Isaiah 61 & Luke 4

Isaiah 61:1 “The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;”

Luke 4:17 “And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.”

Before we delve into my recent study, it is important to highlight that the Lord Jesus Christ closed the book (Luke 4:20) before “…and the day of vengeance of our God…” (Isaiah 61:2). That action is a message in itself.

The main study in this article is to clear up what appears on the veneer to be a discrepancy between between Old Testament (OT) & New Testament verses. The majority of the items between the verses can be easily correlated:

Isaiah 61:1                                                                 Luke 4:18

preach good tidings unto the meek                      preach the gospel to the poor

bind up the brokenhearted                                    heal the brokenhearted

proclaim liberty to the captives                            preach deliverance to the captives

the opening of the prison                                        recovering of sight to the blind      

to them that are bound                                            set at liberty to them that are bruised

How can we correlate opening of the prison to recovering of sight to the blind?

Isaiah 42:7 “To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.”

In the verse we can connect opening blind eyes with bringing out prisoners who sit in darkness. Thus, God shows us–interpretations belong to God (Gen 40:8) and we used the word of God to understand the word of God.  There are no contradictions in the word of God. If you encounter a situation like that, pray with faith & God will clear it up.

I love the King James Bible, not only because I know it is the inerrant, infallible word of God, but for a multitude of other reasons to include formal equivalence. The King James translators didn’t tamper with the OT verses in order to exactly, literally align them with the NT verses. They faithfully translated the Hebrew in Isaiah & the Greek in Luke–no need for dynamic equivalence. Compare scripture to scripture to scriptures…

Again, faithfully translated & interpretations belong to God.

Romans 3:4 “…yea, let God be true, but every man a liar…”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elijah, John the Baptist, Elisha & The Lord Jesus Christ

When I began the study (or rather the study came to me–praise the Lord) of the Old Testament (OT) & New Testament (NT) connections between Elijah & Elisha in conjunction with John the Baptist & the Lord Jesus Christ–barely scratching the surface lead to an overwhelming amount of information.

For instance, a study of parallels between Elijah versus Ahab/Jezebel in relation to John the Baptist versus Herod/Herodias involves a large quantity of scripture in itself. There are an abundance of comparisons surrounding the article’s title, so I decided to highlight the following portion from my study:

We can set a base for relating John the Baptist with Elijah via Malachi 4:5-6, Luke 1:17, Matthew 11:13-14 & Mark 9:13. When it comes to Elisha & the Lord Jesus–we can find portraits of Christ throughout the OT. So let us dive in.

In 2 Kings 2 we read of the passing of the mantle from the prophet Elijah to the prophet Elisha (the OT verse will be followed by the NT parallel):

2 Kings 2:7 “And fifty men of the sons of the prophets went, and stood to view afar off: and they two stood by Jordan.”

Matthew 3:13 “Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.”

In 2 Kings 2:7 “the two” at the Jordan were Elijah & Elisha; in the NT John & the Lord Jesus. In the OT series Elijah parted the waters of the Jordan & they two crossed. Then Elijah was taken up into heaven by a whirlwind. Straightway, it is written of Elisha:

2 Kings 2:14 “And he took the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and smote the waters, and said, Where is the LORD God of Elijah? and when he also had smitten the waters, they parted hither and thither: and Elisha went over.”

Matthew 3:16 “And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

A couple of awesome parallels–praise the Lord. Elijah’s mantle fell to Elisha; meanwhile after the baptism of John, the Spirit of God descended like a dove & lighted upon the Lord Jesus Christ.  Notice also that the waters parted for Elisha, meanwhile the heavens opened for the Lord Jesus Christ. Consider the notion of waters & heavens with:

Genesis 1:7 “And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.”

After Elisha smote the waters & they parted:

2 Kings 2:15 “And when the sons of the prophets which were to view at Jericho saw him, they said, The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha. And they came to meet him, and bowed themselves to the ground before him.”

John 1:32 “And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. 33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. 34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.”

Thus, with the mantle, the parting of the waters & the spirit resting/the Spirit remaining–glorious parallels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unbound by Time

Isaiah 40:8 “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.”

1 Peter 1:24 “For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:

25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”

To claim, when it comes to the Holy Bible, that we must know what was being said in the context of particular time, place & culture contradicts the aforementioned verses. The word of God is not subject:

Malachi 3:6 “For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.”

Hebrew 13:8 “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.”

I do not promote a complete ignorance of history; in fact, the Good Book provides much history. My proposition is that claiming, “what did it mean then & what does it mean now (in our culture)?”–is unsound doctrine.

1 Corinthians 10:11 “Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.”

Different time periods & culture do not dictate interpretation (although we fallible humans often try). We have the Old Testament & we have the New Testament–it is enough.

