GENESIS RELOADED
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
“But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the
end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” (Daniel 12:4)
Daniel tells us that with the passing of history knowledge would increase, and man would begin to unravel the mysteries of God’s Word. For many years scientists and theologians have been in conflict with one another over one main issue: Is our universe thousands, or billions of years old? Before you are so quick to respond with the pat answer, please consider the following examples from history.
When Christopher Columbus endeavored to sail the Atlantic in search of new lands, there were many that viewed this attempt as a suicide mission. Some believed there were monstrous sea creatures waiting, which would gobble up him and his crew. Others believed that if he ventured too far out into uncharted waters, he would eventually fall off the edge of the earth. That’s right. There were many who once believed that the earth was flat, perhaps because a literal interpretation of Biblical passages that spoke of the ‘four corners’ of the earth (Isaiah 11:12; Revelation 7:1) was adhered to. But thanks to the advances of modern science, we now know that these were merely pagan superstitions, which were believed out of ignorance.
All throughout history, God has raised up various individuals to challenge established systems of belief. One such person was Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), an Italian astronomer and physicist, who actually had the nerve, in defiance of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, to agree with the Copernican model of our solar system – that the earth revolved around the sun. So in 1633, he was dragged off to stand before the Inquisition as a heretic, and was forced to publicly renounce his convictions. What was his crime? He disagreed with the established authorities’ teaching on this matter, plain and simple. This was a dangerous man indeed, an independent thinker armed with a telescope, and he had to be dealt with.
- “It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.” – Voltaire (1694-1778), French writer
- “Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence.” – Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Of course, science would later vindicate Galileo, who in 1638 went on to author his Dialogues on the New Science, which forcefully restated his earlier discoveries. But this shows how authority figures are not easily dissuaded from their beliefs, because to admit error is to concede a degree of control. And those in authority do not want to concede control.
- “The truth is that Christian theology, like every other theology, is not only opposed to the scientific spirit; it is also opposed to all other attempts at rational thinking. Not by accident does Genesis 3 make the father of knowledge a serpent – slimy, sneaking and abominable. Since the earliest days the church as an organization has thrown itself violently against every effort to liberate the body and mind of man. It has been, at all times and everywhere, the habitual and incorrigible defender of bad governments, bad laws, bad social theories, bad institutions. It was, for centuries, an apologist for slavery, as it was the apologist for the divine right of kings.” – H. L. Mencken (1880-1956) American journalist, editor, essayist, linguist, lexicographer, critic
- “The doctrine of blind obedience and unqualified submission to any human power, whether civil or ecclesiastical, is the doctrine of despotism, and ought to have no place among Republicans and Christians.” – Angelica Grimke (1805-1879) Source: Anti-Slavery Examiner, September 1836
The truth is that many do not have the courage, nor do they have the humility, even in the face of an overwhelming amount of evidence, to admit it when they are wrong. People could learn a thing or two from a couple of well-known figures from our past:
“Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance.” – Confucius
- “The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.” – William Shakespeare
It is high time to reexamine the Genesis story. Thanks to Albert Einstein’s well-tested theory (now a proven, scientific fact) of relativity, there is no longer any reason why science and the Bible should be at odds. In the following video, nuclear physicist Dr. Gerald Schroeder does a nice job of explaining why science and the Bible must agree.
Before continuing with this article, please take the time to view physicist
Dr. Gerald Schroeder’s 77 minute lecture on the six days of creation.
(View in Hi Def)
Jake
/ December 23, 2010For those who cannot download Dr. Gerald’s lecture, you can watch it on Youtube. Here is the link. There are 9 parts to watch. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRxEeHFHc-Y
JC Vucina
/ March 3, 2011Thank you Jake!
Steve
/ January 31, 2012Aren’t the seals of Daniel 12:4 opened in Rev. 5?
