 |
Chapter 3dThe Great Enemy of Angelfall
The great enemy of Angelfall will not be some skeptical PhD professor from Yale or Harvard. It will not be some sinister atheist club or agnostic organization that mocks Christianity. It will not even be an ingenious computer/math wizard, who sets up a web site and tries to falsely debunk the scientific evidence of the theomatics Bible code. It is a foregone conclusion that people of this caliber will have little use or respect for the facts presented here. But they is not our primary foe. The great enemy and adversary of this web site will be none other than the evangelical Bible scholar. Not evangelical Christians, per se. Rather the fundamentalist/evangelical Bible scholar who has devoted an entire lifetime of effort towards his understanding Scripture—who has formulated His systematic theology and understanding of "the Word of God"—based exclusively upon the grammatical/historical method and various "literal" and "traditional" interpretations of the text. This would also include numerous Christian apologetic ministries (people who defend the authenticity of the Bible and the historical Christian faith). The following discussion is for the benefit of the general public—to show you the reader both the nature of the criticism, and the reasons behind the criticism. It is important to mention that the factual scientific basis from which the conclusions of Angelfall are derived, is in and of itself irrefutable. So that will not be the big issue. It is the theological/philosophical conclusions derived from that scientific evidence that will create all the noise. Many of the people who are the strongest believers in the Bible—they will be the most adamant in opposing the message of Angelfall. The whole thing will be rejected outright—not because it is untrue—only because of the fact it is not historical Christian teaching and only because it does not follow the standard rules and methods of interpretation (exegesis) that Bible scholars swear by. One quote by a fundamentalist Bible college professor will explain what we mean. This quote should not imply that all evangelical scholars are this dogmatic or sterile in their approach to the Bible. But the following will certainly give us the basic platform and premise, i.e. both the theological method and mind set from which most all Bible scholars operate—both liberal and conservative. Those who are opposed to Angelfall will most likely agree in principle with the following statement. "So my first rule is a rule about rules. If there was ever a place for common horse sense, it can be found in the rules for interpreting the Bible. I must advise you, therefore, whatever rules which do not commend themselves to common sense as patently self-evident, you must reject out of hand. Interpret the Bible as you would any other book. Go with the simple and obvious meaning. Ingenuity in the exegete is a sin. Have nothing to do with the prevalent "ear tickling" custom which produces "new" interpretations; interpretations which would be new to the very authors themselves. Assume that the writer is not playing games with us, he had a specific idea he wanted to get across… Take whatever he says as literally as he wanted it to be taken; neither more, nor less. The literal interpretation means the understanding which any person of normal intelligence would get,without any special spiritual gifts and without any ‘code’ or ‘key.’ (bold for emphasis). Happily, it is hard to stir up a quarrel about hermeneutics (the "correct" method of Biblical interpretation), because, since the reformation, especially, just about everybody worth his salt espouses the grammatical-historical method. Explanation The grammatical-historical method dictates that we are only supposed to understand God's message and the meaning of scripture according to two factors: (1) the common rules of grammar, and (2) the recorded facts of history. In a nutshell, this "method" is the EXCLUSIVE manner in which almost everybody out there attempts to understand the Bible (or for that matter any work of literature)—see While there is nothing inherently wrong with the G/H method, it is only the starting point or surface layer of the Bible. MUCH MORE EXISTS! A strict adherence to the methodology will blind a person as to the deeper spiritual and esoteric meanings, and also any hidden revelatory processes that God may have deliberately embedded in the text—it is inherently opposed to, and seeks to strip (or severely limit) the supernatural revelatory/symbolic principle. One of the favorite sayings of those who are opposed to allegorical methods of interpreting the Bible, "If the plain sense, makes common sense, seek no other sense, lest you fall into non-sense" (implying that the literal G/H method is the only way to know and understand truth, i.e. the only way God ever intended). Theomatics and Angelfall debunks that concept completely, and everything on this website is at complete odds with the limitations imposed by the G/H method (and all the subsequent theological systems and interpretive/exegetical methods that emanate from that). Because the Bible contains so much deep and complex spiritual truth, it is impossible to apply the G/H system in a consistent manner according to a hermeneutic "rule"—spiritual truth stretches far beyond what the G/H can either reveal or comprehend. The following website will show the ridiculous complexities and almost total subjective anarchy that exists in the real world when trying to apply consistent "hermeneutic rules" to the interpretation of the Bible. Coming up with a list of hard fast rules on how to interpret the Bible in all instances is for the most part a ridiculous and arbitrary