KJV - inerrant, perfect, or even remotely “inspired”

KJV - inerrant, perfect, or even remotely “inspired”

#‎RAD ‪#‎ATEND G-d (Christ) ‪#‎IIC714

KJV - inerrant, perfect, or even remotely “inspired”

Question for you... well a few questions, really...

1.      Are you familiar with the Groups like HRM, “TO”, Sacred Names, etc?

2.      Would you agree that elitism is, if not simply bad, at least can be very misplaced?

3.      Would you agree (perhaps should have been the first question) John 14;6 and Acts 4:12 are immutable points?

4.      Would you agree that any Group which states - “we have the best, really the only true and accurate, means of accessing Jesus” - is preaching a form of elitism which is NOT Biblical?

5.      Would you agree that paraphrasing is not only “okay”, on occasion, but in fact a vital rudimentary form of communication?

Next to last question:

6.      This paraphrase - “...being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.” - from Philippians 2:6, which is a paraphrased explanation of the KJV rendering for "...being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." - Philippians 2:6, KJV

Is that ^^^ paraphrase, acceptable, reasonable or is it just “dead wrong”?

Final Question, two parts:

7.      Part A)

In Exodus 20:13 & Deuteronomy 5:17 we see they both say - “Thou shalt not kill” - in the KJV

In Exodus 21:12, 15, 16, 17 & 29, we see that they all say - “...put to death.” - in the KJV

Doesn't the phrase (as found in Exodus 21:12, 15, 16, 17 & 29) -  'put to death' - not mean “to kill”?   Yes, clearly it does.  Yet, again as we just read in Exodus 20:13 & Deuteronomy 5:17 - G-d (Christ) said - “do NOT *Kill*...” - is this NOT an apparent contradiction?

We often offer, as an explanation for this, “apparent contradiction”, that - “In the KJV, in the verses found in Exodus 20:13 & Deuteronomy 5:17, when we read the words “do not kill”, we must understand that in the context of the Ten Commandments they are being used in sense of, or they *really* mean - “do not murder”.  Have you ever used that, or something like that as an explanation for why there appears to be an apparent disparity between the words “do NOT kill” as found in Exodus 20:13 & Deuteronomy 5:17, and the words “put to death” found in Exodus 21:12, 15, 16, 17 & 29?  I have.  And I’ve heard many Christian also use that very explanation.

Notice now though, that if we read those same passages in the NIV (Yes, the "EVIL" and allegedly horribly “corrupted” NIV) it says, in both cases, for Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17 - “You shall not murder.”

Notice also that, in the NIV in Exodus 21:12, 15, 16, 17 & 29, the words (which agree with the KJV here) all say - “...put to death.”

While the words 'put to death' (capital punishment) and 'kill' clearly mean, pretty much the same thing, the words 'murder' and 'put to death' (capital punishment) do not even remotely mean, or imply, the same things.  Did the KJV translators add to, alter or otherwise take away from the Sacred texts?  Isn't it interesting that, with the 'perfect' (even “inspired”) KJV, Exodus 20:13 & Deuteronomy 5:17 both require SECONDARY EXPLANATIONS to “splain” away why one Chapter of Exodus (20) says 'do not kill', yet in the very next Chapter, (the 21^st), it says, 'put to death' (execute, or 'kill')... these are seemingly contradictory directives.

But... that "evil" NIV requires no such Secondary Explanations!

Part A) question - why is the KJV superior?

Part B)

In the TaNaKh (the Christian Old Testament), Jonah 1:17, we read:

“...the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah.” - KJV

But.... in that the “EVIL” and allegedly “corrupted” NIV we read...

“...the Lord provided a huge fish to swallow Jonah” - NIV

Wait... there's almost NO difference between the words...  "great fish" or "huge fish"...

Jump forward to Jesus’ Word's about His soon coming death, and Resurrection, Matthew 12:40:

“...in the whale’s belly...” - KJV

“...in the belly of a huge fish...”

And we have a HUGE, yuuuuuuge, difference between the words used...  “huge fish” and “whale” ...

Part B) question - is the KJV really superior?

The words translated into English for Matthew 12, in the KJV translation, do NOT agree with the words used in Jonah, in the KJV...  a whale is NOT a huge fish.