Gary
/ January 31, 2012Thanks for your question, Steve. I quoted Dan 12:4 to verify that scripture sees ahead to a time when information and knowledge will drastically increase. I have to believe that we are now living in that time. In nearly all fields, be they medical, science, or computer, technology continues to make obsolete that which was “new” only a few months ago. And thanks to the internet, the common citizen has access to more information (both good AND bad) like never before. And yes, the opening of the seals is mentioned in Rev 5 as you say, but this does not exclusively make this a yet-to-be future event, as most theologians teach. The book of Revelation is written on three levels: the past, the present, AND the future:
“Write the things which thou hast seen [past], and the things which are [present], and the things which shall be hereafter [future].” (Rev 1:19)
I explain this is much more detail in part 6 of the Genesis series.
Now in Rev 5 we find a BOOK [God's Word] which is SEALED [closed to human understanding] with SEVEN SEALS [seven is the number symbolizing perfection or completeness]. And only the Spirit of God can open to the carnal mind of man this spiritual understanding.
“It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” (John 6:63)
“But we speak the wisdom of God in a MYSTERY, even the HIDDEN WISDOM, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” (I Cor 2:7-8)
Read Rev 5 again with these things in mind and you may begin to see this chapter in a new light.
Peace
Steve
/ February 1, 2012Thanks for your very thorough answer. Is it possible, though, that Daniel was sealing the book and John was opening it? In other words, the opening of the seals occured two thousand years ago?
Gary
/ February 2, 2012I believe you are correct in a sense. “Revelation” comes from the Greek word “apokalupsis” which literally means “unveiling.” And the book of Revelation is the unveiling of that which has formerly been hidden or SEALED, namely Jesus the Christ, the Word of God. And even though the disciples walked with Jesus for roughly 3 1/2 years they didn’t really know him. Even after his resurrection they still didn’t fully understand. But after the Spirit came upon them on the Day of Pentecost they understood. So I guess we could point to that event in history roughly 2000 years ago when the seals of the book were first loosed to that select few. But keep in mind that all throughout the course of this present wicked age God has had his mouthpieces: Abraham, Isaac Jacob, all of the OT prophets, etc. I don’t think we can quite say that the “book” aka “the Word of God” was sealed to them, even though they (just as we today) only saw “in part” and prophesied “in part” (I Cor 13:12).
Steve
/ February 3, 2012Thank you for your quick reply. I have a question that’s not related to this post–please forgive me. It’s just that I haven’t seen it adequately addressed anyhwere else. How do you reconcile univeralism with the book of life? Doesn’t the eventual salvation of all require that people be added to a book of life that was written from eternity past? Doesn’t God know the end from the beginning; why weren’t we all in the book of life already? Thank you so much.
Gary
/ February 3, 2012Great question, Steve. This is one subject that undoubtedly prevents many people from even considering universalism. After all, the opposite of LIFE is DEATH, and since only a select few are in the book of LIFE, then the rest must be destined for DEATH, be it via hell or annihilation. At least this is what most of us have been taught. But I’m now going to show you something I discovered several years ago. This is an excerpt taken from my article Hell: Biblical Truth or Pagan Myth?
“ENTER by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who GO IN by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (Matt 7:13-14)
Now please examine this passage of Scripture carefully. We are encouraged to ENTER by the narrow gate, for most will GO IN by the broad gate. The English word ENTER as well as the short phrase GO IN both come from the same Greek word eiserchomai, which means precisely what it says. So is it possible that the implication is that both groups will eventually ENTER into the same place, albeit via different paths? [ABSOLUTELY!] Jesus Himself told us that there are two paths; one leading to life, and the other one leading to destruction. It is important to note here that the English word “destruction” was translated from the Greek word apoleia, which means to suffer loss or ruin, and in no way implies eternal damnation (or complete annihilation).
Now let’s turn our attention to Rev 20:4-6
“And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.” v.4,5b,6
These passages are describing the saints, aka God’s elect, those who ARE in the Lamb’s book of life. They have been made to walk the difficult to find narrow path leading to life in the coming millennial kingdom age.
“But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.” v.5a
Those who are NOT in the book of life will remain DEAD (not in hell) throughout the kingdom age.
