave the impression that the gods were all knowing, for, by comparison to early man who knew nothing of the science by which the saucerians carried out their missions, the gods were omniscient. Suppose we were to place a hinterland aborigine, who had never encountered our complex culture in any way, next to a scientist who had at his disposal a computer. It is not hard to imagine that that aborigine could go back to his people and tell them that he had met a man who knew everything. For, anyone with access to a computer search engine, this is almost true; hence, the idea of omniscience. If those natives were so inclined, they might start worshipping that scientist as one of their gods.
The astronauts, whom the early man called gods, may well have used rocket belts similar to the ones that science is building today. Using methods of mobility like that, the gods could soar through the air or transport themselves from one place to another in a matter of seconds. It is easy to see how this mode of transportation could have led to the belief that the gods are everywhere at the same time, for comparatively speaking, that was surely true. Early man, who did not race around as we do, could easily have seen air transportation as the basis for omnipresence.
Those astronauts, using electronic devices to speak to humans could speak without being seen by the ancient humans, and so it is no wonder that the humans spoke of them as being invisible and spiritual; without a material body.
We will look at these, and other facets, of the nature of the gods, in more detail in future posts. If any of you followed the posts in my blog, http://wwwthinkagai.blogspot.com/2012/05/five-theosophic-viewpoints.html you will notice that there will be some repetition here, but I feel that it is necessary to repeat myself in order to lay a good foundation for the Bible study that follows this rather lengthy introduction.
Copyright by Ike Fehr
This blog is called Spaceship Theology; a study of theology must start with the nature and attributes of God, since the word, theology, in Greek means, treating of God.
Christians commonly accept that only the Bible of the Christians is the inspired Word of God and that Jehovah especially chose the Jews to write His message. Therefore, the supposition is that, all other writings are manmade or even inspired by Satan. Among those credited to Satan are The Hindu writings, The Koran, The Greek Myths, The Book of Mormon and the New World Translation of the Bible. This list, could of course, be made much longer. According to some, it should include almost everything ever written except the King James Version of the Bible or Bible study helps based on the KJV. My purpose here is not, so much, to defend or to condemn ancient writings. The intention is to look at some ancient literary works, which were written long, long before Western minds were even aware of the idea of UFO’s. Reference will be made throughout these posts to some of those writings, and an attempt will be made to show how they might have been speaking of spaceships, aliens and other theories presented in these posts.
Some argue that the age of the Bible verifies its inspiration. They say that parts of the Bible are about 3,500 years old; therefore it is inspired by God. If we are using that kind of rationale it is good to remember that the Vedas of the Hindu religion are about as old as the books of Moses. Hence, that argument would mean that the Vedas of the Hindus are also inspired by God. The Epic of Gilgamesh, according to some scholars, is about 1200 years older than the Bible’s creation story. Is it, consequently, more inspired than the Bible? Some believe The Atrahasis Epic to have been composed in the period 1646-1626 B.C.E. They also believe that Moses wrote Genesis, but Moses did not come along until about 1500 B.C. So, is The Atrahasis epic more inspired than the Bible is? Simply put, we cannot use the age of the Bible as an argument for its divine origin.
Throughout history, if any teaching that comes along has not agreed with what the Bible scholars have taught, that teaching is, by default, attributed to Satan. Such an approach is to take the easy, thoughtless way out of a doctrinal problem. That is what the Pharisees did with the teachings of Jesus when He denounced them for not hearing the words of God. Then the Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon! John 8:52. Much later, one can almost hear the Roman church fathers saying, about the teachings of the reformers, this teaching of salvation by grace, through faith alone, is new, it does not fit our teaching, it is of the Devil. In fact, their stance then, in Luther’s day, was, and still is, “No, we are saved by faith PLUS love and good works. Faith alone in Jesus Christ as Savior does NOT save! Unless faith is completed by love and good works it cannot save us.” Put another way, then, Roman Catholics say that faith in Jesus is INSUFFICIENT to save us, and actually damned anyone who said that we are justified by faith alone for Christ’s sake. From: Lutheran Church Missouri Synod A Brief Letter Explaining the Differences Between Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism.
For them to dam the Protestants for their stance is tantamount to saying, “Your teaching is of the devil”. In spite of the Roman Catholic’s curse on the Reformers, we hail the leaders of the Reformation for taking a stand. They were willing to risk their all for what they believed! Why, then, is the church of today so blindly against any new ideas; ideas that can be verified by the statements found in the Bible?
1 John 4:2-3 Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God
According to Saint John, the one thing that separates Christians from non-Christians is whether one believes that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. He did not say that one must accept that the Bible is the perfect Word of God; that the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity; that one must believe that there is only one God. These, among others, are doctrines that the church has invented and most Bible teachers refuse to consider seriously the idea that another approach, in fact, might be Biblical. The bottom line is not our adherence to the 1800-year-old church creed but it is our acceptance of the fact that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.
If one is to accept that the God written about in the Bible is a super human being who came in a spaceship from another planet, one must put aside many traditional prejudices and views. One must open-mindedly look at these new ideas; and then realize that they do not stand in opposition to the actual written records, as found in the Bible. However, our ancestor’s rigid beliefs, now in us, stand in opposition to the possibility of seeing “spaceships” in the Bible. A quote from a book by Mr. Wilson, emphasizes the point made here. Chance evolution will be preferred to creation; the Bible will be accepted only as a good human book instead of what it is, the inspired Word of God; The death of Jesus Christ will be regarded at best as only an heroic but unfortunate event in Roman times, whereas, in fact, it was the culmination of God’s great plan of redemption for fallen man. Other doctrines such as the virgin birth and the resurrection of our Lord will be ruled out with no effort to consider the case seriously. From: Clifford Wilson, Gods in Chariots and other Fantasies (Creation Life Publishers, San Diego, Cal. 1975).
It is thinking, exactly like this, expressed by Dr. Wilson, which I am opposing here. Even a person who believes in the active presence of UFO’s can accept the Bible as the inspired word of Jehovah. However, spiritualizing the Bible or treating its message as symbolic, as the church at large does, is unacceptable. If one believes that the Bible means what has been written, of course, one will believe that Christ is the Son of God and that as divine and human He died to pay the penalty for our sins. One will also believe that he rose from the tomb, ascended and will be returning. No doubt, the frame of reference will not be the same as that held by Mr. Wilson.