exercise in futility. One only has to look at the total craziness that exists as thousands of apologetic websites debate "theological correctness." http://www.forananswer.org/Top_General/Hermeneutics.htm. The Main Reason—A Religious SpiritAlmost every person who has devoted a substantial percentage of their life energy into a study of the Bible—these individuals tend to highly resent others who claim to have acquired further understanding of God's Word by different means or interpretive methodology. In other words, "If it doesn't fit my model, if it doesn't fit my systematic theology or understanding of God, if I don't see that in the Bible—neither do you!" In these situations, the emotions are usually driven by two things: Spiritual pride and jealousy. We have observed this fact repeatedly. People who study the Bible intently tend to become very polarized in their thinking. They take great pride in what they know (or think they know) about the character of God. They do not readily accept or appreciate the insights of most other people. Instead, they are deeply in love with their OWN ideas, teachings, and doctrines. They believe that a "complete" understanding of Scripture—how deep and precise scriptural meaning can go—is determinable. Determined by them (of course). Their minds are usually made up on the fundamental issues and they are generally not open to fresh ideas and new concepts. This is especially true for those who are admired by others, and have strong influence over their followers (who usually sit at their feet). Comment: It never ceases to amaze me at the hundreds of "Christian" apologetic web sites on the internet, all claiming to defend the "pure" Word of God, who simultaneously blast and rip apart every other ministry or theological persuasion that does not see things the way they see it. They relish pointing out the heresies and false teachings of other individuals—mercilessly tearing them down in order to puff up themselves. Of course they always justify their position by stating that they are "simply going by what the Bible teaches." Generally and as a rule, most people who are enthused about the Bible are full of their own ideas and notions—they relish, they revel in, and they are totally happy and fulfilled in their own understanding of things. Saying all of this another way, they are many times more in love with their own ideas ABOUT God and the Bible than they are in love WITH the God of the Bible. Many possess what is called "a religious spirit." A religious spirit is a spiritual force assigned to prevent change and/or bind people's thoughts to maintain the status-quo (or a certain way of thinking)—it is the dominant force in all religious persuasions. A religious spirit incorporates the predominance of mans' convictions and traditions about God as being "orthodox" (it may be opposed to what God actually is and what God has actually done)—the hallmark of a religious spirit is where man's established religious order and doctrinal statement (and MAINTAINING that), is the predominant interest. A religious spirit generally does not seek to fully comprehend the eternal plan and purpose of God; it puts limits on what God can or cannot do based upon its own established rules and methods, and also its allegiance to Church history, and does not have as its primary goal finding out more of what is truly in God's heart. It is generally not open to the concept of deeper insight and progressive revelation of truth (see the Cessationist Doctrine below). Humility is the Key Very few people who are in the religious limelight or study the Bible intently will bow down and accept fresh ideas and new concepts from other individuals simply because they have a pure and unselfish love for the God of truth. It takes humility to admit that God may have deposited more into others than into ourselves. It takes humility to discard old established beliefs and theological methods if new truth comes to light. It takes humility to admit that the literal meaning may not be the sum total and that God has installed much more in the Bible than what was previously thought. It takes humility to admit that all things are possible with God. For example, on many occasions when trying to tell various Christian leaders about the wonderful truth of theomatics—if there is no personal or ministerial benefit whereby they can enlarge their own sphere of influence, i.e. there is "nothing in it for them" (no feathers they can wear in their own hat), then the attitude is APATHY—they have little interest in finding out more about the buried treasure—position for them is more important than truth. The rare exception to this fact that we have noticed, is when certain individuals think they can "get in on the ground floor" and use theomatics or this "new" revelation knowledge to further enhance their own position within the Body of Christ. In other words, they see here an exciting opportunity to try and create something unique for themselves. Even though theomatics is true, the emotions and attitudes are wrong in promoting it because they are usually driven by personal ambition and self centered motives. This religious spirit of exclusiveness exists today all through Christendom in all departments, and is what the Bible describes as the "leaven of the Pharisees" (leaven adds no nutritional value to bread, but simply puffs it up). Virtually every church or denomination out there believes that they have the "full" gospel of truth—God smiles on them, but He (of course) frowns on others who must surely have a "lesser" gospel. (Comment: in all fairness, it should be mentioned that not everybody has this attitude, but many do). Many individuals in the Lord's work are so gun-ho