Aliens and the Antichrist: Unveiling the End Times Deception (15 page)

Even in the eternal future, God’s plan of salvation will be commemorated in Jewish feasts and celebrations forever (feasts of Passover and unleavened bread—Ezekiel 45:21; first fruits—Ezekiel 44:30; Pentecost or Weeks—Ezekiel 46:9; trumpets—Ezekiel 44:5; day of atonement—Ezekiel 45-46; and tabernacles—Ezekiel 45:25; Zechariah 14:16-21). Christianity is actually a Jewish religion, and is only a Gentile (non-Jewish) religion as well because God adopted the Gentile people of the world into the family of God. This family of God started with his chosen people, the Jews (Romans 11:17-23; Matthew 22:2-10; Mark 7:26-29). The people of Earth should be aware of this great truth; this is especially the case for the Christian church. Even a great variety of otherworldly beings coming from light-years away, showing up in vast numbers to the small nation of Israel, know more about the significance of Israel than many people on Earth. Many of these visitors may want to be adopted too!

Now I’ve rambled on about the fact that Earth is important even from the heavenly perspective, but I still haven’t answered why Earth was chosen as the spearhead of God’s plan of reconciliation (which I believe applies to both Earth and the heavens); this is what I’ve been building up to all this time. I apologize for any perceived long-windedness, which is very difficult for me to avoid. Frequently the material used to answer questions raises numerous additional questions in itself—questions I am compelled to explain before continuing. Hopefully my wordiness is not too disjointed to follow.

Continuing on, I have learned that what makes Earth significant in the universe concerns the very pieces of the puzzle to Earth’s history that I was missing when I wrote
Aliens in the Bible.
There was not just one catastrophic flood in Earth’s history; there were two. Furthermore, the Bible speaks of a civilization that was destroyed in the first flood, prior to Adam and Eve ever being created. Such a civilization implies that the inhabitants who were destroyed were not human. Even more intriguing is the fact that these beings were ruled under the kingdom of Lucifer; he ruled Earth at that time. This is where his connection to Earth was initially established. It’s no wonder he’s been so intimately tied to this particular planet. Earth is significant not solely because God’s love for humanity is any greater than his love for any other intelligent species in the universe, but because Earth is the seat of rebellion in the heavens that started with Lucifer even before humanity was created. That’s why Christ came to Earth. It is why Earth is a universal mecca of angelic attention among the vastness of the cosmos, and it is the place where Satan will eventually be isolated, and his rebellion will be crushed once and for all (Revelation 20:9).

But how did I discover all of this? I didn’t; Finis Dake, the theologian I mentioned earlier, did nearly twenty years before I was born. Finis Dake taught me about the law of double reference—among many other things, all of which shed light on a number of scriptures that explain everything I’ve just mentioned. While the Watcher site referenced earlier mentioned much of the same material

I’m about to expound upon here, the research wasn’t backed up nearly as well as Finis Dake’s. One of the key elements that would’ve helped the Watcher site greatly is a brief explanation of the law of double reference.

Now I will briefly describe the law of double reference. There are numerous scriptures that speak of a visible person who is immediately addressed, while at the same time, an invisible person who is using the visible person as a tool to hinder the plan of God is also addressed. For example, when Jesus said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou art an offense to me: for thou savor not the things that be of God, but those that be of men” (Matthew 16:23), he did not mean that Peter was the personal devil, but that Peter was being manipulated by Satan. From Jesus’s perspective, he might have even been able to see Satan standing right there, hence both Peter and Satan were addressed and involved in the statement Jesus made. The only way to interpret such passages is to understand that part of the passage is addressed to a man, while the elements that have no relevance to the visible man in question must clearly be referring to the spiritual manipulations working through the man.

Now that it is understood to some degree how the law of double reference works when spotted in scripture, I will now illuminate some Old Testament scriptures, some of which require the law of double reference to interpret. These scriptures speak of a flood predating the flood of Noah, which Finis Dake referred to as the flood of Lucifer.

1. The Flood of Lucifer Mentioned in the Old Testament

The flood of Lucifer is first alluded to in Genesis 1:2, which states the following (bold emphasis added): “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the
waters.”
The wording in Genesis 1:2 is significant because it proves that the original creation of the heavens and Earth was completed in its entirety in Genesis 1:1, and that the re-creation of Earth into a habitable state follows from Genesis 1:2 to Genesis 2:25, as I will now explain.

Genesis 1:1-2
(bracketed comments added)

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth [the creation is complete]. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep [earth was destroyed]. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters [earth is covered with water].

Like many people, I used to separate Genesis 1:1 from the rest of the account of creation by thinking of it as a qualifying opener. I thought the author opened with a brief one-line summary to serve as an outline, as a form of literary style, then followed with the details. Supporting this position is the fact that the sun, moon, and stars were made on the fourth day of creation. How could the “heaven and the earth” have been created in Genesis 1:1, when we can see that the sun, moon, and stars, which constitute the heavens, were made on the fourth day of creation?

While this question may seem difficult to answer, translating Genesis 1:1 as being nothing more than an outline raises a number of other intriguing questions, which are even more difficult to rectify than the sun, moon, and stars being made on the fourth day of creation.

First, if Genesis 1:1 is an outline of creation, it’s not a very good one: it doesn’t establish the order of creation correctly. If Earth were made before the heavens, then Genesis 1:1 should state that God made Earth, and then the heavens, rather than the heavens and Earth. Wouldn’t the order of these details be somewhat significant, considering the fact that this outline documents the origin of all creation?