But, the words translated into English for Matthew 12, in the NIV translation, DO agree with the words used in Jonah, in the NIV...  a huge fish is... a huge fish.

The Hebrew word used in Jonah, dag, pronounced 'dawg' ( דָּאג ), means fish, not whale.  While the Greek word  kétos, pronounced 'kay'-tos' ( κῆτος ) can legitimately mean either fish or whale.  One word, “fish”, agrees with the passage in Jonah, the other word, “whale”, does not agree with the passage in Jonah.

In fact, the Hebrew word tannin, pronounced 'tan-neen' ' ( תַּנִּין ), which can be found in Job 7:12; Ezekiel 32:2 and Ezekiel 32:2, and which can be translated into English as:

dragon, sea-monster, serpent, or whale

is NOT used in Jonah.

As one can see from Job 7:12; Ezekiel 32:2 & Isaiah 27:1 the English word “whale”, which is derived from Hebrew the word tannin, pronounced 'tan-neen' ' ( תַּנִּין ), is not the same Hebrew word used in Jonah.  The point?

The point is simple.  Is the KJV a bad Bible?  NO!  Is the KJV inerrant, perfect, or even remotely "inspired"?  NO!

Is the NIV a bad Bible?  NO!  Is the NIV inerrant, perfect, or even remotely "inspired"?  Also, NO!

Shalom

“No Jesus, NO peace” and yet, “Know Jesus, KNOW peace”

How does one get to “know” Jesus?  Simple, invite Him into your heart, as Jesus says: “Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.” [Revelation 3:20 NIV]  How can be assured that this Jesus stuff means anything?  Well because the Bible tells us so, as the Apostle Paul wrote:

“If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.” [Romans 10:9-10 NIV]

And for those of you who say to me, I can’t be bothered reading the Bible, “it’s confusing” or “it’s a waste of my time”, may I draw your attention to what the Bible says about wisdom: “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” [Proverbs 9:10 NIV]

If nothing else, PLEASE read two chapters from the Bible – (don’t own one, sorry NO excuse, if you’re reading this, you can access this: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203:16&version=NIV) John 3 and John 14!

John 3:16 says: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

And John 14:6 says: “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Well that’s it, that’s Da Bauz’s Take on, “the KJV inerrant, perfect, or even remotely "inspired"” – this 28^th day of June 2018 © 2018, All Rights Reserved. wr (Da Bauz, Christian Zionist “creationist” too!)

Just sayin’...

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem...

What is #RAD? #RAD is:

R epent of rejecting Christ

A ccept Christ as your Lord

D evelop your relationship with G-d

#RAD your relationship with the Living Almighty God Himself as your personal Lord and Saviour depends on it!

What is #ATEND G-d (Christ)?  Ask me!

What is #IIC714?

II 2nd

C hronicles

7:14

John 3:16, Revelation 3:20, Romans 10:9 -10, Revelation 21:27, II Corinthians 5:21 and I John 5:13 / John 20:31!

Shalom

Cited or consulted sources, references and resources

http://bit.ly/1kliLwA, “Bible Hub”

http://bit.ly/1kliTMD, “Bible Gateway”

http://bit.ly/1MzWhEQ, “Bible.org”

http://bit.ly/2qPm835, “Bible.is”

http://bit.ly/2qOVbNd, “The Bible Project”

http://bit.ly/2qP1lg8, “Biblia”

http://bit.ly/2qP26FP, “Bible Study Tools”

http://bit.ly/2qP27JY, “Blue Letter Bible”

Rigorous Terminology

Rigorous Terminology

#‎RAD ‪#‎ATEND G-d (Christ) ‪#‎IIC714

Rigorous Terminology

It has been said that we can be very confident of distances claimed in Astronomy for objects, such as stars in the Andromeda Galaxy, from Earth.  One such claim phrased the assertion thusly - “Cepheid variables provide absolute luminosity measures that allow distances to be gauged” - Mr. Rulon James Downard [¹], 18 Jun 2018 - https://twitter.com/RJDownard/status/1008798756114817024 

Once red shift came onto the game, that can be used as a rough heuristic as well. But cepheid variables etc provide absolute luminosity measures that allow distances to be gauged