on what they are "doing" for God, that they cannot see anything else but… they do not know how to stop, turn off the activity in their brains for an extended period of time, go to the "backside of the desert," and simply be quiet long enough to listen to God's voice—spending time alone with the Master when nobody else is paying the least bit of attention to them (like Martha's sister Mary who sat at the feet of Jesus instead of scurrying about "doing work for God"—Luke 10:38-42). The Bible says "she chose the better portion.") The critical issue related to this prevailing attitude is the following. God becomes a means and not the end. People use God and the Bible (1) to bolster what they want to be true, or (2) to satisfy their own religious ambitions. They have little enthusiasm for anything except for their own dreams and visions within the Christian community. This is especially true of many pastors and other individuals who head up their own ministries (it could be safely stated that virtually everybody in the Lord's work today, is riding on various teachings and doctrines, or a "hobby horse" of some kind). Most people are unwilling to crucify their prideful intellect and adopt the simple faith and heart of a child—coupled with a willingness to accept new revelation knowledge, irregardless—giving glory to God instead of man's cleverness and ingenuity and religious tradition. Jesus made it very clear how impossible it was to put new wine into old wineskins. Therefore… … if the comprehensive truths presented here on Angelfall, are not something Bible scholars have personally seen or comprehended, then all of it will be met an an immediate and pronounced rejection. Christian fundamentalists will see no direct connection between men and angels as we present it. For two reasons: (1) This concept has not been traditionally taught, and (2) the Bible does not just come out and openly "say" that sinful men are actually fallen angels that pre-existed in heaven. No evangelical scholar would ever accept the notion that Christ came and died on the cross—exclusively—to save and redeem fallen angels that pre-existed in heaven and then became incarnated as humans into this world. But that is precisely what theomatics and Angelfall proves 100%—objectively and conclusively (read the story of the prodigal son and Matthew 25:41 and Revelation chapter 12, and numerous other passages—see Chapters 5a and 5b). Fundamental Bible scholars view the fall of man in the garden of Eden and the fall of "Lucifer" and the angels from heaven, as two separate and independent events, i.e. accordingly there is no substantial or essential link between the two. Angelfall proves that they are not separate, but integrated into one and the same. Question: If that is true that there is no connection between the two realms, why then does the Bible even mention the subject of the angels rebelling in heaven? This theme saturates the Bible from cover to cover, from the serpent/Satan in the garden—all the way through the book of Revelation where the same serpent/Satan pulls down the stars from heaven. Yet if mankind is not integrated with all of that in some manner, then what for goodness sakes, would be the purpose of God even bringing up the subject in such a pronounced way? The fact of the matter, is that God has deliberately hidden the specifics of the pre-existence and fall from heaven and man's direct connection to it (and our conscious memory of it)—behind a secretive, esoteric, and elaborate system of Biblical symbology—truths that have been completely unknown to church leaders down through the centuries—truths that apparently were unknown to the very apostles who "wrote" the Bible. In other words, God in His sovereignty, apparently, did not want man to see or delve into these facts until a certain point in history, so He DELIBERATELY BLINDED men and made them OBLIVIOUS to this perspective and view point. That is why He hid the truth behind esoteric methodology—a fact that evangelical literalists will hate with a purple passion. And even at that, probably very few people will truly comprehend the significance of Angelfall—where it will make a truly lasting and permanent impression on their lives as witnessed by the Holy Spirit. The hearers of the message will be primarily to those who simply have a hunger and thirst for the deeper things of God and are unsophisticated theologically—rather they are short on theological skill and pride, but long on a heart that thirsts for righteousness. It is to these individuals that God will open up the treasure chest. Let's talk now concerning the standard approach procedure various skeptics will use. The Obvious Negative Approach The end game for the critics will be in accusing the conclusions of this web site as being nothing more than groundless speculation that goes "way" beyond the intended and historically accepted meaning of Scripture. According to them, by using some sort of "deviant," or "arbitrary," or "mystical/esoteric" Bible code system in order to introduce a "new theology," we are seeking to either add to scripture, or stretch beyond God's intended meaning. Of course in that whole subjective reasoning process they will either deny outright the existence of theomatics—or severely downplay it as having any relative significance. Yet they will have NO EXPLANATION for the spectacular statistical results, and the scientific testing that provides a solid anchor to these conclusions. Nor will they even want to deal seriously with the issue or with the data that EXISTS with this entire newly discovered aspect of the Bible. In the final analysis, there are only two negative approaches or "excuses" possible when confronting this subject.