Luke 22:38 “And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.”

Ephesians 6:17 “..and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:”

My claim is not akin to history has zero value. I am a history buff & history can offer insights, but let us not apply history to the word of God, but rather the word of God to history:

Hebrews 1:10 “And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:

11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;

12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Dinosaur Delusion

2 Thessalonians 2:11 “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

I consider Ken Ham one of my brethren; I believe his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is just as genuine as mine. However, believers can disagree some things & not be enemies. Ham accepts that dinosaurs existed, but he also believes the Bible; therefore, he believes the dinosaurs must have existed IAW the framework of the word of God. That is not a heretical doctrine because even if he accepts some common claims of government controlled science, he will reject any claim about the same that contradicts scripture.

While Ham may reject the claim that alleged dinosaurs were tens or even hundreds of millions of years old; I reject dinosaurs outright. We are consistently fed fictional pictures of full dinosaur skeletons, yet the actual digs produce what look like large bone fragments of unidentifiable large creatures. The claim is these large bones all found in the same area must belong to the alleged dinosaurs.

I believe the bone fragments are real bones; not the bones of fictional thunder lizards, but the bones of very large creatures…sea creatures. There are more elements involved in my proposal than finding the bones of large sea creatures where they shouldn’t or where they shouldn’t if they do not believe the flood in Noah’s days.

When the waters of the great flood receded, many inland valleys would still be filled with water for a period of time. This would trap large sea creatures such as numerous kinds of whales. Once the temporary bodies of water in the inland valleys evaporated or ran off, the bones of large sea creatures would be directly intermingled with the bones of perished land creatures that succumbed to the flood in the same valleys. Also, the issue is further complicated by the large land creatures’ bone fragments being intermingled together as well.

Take the alleged Dimetrodon for instance:

focus_dimetrodon (1)

It is claimed that this creature existed around 200 million years ago. The creature ranged from 6-15 feet long. There is a common debate over whether this creature was in fact a dinosaur–a few of its skull features renders it closer to mammals. The creatures qualities  would make sense if a mammal & reptile bones were intermingled with a swordfish or marlin (thus the spine fin on the creature). The large fish are within the same range of length.

The title picture does not represent the bones of a dinosaur–it is the skeleton of an Orca. You could only imagine if bone fragments from an Orca that was stuck in a temporary inland valley lake was mingled with bone fragments of the perished large land creatures. Take note of the very small arms of the alleged Tyrannosaurus Rex (and the others that supposedly looked a lot like it). Whether it is Orca’s, Pilot or Beluga Whale skeletons–if intermingled with land creatures–it looks like a large fierce land creature with small arms & a long tail.

Notice that a common argument is over whether dinosaurs are closer to reptiles or birds. That makes sense when the bones of sea creatures, birds, land mammals & reptiles would be scattered & mingled together in the formerly flooded valleys. It would be a worse situation than mixing boxes of space legos, city legos, star wars legos etc. Sure, you could make something that looks logical & acceptable out of the mixed lego’s, but it would not be right.

The government controlled science of hundreds of millions of years & thunder lizards draws many away from the word of God. They teach the government religion to children in school from very young age. With the compulsory, constant indoctrination, soon they cannot even contemplate anything else to the contrary. Many Christians are stuck in between believing the Bible & believing elements from government controlled science (like Ken Ham). The fact is they are real bones & they accept dinosaurs on the basis that the bone fragments are real.

The fact also is that there are other reasonable explanations for these real bones as I have just proved. The bone fragments of numerous land & sea creatures mingled together after the great flood.

The question is why does government controlled science promote the myth of dinosaurs & hundreds of millions of years to children of a young age? Well, if you can beguile a population into believing the Bible’s truth about the past is false, then they will question what the Bible says about the future & the morals therein. That is what it is ultimately about–attacking the morals in the Bible. Examine 2 Thessalonians 2:12 again–rejecting the truth is connected to pleasure in unrighteousness.

The government could not shift or control the populaces’ morals until they somehow pried the majority away from the word of God. No better way to do that than repetitively indoctrinating children with pseudo-science contrary to the Bible…and they claim Christians are brainwashed?

I caution, I do not claim that pleasure in righteousness represents one such as Ham. That is a position a Christian retreats to when they cannot explain the real bones. They accept government controlled science’s theory about the real bone fragments; therefore, they must fit their mythical dinosaurs in somewhere. I do not believe that Ham malicious in the least as far as his beliefs. We both believe the great flood occurred; the difference is I do not have to account for alleged dinosaurs. My post flood temporary inland lake theory makes more sense than dinosaurs.

As a Christian, you do not have to work around the alleged existence of dinosaurs.