NARROW WAY OF LIFE = FIRST RESURRECTION = KINGDOM INHERITANCE
BROAD WAY OF DEATH = SECOND RESURRECTION = NO KINGDOM INHERITANCE
I believe that even Moses understood this:
“And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin–; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.” (Ex 32:31-32)
Does anyone really think that Moses was asking our Lord to annihilate him or send him to hell for all eternity? Of course not. He was asking our Lord if he could absorb the punishment for his people, the penalty for which is DEATH (Of course, Jesus would later absorb the punishment for ALL). And keep in mind that the kingdom of God to which Christ so often referred is the coming promised AGE [Greek: aion], a period of TIME that WILL eventually come to a close according to Rev 20:3,5,7 as well as I Co 15:24. I believe that Moses was merely asking to be excluded from the coming promised age for the sake of his people.
So what about those Pharisees who supposedly committed Christianity’s “unpardonable sin?” Will they be forgiven at some point in time?
“And whoever may speak a word against the Son of Man it shall be forgiven to him, but whoever may speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in THIS [present wicked] AGE, nor in THAT [kingdom age] which is coming.” (Matt 12:32)
Things would be a lot clearer if only the church could come to admit that the Greek word aionios has been mistranslated. Everlasting punishment? NO! Age-enduring punishment? YES! Even Paul confirms that Christ’s rule only endures until ALL enemies have been subdued, the last one of course being DEATH (I Co 15:25-6; Rev 21:4). It is at this point when ALL will be forgiven:
“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” (I Co 15:22)
“And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” (John 12:32)
I encourage you to read through some of my other articles when you have time. They are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but I trust that they will help you to comprehend some wonderful scriptural truths. God’s Word never returns unto Him null and void..
Thanks again for your question
Gary
Steve
/ February 4, 2012I had to read Matthew 7:13-14 about a dozen times before I could see your point. And I say that as a Universalist! Is it any wonder that non-universalists can’t see our point of view? Incidentally, I have read many of your other articles. I love the Genesis Reloaded series. Isn’t it incredible that the vast majority of professing Christians continue to believe in the perfect Adam theory? It never made a shred of sense to me–or most people–yet almost everyone has been forced to swallow it. I even followed a very popular blogger who constantly wrestled with the issue, yet had no resolution, and this despite the fact that tons of her readers probably knew she had that issue. It’s likely none of them knew there was a coherent version of the Adam story. If the church had started with this understanding I wonder if the idea of eternal torment would have ever developed. In any case, thanks for your outstanding reply. Peace.
Steve
/ February 4, 2012Hi, how are you? I have three questions. Rev. 22:5 says the saints reign with Christ forever. I thought they only reigned with Him until He put down all authority, at which time He gives over the kingdom to the Father in order that He might be all in all. As long as there’s still authority, then He hasn’t destroyed the second death, which is the last enemy to be destroyed. But Rev. 22:5 is saying the saints reign forever. If this is true, then the second death will never be destroyed. Please clarify this for me. Thank you.
Rev. 20:5–Why wasn’t the sentence “This is the first resurrection” placed before the preceding sentence, where it would make a lot more sense? The way it’s structured seems to imply that the “first ressurection” is referring to the “dead who lived not again until the thousand years were completed.”
Rev 22:2 makes reference to leaves that were for the healing of the nations. Doesn’t nations usually refer to Gentiles. But the church are the Jews–if you are Christ’s then you are Abraham’s seed. In other words, those who initially reside in the new Jerusalem are the Jews–the church. But if they are the only ones to ever reside there, then why are there leaves there for the healing of the gentiles? Doesn’t this imply that they are waiting for more people to come in, namely those who had been cast into the lake of fire?
Moreover, why does Rev. 21:4 talk about God wiping away their tears and getting rid of death if it is talking about those who were already saved–the church? They had been alive and immortal for a thousand years. Why would they have had any tears? Or death? Isn’t it likely that this verse is referring to those who just came out of the lake of fire? Thank you.