The problem with this second approach—logic demands that the argument return full circle back to item 1—randomness would be the ONLY possibility if item 2 is true. If the theomatic system itself is completely illogical, then that must mean that God never put anything like this in the Bible in the first place—the data must therefore be random (what other possibility is there?) Otherwise, we would INVARIABLY be dealing with an esoteric system or hidden revelatory process of SOME SORT, that (surprise!) is STILL credible and valid. We just don't know everything about it quite yet. Comment: This would be like telling an astronomer that he doesn't know ANYTHING about the universe because he doesn't know EVERYTHING about the universe. Just because every fact is not known and there are still mysteries out there, does not disprove the existence of the universe—we still know SOME things about the mysteries of the heavens. Yet there obviously is much more to be learned. That is why we build space telescopes. Likewise, with theomatics we are dealing here with God's infinite knowledge. More and more will be discovered as time goes by (and as God may sovereignly allow it). The principle question (the only question for that matter) is whether or not theomatics exists. Stating it succinctly—in order for any negative argument to hold water—THE CRITICS MUST KILL AND DESTROY ANY AND ALL POSSIBILITY THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS EVEN EXISTS. The only option is to find the fatal mathematical flaw so that the whole thing can be easily thrown out the window and conclusively "put to bed." Then and only then could it be safely said with certainty that God only communicates to man through simple and common language. Therefore… … the very fact that this numerical code system exists in the Bible (and can be scientifically proven in the laboratory), automatically fractures the measuring rod of those who would say that God has ALREADY revealed everything (why did God put something in the Bible 2000+ years ago that was discovered only now and can be objectively verified according to the highest standards of mathematical science???) Furthermore, when it comes to Angelfall, the other interesting question people must ask themselves is this: If theomatics is indeed true and objective scientific fact of something that God has actually done and literally/deliberately performed—then why would God reveal and expose it to some individual who is completely haywire and heretical in doctrine when it comes to the Angelfall message? If the first premise is true, then it would seem pretty logical the two aspects are probably inextricably linked. The Symbolic Principle Most Bible scholars have little understanding of what is called the "double entendre"—a surface story with an underlying hidden meaning (the grammatical-historical method does everything possible to get away from the double entendre—pre-millennial dispensationalism is one good example of that). Yet this is the very format that God uses throughout the Bible in literally tens of thousands of instances—theomatics proves that every single verse is packed solid with hidden and deliberate esoteric meaning. Thus the skeptics will be inherently blind as to the depths of the symbolic principle that God has incorporated in scripture since they have little or no knowledge of these things. Stating it in a straight forward manner, evangelical zeal for literal interpretation of scripture has too often resulted in running roughshod over those Bible passages that are "mysterious," and for which no logical natural or literal interpretation is appropriate. Theomatics is starting to show us what "those" mysterious passages are actually talking about. There are thousands of Bible passages that contain depth of meaning—matters and issues that no one has even thought of yet and which God has not yet openly revealed—that are completely valid in new light. As it has been stated elsewhere on Angelfall, most all Christian scholars see the Bible primarily in the context of history. The general consensus is to try and demystify the Bible by interpreting things literally as much as possible. Accordingly, the Bible is a document God gave to man for his exclusive use in this world, i.e. it only has its application during our physical sojourn on planet earth. That is a false premise. Just like the scribes and Pharisees in Jesus day who already had the law of Moses and felt nothing more was required—they will seek to suppress any new phase of enlightenment in the advancement of the Kingdom. Let us not forget that the very Son of God was hung on a tree and left to die because he dared open His mouth and declare that there was more to God than what the religious establishment thought there was at that time. Saying all this in another way: They want their limit of understanding to be God's limit of revelation. Instead of being respecters of actual truth, they prefer their own truth. In the final analysis—in order to protect their religious interests, the biased religious spirit will seek to discredit any valid or Divinely sanctioned esoteric knowledge that is forthcoming from Angelfall, for no reason other than spiritual pride and jealousy, i.e. as the old saying goes, "My mind is already made up, so please don't confuse me with the facts (or any new information)." Mysticism and Gnosticism Then there are those who will accuse this whole theomatics and Angelfall thing as being nothing more than a Christianised version mysticism and Gnosticism (even of the occult). The reply to that accusation (if it is a valid one) is very simple. The only possible conclusion—as stated earlier—if theomatics is untrue and nothing like it exists, then all the supposed findings could be nothing more than the proponent(s) arbitrarily