 

Raised Up–A Symphony

1 Chronicles 17:11 “And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom.

12 He shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever.

13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee:

14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore.”

Acts 2:29 “Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.

30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.”

The following revisions omit important words from Acts 2:29:

ASV, RSV, NRSV, NLT, NIV, NASB, HCSB, ESV

For beginners, the mentioned revisions remove, “according to the flesh” from Acts 2:29 (see 1 John 4:1-3 for more on that matter). They also omit, “raise up Christ.”  This disrupts the correlation not only with “raise up” in 1 Chronicles 17:11, but also disrupts Acts 2:29-32 in itself.

The omission of “raise up Christ” to sit on his throne is replaced in the revisions with only, “seat” or “put” one of his (David) descendants on his throne. As proven by Acts 2:29-32; the series in 1 Chronicles 17:11-14 is more than seating a descendant of David on the throne–“raise up,” a prophecy fulfilled by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

As I said, removing “raise up Christ” & replacing it with seating one of his descendants on his throne in Acts 2:30 does not even sync well with the subsequent verses concerning His resurrection. Acts 2:30 includes “raise up Christ” & the provided portion concludes with:

Acts 2:32 “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.”

The word of God is a perfect, interconnected symphony; if one note is changed over here, it disrupts the unity & continuity with a note elsewhere. A person does not need to know one iota of Hebrew or Greek to witness the recklessness of modern scholars in the English language.

Modern scholars have often claimed they simply want to update pronouns such as thee, thou or ye (in truth, the English Grammar pronouns are more concise than the wide ranging vernacular pronouns). However, avid Bible readers can routinely witness that they have changed so much more.

There is a great irony with the modern scholars & their more “readable” revisions: not only do they disrupt verse-to-verse correlations in the Bible, but they also have made verses more difficult to understand even within their own context.

John 2:18 “Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Hollywood, Netflix & Media Inversion

I watched the first few episodes of Netflix’s Stranger Things 3; the season had an interesting Invasion of the Body Snatchers theme. Unfortunately, the writers’ must have been unaware of any term (whether dictionary based or slang) to convey shock, surprise or irritation….save for taking the Lord Jesus Christ’s name in vain. Multiple characters took the Lord’s name in vain over & over again; finally, I terminated my viewing of the TV show as a result.

I have heard the same here or there in real life (and I hate it when I hear just the same), but not nearly close to the frequency I hear it on movies, TV shows & Netflix. It is as if they have a goal of incorporating blasphemy into the everyday English language. Perhaps they have an evil hope that if people hear that garbage enough on their TV shows, they will accept it & robotically regurgitate it?

There were zero mainstream articles about Stranger Things 3 ad nauseam use of our Lord’s name in vain; however, there were an abundance of articles condemning the routine smoking of cigarettes on the show. Thus, taking the Lord’s name in vain ad nauseam was acceptable, but the smoking of cigarettes on screen is of grave concern? The situation is not happenstance–it is a purposeful inversion.

Mark 7:15 “There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.”

Serving the Groves…again

2 Chronicles 24:18 “And they left the house of the LORD God of their fathers, and served groves and idols: and wrath came upon Judah and Jerusalem for this their trespass.”

When people abandon faith in the word of God, the concept of groves & serving groves routinely occurs.

When a church believes the word of man’s science instead of the word of God–they are left with little to preach about & cannot edify anybody. So they turn to the communist platform (psychology, racism, sexism, LGBT & socialism) in the hopes of fulfilling something.

There is another common denominator within Churches that have abandoned faith in the word of God: serving groves. Yes, instead of preaching about the Word made flesh (John 1:14) the Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ–the same who have abandoned faith often “preach” or have mission statements concerning climate change or sustainable development.

Therefore, they are back to serving groves again. They just repackage their pagan religions as modern science so called.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Planet of the Apes: Interpretations, Themes, Theology, Philosophy

The original Planet of the Apes (1968) & Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) contained far more depth by way of theological & philosophical issues. Unfortunately, the last three movies in the series went downhill in a hurry concerning those topics.

The first two installments reflect this to the viewer:

Genesis 1:27 “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”

The creation or origin narrative was the theme not only for the apes, but also the surviving intelligent humans we encounter in Beneath the POTA. In the third movie (Escape from the POTA) one short sequence caused a radical shift for the series & the recent reboots began with the same theme. Cornelius tells the tale of how the apes rose; however, his story not only contradicted everything from the ape’s Sacred Scrolls in the first two movies, but also his own theory in POTA–that apes physically evolved from man.