— Rulon James Downard (@RJDownard) June 18, 2018

At face value that statement seems both pretty strong, self-assured even, and rather cut-N’-dried.  But is it?  Is the explanation for how firmly reliable the claimed distance(s) are, truly that sound?  Well, let’s first look at a few other assertions made by “happy” G-d-haters (a.k.a. atheists) on this very subject:

Cepheid variable - A star that pulsates radially, varying in both diameter and temperature, producing changes in brightness - [²]

“Spectroscopes tell a lot about the size, based on temperature & composition” - https://twitter.com/RJDownard/status/1008834281894899713    

“The dimmer a particular class [of star] is, [or the smaller the] size [a] star is, the farther it is away” - https://twitter.com/RJDownard/status/1008834281894899713

well they're stars, and we have those spectroscopes to tell a lot on size based on their temperature & what's in them, so the dimmer a particular class/size of star is, the farther it is away

— Rulon James Downard (@RJDownard) June 18, 2018

Of course another Tweeter, Ms. Rosa Rubicondior [³], says “No. Not all objects are equally bright.” - https://twitter.com/RosaRubicon/status/1008835313471541253 

— Rosa Rubicondior (@RosaRubicon) June 18, 2018

Ergo, we have two members of the #GHADE who cant seem to agree on whether:

“Distance increases, or decreases, as brightness and size likewise increase or decrease” or “No. Not all objects are equally bright.”

Now, let’s break this all down to see how wholly circular the reasoning, and methodology even, is in asserting many (admittedly, NOT all) Astronomical values for distances claimed, really is.  

We have the assertion that - “Cepheid variables provide absolute* luminosity* measures* that allow distances* to be gauged*.”  

And we have the statement that - “Spectroscopes (one could reasonably insert the word(s) ‘Spectroscopy’ or ‘Spectroscopic Analysis’) tell a lot* about the size*, based on temperature* & composition*.  And we also have the conflicting claims whether “Distances increase, or decrease, as brightness* and size* likewise increase or decrease.” or if distances and size have limited bearing on brightness*, because… well because you know… “… Not all objects are equally bright.”

Note the subjectiveness, and not only inter-relational, but also of substantial inter-dependence, between many of the asterisked words above. One at a time, consider:

 * absolute - the word “absolute” is hardly subjective in nature, however its use in this context bears mentioning because there’s just nothing about the values for distance(s) claimed that is “absolute” - consider total, utter or unqualified

 * a lot - the phrase “a lot” is unquestionably, an exceedingly subjective statement - a whole heap, very much and a great deal

 * gauged - the word “gauged” is likewise, a very subjective term - evaluated, judged or assessed

a)      luminosity - glow, brilliance & radiance

b)      distances - interval, space & extent

c)      size - scope, magnitude & dimensions

d)      age - phase, stage of development & time of life

e)      temperature - melting-point, freezing-point & physical property

f)       composition - configuration, structure & ingredients

g)      brightness - illumination, intensity & brilliance

 * measures - What, exactly, is being measured, evaluated, judged, “gauged” or assessed here?  Luminosity, Distances, Size, Age, Temperature, Composition or Brightness?  And, upon what basis are each of these values being evaluated, judged or even “gauged” on?  I submit to you that each and every point, “a” through “g” above, requires, and relies (re-lies) on, values in at least one (if not on two or more of the other five) values, to be meaningful.

In addition to the inter-relational and inter-dependence of each point above, where each of the above seven points also have their value(s) having a direct impact on the other value(s), we also have the great, great, great, great, great, great, granddaddy of all things #DarwinianEvo - #Uniformitarianism.  Under #Unifomitarianistic Dogma, effectively that - “Changes in, or rather “changes” throughout, history have been the result of, or resulted from, the action of continuous and uniform processes”.  The #Uniformitarianism’s Dogma is completely, and utterly destroyed by such things #ToEMacro’s #PunctuatedEqualibrium; the #BBT’s #Singularity;

But, instead of conceding these contradictory points, #DarwinianEvo’s #Uniformitarianism; the #ToEMacro’s #PunctuatedEqualibrium; the #BBT’s #Singularity, etc., the #GHADE just make vitriolic excuses. Also instead of conceding these contradictory points, and from there, at least admitting that an Intelligent, Creative, Purposeful and Loving G-d, at least, MIGHT be behind the formation of LIFE, the #GHADE will damned near do, or say, anything to #ATEND G-d (Christ).