Narrow-minded Bible teachers repeatedly accuse Ufologists of being literalists; this is an accusation that is probably well deserved. Many Ufologists, studying the Bible, notice things that they have never heard in church, and they accept those Biblical statements as facts because they are in the Bible, and because the church has not yet taught them how to bend those facts out of shape.
For example, notice what one Bible teacher wrote about the UFO’s which Ezekiel saw: Ezekiel looked and saw a whirlwind (a great rushing or tempest) coming out of the north (hidden or secreted for God’s use), a great cloud (covering a wide area) and a fire infolding itself, (truth and glory of God). Out of the midst of this fire (God’s glory and truth) came the likeness of four (worldwide, as in the four corners of the earth) living (spiritually) creatures (people). Every one had four faces (to uphold or stand to face) and four wings (overspreading, an army). Their feet were straight (not wavering from their stand) and they shone like burnished brass (tried and purified by the glorious Truth of God). They were united and went straight forward (didn’t stray from the truth).
In verse 24, we are clearly told that the wings (overspreading) made noise (God’s Word) like the noise of great waters (God’s people) as they speak the truth and stand for it.
The symbolic meaning of the words in Ezekiel chapter one are not meant to be taken literally any more than when they are used spiritually elsewhere in God’s Word. Ezekiel 1:4: From: Unraveling False Images Web.
If fundamentalist Bible teachers are so eager to symbolize what the Bible plainly states as fact, why do they not follow through with that method of interpretation, throughout the Bible? Some of the results would, of course, include the teaching that Christ was not born to a virgin, but rather to a chaste woman (symbolically, she was a virgin). Christ did not really raise Lazarus from the dead. Lazarus was only symbolically dead; he represented the Jewish race. Christ did not really die on the cross, He died symbolically to indicate that He was finished preaching to the Jews. On and on those lies would go. Those of us who are literalists do not condone that kind of Bible teaching! Whenever possible we try to take the statements in the Bible at face value.
Why, on the one hand, do those authors accuse us of being literalists and then, on the other hand accuse us of not believing the plainly stated facts about Christ? For Example, the virgin birth of Christ, His atoning death, His resurrection and ascension. Those facts are all in the Bible for us to read, and if we are literalists, of course we will believe them. If those authors are going to accuse us, they should at least decide, first, for what they are going to defame us! Are we wrong for believing what the Bible says? Or, are we wrong because we do not agree with the narrow minded authors who symbolize or spiritualize everything that does not fit into their preconceived, blind sided way of thinking? Anyway, who gave them the authority to tell us, Ufologists, what we believe or do not believe?
Mr. Seagraves, a creationist, throws the literalist blanket of accusation over all Ufologists. He takes it a step further and says that to believe in spaceships and the saucerians involvement with humans requires eons of human existence, and the Bible allows for only six thousand years of human existence. Therefore, he maintains that Ufologists cannot accept the idea of the great deluge, consequently, he says, we do not accept the Bible and therefore Ufologists are not Christians. From: Sons of God Return, Kelly L. Segraves (Fleming H Revell, New Jersey, 1975.
In any case, there are many Christians who believe that humankind has been around much longer than 6,000 years in spite of the fact that Mr. Seagraves says that if one believes that one cannot be a Christian.
Copyright by Ike Fehr
The Akashic Field
The affirmation that the gods spoken of in the Bible are in fact super human beings from other planets does leave a very important question unanswered. Namely, if those beings the Bible calls, gods, are only super human beings they must admittedly be creatures. If they are created, we come back to the problem, who is their creator. Obviously, a created being, even the first, cannot be the creator of all things. If one reads, the Bible with an open mind one comes to the same conclusion as the philosophers Plato and Plotinus who taught that above the Gods of traditional belief was “The One” also called God. The One is the impersonal unifying principle of divinity. The following quote is also from Wikipedia. To believe that there is “The One” seems necessary to the human mind, for without that belief we cannot imagine the origin of the universe. However, to try to fit what the Bible says about Jehovah into what is “The One” is not at all possible.
The following two paragraphs are duplicates of part of a post I did in April, 2012.
Erwin Laszlo in Science and the Akashic Field: An Integral Theory of Everything writes: The akashic records (akasha is a Sanskrit word meaning “sky”, “space” or “aether”) is a term used in theosophy … to describe a compendium of (mystical) knowledge encoded in a non-physical plane of existence. These records contain all knowledge of human experience and the history of the cosmos. They are metaphorically described as a library; other analogies commonly found in discourse on the subject include a “universal supercomputer” and the “Mind of God”.
Mystics and sages have long maintained that there exists an interconnecting cosmic field at the roots of reality that conserves and conveys information, a field known as the Akashic record. Recent discoveries in the new field of vacuum physics now show that this Akashic field is real and has its equivalent in the zero-point field that underlies space itself. This field consists of a subtle sea of fluctuating energies from which all things arise: atoms and galaxies, stars and planets, living beings, and even consciousness. This zero-point Akashic-field-or “A-field”- is not only the original source of all things that arise in time and space; it is also the constant and enduring memory of the universe. It holds the record of all that ever happened in life, on Earth, and in the cosmos and relates it to all that is yet to happen. http://wwwthinkagai.blogspot.com/2012/05/creative-force.html
To try and fit that creating force into the Bible narrative is, to say the very least, confining the nature of that force. The church throughout history has faced the problem of reconciling the Bible with the teaching that there is only one God, since the God written about in the Bible does not meet the criteria of the Omni everything God. Conversely, the Omni everything Akashic Field cannot be made to fit into what the Bible says about Jehovah.
Concerning this same thought, Madam Blavatsky wrote, the English (word) God … may be said to represent the Creator of physical “Humanity,” on the terrestrial plane; but surely it had nothing to do with the formation or “Creation” of Spirit, gods, or Kosmos. From: The Secret Doctrine, H.P. Blavatsky. Vol. 1, Bk.2, ch. 4.
Earlier I wrote that the Bible is not without what seem to be contradictions; the following is another example of this. On the one hand, we have verses such as, No one has ever seen God. John 1:18 Not that anyone has seen the Father. John 6:46 You cannot see my face, for no man can see my face and live. Ex. 3:20 He (Christ) is the image of the invisible God. Col. 1:5 On the other hand we have verses such as, I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne. Is. 6:1 After this I looked, a throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne, and he who sat there appeared like a jasper. The Rev. 4:2-3
The answer to this dilemma could be that the Akashic Field, that force which created the universe, which includes the saucerians of the Bible, is (the God) that is invisible. However, the God of the Jews, whose name is Jehovah, and His Son, Jesus Christ, are both physically visible. It is Jehovah that was seen by Jacob, Isaiah, Moses, Daniel and John.