The Sacred Scrolls were simple; apes were created in the divine image. In POTA Cornelius discovered evidence that man may have had an older civilization than the apes. Men, were speechless beast-men on late 40th Century Earth. They never could speak, nor have reason according to the ape’s religion. In Escape from POTA Cornelius claimed that primitive apes were pets for humans, then they advanced to chores, then slavery. Finally, one day an ape named Aldo spoke a word back to the humans that he had been told countless times… “No.” He claimed that instance was documented in The Sacred Scrolls; he must have recounted the incident from the New Revised Version of The Sacred Scrolls.

Thus, the POTA series shifted its focus from brilliant theological & philosophical issues to oppressed vs oppressor philosophy (which was a present issue, but to a much lesser degree). The series shifted from transcendent, universal issues with everlasting implications to temporal socio-political issues. Therefore, The Sacred Scrolls & the series shifted from “in the beginning God created…” to “in the beginning–rebellion.”

In the first two POTA’s it is logically inferred to the viewer that man destroyed himself  & the apes mutated as a result of nuclear fallout. This can be supported via the mutated humans in Beneath the POTA; which now had superior abilities such as telepathy.

In POTA the presence of an alien challenged all the apes’ beliefs–a human astronaut named Taylor. However, it is eventually revealed that Taylor is only an alien to the time (40th Century) & not the place (Earth).

Dr Zaius was an orangutan that served as the Minister of Science & Chief Defender of the Faith. In retrospect, Zaius privately knew that an older human civilization existed prior to ape civilization. In public he upheld the full-spectrum verity of The Sacred Scrolls. He was a Neoplatonist per say; he had a logical, pragmatic faith in the wisdom, principles & morals contained in The Sacred Scrolls. Ultimately, Dr Zaius knew if the apes ceased to believe the origin story in the scrolls; the wisdom, principles & morals therein would be jettisoned as well. Thus, he promoted the noble lie.

(Note to the reader: I am not a Neoplatonist. I believe the literal creation in the book of Genesis & also believe the real event presents allegories)

Speaking of Plato, Ape civilization was organized along the lines of The Republic. The orangutans were the oligarchs, the gorilla’s were the soldier class & the chimpanzees were the masses. The chimpanzees became more enlightened through their study of science. The discoveries of the chimpanzees began to clash with boundaries set by the oligarchs.

Plato is of even more importance in POTA. The chimpanzee Cornelius discovered evidence of an older human civilization inside of a cave. For that reason Cornelius postulated the theory of evolution. Logically, his discovery did not prove that apes physically evolved from men. In The Sacred Scrolls (NRV) the apes socially evolved from men. However, in POTA, Cornelius’s theory was based on our cave’s (education) theory of evolution.

While Cornelius’s theory reflected the genesis of a new religion (or scientific theories supplanting religion), the mutated humans in Beneath the POTA displayed the end of Cornelius’s new religion. These mutants worshipped a nuclear missile (The Bomb) inside of a cave. The mutants no longer practiced a religion that included a creation or origin story, but instead an evolution story.

The mutants worshipped The Bomb because it was a nuclear war that caused The Holy Fallout, their change, their evolution to have psionic capabilities. The mutants wear false normal human faces, but when they reveal their “innermost self to the bomb” they remove their masks to reveal severe radiation sickness. The nuclear missile in their subterranean abode was the idol & represented the power of their god. In one scene, the mutants hold a liturgy that is identical to many Christian liturgies save for substituting God & the Holy Spirit with The Bomb & The Holy Fallout in identifiable scriptures.

The allusion is that the mental super-humans do not even need to eat. The “everlasting” Bomb as they call it brought peace or heaven on Earth in their theology. The mutants have a true weakness though; their powers are based on visual & audio illusions that cannot inflict real damage. If the mutants wanted someone to be murdered, they would use their mental capabilities to make others commit the act. It is inferred that they made gorilla scouts kill each other because their mutants powers have been bestowed “for peace.” By this doctrine they can disassociate themselves from any violence they cause.

That statement is in bold because that summarizes the religion of science. For instance, when some abandon faith in the Lord Jesus for faith in science, they often boast of all the good that the sciences have bestowed upon the world, but disassociate the same from biological weapons, chemical weapons or The Bomb.  One could reasonably claim a figurative allusion in early POTA was abandoning the Tree of Life for the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 2:16-17).

First, I will return to the Plato theme:

Taylor: “That still does not explain the why. A planet where apes evolved from men? There’s got to be an answer.”

Dr. Zaius: “Don’t look for it Taylor…you may not like what you find.”

This exchange between Taylor & Zaius was after Cornelius (accompanied by his chimp wife Zira) displayed the evidence of an older civilization comprised of men inside of a cave to Taylor & Dr Zaius. Taylor agreed with Cornelius’s postulation, but did not find truth inside the cave–he still thought he was on another planet. After Taylor rode off in search of answers further out in the forbidden zone, Zaius ordered the gorilla’s to seal the cave with explosives despite Cornelius’s protests. Dr. Zaius’s mode was not to secure power for the oligarchs (orangutans); his mode was to preserve his civilization.