Consider a couple of parting points / queries, before this Blog on the critically important value of the precise use of - “Rigorous Terminology” - (said with my most passionate application of “Queen’s English”, through full PLUMB):

“One is provided with a Luminosity Value derived from Spectroscopic analysis of a given "bright-spot" in the sky.  As dim, or bright, as it may be, absent other inputs: size, composition, age or temperature, can one definitively identify the bright-spot's distance?” - https://twitter.com/DaBauz/status/1009458478673321985  

For example, Ru:

One is provided w/a Luminosity Value derived from Spectroscopic analysis of a given "bright-spot" in the sky. As dim, or bright, as it may be, absent other inputs: size, composition, age or temperature, can one definitively identify the bright-spot's distance?

— The Dub's view (@DaBauz) June 20, 2018

“What is (are) the MINIMUM number of Inputs, in addition to a Luminosity Value derived from Spectroscopic analysis of a "bright-spot" in the sky, such as size, composition, age or temperature, NEEDED for one to be able to definitively identify the bright-spot's distance?” - https://twitter.com/DaBauz/status/1009478483481772037 

Ah Ru,

What is (are) the MINIMUM number of Inputs, in addition to a Luminosity Value derived from Spectroscopic analysis of a "bright-spot" in the sky, such as size, composition, age or temperature, NEEDED for one to be able to definitively identify the bright-spot's distance?

— The Dub's view (@DaBauz) June 20, 2018

And with that, we’ll wrap-up today’s Blog on the critically “Important” “Requirement” for “Rigorous Terminology” - (in this case, both the words Rigorous Terminology and the words Important and Requirement, are said with the most passionate application of the “Queen’s English”, through full PLUMB)!

Shalom

“No Jesus, NO peace” and yet, “Know Jesus, KNOW peace”

How does one get to “know” Jesus?  Simple, invite Him into your heart, as Jesus says: “Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.” [Revelation 3:20 NIV]  How can be assured that this Jesus stuff means anything?  Well because the Bible tells us so, as the Apostle Paul wrote:

“If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.” [Romans 10:9-10 NIV]

And for those of you who say to me, I can’t be bothered reading the Bible, “it’s confusing” or “it’s a waste of my time”, may I draw your attention to what the Bible says about wisdom: “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” [Proverbs 9:10 NIV]

If nothing else, PLEASE read two chapters from the Bible – (don’t own one, sorry NO excuse, if you’re reading this, you can access this: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203:16&version=NIV) John 3 and John 14!

John 3:16 says: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

And John 14:6 says: “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Well that’s it, that’s Da Bauz’s Take on, “Rigorous Terminology” – this 20^th day of June 2018 © 2018, All Rights Reserved. wr (Da Bauz, Christian Zionist “creationist” too!)

Just sayin’...

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem...

What is #RAD? #RAD is:

R epent of rejecting Christ

A ccept Christ as your Lord

D evelop your relationship with G-d

#RAD your relationship with the Living Almighty God Himself as your personal Lord and Saviour depends on it!

What is #ATEND G-d (Christ)?  Ask me!

What is #IIC714?

II 2nd

C hronicles

7:14

John 3:16, Revelation 3:20, Romans 10:9 -10, Revelation 21:27, II Corinthians 5:21 and I John 5:13 / John 20:31!

Shalom

Cited or consulted sources, references and resources

[1] - Mr. Rulon James Downard, - “Tortucan” - https://tortucan.wordpress.com

[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cepheid_variable&oldid=842325197 - “Cepheid variable”

[3] - Ms. Rosa Rubicondior - “Blogger” - http://rosarubicondior.blogspot.com

http://bit.ly/1kliLwA, “Bible Hub”

http://bit.ly/1kliTMD, “Bible Gateway”

http://bit.ly/1MzWhEQ, “Bible.org”

http://bit.ly/2qPm835, “Bible.is”

http://bit.ly/2qOVbNd, “The Bible Project”

http://bit.ly/2qP1lg8, “Biblia”

http://bit.ly/2qP26FP, “Bible Study Tools”

http://bit.ly/2qP27JY, “Blue Letter Bible”

Satan's rebellion, and the extinction of the Dinosaurs

Satan's Rebellion, and the Extinction Of The Dinosaurs

#‎RAD ‪#‎ATEND G-d (Christ) ‪#‎IIC714

Satan's rebellion, and the extinction of the Dinosaurs

I've wondered, for almost as long as I've believed in G-d (which is pretty much from my earliest memories) and certainly since becoming a Christian - “How can folk (“pre-Adamic race” / “gap theory” minded folk) build an entire dogma out of one word, in one verse that... at best, *can be* translated as either *was* or *became*?