In spite of the fact that Jacob said that he had seen the Lord, and Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel and Daniel later wrote that they had seen the Lord, Saint John, who must have known the Old Testament, wrote, No one has seen God at any time. 1 John 4:12. If we believe that the Bible does not contradict itself, we are forced to believe that John was not writing about the same God that his ancestors claim to have seen. Maybe John was writing about the Akashic Field and not about Jehovah.
The Epic of Gilgamesh, was probably written before any part of the Bible was written, and makes some statements that are in total accord with the theories presented in my upcoming posts. Therefore, I will quote from The Epic of Gilgamesh from time to time.
Considering that Moses probably copied, or at least borrowed from that epic, it seems incongruous to completely reject that epic while accepting the writings of Moses as being completely without error.
The Plurality of the Gods – part one
At the declaration that one believes in more than one God, one is branded a heretic, lunatic or a pagan. However, in this brand of theology, the word “God” no longer carries the connotation that it has held throughout church history. If one believes that the God of the Old Testament is a saucerian, it is logical to suppose that He is not the only being who developed to that point of eminence. Therefore, one can surmise that there are also other gods of like nature. This thought brought to its conclusion is the basis on which “Spaceship Theology” rests.
So, for the benefit of those astronomers who are searching outer space for signs of intelligent life, for scholars, and skeptics, who say there is no evidence that extra-terrestrials have ever visited our planet, let me quote, people throughout the Early World believed that E.T’s, from the Pleiades, civilized their people and that these beings were worshipped as gods. From: Alien contact – Fact or Fiction. By: Leonard Farra
Concerning the multiplicity of the gods, the Epic of Gilgamesh tells us that the gods are created beings. When on high the Heavens had not been named, firm ground below had not been called by name…when no gods whatever had been brought into being, uncalled by name, their destinies undetermined – then it was that the gods were formed within them. From: Archaeology and The Old Testament, James B. Pritchard, (Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.)
Let’s look at a few quotations from the Biblical records.
In the beginning God. Gen. 1:1. Even fundamentalist believers accept that the word, God is a plural form of the word. Dr. James Strong, a Lutheran Theologian, in his Dictionary of Hebrew Words of the Old Testament gives this definition of the word, God, The plural form of the Deity, in English especially used with the article. So we should really read Gen.1:1 like this, in the beginning the gods created the heaven and the earth. The word, God, according to Dr. Strong was the same word, at the time the Old Testament was being written, as the word that was used in speaking to or about magistrates. The word, God, is not as majestic a word as Bible teachers have told us to believe it is.
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image”. Gen. 1:26 The obvious question arises; to whom was God talking when he said, let us make man in our image? He must be speaking to more than himself. Why would He say our image if there were only one God? If these gods were only one God, why would he speak to Himself? Why not just think, “I will make man in my own image” and then proceed to do it?
About the plurality of the gods, Mr. Roop, in his commentary on Genesis, wrote, God speaks to a group, stating that the man and the woman have become ‘like one of us.’ …Yahweh sits in the company of other divine being. From: Believers Church Bible Commentary – Genesis. Eugene F. Roop, (Herald Press. Scottdale, Kitchener, Ontario.)
Then, it seems that, almost as an afterthought, because that statement does not fit church theology, he adds, for example, angels. Surely, no traditional or evangelical Bible student believes that angels are divine beings. It seems, that Mr. Roop is trying to cover up the truth he uncovered in his Bible study, not that this is unusual among Bible students! His study lead Mr. Roop to state that there is a plurality of Gods, but then he tries to diminish that finding by calling those other gods, angels.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Gen. 1:27 Again, changing the singular to the plural, as Dr. Strong says we need to do, we read it like this, So the gods created man in their own image, in the image of the gods created they them; male and female created they them.
I will pass through the land of Egypt…and I will smite all the first born…and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment. Ex. 12:12. Mr. Strong says that the definition for the word, gods, in, gods of Egypt, is the same as the definition for God in the phrase, in the beginning God created heaven and earth. In this instance, are we going to take the Bible literally, or are we going to say, as the church at large does, “it doesn’t mean what it says”? If the Babylonians called on their gods by name, why wouldn’t we believe that they knew what they were talking about? If the Egyptians called on Ra, Isis or Osiris by name; and if they believed that their gods heard them; are we in any position to say that their gods were not real?
This argument, of course, does not diminish the fact that the Bible very clearly speaks of idols; those things made of inanimate objects that are worshipped as gods. The prophets of the Old Testament, speaking to the Jews, made it a point to denounce the worship of such items, because Jehovah, their God, had told them not to make any graven image to worship. That simple fact indicates that some other real, living gods, did not mind if their followers made images of them.
Mr. Meek agrees with Asimov by saying, It is clear from the Old Testament that the early Hebrew religion was a very primitive one… The religion was polydaemonistic and polytheistic, so the Old Testament explicitly affirms. From: Guide To The Bible. Isaac Asimov, (Avenol Books. New York)
Here we might insert one of the verses he mentions, Thus says the Lord God of Israel: ‘Your fathers, including Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side of the River in old times; and they served other gods. Joshua 24:2 the most we can claim for Moses in it (The Ten Commandments) is monolatry. Neither here nor anywhere else does he deny the existence of gods other than Yahweh, nor does he assert the sole existence of Yehweh. From: Hebrew Origins. Theophile James Meek, (Harper Torchbooks)
Monolatry means, worship of only one God, although others may be believed to exist.
More about this in the next Post.
The Plurality of the Gods – part two
Many of the religions of the world have developed along very similar lines; all ancient major religions started with a plurality of Gods. Many religions, over the course of the centuries, have changed to monotheism. The Jewish religion is no exception to this trend. Concerning this topic Mr. Meek writes, Among critical scholars today there is none who claims monotheism for anyone earlier than Moses. From: Hebrew Origins. Theophile James Meek, (Harper Torchbooks.)
Later he writes, El may have been a great High God to the people of Ugarit (ancient Ras Shamra), but along with him were hosts of other deities, many of them little less important than He. From: Hebrew Origins. Theophile James Meek, (Harper Torchbooks.)