The contents inside the cave were not going to be the basis for the apes’ religion or education. Zaius knew scientific theories that resulted from that evidence conflicted with the foundation of his civilization. He also finally admitted that he knew an older civilization of intelligent men had existed, but they had destroyed themselves via their own science. That theme reminds me of a famous quote by General Omar Bradley:

“Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.”

The irony of Taylor & Zaius’s exchange was that Zaius knew Taylor would not find truth inside of the cave. The orangutan knew he would find it outside of the cave & his foreboding warning to Taylor mirrored:

Ecclesiastes 1:18 “For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.”

Dr Zaius was entrenched in a battle to keep the apes from suffering the same self-destructive fate that men suffered–which reflects:

Ecclesiastes 1:9 “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”

Early in POTA the impression is that the conflict is the alleged truth of science versus the oppressive force of religion. Midway through the film, Taylor acts as an enlightened alien guide to help Cornelius develop his theories & fight for what he believes to be the truth. The end of POTA reflects the opposite. Taylor finds the truth he was looking for on a beach further in the forbidden zone–the half-buried, mangled Statue of Liberty. He realizes he was on Earth all along, but in the future & man had finally went through with his nuclear war.

That is another grand irony in more ways than one. Again, Taylor, the enlightened alien was in fact helping to put Cornelius (and the ape civilization as a whole) on the same road that the leads to the same end; the same end Taylor just encountered. Inside the cave, based off the evidence, Taylor boasted to Dr Zaius that this older civilization of men on the planet were superior to Zaius’s civilization because of science & technology.

In the final conversation between Zaius & Taylor (from which I already provided the final exchange), Zaius admits to Taylor that he knew of the older civilization of men. Zaius said of men:

“His wisdom must have walked hand and hand with his lunacy.”

This is outside of the cave & Zauis then tells Taylor the truth:

“The Forbidden Zone was once a paradise. Your breed made a desert of it, ages ago.”

Taylor did not fully comprehend Zaius’s statement. It did not concern a similar species on a different planet–it was Taylor’s breed. The beastmen that remained were all that remained of Taylor’s people. Zaius rejected that Taylor was an alien from the beginning. He did not know Taylor time-travelled; he believed Taylor was a leftover from the destroyed civilization of intelligent men & was correct.

Zaius had a concern equal to Cornelius’s corrupt theories. He thought Taylor was part of an intelligent tribe of humans that remained. If that was the case, Zaius knew they had or would soon have the technology to destroy ape civilization. For this reason, the Apes began sending out Gorilla scouts in Beneath the POTA. They search for Taylor’s theoretical tribe. They find the mutated super-humans, who already had imprisoned Taylor & Brent (an astronaut who was sent out to find Taylor & encountered the same timespace rift).

Both Taylor & Brent are essentially ghosts of a long dead civilization. They cannot assimilate into the ape civilization, the superhuman civilization nor the beastmen herds. Early in POTA, after the crash of their shuttle & a long march; Taylor & the two other astronauts encounter the beastmen (concerning the astronauts with Taylor: one died before the crash, one died in the ape hunt, one was lobotomized by the apes).  The beastmen are foraging fruits, vegetables & it initially looks like the Garden of Eden. Taylor believes that if the beastmen are the best that the planet has to offer, due to the superior knowledge he & his comrades, they’d be running the planet in 6 months. Taylor initially plays the role of the serpent:

Genesis 3:5 “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”

It is a short lived revel because the beastmen were actually foraging amongst the apes’ crops. Even as the movie progresses, Taylor plays the role of the serpent among the apes. He is the enlightened alien to Cornelius & Zira, but the devil IAW with ape civilization. This is yet another aspect that is lost when the POTA series fully transitioned into oppressed vs oppressor philosophy.

Extra-Terrestrials. This movie reflects the two camps that reside in our world. One group would regard ET’s as the enlightened aliens that are here to help man progress towards a technologically & morally superior civilization. The other camp, my camp, knows that the ET’s are either here because they destroyed their own civilization (via war or exhausted their resources) or they were cast out of their own civilization:

Revelation 12:7 “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.”

Beneath the POTA is the 2nd movie; however, it is the chronological end of POTA & the world. Taylor identifies the nuclear missile that the mutants worship as the alpha & omega bomb or the doomsday bomb. This particular bomb apparently existed since Taylor’s time in the 20th Century & was build to be the ultimate war deterrent. That fact helps explain the mutants peace doctrine–The Bomb, their god, a manmade idol, was built to bring peace on Earth. It was capable of melting the Earth’s atmosphere according to Taylor.