Hebrew, as is, similarly, the case with most languages, has many words that have different possible meanings.  Consider just these ten (10) English words:

Live or Live

Wind or Wind

Bow or Bow

Row or Row

Light or Light

Lead or Lead

Right or Right

Saw or saw

Might or might

Watch or watch

At a glance, many might not think so, but those ten words present a challenge to define, absent context.

The very first word, “wind”, is it properly pronounced "win-d", as in a breeze outside? Or is it more appropriately pronounced “whine-d”, as in to wind a watch, or a clock?

The same thing can be said of the Hebrew word hayah ( הָיָה ), pronounced “haw-yaw” used in Genesis 1:2... which can mean a host of different things including, but not limited to, “was” & “became”.

“And the world *became* formless and void...”

or

“And the world *was* formless and void...”

So... with myriad options for what the Hebrew word hayah ( הָיָה ) can mean, how does anyone “decide”?  How do we decide?  Back to my earlier question(s), just like I've asked elsewhere - “How does one decide, and upon what criteria, is the Earth determined not to be less than six thousand years old?” And “Upon what criteria is it determined that dinosaurs died nearly 100 million years ago?”  I now ask, “Upon what criteria does one conclude the Hebrew word hayah ( הָיָה ), as used in Genesis 1:2, means *became* vs *was*?

By the context... but, what does that, “by the context” even really mean?  Well, in my view, “in context” or “by the context” simply means:

A) - the immediately surrounding (as applicable) two to three verses before, and after any given piece of text

B) - the context of the chapter, in which the text in question is found, plus

C) - the overall context of the book* being studied, or reviewed, and in the case if the Bible,

D) -  the broader context of the overall collection of the 66 Books of Biblical Canon

Now, what does any of this have to do with the Hebrew word hayah ( הָיָה ), Genesis 1:2, and a pre-Adamic race, etc?  Context. 

Do we know, much of anything about Satan / Lucifer, his (her**) life / existence pre-rebellion, prior to his “fall from grace” or his “rebellion, and subsequent casting out from Heaven?”  I believe we do, yes.  Based upon, Job 38, Revelation 12, Ezekiel 28, and Isaiah 14, I believe we can get a pretty good picture ole' Lucy's first period of existence, from his creation through to his rebellion & banishment.

Let's begin with Ezekiel 28:12 - 19 shall we?  In verse 12 we see that Ezekiel is being directed, by G-d, to - “Raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre” - and many people I know immediately stop there and say - “Dude, that has nothing to do with your Lucifer / Satan tripe.  It's just about ‘the king of Tyre’ stop conflating things.” - but, in the second part of verse 12, and in the very next verse, as well as subsequent verses, we see an exceedingly interesting point, or set of points:

“12... You were the signet of perfection,

    full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.

13

You were in Eden, the garden of God;”

Did you catch that?

* “...the signet of perfection...” and

* “You were in Eden, the garden of God”

Most people, with even just a remote understanding of the Biblical texts, should very readily see two problems in the above two points, with respect to the king Tyre.  A) - his lifetime was, at a minimum, hundreds (my best guess is about 3,000) years after Adam, and after Adam's banishment from Eden.  And B) we know from Scripture, Isaiah 53:6 & Romans 3:23, that no one, since Adam, has been “created blameless, in perfection, or in Eden”.  Clearly, this passage in Ezekiel has, some broader meaning, or meanings, to it than being - “just about the king of Tyre”!  Or, Scripture is unclear / misleading.  As I do not believe Scripture can contradict Scripture, or be unclear, I’m convinced it must have some broader meanings.  And I therefore submit to you, that this collection of text, also refers to Satan, and his creation, position in heaven and subsequent rebellion.