The oral traditions handed down from Adam to Moses spoke of a plurality of gods. However, when Moses recorded the history of Israel, he emphasized the Lord of the Jews, Jehovah, the God that called Abram from Ur; the God that lay claim on Jacob’s life and later delivered the Jews from Egypt. Considering the mighty deeds that Jehovah had done for them, it is not surprising that they affirmed that, for their nation, there was only one God.
In speaking about the plural pronouns in reference to God, in the opening chapters of Genesis, it is insisted by many that God is, in fact, singular, but in speaking of himself, God is using what is known as “the royal we”. If that were the case, it would be proper for Him to say “us” although He meant only himself. Admittedly, this is one way of explaining the problem but it sounds like nothing more than an easy way out of an interpretation dead end. Concerning the problem of the plural pronoun, (the royal we) the well-known author, Isaac Asimov, said the following. It is possible to argue that this (the plural pronoun) is not true evidence of early polytheism. God might be viewed as using the royal “we”; … Nevertheless, as far as we know…early beliefs were always polytheistic and monotheism was a late development in the history of ideas. From: Guide To The Bible. Isaac Asimov, (Avenol Books. New York)
It is not without importance that even the first commandment emphasizes the fact that there are other gods. Notice that the commandment explicitly says, You shall have no other gods before Me. Ex. 20:3. Here, again, Mr. Strong says we must use the same plural word for God that we used in Genesis 1:1. There, obviously, the word did not refer to idols and so it cannot refer to idols here! It refers to plural, real, living gods. If these other gods were pieces of metal or stone only, surely, Jehovah would not be so hung up about it.
It would seem, at a casual glance, that a good argument against the plurality of the gods would be the verse, which reads, Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord. Deut. 6:4. Mr. Thiessen says, that there is but one God is the great burden of the Old Testament. Lectures in Systematic Theology. H.C. Thiessen, (Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Mich.)
To understand that verse this way is to overlook one basic fact. That fact is that the Old Testament is a book written by the Jews and for the Jews. Rather than arguing for the singularity of God this verse indicates that each nation, including Israel, has its own god or gods. To make his statement read right, he should have written, That there is but one God, for the Jews, is the great burden of the Old Testament. Moses, speaking to Israel only, said, Israel, we have only one God, we are not like other nations, which have many gods. The Psalmist reiterated that statement with, Happy is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom he has chosen as his heritage. Psalm 33:12
The Psalmist said For the Lord is a great God, and a great king above all gods. Psalms 95:3. In reference to the word gods as used in the Bible, Mr. Strong tells us that its meaning is, mighty ones. That definition does not fit the meaning of dead idols. Asaph, takes up this theme, he wrote, God stands in the congregation of the mighty; He judges among the gods. Psalm 82:1. Bible students, with a traditional mindset, of course, cannot allow the thought that God judges among other gods (since they believe that there is only one God). Therefore, in the footnotes they write words such as, gods, as it is used here, is elohim, which means judges. This would mean that Jehovah arbitrates among judges. That, than, becomes an interesting subject, because elohim is the word that Christ used when, on the cross, He cried out, “Eloi (Elohim) Eloi (Elohim)…why have you forsaken me”? Was Christ actually asking a judge, other than His father, why have you forsaken me? Either this is true or the word, judges, in Psalm 95:3 refers to gods other than Jehovah.
Many modern writers claim that ancient religious books, including the Bible, speak of a myriad of gods in the universe. Because the Bible says so, Christians should accept that idea, while, at the same time, insisting that, for them, Jehovah is their only God.
In opposition to the idea that there is a myriad of gods in the universe, or in the Bible, there are verses such as. The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof. Ps. 24:1 Or, For all the earth is mine. Ex. 19:5. To find these thoughts in the Bible is not surprising because the Israelites were so overwhelmed with what Jehovah had done for them that they credited every awesome and wonderful thing to Him, even those things for which the Akashic field is responsible.
Still more about this very important topic in the next installment…
The Plurality of the Gods – part three
There are many, many Bible verses that tell us that there are numerous Gods; it is interesting to see what Bible translators have done to some of them. Let’s look at one, in detail:
1 Cor. 8:5 in Greek. For if there are being called gods either in heaven or on earth, even as there are gods many and lords many.
This is very much like the KJV, NKJV, The New World Translation have written it. These are in agreement with The New American Bible, (there are, to be sure, many “gods” and many “lords”),
Take a look at what modern translators have done to that verse to make the Bible agree with church doctrine. Many things in heaven and on earth are called gods and lords, but none of them really are gods or lords. Contemporary English Version. According to some people, there are a great many gods, both in heaven and on earth. The Living Bible.
Notice also that the Greek, the KJV, NKJV, New World Translation and the New American Bible include the meaning, to us or for us.
yet to us there is God the Father…NKJV
yet for us there is one God, the Father, TheNAB
The new translations leave out those words; again, to suit church theology, and completely change the meaning;
But we know that there is only one God… The Living Bible
But we know that there is only one God, the Father. New Living translation
I have noted that v.4 states that there is no other God but one, and I also noticed that about this Greek word (Theos), God, Vine writes that, theos in the polytheism of the Greeks, denoted “a god or deity”. It appears therefore that when Paul wrote these words he was using the Greek thought of a plurality of Gods, even though he said that, for us, there is only one God.
Some people, especially women, have taken exception to the fact that God is almost always referred to as “He”. When, in fact, according to most people, God is a spirit. Spirits are genderless, are they not? However, from my point of view, Jehovah is a male saucerian and it would not be right for me to speak of Him as being genderless. Sorry, ladies, but I worship a male God.
Is it not also easy to believe that when the gods said, Let us make mankind in our image, there were female gods present, and that they are the ones who made women in their own image?
The Humanoid God – Part One
We were created in God’s image. The argument has been made that this means that since God is a triune Being: Father, Son and Holy Spirit we are also a triune being: body, soul and Spirit. Let us realign our thinking: God is a triune Being: Body, emotions and Spirit and in that sense, we are in God’s image.
Is God Visible?
Is God invisible? The church says yes, the Bible says yes and no. To say that the Lord of the Old Testament is only spirit and whatever the Bible says about him as being physical is not to be taken literally is completely contrary to and many portions of Scripture.
And the Lord said to Moses, “Go down and warn the people, lest they break through to gaze at the Lord, and many of them perish.” Ex. 19:21.
Then Moses…and seventy elders of Israel went up, and they saw the God of Israel; they beheld God, and ate and drank. Ex. 24:9+11.