picking and choosing from random numbers—it would nothing more than a completely worthless fallacy. Any false teachings or heresies that might perhaps emanate from something like that, would of course be another issue. Man is Not the Author There is one unpredictable and impenetrable wild card in the stack of this whole debate. The God of heaven is not limited to man's religious rules and regulations. Man did not write the Bible. The God of heaven is the only one who knows these sorts of things, and He is not bound or regulated by any of men's religious rules or pernicious thoughts. All through scripture, at certain appointed times and seasons, God broke through the theological sound barrier, and (unpredictably) revealed Himself in VARIOUS ways to many dozens of individuals who were especially called of God, and given privileged insights as to God's greater eternal plan and purpose. People such as Noah, Abraham, king David, John the Baptist, Christ's twelve disciples, more particularly Peter, James, and John on the mount of transfiguration, and most importantly the apostle Paul, etc.) And finally, John on the isle of Patmos. There is no denying that fact. Any time God does a new and fresh thing in the earth, you can be sure there will always be resistance. The religious spirit will invariably raise its ugly head. Religious tradition will never die easily. A number of years ago I corresponded with a Southern Baptist pastor from Tennessee who was very enthused about theomatics. One day I asked him, "I am somewhat puzzled by your interest in this subject, because most all of your colleagues would immediately repudiate something like this." His answer was simple and straightforward. "The reason," he said, "is because they are not trained to think that way. The theological system(s) they follow does not allow even the possibility that God might put something like this in the Bible. Everything in their theological training points them away from any sort of allegorical or mystical approach to Scripture, so they are inherently biased." What is truly heartbreaking, is that the debate over theological "correctness" and proper exegesis of the text, will take precedence over men finding God and souls getting saved through the message of Angelfall. The Spirit of CessationismWhen we state that the great enemy is the evangelical Bible scholar, we are referring primarily to: (1) those who adhere to the premise of a grammatical-historical hermeneutic (both liberal and conservative/literal interpreters), and (2) those individuals who are primarily pre-millennial/dispensational in their thinking, and who also tend to be anti-pentecostal and anti-charismatic (even a few "spirit filled" Christians will be opposed). The cessationist doctrine is very simply the idea that after the Bible was written, God's revelation to mankind through a simple reading of the Word, is now complete. Miracles, the baptism of the Holy Spirit (with speaking in tongues), etc. all ceased after the early foundation of the apostles was established. God now communicates to man only through the written Word in "open and plain" fashion. There is no further evidence or methodology necessary in order to understand God's message. Thus our understanding of Scripture is now essentially "complete." The Bible as we know it and understand it is "all sufficient." There is now no need for any new level of understanding. Cessationists tend to be "book worshippers," they worship the "letter" of scripture, and downplay the mystical work of the Holy Spirit. Also, this group of individuals are the major proponents of the false doctrine and heresy of pre-millennialism (and more recently the heresy of total preterism—see Section 13a on Bible prophecy). It is true that with just the simple words of the Bible, and their simple literal interpretation, God has indeed given mankind all the information he needs for living a practical life of godliness in this world (more text will never be added to the 66 books of the Bible for sure). Yet in a certain sense, the Book of the Acts of the Apostles is still being written today. Miracles, healing, prophecy, and supernatural manifestations are completely viable—anytime—according to the sovereign will of God. Liberal and Humanistic Bible PreachersToday, especially in the big mega churches and many so called evangelical "seeker" churches, there exists a false gospel that is being taught. It is a combination of two things: A watered down Biblical Christianity in conjunction with psychological self improvement. Much of it of course is based upon good scriptural principles. It is a "positive" and inspirational message designed to encourage people and make them feel happy and good about themselves (personally, I enjoy listening to some of these sermons). This modern "purpose driven" and "crystal cathedral gospel" targets people's "felt needs" instead of giving them doctrinal truth—truth which preaches the WHOLE counsel of God and promotes a healthy fear of God because of the dire spiritual quagmire man is in. It is a statistical fact that People in our modern day society, as a general whole, resent the idea of absolute truth. No one appreciates hearing a message on hell or final judgment. So preachers must be careful not to offend. It needs to be stated that this "new" gospel is not THE gospel of Jesus Christ. You cannot eliminate the message of God's wrath and judgment, and the fact that the vast number of people born into this world are probably going to wind up lost someday, and call it the Gospel. Jesus came proclaiming a gospel of repentance and the forsaking of sin—calling upon men everywhere to forsake ALL and follow Him exclusively. Christians are to live sanctified lives that are set apart to God's Kingdom (a true Christian would be abhorred