Next, let's now look at Job, and what he has to say about Lucifer's early days.  Many suggest that, while much of Job is poetic, Chapter 38 comes to mind, and verses four through seven of Chapter 38 have been attributed by many to suggest angels, including Satan (pre-rebellion) witnessed G-d creating.  This line of thinking is often used to bolster the alleged “gap” in Genesis Chapter One, verse two, where the English word “was”, it is argued, should be swapped in favour of the English word “became” for the English rendering the Hebrew word hayah ( הָיָה ); but is this a reasonable, or fair, conclusion to draw?  Does Satan witnessing G-d creating prove when Satan was created?  It certainly supports the conclusion that Satan witnessed, at least part of G-d’s creative efforts.  But, does it really support the alleged “gap” in Genesis Chapter One, verse two?  I really do not believe it does, no.

The argument goes, in its most rudimentary form, that... “As Satan, and the other angels witnessed G-d creating everything, surely, they must have been created long, long before G-d's creative works recorded in Genesis 1:3 to 30.  Ergo, it is alleged / argued that, the “gap” in Genesis 1:2, explains this assumption / conclusion. But...

But, does Job 38:4 - 7 really bolster the pre-Adamic point?  Or does it merely bolster the simple idea that angels witnessed G-d in, at least some (if not quite all) of, His creative efforts?  Consider the text, with context (begin with verse two, continue to verse nine) and then consider what Genesis Chapter One simply says, Job 38:2 - 9

“... 2 “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?

3  Dress for action like a man, I will question you, and you make it known to me.

4  “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?  Tell me, if you have understanding.

5  Who determined its measurements—surely you know!  Or who stretched the line upon it?

6. On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone,

7  when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

8  “Or who shut in the sea with doors when it burst out from the womb,

9 when I made clouds its garment and thick darkness its swaddling band…”

And Genesis Chapter One simply says that G-d created everything, period.  Everything from our Earth and heaven (first, verse 1) to the entirety of the Cosmos, on Day Four (as seen later in verses 14 through 19).  And yes, I get it... that makes our Earth, not even our Sun, the very centre of creation! 

Genesis 1:1 - “G-d, in the beginning, created the heavens and the Earth” - could, and I believe very reasonably should, include the creation of the angelic host, including Satan.  Yes, ALL on Day One.  This would give the angels a very clear, and plain vantage point from which to “witness G-d form all of the rest of Creation”, including His crown jewel - man!

Next, let's consider what we read in Revelation.  In Revelation Chapter 12, verses seven through seventeen, we read of Satan's banishment from Heaven.  Given the use of the word “dragon” (used eight times between verses 3 and 17), and its connection with Satan, six times in verses 7 to 17, it seems reasonable to conclude that the dragon referred to in verses 3 and 4, can also reasonably be concluded to be about Satan.  And it is with the phrase found in Revelation 12:4 - “His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth” - that we conclude "Satan, and one third of the angelic host, was cast down to Earth, banished from Heaven" from.    All of this only begs the first of two “why” questions?  And the first why - “Why was Satan cast out?” - in my understanding and opinion, is best explained with Isaiah 14!  Although we are given a clue in verse 15 of Ezekiel Chapter 28:

"...were blameless in your ways

    from the day you were created,

    till unrighteousness was found in you".

And now, let's explore what Isaiah Chapter 14, verses 11 - 16 have to say.  But, before we do explore Isaiah 14, let's once more reflect on the theme addressed regarding Ezekiel 28 - "Clearly, this passage in Isaiah too has some broader meanings, than being - “just about the king of Babylon”!  Thus, I submit to you, that this collection of text, also refers to Satan, and his creation, position in heaven and subsequent rebellion!

“11 Your pomp is brought down to Sheol, the sound of your harps; maggots are laid as a bed beneath you, and worms are your covers.

12  “How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn!  How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low!

13 You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God

I will set my throne on high;

I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north;

14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;

I will make myself like the Most High.’

15 But you are brought down to Sheol, to the far reaches of the pit.

16 Those who see you will stare at you and ponder over you: ‘Is this the man who made the earth tremble, who shook kingdoms...”

Notice here, in Isaiah 14, two things:

A) - the list of what many simply call, “the Five ‘I Wills’ of Satan” verses 13 & 14

 i) - I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God

 ii) - I will set my throne on high;

 iii) - I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north;

 iv) - I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; and

 v) - I will make myself like the Most High.’