In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne. Is. 6:1
the heavens were opened and I saw visions of God. Eze. 1:1.
And the Ancient of Days was seated; His garment was white as snow, And the hair of His head was like pure wool. Dan. 7:9.
a throne set in heaven, and One sat on the throne. And He who sat there was like a jasper and a sardius stone in appearance; Rev. 4:2-3
Is God Temporal?
God is eternal, or, at least He has let us believe that He is. Again, it is important that we do not think in terms of the absolute. It would be unreasonable for “saucerians” to reckon time by earth years while travelling from one planet to another. When travelling just below the speed of light, a new kind of reckoning comes into play. These time shifts are known as, time dilation. According to Van Daniken, depending on certain mathematical facts, the following time shifts happen. In the time that the earth ages eighty years the crew on a spaceship, traveling at just below the speed of light will age only fifteen years. What is still more amazing, in the time that the earth ages 3,100 years the space crew will have aged only thirty years. Astoundingly, in 420,000 years of earth time, the spaceship crew will be only fifty years older. From:Von Daniken. In Search of Ancient Gods. (Heron and Souvenir Press, New York).
Is it any wonder that primitive people spoke of the astronauts as being eternal? For that matter, is it surprising, that the gods did not bother correcting them about the error, for, relatively speaking, it is true. Even if the saucerians would have corrected the false impressions that the early people had, the people could not possibly have understood what the gods were talking about.
The Lord himself allowed for the fact that he was getting older. It is true, Jehovah said, that He is not getting old as fast as humans are, but nonetheless, he said that a thousand years in Your sight Are like yesterday when it is past. Psalm 90:4 However slowly He may be aging, we may as well accept the fact that the Lord is older now than he was 100,000 earth years ago. Let us dismiss, than, the idea that the Lord of the Old Testament is an eternal, unchanging entity. If this were not true, why would He be spoken of as having white hair? And the Ancient of Days was seated; His garment was white as snow, And the hair of His head was like pure wool. Dan. 7:9
Is God Physical?
In the Bible Jehovah is spoken of as having feet, hands, arms, eyes and other characteristics that humans also have. The Bible clearly teaches that God does have physical and emotional characteristics. It is interesting to note what Bible teachers have done to circumvent the teaching that God is physical. Theologians call these physical attributes, anthropomorphisms. That means that the Bible speaks of God as being physical so that humans can better grasp the idea of God. Why not call these physical attributes actual? Why not believe that a super human being from another planet, (the Jehovah of the Bible), in fact is physical?
For other evidence look at, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh. Gen. 6:3. The RSV has dropped the word, also, from the text, apparently, to avoid the problem of having a teaching about a physical God. Dr. Atkinson, an evangelical Bible teacher, allows that the word, also, belongs in the verse as found in the KJV, but, he says, the, also, refers to animals; those animals, which are to perish in the great coming flood. This argument appears to be very weak, for up to this point the flood has not even been mentioned in the Bible. This would be a strange way to introduce the flood and the death of animals. The flood itself is not introduced until after the story of the giants on the earth. In retrospect, animals have not been specifically mentioned in the Bible since the time that Abel brought the firstlings of his flock in Geneses 4, except that we are told that Jabel…was the father of those who…have cattle. Gen. 4:20. For those who insist that the, also, does not refer to a physical God, the most likely connection of the word, also, would be to the sons of the gods. (6:3). These sons of the gods are mentioned in the verse immediately preceding the verse that says, the spirit of God will not always strive with man. The meaning of that verse would than read like this, the spirit of God will not always strive with humans, for humans, like the sons of the gods, also are flesh. If we accept this explanation, we are, of course, forced to admit that the gods had sons, because the Bible says so. It is either this argument or my first suggestion: Jehovah says that humans are flesh like He also is.
Much has been written about the sons of the gods and how they fit into pre-history. Many good articles about this subject are available on world-mysteries.com and so I will not go into that lengthy and convoluted discussion here.
More about this in the next Post.
The Humanoid God – Part Two
Is God Emotional?
Is He sorry for what He has done?
Humankind is also emotionally in the image of God. People make mistakes and express sorrow for their errors. People can be imposed upon by the pleadings of others. People can enjoy pleasure and experience hate. Jehovah is capable of all these emotions, to mention only a few. For example, And the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. Gen. 6:6 Previously, mention was made about the gods discussing the feasibility of creating man on the earth, and that they decided to do so. Now we find that Jehovah was sorry that he had anything to do with the creation of man. Is the Bible speaking of a God that makes mistakes? Or, is it speaking of gods that decide to undo what they have done and wipe out most of the human race because of their unexpected disappointment with it? Could they not look into the future to see what was coming! Surely, an omniscient God could.
From the Epic of Gilgamesh comes this bit of interesting prose: The gods were frieghtened by the flood, they retreated, ascending to the heaven of Anu….Ishtar schrieked … how could I say evil things in the Assembly of the Gods, ordering a catastrophe to destroy my people!! The gods—those of the Anunnaki—were weeping with her, the gods humbly sat weeping, sobbing with grief.
Does God Get Jealous?
Jealousy is not a stranger to humankind, and it is also an emotion that Jehovah has. I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the Fathers upon the children. Ex. 20:5. Is this the picture of an omnipotent, all-knowing, all-loving God? No! It shows a God who is subject to emotional variations. It is the God of the Hebrews that we read about in the Old Testament. He is a jealous God; in fact, his “nick name” is “Jealous”. (For you shall worship no other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God) Ex. 34:14. He will not share his glory with any other. This, incidentally, is a redundant sentiment, if there are no other deities vying for glory from mortals.
Does God get angry?
He, the Lord of the Jews, is a God who, in anger, disperses his people to other nations as punishment for sins committed, and, when His anger is abated, brings them home again. These definitely are not pictures of an omnipotent and unchanging God.
In the Bible is recorded an incident in which Balaam went, with the princes of Moab, to curse the children of Israel, and Then God’s anger was aroused because he went. Num. 22:22. Is the Lord’s anger short fused? According to the standards that the church has imposed on the ‘all-loving’ and ‘all-knowing’ God, it seems improbable that He should get himself into a situation in which he must compromise his divine characteristics such as love and knowledge. It seems so much more in agreement with the Bible to think of God as being a super human who came to earth as an astronaut. He seems to be a God who is physical, temperamental and with mental limitations. This theory would certainly clear up many contradictions that traditional religion has taught us!