by 80% of the immoral filth on T.V. these days). The Bible says that without pursuing holiness no man will see the Lord (Heb 12:14). These days, especially on Christian television, you rarely hear this huge body of "negative" scripture even discussed, much less preached (for obvious $$$ reasons). So in relation to both this fact and the message of Angelfall, it is important to state one thing. The vast majority of people who are enthusiastic fans of these teachings will have a hard time swallowing the concept of men being fallen angels on their way to eternal damnation. Those who want to believe that man is basically and inherently good, and that a merciful and kind God would never pronounce irrecoverable judgment, will be inherently biased against the conclusion of Angelfall. They will not be at all enthused about this. Of course the end result of this way of thinking is what leads directly into the false doctrine and heresy of universal reconciliation, i.e., the idea that once everybody living on the planet sees the bad results of sin and wickedness, then all those who ever lived will "get saved" and eventually go to heaven and be happy (most people of course will repent and become Christians after they die—even the devil himself, according to some, will "get saved" and came back to God). No Fatal ContradictionsSo when it comes to examining Angelfall—its premise and its conclusions—evangelical scholars and other skeptics will vigorously look for anything that is illogical, i.e. "crazy ideas" or "ridiculous notions" that contradict the direct statements of scripture (we do not believe that there are any significant contradictions). They will try to find passages and timeline scenarios that seemingly contradict the Angelfall premise (such as verses in Revelation—according to certain pre-conceived chronological arrangements—suggest the fall of the angels took place long after man was created in the Garden of Eden, or is yet to happen during some sort of future "great tribulation"—(see Chapter 5c on the Great Tribulation Fallacy.) In reply it is totally impossible to pin down a time sequence of events in the book of Revelation—the book covers the whole span of the history of the earth and cosmos. It is a well established fact that there are extensive time overlaps all through major sections of the book of Revelation (the book contains at least seven sections that all overlap each other). As someone put it well, "Interpreting Revelation and pinning things down sequentially, is like trying to squeeze air out of an air-mattress with one hand tied behind the back. COMMENT: In Luke 10:18 it says, "And He (Jesus) said unto them, I BEHELD Satan as lightning fall from heaven." The imperfect active Greek verb for "I beheld" (åèåùñïõí) clearly indicates time present, or time past, but certainly not time future. This verse pretty much kills the idea that the fall of Satan and the angels is yet an event 2000 years in Christ's future, limited only to the "last days great tribulation of the Antichrist." No Fatal Flaw The clear cut fact of the matter is that there is not one single verse or proof text in the entire Bible—from cover to cover—that EXPLICITLY states (or even critically implies) that men could not possibly be fallen angels. There is not a single verse or proof text in the entire Bible—from cover to cover—that EXPLICITLY teaches that man's spirit and soul came into its very first conscious existence at the time of physical birth on planet earth. The entire argument against Angelfall will be from a position of silence, i.e. the most damaging criticism that any critic can offer is that in their opinion "Angelfall is a maverick approach to the Bible and mere speculation." In other words, there exists no ammunition to debunk the entire foundational premise, i.e. no fatal flaw. Therefore, all the arguments the critics will attempt to throw out will be inconclusive, hypothetical, and irrelevant—rather just their own SUBJECTIVE and BIASED opinion of what they think is the "correct" traditional interpretation (if they can't debunk the substance, they will make issue of the exegetical method.) Again, most of this opposition will come from pre-millennial/dispensational/literal-interpretive thinkers, and also ultra preterist thinkers. Here there is only one issue that matters. Has God already given us all the information he intends for us to know, or is there a vastly expanded truth/symbolic system present in the Bible, one of which only a tiny fraction has yet been revealed? The obvious answer will be—Yes! By rejecting the spiritual/symbolic principle (or severely downplaying it), the literalists have decapitated themselves and "pulled down the shade" so to speak, thus having little or no comprehension of the existence of this galactic truth system and pearl of great price. What we are learning here is that it is never a wise thing to put limits on the Almighty. Man and his ideas are not the Author of Scripture. It is not the literal meaning that is ultimately important. The literal meaning is only a vehicle. It is only a means to arrive at a spiritual/eternal truth understanding—the interpretation that the Creator Himself had in HIS OWN MIND—when he uses literal things to represent eternal and spiritual concepts (see 1 Corinthians 15:44-46). It goes without saying that much of this is virgin territory that has been little explored or researched, because quite frankly, many Bible scholars are very much afraid to venture past the literal horizon and start spiritualizing things. Sin Began in Heaven At this juncture in our discussion, one critical fact is very important to point out. Evangelical scholars would love to entertain the concept that sin and evil only began on earth, with man, in the geographic garden of Eden. As stated