The end of Beneath the POTA is awful for the viewer; the same end is spectacular on theological & philosophical basis. The apes overcome the mutants’ defensive illusions, invade the subterranean city & kill all the mutants who have yet to commit suicide. The apes (Zauis included) enter the sanctuary of the Bomb & pull down the golden idol (The Bomb). It begins leaking nauseas gas. The gorilla commander is about to push the red button thinking he can stop the gas leak. Brent & Taylor had been hiding in the sanctuary; they break concealment & begin shooting to stop the detonation. At the tail end of melee, a mortally wounded Taylor states that it is doomsday & asks Dr Zaius to help him (the inference is that if he can get Zaius to help him with his wound, then he can disarm the bomb). Zaius refuses. Taylor collapses, but reaches his arm out & pulls down red button.

A building flash intensifies on the screen. An emotionless third party narrator says:

“In one of the countless billions of galaxies in the universe lies a medium-sized star, and one of its satellites, a green and insignificant planet, is now dead.”

The screen goes black & the credits roll in silence.

Consider origin, the creation theme of POTA. The theological & philosophical message at the end of Beneath the POTA was not nihilism or everything is worthless. The message is that if a world abandons its creation narrative, then its existence & death are meaningless.

Therefore POTA & Beneath POTA are often misunderstood as the battle for science to overcome religious oppression, or rightly understood to a lesser degree concerning the dangers of modern science or technology.

The prime message of the two movies is: there are ultimately, only two choices…creationism or nihilism.

Thus, if one is absolutely opposed to creationism & believes there must be another answer, I say:

Dr. Zaius: “Don’t look for it Taylor…you may not like what you find.”

The Mad Star

Isaiah 14:12 “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!”

(Even if one is not a KJB’er, stick around because my translation notes are relatively short & their is edification for all believers in this post. I do not include macrons or symbols above the hebrew or greek words, I do not know how on this website, but the words are accompanied by Strong’s Concordance reference numbers)

Anyone who has engaged in the KJB vs the rest debate should be familiar with the issue of modern translations & Isaiah 14:12. A majority of modern translations substitute “Lucifer” with “morning star” or “day star.”

The primary debate is that both substitute terms used by many modern translators refer to the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament (2 Peter 2:9; Rev 22:16). That is evidence enough against modern translations from my estimation. I will offer something more though.

In the Bible, God provides the proper names of people & places. Sometimes He gives us the name meaning along with the name, but for most proper names the English reader has to refer to a concordance. Why would modern translators chose only one name (Lucifer) out of the entire Bible & only give the name meaning, but not the name itself? That is inconsistent.

Lucifer appears once in scripture in the KJB, Geneva & Wycliffe Bible. The hebrew word is “heylel” (H1966). Strong’s concordance says it means “morning star,” refer back to the paragraph above. One question for both KJB’ers or MT’ers should be, how is the name Lucifer a name for the devil? In Isaiah 14, it speaks of the King of Babylon? There are several reasons (the examples at the end of this article also infer it), but for beginners in Isaiah 14 we can tell God speaks of more than the King of Babylon:

Isaiah 14:29 “Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpent’s root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent.”

Thus, Isaiah 14 speaks of the fall of the King of Babylon & includes breaking the Assyrian (Babylon included Assyria in their empire)–then we have the mention of the “serpent’s root.” Full stop. Let us address the common scholarly claim that Satan is not the same Satan throughout scripture. They claim the proper name is instead a general term for an adversary & Satan refers different entities throughout scripture. Satan is the same Satan & the serpent is Satan:

Revelation 12:9 “And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.”

Revelation 20:9 “And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,”

Now for a very interest thing involving the Geneva Bible. For starters, the KJB translators did not claim all prior English translations bad translations; in fact, their goal was to make “one principal good one.” They succeeded, for even MT advocates use the KJB as the standard for comparison. James White wrote The King James Only Controversy–not the NIV or ESV or NLT or NASB controversy.

In the Geneva Bible, which also uses the name Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12, there is an interesting expository footnote which includes, “…for the morning star that goeth before the sun, is called Lucifer, to whom Nebuchadnezzar is compared.”

Here is how that exposition ties in: the name heylel (H1966) is a derivative of halal (H1984). The term halal is used 165 times & the KJB translators rendered it most often as “praise,” but also sometimes as “glory” or “shine” (amongst 13 different renderings). The interesting thing in relation to the Geneva footnote is that KJB translators rendered halal as “mad” (as in insane) several occasions. Well…what happened to Nebuchadnezzar?

Daniel 4:33 “The same hour was the thing fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar: and he was driven from men, and did eat grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hairs were grown like eagles’ feathers, and his nails like birds’ claws.”