Did the decision of whether or not the Jews entered the promised land depend on his emotional variations? It sounds as if it might have; He said, So I swore in My wrath, ‘They shall not enter My rest.’ Heb. 3:11. Conversely, we also hear him say, if My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land. 2 Chro. 7:14. Can our words or our attitudes, in fact, change the mind or the eternal, foreordained plans of an Almighty God? This is not a picture of the Almighty, Creating, Sustaining force of the universe; rather it is a picture of a father’s relationship with his child. This shows to us that when the gods created us they made us emotionally, also, in their image.
Is God unjust?
Is the Lord just? Based on what the Bible says it does not seem so. We find the Lord of the Old Testament to be partial, temperamental and full of revenge.
Cain and Abel each brought the Lord a gift. We do not find that Cain went contrary to any given instructions, but we do find that, the Lord respected Abel and his offering, but He did not respect Cain and his offering. Gen. 4:4-5. It is no wonder that Cain would have been angry at that time. He had planted, grown and harvested something, just as God had told his father, Adam to do. Now that it was harvested, he was legitimately proud of it, and wanted to share it with the Lord; the Lord, however, refused Cain’s gift indiscriminate of Cain’s feelings.
The Apostle Paul asks the same question, Is there unrighteousness with God? Rom, 9:14. For an answer to his own question, he refers to the writings of Moses. He quotes, I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion. Moses had also written, Jacob I have loved, the Lord said, but Esau I have hated. 9:13. Paul continues to answer his own question; Therefore, He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. 9:18. In spite of all his arguments to the contrary, Paul concludes that the Lord is fair and just.
In this connection, the important thing, for us, is to remember, that whether we believe God to be just or not, we are in no position to question his decisions. Quoting the great apostle again, But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? Rom. 9:20-21
Without any disrespect intended, the question can be asked, what is more important to God, man’s happiness or His own personal glory? Speaking to the pharaoh of Moses’ time the Lord said, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. Rom. 9:17
For this purpose, namely, the glory of God’s name, pharaoh and his army had to forfeit their lives. From this incident, Paul draws this conclusion, what if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. Rom. 9:22
There is also the incident in the Life of Christ, which clearly shows that God is more interested in his own glory than in the comfort of humankind. His disciples asked Him, (Jesus) saying, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him. John 9:2-3. It appears cruel that a man would need to endure many years of sightlessness just so that Christ would have someone to heal, thereby glorifying God, and yet, that is what the Bible says, happened.
There are also the persistent questions asked by atheists, agnostics and Christians. If God can do anything and if He is love why is there so much suffering in the world? Why are there so many wars? Why do innocent children starve to death, why do they grow up in a world that is worse than death? If we insist on giving God credit for all the beautiful babies born into the world, than the blame for the over-population of the world also lies at His doorstep. If, after having over-populated the world does He need to send tornados, earthquakes and bad weather to keep crops from producing, to help control the over-population of the world?
Isn’t it all a lot more logical to believe that nature is taking its course, as it will, and that Jehovah intervenes only when He has a direct interest in a certain situation. At least, if we see it this way, we are not forced to believe that Jehovah is cruel.
A Humanoid God- Part Three
Is God Love
Jehovah, and some other gods, came to earth to start life here. He was here to help the Jews become a nation and to become the Father of the human aspect of Jesus Christ. The glorious truth of the gospel is that he has promised that his Son is coming back to earth to receive us to His glory. However, His promise is conditional: our mindset must be re-rdesigned by faith; faith that the death of Jesus can make that change in us.
The Bible teaches, beyond argument, that God is love. It also teaches that because of His love He did something to show His love. Really, a love that refuses to do something for the unfortunate is no love at all. The Church has taught us that since God is love, He “always loves all people forever, but He hates their sins”. This old, worn out cliché has been universally accepted but is it really true? The Bible declares that it is not true!
It seems that the difference in how much God loves a person is based on a person’s lifestyle and attitude towards Jehovah. The Psalmist wrote, The boastful shall not stand in Your sight; You hate all workers of iniquity. Psalm 5:5. He hates the workers of iniquity, not just the things they do! Solomon penned, For the perverse person is an abomination to the LORD. Prov.3:32 Those who are of a perverse heart are an abomination to the LORD, But the blameless in their ways are His delight. Prov. 11:20 According to these proverbs it is not just the sin that God hates, but the sinner himself.
The story of Esau is a case in point. Speaking for the Lord, Malachi, the prophet, wrote, Jacob I have loved; But Esau I have hated. Mal. 1:2-3. Some newer translations of the Bible state it more softly, but the difference is really just a matter of semantics. The statement still stands; God loves some people more than He loves others.
It is not a godlike characteristic to love humans. Their involvement is mostly with themselves and they want what is best for themselves. A picture of this is strikingly portrayed in the Enûma Eliš. Anshar, your son, has sent me here, Charging me to give voice to the dictates of his heart, He says that Tiamat, she who bore us, detests us. She has set up the Assembly and is furious with rage. All the gods have rallied to her; Even those whom you brought forth march at her side. They throng and march at the side of Tiamat. Enraged, they plot without cease night and day. From: Enûma Eliš.
However, the outstanding qualities that distinguish Jehovah, from the other gods is His moral uprightness and love for humans. This is the strength of the teaching of the New Testament. God is love. 1 John 4:8. God so loved…that He gave. John 3:16. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. 1 John 4:9
Throughout ancient writings, we find that the gods demanded sacrifices of children. In many religions, it was the firstborn son in the family that the gods wanted sacrificed. It is recorded in the Bible that the followers of Baal practiced human sacrifice and that the Hebrews, when they quit following Jehovah, took up that horrible practice. This was the way of the gods and the gods were pleased that their followers were willing to give up so much for them. Of course, the people were not willing to give so much, but in most cases, they were afraid of what the gods would do to them if they did not make that sacrifice. One of Israel’s prophets told his people what Jehovah thought of that practice; In the Valley of Ben Hinnom they built places to worship Baal so they could burn their sons and daughters as sacrifices to Molech. But I never commanded them to do such a hateful thing. It never entered my mind that they would do such a thing and cause Judah to sin. Jer. 32:33 (New Century Version)
Jehovah hates human sacrifice, and He had a plan that would end the need for all blood sacrifices. It was a plan that would put all the other gods to shame. Jehovah has only one Son. Because of His love for humans, He gave His Son as a sacrifice to the people of this world. After Christ had sacrificed His life for the human race, which He did because of Jehovah’s love, the other gods where forced to admit defeat. There was nothing they could do, that would outperform the action that Jehovah had taken. Because of His love, Jehovah had made the ultimate sacrifice. Perhaps, it was then, the gods repeated the words of the Psalmist, Among the gods there is none like You, O Lord; nor are there any works like your works. Psalm 86:8. They knew that they could not rival a gift like that. Mr. Meek writes, Yahweh, it was true, was the supreme god by right of conquest. From: Hebrew Origins. Theophile James Meek, (Harper Torchbooks. 1960)
By love and sacrifice He proved Himself to be the conqueror. One of the minor prophets, looking forward to a better day, put that same thought into these words, On that day will the Lord be one and His name one. Zech.14:9. After the death of Christ, the other gods fade into insignificance; they have lost their role as contenders for the throne in the heavens.