previously, that is the premise that any opposition to Angelfall would tenaciously cling to—critics would attempt to see little connection between earthly sinfulness and heavenly sinfulness. According to them, the original sin and its solution is strictly an earthly matter, perhaps only influenced by a rebellious archangel (the standard theory for which no one has any comprehensive explanation). Angelfall will completely destroy that shallow and "not critically thought through" premise. Scripture makes it abundantly clear, that sin and evil did not begin on earth. It all began way up in heaven (see Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 and Revelation 12, and numerous other passages). In the book of Revelation the tree of life was "in the midst of the paradise of God," ACTUALLY SEEN IN HEAVEN (Rev 2:7). This proves conclusively that the earthly garden of Eden is simply a shadow of the true heavenly picture, and that the real sin TOOK PLACE UP THERE! In Hebrews 9:23 it specifically states that things in the Old Testament tabernacle and temple upon earth were only models of things in the heavens. Also, the Bible specifically states that the blood of Jesus (which was shed upon earth) was for the purpose of CLEANSING THINGS IN THE HEAVENS (see Heb 9:23 and Col 1:20). That fact unmistakably links together man on earth and the redemptive blood, with some sort of a pre-existent/cause/issue in heaven. Another interesting question to ponder is this. If there was already heavenly sin (and some sort of angelic rebellion) before Adam was created upon earth, then why for goodness sake, didn't God take care of that first and completely eliminate it? WHY DID HE ALLOW IT TO POLLUTE HIS (supposedly) BRAND NEW CREATION OF BEINGS UPON EARTH? That fact in and of itself establishes the fact that Adam and Eve's physical creation upon earth and the involvement of Satan and hordes of demons, was NOT A BRAND NEW THING—only a re-enactment (and symbolism) of something much bigger and prior. Few if any individuals have ever thought through these facts or seen the BIG picture of how all the dots connect—how all these matters and issues in the Bible tie themselves together and relate to us humans living on earth (compare Genesis chapter 3 to Revelation chapter 12—see chapter 5a). The truth is hid behind much symbolism. Evangelical scholars recognize that the Bible talks a whole lot about these things, but they are almost completely oblivious as to the actual meaning. Yet another interesting fact related to all this, is why the demonic realm and human realms are all intertwined. If the original sin is only an earthly matter related only to a brand new creation of beings upon earth—then what, for goodness sake, gives these vile demon spirits the legal right to dwell inside of men and women and have sway over their thoughts and actions? The fact that the human world and the demonic worlds are all intertwined should make anybody stop and realize the fact that something is going on "in the heavenlies" related to all of this, something that is very mysterious and far reaching in its implications. Again, few people have ever thought through the logic. "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual hosts of evil IN THE HEAVENLIES" (Eph 6:12). Also, at the very bedrock of this whole issue—theomatics completely destroys the popular notion that a fallen archangel from heaven named Lucifer or Satan, slipped into the garden of Eden and spoke to Eve through a serpent (see chapters 4b and 4c on the literalness of Satan the devil and chapter 9a on the meaning of the serpent in the garden). What actually took place is very different. Summary and ConclusionThe difficulty in trying to dismiss the conclusions of Angelfall, is that this time around there is the scientific evidence (the experimental data) to contend with—hard objective data that substantiates the conclusions. Yet even if some people don't like the conclusions of Angelfall, they still will not be able to get past this scientific aspect. This inductive logic and reasoning aspect is a new sort of animal the critics will not know how to deal with. In other words, here lies before us a whole new basis of objectivity that God deliberately and inherently placed in the text, that supports a whole host of new and different interpretations and conclusions of Scripture, than what has been traditionally believed. It essentially DESTROYS pre-millennialism. All of this new evidence debunks and flies directly in the face of the following statement by a well known and respected Christian leader. While this statement is true in some respects, its fallacy is that it erects barriers against the sovereignty of God. Evangelicals should come to grips with the fact that the Bible belongs to the church. It is the living church that receives, guards, passes on, and interprets scripture. Consequently, the modern individualistic approach to interpretation of Scripture should give way to the authority of what the church has always believed taught, and passed down in history (R. E. Webber). Some Further CommentsProverbs 11:14, states "Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." No one person within the Christian Church should ever have authoritarian power to speak exclusively for God, including the author of this web site. God has placed within the Body of Christ other individuals, who likewise have been granted a measure of spiritual wisdom and discernment. Therefore, whatever we state or believe has a right to be judged—both in light of God's word and through the Holy Spirit. It is entirely possible that we could be wrong about some things. No human being has perfect understanding on all matters. I have to ask God constantly to place my intellect under the discipline of the cross (die to self and my