And B) - the clear, and plain implication that the subject of this passage, Satan, - “…fell (or was cast down) from Heaven…” - verses 11 and 12 - “Your pomp is brought down to Sheol...” and “How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star...” (the KJV renders verse 12 thusly - “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!”)

Thus, the verses in Ezekiel and Isaiah also both point to, and infer, a broader spiritual-realm meaning as well as plain references to kings, one of Tyre and one of Babylon.  With all the above in mind, I would now ask readers to consider - Genesis Chapter One verse 31:

"...God saw EVERYTHING that he had made, and behold, IT was VERY GOOD." - emphasis in all CAPS mine

Dinos dying, Satan rebelling and a host of other points, seem to brazenly fly in the face of four simple things noted in Genesis Chapter One:

A) - verse 31 EVERYTHING was VERY GOOD

B) - verses 9 through 27 describe G-d creating ALL life, from microbial to humankind (Adam) in the span of just six days,

C) - a complete absence of any statement, or even implication, of death, of any kind, and

D) - the EVERYTHING being VERY GOOD denoted in point A above, by implication, includes Satan and the full original angelic host

Therefore, based upon all the above, especially in view of even Satan being counted as “Very Good” (as of the end of Day Six - Genesis 1:31) it seems the best conclusion for the Hebrew word hayah ( הָיָה ), found in Genesis 1:2, to be rendered as “was”.  This of course only begs the second of the two “why” questions.  “Why did Satan rebel?” And perhaps also a reasonable third question might be, “When did Satan rebel?”

Let's consider the latter, first, shall we?  When did Satan rebel?  If Satan's rebellion does not relate to some vaguely inferred period, eons before Genesis 1:3, then when?  As Scripture says nowhere - “And this is when Satan rebelled” - we can, in all fairness, only at best hypothesize the “when”.  Referencing Genesis 1:31, Satan's rebellion seems likely to have occurred sometime following Day Six.  In Genesis Chapter Three, verse 8 we read of G-d “…walking in the Garden in the cool of the day…” - although Genesis Chapter Three is primarily about man's fall from grace (sin), this verse carries with it the implication that it was a common practice for G-d, and Adam & Eve, to be walking together in the cool of the day, each evening.  Why this implication is significant to Satan's fall, is perhaps more closely tied to the “why” of Satan's rebellion, than to the “when” of his rebellion, but it's a salient point nonetheless.  And that saliency is this, the “Very Good” status of EVERYTHING in G-d's creation covered some, albeit an indeterminate, period of time.  Man's, Adam's, sin (rebellion) threw the whole world into a progressively worsening catastrophic state of failure, or collapse. 

It can additionally be inferred that, because one of the very first Commands of G-d to man was - “Be fruitful and multiply…” - Genesis Chapter One verse 28, and that in Genesis Chapter One verse 31 G-d calls EVERYTHING VERY GOOD, man (Adam and Eve) must have been complying with said Command.  Keeping this thought in mind, now consider what we read in Genesis Chapter Four, verse 25 where we read Eve bore another son, Seth; followed by Genesis Chapter Five verse three we read that Adam was 130 years old, when Seth was birthed.  Thus, from “G-d walking with man in the Garden, with man”, to Seth's birth when Adam was 130 years old, we can safely conclude Satan's rebellion happened LESS than 130 years, post the creation of man.

This now only leaves the one remaining “why” question, “Why did Satan rebel?”  And my best guess for that one, based upon Scripture, is:

Satan had been, according to what we read in Job 38 and Ezekiel 28, both present to witness much of G-d's magnificent creative works, and also hold the privileged, and even elite, position of being G-d's primo Guardian Cherub!  At least he was, until G-d had the audacity, the unmitigated gall that is, to create that punk, Adam.  Satan, I believe, was driven insane with jealously, which lead to rage. 

When Satan saw that where he was once (and had be for as long as he'd existed) “the veritable apple of G-d’s eye”, but that this human, Adam, had become the apple of G-ds eye, just like many a first-born, and for a season an ‘only-child’, he became enraged that G-d, in his view, had rejected (or at least replaced) him. 