All, except one; Satan. He is defeated but he is still fighting for the souls of humans. Milton has Satan saying, Tis better to rule in Hell than serve in heaven. To that end, he is still fighting for souls over whom he can rule.
Is God Spirit Only?
The claim is made that Jehovah is invisible because the Bible says that God is a spirit. Actually, the Greek text of the New Testament does not say that God is a spirit. In the fourth Gospel, John writes, God is spirit. John 4:24. John is saying that God is not wood, stone, or other inanimate object but that He is alive with spirit. To be sure, the Bible speaks of the spirit of God. God has spirit as we also have spirit. After all, we are in His image. If John had meant to write that Jehovah was only ethereal (without a physical body), he would have needed to include the word “a” so that it would read, God is a spirit. The KJV actually has it that way, but neither the Greek version nor the newer translations include the word “a”, and so John 4:24 has no argument that God is not physical. The King James Version has its pros; but it is not a perfect book.
This is perhaps an unpleasant argument for the physical attributes of God. However, the Bible uses it; therefore, it is deemed to be acceptable evidence. Also you shall have a place outside the camp, where you may go out; and you shall have an implement among your equipment, and when you sit down outside, you shall dig with it and turn and cover your refuse. For the LORD your God walks in the midst of your camp. Deut. 23:12-14. If God is spirit only, why would it bother Him if the area around the camp were not clean? He says He wants it to be tidy because He walks around the camp of Israel for their protection. According to the Bible, the requirement for this cleanliness is not for the sake of the campers.
In the Bible Jehovah is spoken of as having feet, hands, arms, eyes and other characteristics that humans also have. The Bible clearly teaches that God does have physical and emotional characteristics. It is interesting to note what Bible teachers have done to circumvent the teaching that God is physical. Theologians call these physical attributes, anthropomorphisms. That means that the Bible speaks of God as being physical so that humans can better grasp the idea of God. Why not simply believe what the Bible says? Why not think of these physical attributes as being actual? Why not believe that the super human being from another planet, (the Jehovah of the Bible), in fact is physical?
Considering the weight of all the arguments in the Bible that say, God is physical, it does seem incredible that Bible students refuse to even consider that possibility, simply because they have been taught otherwise.
Scientists have proven, beyond doubt, that the earth is much more than six thousand years old. Most Bible scholars have no difficulty accepting this. It simply means that the six days of creation were not actual twenty-four hour days but rather eons of time. Anyway, why would a day have been twenty-four hours long before the sun was even created?
It has even been suggested that when Moses wrote, The evening and the morning were the first day, and, the evening and the morning were the second day, etc., he was referring to the time in which he saw the “video” which portrayed the events that are recorded. For example, on the third day, he watched the “video” which showed when the world first began turning green and the first of the trees began to grow; and so on, for the six days in which he was watching “videos”.
Beyond doubt also are the findings that mutations and evolutionary changes have taken place. Nor are these theories contrary to the teachings of the Bible. However, anthropologists and archaeologists hit a snag when they look for “the missing link”. Mutations, evolution, eons of time all fit into the Bible narrative. However, animal, evolving into human, does not. At that point, where the missing link ought to be found, Jehovah stepped in.
…there is convincing evidence to suggest that there was alien contact with this world and that it occurred more than 500 years before the Great Pyramid was built.
The statement of a witness, in a court of law, is acceptable as evidence and more credence is placed on this testimony when several people tell the same story. When it comes to Early World stories about extra-terrestrial visits to this planet, scholars regard them as myth even though thousands of initiated people, throughout the Ancient World, were taught that a being from the sky-world, sometimes with several companions, helped civilize their ancestors.
Although the Ancients gave this entity a variety of names, such as Viracocha in Peru and Quetzalcoatl in Mexico, he was often described as having the appearance of a tall, white, bearded man who wore a long white robe. The Ancients worshiped him as a god and some people were so amazed, when they saw him, that they thought he was the Creator. From: Alien contact – Fact or Fiction. By: Leonard Farra @ World Mysteries
At a certain point in time, He implanted enlightenment into Adam and man became a new, thinking creation. After that “operation”, humans were no longer beings which operated by instinct only, because God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Gen. 2:7
The word living here refers to an enhanced life, a quality of life that animals do not share with humans. In a certain aspect, the difference would be similar to, but by no means the same as, the distinction that Paul pictures between a Christian who is “alive in Christ” and an unbeliever who is still “dead in sins”. Man became alive with spirit, after God breathed into him the breath of life, but animals have no spirit since God did not breath into them the breath of life as he did into the humans.
That was an instant “quantum leap”, hence no gradually developed missing link can be found. However, this incident of becoming a living being did not endue them with the knowledge of sin; of right or wrong. That was another incident altogether.