Gary
/ February 5, 20121) It’s easy to assume that the word “forever” means eternally in most of the modern English Bible versions we use. But there should be a break between the words “for” and “ever” like the KJV has it. They are two separate words. And the Greek word that was mistranslated as “ever” is aion which means AGE. The saints rule with Christ for the AGE(S) of the AGE(S) is how it should read. I put the (S) in parentheses because the singularity or the plurality of the word aion is not crystal clear. But we are to compare scripture with scripture to determine the meaning of a word or phrase (I Cor 2:13). I personally believe in the context of scripture it should be “AGE of AGES”, just like “KING of KINGS” or “LORD of LORDS”. Christ is the KING over all kings, He is the LORD over all lords; likewise, the coming age is the most important AGE over all ages. It only makes sense.
2) I have often wondered why this sentence is structured this way as well. The only conclusion I could come to is that the Holy Spirit wanted to intentionally mislead the common reader and conceal this truth from those to whom it has not been given (Matt 13:11-16). God wants us to study to show ourselves approved, to find those hidden pearls in the sand. They are not always easy to find, as you just experienced (Matt 7:13-14).
3) Christ is the Vine and the saints are His branches (John 15:15). Likewise, in Rev 22:2 Christ is the tree of life and the saints are the leaves for healing the nations:
“For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.” (Rom 8:19)
The sons of God are the saints. When Christ returns to establish His millennial kingdom the saints will be gathered together to rule with Him (Matt 24:31; I Thess 4:16-17). And I think we can safely conclude that there will still be nations on the earth, for flesh is going to be preserved for the elect’s sake (Matt 24:22). Why is corruptible flesh going to be preserved you might ask? Well, Christ did promise the meek that they would one day inherit the earth. And Christ always keeps His promises. Besides, if there was no flesh left upon the earth then there would be nobody left over which they can rule. And rule over them they will (Rev 2:27; 12:5; 19:15).
4) And yes, Rev 21:4 is obviously talking about those who will be raised to life in the second resurrection. I firmly believe their weeping will occur at the Great White Throne, prior to their purification in the lake of fire.
Peace
Steve
/ February 5, 2012Thank you for your usual quick and thorough response. I heard an interpretation that actually makes the sentence structure make sense. It is based on the idea that the church age–the period when God is using the church to save people–comes to an end. Under this pattern, the verse would be saying that there are two parts of the first resurrection–those saved during the church age and those saved after it, and both are the first resurrection. In this case “lived and reigned” means saved and “the rest of the dead lived not again” refers to spiritual life.
Regarding your statement that there is flesh on the earth: How could there be any flesh left? After the wicked surround the heavenly city they are all killed. The only ones left at that point are the saints.
I’m not sure from your answer if you agreed with my point about the Gentiles/Jew distinction and the idea that the leaves for healing of nations must be referring to the as yet unsaved. In other words, the Bible always calls the saved the Jews and the unsaved the Gentiles, right? Doesn’t that mean the healing to be done for the nations must have in view those who were cast into the lake of fire?
Gary
/ February 6, 20121) What you describe in the first paragraph sounds an awful lot to me like something an amillennialist would teach: that the millennial kingdom (the church age) is now, and the coming age is eternity. But there are several reasons why I rejected amillennialism a long time ago, three of which are:
a) Paul clearly states that there are AGES (plural) yet to come (Eph 2:7).
b) Satan is unable to deceive the nations during the thousand years (Rev 20:3). If there is anyone who really thinks today’s nations are not being deceived, then I have some beachfront property in Arizona I would like to sell them..
c) Jesus told those Pharisees in Matt 12:32 that they would not receive forgiveness in this age or the next. If the millennium really is now, and there is only one (eternal) age yet to come as they believe, then according to Jesus universalism cannot be true.
2) And when do the wicked surround the city? … AFTER the thousand years (Rev 20:7). I am saying that there will still be nations upon this earth DURING (not after) the thousand years.