I find it both interesting, and intriguing, that even with Satan beginning as a perfect being, holding the elite position of Guardian Cherub, it was not with his sin, rebellion, or even with Eve's sin in eating of the forbidden fruit, that the world was tossed into chaos... that consequence, or outcome if you will of sin, lands squarely on Adam's shoulders - Genesis Chapter Three verses six & seven - “...she... gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both were opened...”.  Notice that?  Eve, the woman, ate, and NOTHING happened.  Then, Eve gave her husband WHO WAS WITH HER, some of the fruit, and he ate. THEN the eyes of both were opened… but I digress…

The timing of Satan's rebellion, and the extinction of the Dinosaurs, Scripturally speaking, in my view, and opinion, best fits with some time after Adam was created!

Shalom

“No Jesus, NO peace” and yet, “Know Jesus, KNOW peace”

How does one get to “know” Jesus?  Simple, invite Him into your heart, as Jesus says: “Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.” [Revelation 3:20 NIV]  How can be assured that this Jesus stuff means anything?  Well because the Bible tells us so, as the Apostle Paul wrote:

“If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.” [Romans 10:9-10 NIV]

And for those of you who say to me, I can’t be bothered reading the Bible, “it’s confusing” or “it’s a waste of my time”, may I draw your attention to what the Bible says about wisdom: “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” [Proverbs 9:10 NIV]

If nothing else, PLEASE read two chapters from the Bible – (don’t own one, sorry NO excuse, if you’re reading this, you can access this: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203:16&version=NIV) John 3 and John 14!

John 3:16 says: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

And John 14:6 says: “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Well that’s it, that’s Da Bauz’s Take on, “Satan's rebellion, and the extinction of the Dinosaurs” – this 6^th day of June 2018 © 2018, All Rights Reserved. wr (Da Bauz, Christian Zionist “creationist” too!)

Just sayin’...

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem...

What is #RAD? #RAD is:

R epent of rejecting Christ

A ccept Christ as your Lord

D evelop your relationship with G-d

#RAD your relationship with the Living Almighty God Himself as your personal Lord and Saviour depends on it!

What is #ATEND G-d (Christ)?  Ask me!

What is #IIC714?

II 2nd

C hronicles

7:14

John 3:16, Revelation 3:20, Romans 10:9 -10, Revelation 21:27, II Corinthians 5:21 and I John 5:13 / John 20:31!

Shalom

Cited or consulted sources, references and resources

* book being studied or reviewed - case in point, if one were studying a book on “clock, or watch, winding”, whenever one saw the word “wind” one might logically default to “whine-d” for the anticipated *correct* use of the word.  Conversely, if one were studying a book on the Earth's air currents, each use of that same four-letter word, “wind” might very likely be to default to “win-d”.

In each case, the possibility remains that within any specific incidents of the word “wind” there might well be a different rendering.  Consider a book talking about “winding a clock” and suggesting that the ideal place to practice how best to “wind a clock”, would be indoors.  Indoors because, outside the wind may cause pages of the book to turn, and / or one may get dust in one’s eyes, making for the efficient practice of “clock winding” winding up becoming very impractical.  In which case the student may wind up having to go back inside frustrated...

** Satan as a her - see Luke 13:32, The text found in Luke 3:32:

“…Go, tell that fox…” (possibly ‘go tell that effeminate one’)  In the text found in Luke 13:32 we see Jesus the Christ use the English word ‘fox’.  The Greek word used here is alópéx, pronounced - al-o'-pakes - which literally means she-fox, it is a feminine noun.  This reply was given by Christ to some Pharisees (see Luke 13:31) who said that Herod wanted to kill Him (Christ).  It has been said that Herod is a type and shadow of Satan, if not Satan herself, then the Anti-Christ certainly.  Thus, Christ’s calling / referring to King Herod as a she-fox, King Herod who is noted for his exceedingly wicked, evil ways, and as a type, or shadow, of the ancient evil one, Satan (Hasatan / Shaytan / Allaah), suggests Satan’s feminine traits.  Take it as you will.  I recommend reading Luke 13:22 – 35 for some basic context.

http://bit.ly/1kliLwA, “Bible Hub”

http://bit.ly/1kliTMD, “Bible Gateway”

http://bit.ly/1MzWhEQ, “Bible.org”

http://bit.ly/2qPm835, “Bible.is”

http://bit.ly/2qOVbNd, “The Bible Project”

http://bit.ly/2qP1lg8, “Biblia”

http://bit.ly/2qP26FP, “Bible Study Tools”

http://bit.ly/2qP27JY, “Blue Letter Bible”