Specific details are given about the celestial beings, in the place called ‘heaven’ in Revelation, and this information, and the symbolism associated with them, suggests that the story of John’s ‘close encounter’ is based upon traditions associated with those entities who, 3,000 years earlier, were known to the Sumerians as the Annunaki-the Shining Ones. The Annunaki who, many researchers believe to have been Extra-terrestrials, were worshipped by the Sumerians as gods. Legend says that they first helped to civilise man but they later destroyed the evil people, on this planet, with a huge flood. The Sumerians arrived in Southern Iraq fully civilised, 5,000 years ago, and their scribes say that they were survivors of the Flood. Civilisation, in various parts of the world, suddenly sprang up fully developed, at that time, and there is also evidence of flooding and a sudden dramatic climate change. In other words, this era was not the Dawn of Civilisation, as most scholars believe, but its rebirth after the destruction of the previous age. From: Creation of Mankind – Sitchin’s View — World Mysteries Blog
There is a source of information, dating back to Sumerian times, about 5,000 years ago, about which Mr. Sitchin says, The long and slow process of human evolution was “jumped-over” by the help of the Anunnaki (Ancient gods) creating us sooner than we could have ever evolved on our own. Except for the Knowing and the Longevity, by increasing to the level desired by the Anunnaki, we can best understand how the first human were created in its simplified story in Genesis; it involved the use of “clay” and by “breathing” the life into its nostrils. From: Creation of Mankind – Sitchin’s View — World Mysteries Blog
The Book of Ecclesiasticus in The Apocrypha, as to the early development of mankind, states, They received the use of the five operations of the Lord, and in the sixth place he imparted them understanding, and in the seventh speech. Ecclesiasticus 17:5. The five operations undoubtedly refer to our five senses, which we have in common with the animals. Later, at the point where Adam received understanding, he became human. Out of that understanding, with the Lord’s gift of speech (physically), came the ability to talk.
Many Bible students, including James B. Pritchard, an archaeologist, believe that when Moses wrote the Book of Genesis, he based his writings on Babylonian folklore, which he had heard from the Jews. These were stories, which they had originally received from their father Abraham who had brought these tales with him from Ur. It was in Chaldea that The Epic of Gilgamesh originated.
Mr. Pritchard says, the Hebrew writers made use of traditions which were ready at hand as a means of presenting their own views about religion and life. From: Archaeology and The Old Testament, James B. Pritchard, (Princeton, New Jersey)
Just in case you are wondering why I wrote “carbon units” rather than “humans”, I will tell you; the idea came from the Star Trek series.
In the previous post I mentioned the Epic of Gilgamesh. I will resume here where that post left off.
The Epic of Gilgamesh is based on another version of the same events, which was a thousand years older yet. In the oldest known, recorded version of the humanoid’s fall into sin, the story goes like this. The milk of wild creatures he was wont to suck. Food they placed before him; he gagged, he gaped and he stared. Nothing does Enkido [Adam] know of eating food; …The harlot opened her mouth, saying to Enkidu: “Eat the food, Enkidu, as is life’s due; …Enkidu ate the food…of strong drink he drank…became human.” From: Archaeology and The Old Testament, James B. Pritchard, (Princeton, New Jersey)
The later version of this story, The Epic of Gilgamesh, records the story this way. But as for him, Enkidu, born in the hills – with the gazelles he feeds on grass, with the wild beasts he drinks at the watering place, the lass beheld him, the savage-man, the barbarous fellow…Reject him will his wild beasts that grew up on his steppe, as his love is drawn to thee.” The hero spent some time with the lass, then the story goes on like this, it is not as before; but he now has wisdom, broader understanding. From: Archaeology and The Old Testament, James B. Pritchard, (Princeton, New Jersey)
In both these versions of this story, it is apparent that the subject of the story was an animal before he became human. It is believed that it was from information gathered in these stories that Moses rewrote the story of the creation of humans.
The gods had plans. They were doing a great scientific research on earth. The earth was the laboratory in which they kept their specimens. One of the tests was to monitor the outcome of Adam’s mating with other species. These tests had unsatisfactory results; it was then that the Lord enhanced Adam and gave him a new mate. Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him”. Gen. 2:18 The Lord knew what He had in mind, but Adam did not have any inkling of what was to happen, so, while Adam was naming the various animals of the earth, he looked for one that would be suitable as a life’s mate, but for the man there was not found a helper fit for him. Gen. 2:20. It seems as if Adam expected to find a partner among the animals of the earth. He did not. So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man and (He) made…a woman. Gen. 2:22
As to the creation of Eve, Mr. Van Daniken had this to say. Eve can hardly have blossomed forth in her naked beauty from the narrow rib of the male thorax by a conjuring trick-after a surgical intervention. Perhaps she originated with the help of a male sperm cell. But there…was no female human being in Paradise who could have received the seed, Eve must have been produced in a retort. Could foreign intelligences with their highly developed science and knowing about the immune biological reactions of bones have used Adams marrow as a cell culture and brought the sperm to development in it? From: Gods from outer Space. Von Daniken, (Bantam Books, New York, N.Y)
It does seem strange that the dust of the ground worked fine for making Adam, but for making Eve, God needed a different material.
In Genesis 1:26, there are important clues that the creation of Eve from Adam was not conducted by a singular God. In this one sentence, there are three plural references: ‘us,’ ‘our’ and ‘our.’
This was a cloning operation observed by a primitive who did not understand. First, one of the technicians caused Adam to fall into a ‘deep sleep.’ This was the anesthesia. Second, a cell must be taken from somewhere on the body to create another body. The rib area was where the cell was taken. They ‘closed up the flesh’ is a modern expression describing the completion of the operation. Master-cloners could quickly form an adult and change the sex from the original. This idea was illustrated in a Star Trek Next Generation episode where a primitive was brought back to life and mistook Captain Picard as a god. He prayed to ‘the Picard’ and was later corrected. From: Copyright 2002-2012 by Doug Yurchey
When Adam saw Eve for the first time, he said, WOW! Actually, according to the Bible, he said, Therefore shall a man…cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Gen. 2:24. What Adam is saying is that from now on, human shall mate only with human, and they will produce only one kind of offspring; that is, they shall be one flesh. The idea of man mating with animal is not as absurd as it sounds. Later, among the laws laid down by the God of the Jews, He forbade this practice and instituted the death penalty for it. The fact that some people practice it in our own society might be a throwback into prehistoric, unenlightened days.
When Moses wrote the story of how Adam and Eve were enlightened he put the responsibility on them, and not on the Lord. The Bible says, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate. Then the eyes of both were opened. Gen. 3:7
Things do not always work out as expected for the gods. They had a special specimen until the serpent came along and spoiled it. So the gods needed to change their plans. They had hoped that the human race, their special creation, would continue in such a way that they, the creators, could keep on having fellowship with their creation. As it turned out the woman’s punishment for disobeying God was that she, in pain, would bear a large family, and that she would be subject to Adam in a way that she had never been before; your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you. Gen. 3:16. The gods must have been so very disappointed at this unexpected turn of events. It was only a little while until they decided to destroy most of the human race and start over again, with one man and his family.
The next post will begin a series on the cast of Biblical characters who had experiences with saucerians and with UFO’s.