Thus, the reason I used the term The Mad Star for the title.

Another interesting note in the study; the Romans called the planet, a”star” to them–Lucifer (one source–The Days of the Week by Isidore, bishop of Seville). If one looks up at the night sky & regards all the lights as stars; some stars have an erratic pattern (you could say mad pattern) in respect to other stars. In Jude 1:13 we encounter the phrase “…wandering stars…” which is planetes (G4107) aster (G792).

Like when the Lord Jesus turned water into wine, I saved the best for last in this article:

John 2:10 “And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.”

I will transition from translations & interesting notes to the prime edification of Isaiah 14. To say prime edification–the material has to do with our Lord Jesus Christ. Whether it is a prophecy or portrait of the Lord Jesus Christ in the OT or as in the case of Isaiah 14–a contrast.

In Isaiah 14:19 Lucifer/the King of Babylon is referred to as an “..abominable branch…” ; whereas Jesus the King of kings:

Isaiah 11:1 “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:”

Zechariah 6:12 “And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:”

John 2:19 “Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

Also concerning the King of Babylon/Lucifer in the Isaiah 14:9 “Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming…” in contrast to the Lord Jesus:

Mark 16:19 “So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.”

In Isaiah 14:13-14, Lucifer exalts himself, whereas the Lord Jesus Christ:

Philippians 2:6 “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

Note that Lucifer said in his heart: “.. I will exalt my throne above the stars of God…” (Isaiah 14:13). There are many places in scripture where stars & angels can be connected (e.g. Rev 12:4 with Rev 12:9 or Job 38:7 which includes “morning stars”–boqer (H1242) kowkab (H3556) in that case). Thus, exalting himself above the angels of God. That is a contrast with our Lord Jesus Christ:

Hebrews 1:6 “And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.”

Hebrews 2:9 “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.”

Finally, even if MT’s render the name Lucifer as “morning star” or “day star” as a reference to the physical star or planet that we can observe rise in the sky; note the contrast to the where the true day star (the Lord Jesus Christ) arises:

2 Peter 1:19 “We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:”

Luke 17:20 “And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:

21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.”

Praise the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unsound Eschatology

I will begin the article by defining what may be Christian jargon for some. I do not do so as if I am standing on an intellectual pedestal & I am feeding the lowly masses. Familiarity with terminology is no measure of intelligence. That is why I dislike the slang phrase dumbing down. So one never heard a term before or it is not a routine part of one’s vocabulary–that would be uninformed or unaware, not dumb.

Doctrine–A collection of beliefs that are supposed to be based off the word of God. A doctrine may encompass several supporting scriptures from different books & chapters of the Bible. Sometimes the label for the doctrine is based off an older language; also the label is used for brevity.  Thus, one may not find the verbatim label for the doctrine in scriptures. For instance the rapture is used instead of the, “…caught up” (1 Thess 4:17). That label is derived from an older language. Another example for brevity is the harrowing of hell. Not all doctrine universally agreed upon via interpretation, but the label is an abbreviated way to highlight a subject for those who already have familiarity.

Eschatology–The doctrine of last things. To say end times is a reference to the same study.

Unsound Eschatology–Unsound doctrine of last things. An unreliable collection of beliefs concerning the end times because the collection of beliefs do not align with the Bible. Doctrine is not unsound or unreliable on the basis that it does not align with human reason or logic. The bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is not logical or rational IAW with human reason. That is why I am not a fan of rational faith. The term itself entails cognitive dissonance.

Hebrews 11:1 “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”

Faith is not going to meet a human endorsed rational or logical cause & effect formula. Some will accuse us of blind faith–which the phrase itself is like saying round circle: “the evidence of things not seen.” Blind faith? Guilty–so what? Not only is my faith irrational–it is exciting. On the topic of logic & reason, many versions of Christian doctrines have been warped via the influence of Plato or Aristotle. The two men wrote some interesting things, but an attempt to glean anything from the Holy Bible on the basis of their writings is error. Christians should be on guard when scholars or theologians routinely toss the terms rationality, logic or reason into the mix.

John 20:29 “Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”

The existence of giants is not rational by our modern measure, yet God not only speaks of giants, but He also tells how big a certain giant’s bedstead was & that his bedstead was in a particular place at a particular time:

Deuteronomy 3:11 “For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man.”

The dimensions of the bedstead are in the area of 13 feet long & 6 feet wide. The inference was not that Og owned a huge bed, but Og required a huge bed with strong support (iron). If the inference was luxury–we would have been told about Og’s gold or many possessions. All that being said, the size of Og does not align with modern human rationality. This might shake up some folks, but the giants existed–sound doctrine (Ecc 1:9; Gen 6:4; Dan 2:43). It is unsupported by modern human reason, but supported by the scripture.