own ideas). Therefore, if any information is presented on this site that is an obvious error, gross contradiction of what the Bible clearly states, and/or is a clearly a false presumption of God's Word—we should always be willing to listen and in some cases heed the wisdom of godly counselors (this does not require everything stated to be in agreement with everybody's viewpoints, opinions, and interpretations of scripture). What that means is that we cannot say that theomatics and the message of Angelfall establishes something that clearly is the exact opposite of what the Bible unambiguously states. Theomatics must always be in agreement with the open text. Again, as it was previously stated—there is not a single verse in the entire Bible that rules out the possibility of pre-existence. The open text gives virtually no overt statement on the matter whatsoever. Yet there will be fundamentalists who will try to raise the subjective argument that such a concept is completely unbiblical and even a perversion. In reply to that, if there were indeed Bible passages that unambiguously taught that man's Spirit and soul comes into its first existence at the time of physical birth onto this planet, then Angelfall would be in serious trouble. No such verses exist. And for good reason, obviously. Even though the facts presented on this web site include much new information and heretofore unseen revelation knowledge relative to the symbolic principle and meaning of Scripture; nevertheless, it must be examined and weighed objectively and logically. No human being, however anointed by God, is infallible. We must always be willing to back up, take a deep breath, and carefully re-evaluate our position (and the numerical data) on various matters. And then make the required adjustments in our premises and conclusions, if and when fresh light demands it. For that reason we welcome any constructive criticism that is both profitable and efficacious. If presented in the right spirit, we will humbly weigh and assess it. The truth should be all that matters to anybody. No RulesTherefore, my response to all general criticism can be summed up with the following statement. There are NO RULES for interpreting the Bible (that limit God's potential revelation). Nowhere in scripture does God lay down any clear methodology, i.e. hermeneutic principles, rules of exegesis, etc. for understanding spiritual and eternal truth. God's intellect exists over and above and beyond men's pernicious and petty rules, and it will resist all of man's attempts at systematizing it. An in depth understanding of Hebrew and Greek syntax will do little unless a person is granted insight by the Holy Spirit and equally understands the inherent symbolic principle AND THE FACT that God never intended His word to be interpreted exclusively in the manner as most all Bible scholars assert. Theomatics and angelfall rejects the exclusive use of the grammatical-historical method in favor of the spiritual/allegorical method of understanding scripture. While common sense and reasonable logic is always necessary, all "rules" that attempt to become too specific, are the systematized methods of men (pre-conceived premises in an honest attempt to apply consistent logic and structure), who in their egos and self sufficiency desire to be in control—confining God to a box of their own finite understanding. Who is there out there qualified to put limits on the spiritual depth and meaning contained in Scripture by another Person who actually wrote it, no less than God Himself? What most all of this resistance to Angelfall will show is that even pious Christians who claim to love Jesus and who take great pride in the fact that they are staunch defenders of the "pure word of God"—the hearts of these same people carry within itself—inherently—overtones of the fall from heaven and man deciding for himself what is good or evil. When something down deep in a person's heart swells up and automatically resists the message, and their own spirit tries to reject the work of the Holy Spirit relative to that which is honest, valid, and true (something which God has actually and literally performed) … and in lieu of accepting the facts and simply falling down to worship—the nay sayers lean to their own understanding and theological presuppositions—this still demonstrates the two demons of spiritual pride and self sufficiency that traces itself right back to the original sin in the garden—man deciding FOR HIMSELF was is true or not. And worse, lack of faith and lack of acceptance in the One who knows all truth who is the very Author of life itself. Important Personal CommentIt is critically important to add the following at the very end of this discussion. I must be very careful personally to not allow the same religious spirit of religious jealousy, to take hold of me as those to whom all the above statements are addressed. In other words, I must never see myself as being important or significant in regards to theomatics or Angelfall—both myself and the message must be detached from any personal feelings or personal ministry ambitions. What that means is that I personally, should never ever have either a defensive attitude, or reactionary attitude, or overly protective attitude about what I do and say in regards to any of this. Or be affected in any way, i.e. take personally, the actions or non constructive criticism of others. What that means is NOT challenging or "picking a fight" with those who are opposed. In otherwords, leave them be and simply pray for them. Only the Holy Spirit can remove the scales from anyone's eyes. In the end, the truth all by itself will either stand or fall based upon its own strength. The facts and the data are important and must be correct. But acceptance of the |
 |
 |
 |
 |