Then there’s Job 38:4-7, which states that the heavens were in existence before the foundations of Earth were laid. How is this possible, if the heavens weren’t even made until the fourth day ofcreation, which didn’t occur until
after
Earth had form, land, and even vegetation?

Job 38:4-7

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou know? Or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? Or who laid the corner stone thereof; when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Continuing on, I’m certain that God can do anything he wants, and in any order. But I always thought that it was extremely odd that Genesis seems to indicate that Earth was created before the sun around which it rotates. I’m no astrophysicist, but something about that just doesn’t seem right.

What about the days of creation? How could there be days if there was no sun until the fourth day? One could postulate that the word “day” symbolizes an unknown period of time, a creative age, such as a thousand years (taken from Psalms 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8, which stipulate that a day to the Lord is as a thousand years to man). The language of the creation account, however, qualifies days with a beginning and an ending. In every other place in the entire Bible, days qualified in this manner refer to a literal twenty-four-hour period. Interpreting the word “day” in a different way in this part of the Bible makes for a nonstandard method of interpretation; it’s an extremely weak argument, and subject to opinions and biases rather than interpretational standards. Even harder to rectify with the idea of a creative age is the fact that vegetation was created on the third day. Exactly how long could the vegetation created on the third day have survived without sunlight? Are we to believe that vegetation grew in the complete absence of sunlight for a thousand years?

I want to know what the Bible actually says—not what I want it to say. And when something doesn’t make sense, the incongruence is never a contradiction, but rather a passage highlighted by God for more revelation. I can’t count the number of times God has taught me something new in scripture because I was trying to resolve a perceived contradiction. I have discovered that the Bible makes perfect sense, both logically and in consistency, if people would simply study it, believe what it says, and weigh out all the implications of all of its facets.

Concerning these perceived contradictions, of which Genesis had a list I contemplated for years, it is even harder to squeeze the Bible’s mention of angels into the creation account when the Bible speaks of angels, yet never mentions when they were created. This is another mystery that bellows in its conspicuous absence. Hidden within this mystery lies a clue to Earth’s ancient history. How do those who argue against the interpretation of Genesis 1:2 through Genesis 2:25 as being the account of a re-creation of Earth into a habitable state explain questions that arise concerning angels? Certainly they dwell in the heavens, and the heavens had to be created before the angels, so the angels would have a place to exist—so were angels created on day four, five, or six? If it took an entire day to create Adam, then why wouldn’t it take a longer period of time to create all of the angels, who, according to scripture, are even greater than man, both in glory and in number (Psalms 8:5; Hebrews 2:6-9)?

Psalms 8:5

For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honor.

Hebrews 2:6-9

But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful ofhim? Or the son ofman, that thou visit him? Thou made Him a little lower than the angels; thou crowned Him with glory and honor, and set him over the works of thy hands: Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet.

For in that He put all in subjection under Him, He left nothing that is not put under Him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that He by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

The existence of angels is first established with Satan’s arrival in the Garden of Eden. For humanity it’s early in life, seeing that Adam and Eve were innocent, naive, and didn’t have any children yet. It’s evident that Satan, however, was prowling about much longer than Adam and Eve. In Ezekiel 28:11-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14, we’re told that Satan tried to lead an invasion into heaven at one time, yet failed, and his kingdom was destroyed. As I questioned earlier, did he once rule an entire kingdom, deceive his kingdom as well as many other worlds, then orchestrate a massive, interstellar invasion into the highest heaven—in less time than it took Adam and Eve to have their first male child? This has to be the case, if one believes Genesis 1:1 falls within a six-day construct of the heavens and Earth.

As always, whenever there is a perceived incongruence in scripture, the deficiency is due to a lack of human understanding, rather than an inconsistency in scripture. In this case, I was very fortunate to have Finis Dake’s thirty years of research on hand, which pointed me in the right direction.

In order to rectify the incongruence of the fourth day of creation with Genesis 1:1, it makes more sense to suggest that the heavens were in fact already created, but not illuminated. The darkness that covered Earth in Genesis 1:2 was removed on the fourth day, revealing the sun, moon, and stars, instead of the heavens being created on the fourth day of creation. In the English translation of the Bible, this isn’t particularly evident, but one clue that stands out is a distinction between the purposeful translation of the words “create” and “made.”

The word “created” is from the Hebrew word “bara,” meaning, “to create,” in the sense of making something new or bringing something into existence without the use of pre-existing material. This latter idea is certainly true of the materials out of which the heavens and Earth were formed. In Hebrews 11:3, we read that the “things which are seen [the visible things] were not made of things that do appear” or that were visible. If the heavens and Earth were brought into existence, then it is certain that at one time they were not in existence. “Bara” is found forty-nine times in the Hebrew Bible, and it is translated as “create,” eight times; “created,” thirty-three times; “make,” four times; “Creator,” three times; and “createth,” one time. The primary idea is to bring into existence something new that never existed before, in any way, shape, or form.

“Bara” is used only seven times in Genesis 1:1-2:4, the passage that records all of the creative ages. It is correctly translated “created” in each case. In all other verses in this passage of scripture, the word “made” is used. It is from the Hebrew word “asah,” meaning to make something out of already existing material.