All that wraps back around to eschatology. The manner of eschatology is molded by whether one has faith in the word of God or human reason or rationality:

2 Peter 3:3 “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.”

(Compare to Exodus 32:1)

What people believe about the last things, whether they happen 10 minutes or 10 centuries from now–affects our modus operandi here & now. Generally speaking, there are two vastly different versions of eschatology being promoted within Christian institutions. I am not speaking of disagreements like whether the rapture occurs before, during or after the great tribulation. The two general doctrines are night & day.

I speak of one eschatology that involves patience (Rev 13:10) & another that leads to the belief that men will build the kingdom of heaven on earth (tower of Babel–part 2). One mode promotes the word of God & the other mode promotes oppressed & oppressor philosophy. Both camps utilize the Bible, but one in a greater capacity & one in a lesser capacity.

I am going to discuss a severe case of unsound eschatology connected to terrible things from the other camp. Note that the entire other camp may not be near as extreme, but their doctrine is akin to this example:

Notorious communist cult leader Jim Jones once slammed a King James Bible on the floor & exclaimed to his congregation, “My grand-daddy believed this Bible–and he was racist!” Although Jones quoted scripture from time to time; this action displayed the treasure of his heart (Luke 6:45). He obsessively spoke on the likes of diversity, racism & sexism.

Eventually the entire cult packed up, went off to a jungle & through precepts such as equality–they planned on building the kingdom of heaven on earth. As is the routine with communism; the end of the matter was mass murder.  Some call it mass suicide, but it was mass suicide at gun point.

I must note this is not about a Church ever addressing items like racism, but rather a question: can there ever be a Sunday or two absent of the mention of diversity, racism, sexism or equality? Can scripture such as Hebrews 1 be about Who it is about or must it somehow be related to that agenda?

Based on frequency, is the focus the Lord Jesus Christ, His return & resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-14) or is it a steady stream of oppressed & oppressor rhetoric which promotes insurrection (Barabbas–Mark 15:7) against the perceived status quo?

The night camp’s eschatology leaves no room for Biblically sound eschatology. Through democracy, diversity, equality, no-borders, socialism–it promotes that men will build the kingdom of heaven on earth, the communist utopia. Where does the world worshipping the beast, the mark of the beast, the return of Christ or the battle of armageddon fit in?

In order to propagate the night camp’s version of events–unsound things are promoted across the board. A classic example is the claim that in the Book of Revelation, the emperor of Rome at the time was the beast. Negative:

Revelation 17:8 “The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.”

So, “was, and is not; and shall ascend” does not fit the narrative of what would have been at the time the scripture was penned–a current emperor of Rome. Another question along the lines of the night camp’s narrative–when was the mark of the beast? When did people have to get the name, mark or number of a Roman Emperor in their right hand or forehead in order to buy or sell (Rev 13:16-17)?

Thus, the night camp’s claim is that the Apostle John wrote in the apocalyptic style of the day to reflect what was going on the world around him. Take note: there is not a thing about it being the word of God in such a statement. That is a common marker to watch out for with the night camp. They ascribe too much agency to the human pens–inspired like poets instead of God giving them words & visions to write down:

2 Timothy 3:16 “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

“All scripture is given..” is often confused with “inspiration is given.” The inspiration of God was the vehicle (“by”) for all scripture that is given. The men did not take artistic liberties as if John the Apostle thought, “I think I will write this piece in the popular apocalyptic style of today.”  In fact the night camp’s claim alludes that the Apostle John was not shown a vision by God.

This article could become book length. I will wind it down by stating that the night camp’s eschatology is like, “As a community, we are going to build the best city that we can.” There is not anything wrong with building a nice city, but the problem is–that is the end of their religion; to build the best city that they can (Gen 11). It is also a pragmatic religion. They want to see things now, they want to make things happen now. Everything is of a temporal nature. Constant oppressed & oppressor rhetoric imparts bitterness. Frankly, all Americans are force fed enough the same rhetoric from the media, the education system, the entertainment industry…the world.

The day camp’s eschatology is patiently enduring the downward spiral of the world. This is not to state that justice should be ignored where it is in our power to do something. The day camp does not lie–lot’s of bad things are going to happen. At some point the world will break it’s cycle of up’s & down’s and only head down, down, down. Bible believing Christians are going to have zero desire to even breath in that world, but they must endure & have faith that everything will end up how the Bible says it will end up. A rational faith will not do because nearly everything around will be heading the opposite direction of the faith. Rationally, pragmatically, the faith will appear not to be working in the world at the time (Rev 13:7). Most importantly, it must be a faith that resides in the heart:

Romans 10:9 “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.”