3a) I believe “leaves” is a symbol for “saints” who sprout forth from the Tree of Life: Christ. I also believe that since they will by definition be PRIESTS of God and Christ (Rev 20:6), it will be their function to provide healing for the nations during the millennium. What all this entails I really don’t know. What I DO know is that the whole creation eagerly awaits their arrival (Rom 8:19).
3b) Depends upon “which” Jews you a talking about. OT Jews are not saved… NT Jews are “spiritual Jews” who belong to Christ and ARE saved (Rom 2:28-29; 9:8; Gal 3:29).
3c) Nation healing takes place DURING the 1000 yrs. Lake of fire purification occurs AFTER the 1000 yrs.
Hint: Revelation is NOT written in chronological order like many erroneously believe. It is a series of visions that John recorded for us. If it really is in chronological order then why does Christ return to establish His kingdom way back in chapter 11? And again in chapter 19?
Revelation 21 & 22 are describing the heavenly city from which the nations of the earth will be ruled… DURING the millennium. At least this is the way I currently understand it..
Steve
/ February 6, 2012Thank you for your usual quick and thorough response. What I’m getting at is this–Rev. pictures a new Jerusalem filled with saints–spiritual Jews. Then it says that inside the city are leaves for the healing of the “nations.” Since the timeframe mentioned for the healing of the nations is the new heavens and earth, it can’t be the nations that existed during the 1000 year millenium. At least I believe that’s the time frame in view. It says there’s “no more curse.” But the curse isn’t completely removed until after the thousand years end. If the time-frame is in fact the new heavens and the new earth, then the healing of the nations must be referring to the as yet unsaved–those who were cast into the lake of fire. In other words, the nations in this view must mean the unsaved (gentiles) as opposed to the spiritual Jews living in the New Jerusalem.
Isn’t reason C a bad reason for rejecting amillennialism? You said, if I understand, that you reject it because if it’s true than universalism is false. Thanks again.
Gary
/ February 6, 2012Why would you think C is a poor reason for rejecting amillennialism? If universalism is true (and we both know it IS), then C is the very BEST reason to reject it. I will take the time to break this down for you one last time: Amillennialists erroneously believe we are living in the millennium NOW. And what event takes place immediately after the millennium? A: The great white throne/lake of fire judgment, which will bring to a close the current age (according to THEIR doctrine). And Jesus clearly stated that those Pharisees who blasphemed the Holy Spirit will not find forgiveness in THIS (current) AGE or the next. So if there are only TWO ages left like amillennial doctrine teaches: 1) the current age in which we live (after which is judgment), and 2) the next age which is eternity, then those Pharisees can NEVER, EVER have forgiveness. Their judgment will have already occurred BEFORE the next age begins (the eternal age)… which means that Jesus’ own words will have sealed their fate, for they can NOT have forgiveness in the age to come. This means that Jesus will have FAILED in his mission to seek and to SAVE that which was lost (Luke 19:10), as well as contradicting many other scriptures. But God’s love can NEVER, EVER fail. This is just one of MANY reasons why I reject the amillennialist’s notion that we are currently living in the millennium, which is ABSURD! I don’t know how I can make this any clearer..
Amillennial doctrine began when the Catholic Church set itself up as the supreme spiritual authority on earth during the reign of Constantine the Great. The church would now be a light to the world and 1000 years of peace on earth would become a reality, or so they claimed. But instead of being a “light” to the world, the exact opposite became true, and the Dark ages would ensue, marked by some of the bloodiest and most oppressive years in church history.
And before I address the first part of what you asked, I first would like you to read Zechariah chapter 14 and try to put into perspective for me these verses:
16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
Three questions:
1) During which age does this occur?
2) Are the nations in v.16 the same nations in Rev 21:24-26?
3) If so, then how would withholding rain be a punishment for them, who if they are already in their glorified bodies, would surely have no need of it?
Thanks
Steve
/ February 7, 2012Thank you for your usual quick and thorough response.