I subsribe to an email (sometimes i do wonder why) advertising a podcast from a Christian pastor (not sure what denomination).
I really struggle with this guys theology and the following is an example of where our paths really diverge. Given the inspiration of these forums however, I’m trying my best to keep an open mind.
I have copied the sermon outline pdf URL below. Before going off on one of my rants, i thought i would open this up to another pair of eyes to ensure I’ve got the gist of what this guy is preaching. An exerpt that I’ve taken from it that I’m thinking is the gist, i have quoted below…
**
Before these fallen angels began to mingle with the human race, the earth was agrarian and mankind did not possess any tools made by metals. Satan used the fallen angels to teach about mining and metallurgy. They taught mankind to make swords, spears, axes which were used in warfare. Plants and animals were genetically modified and this is why the Bible described the earth as corrupted.
You can hear all kinds of wild speculations from the mouths of otherwise decent believers. Maybe they have an internal pressure to form a comprehensive explanation about everything - a horror of knowledge vacuum. When there are no information about something in the scriptures, wild imagination and baseless speculation fill the vacuum. When otherwise decent believers tell their imaginary explanations, possibly in sermons or books, many others adopt these speculations uncritically.
I hope that we believers would have a bit more courage to judge what we hear in sermons or podcasts, or read in books and blogs. Even respected speakers and writers may sometimes tell baseless speculations.
Given his sermon is based on reading Enoch 1 as authoritative it isn’t surprising his theology is in the weeds. There is a reason Enoch 1 didn’t make the cut to be included in the canon, even though the NT authors did reference snippets of it.
Edit to add:
Just scanned through the whole sermon. He appears to be a UFO enthusiast as well.
That’s pretty much the standard understanding of the literature at this point, derived from the Book of Enoch (which as I recall is really “first” Enoch – there are three others that were most likely written before it) and corresponding sources around the ANE – with one exception, and that is the idea that
which is new(s) to me.
But the bit about Roswell is bizarre!
That said, my judgment is that it is a crappy sermon for a simple reason: it doesn’t proclaim the Gospel. It doesn’t matter what else may be said, a sermon should proclaim the Gospel – even Roman Catholic priests have come around to doing that over the last generation or so.
I can buy the fallen divine council members being behind whatever new thing was most destructive in each generation. They know they aren’t going to be invited back, they know that humans will never belong to them, so it makes sense that they would indulge their resentment by driving humans to kill each other.
He may be one of the people who regard those portions of Enoch that were referenced in the scriptures to be authoritative but not the rest.
He points out the bits that were referenced in the NT, but he includes a lot more that isn’t. When he says, " I don’t know why Enoch’s writings were not made part of the Bible because he was quoted by Jesus and others in the Bible." it is clear he places a lot of value in 1 Enoch.
I think that teaching comes from Enoch. But Enoch doesn’t teach Satan to be the educator of mankind for these arts and crafts rather a Nephelim or fallen angel which name I cannot remember. This teaching though for it to be true must abide with the YEC notion of the earth which has been proven false. So unless its something allegorical or some form of parable maybe I don’t think it’s true
I do believe Enoch as a whole has some things true in it though.
Im suposing that he believes that sinful man must have taught already corrupted angels or, perhaps the conspiracy of thr nephilium being the offspring of fallen angels mating with human females has something to do with it?
Im guessing the extrapolation is that intelligence came to humanity via the inbreeding of angels and humans?
Agreed, its pretty obvious that payback was in order.
I can also acept the possibility that man inbred animals as a result of influence from Satan and his angels (whether direct or indirect), and that is because the whole idea of ancient huge animals that cannot survive on this earth anymore and therefore died out…however, i do find this puzzling to be honest.
Why would God, provide the basis for such animals knowing they wouldnt survive?
Wether YEC, TEist, or Atheist world view, the basic dilemma of that question really never makes sense to me.
I just dont get it that something appears on the scene that is unfit for survival given its size…i mean lets face it, which died out first, the Trex, the Brontosaurus, or the Terradactyl? Why did the Crocodile survive? If the Crocodile survived by breeding smaller, why not also the TRex?
I had to look it up… actually went back considerably further than I would have guessed
The discovery of asymmetric electrical conduction across the contact between a crystalline mineral and a metal was made by German physicist Ferdinand Braun in 1874.
The genius inventor claimed he could visualize his inventions in full-detail and manipulate them in his mind. And he also claimed to have direct communication with intelligent beings on other planets. Is it possible that this alleged mad scientist, so far ahead of his time, was actually a human “receiver”? A being tapped to advance mankind–and pave the way for a future reunion with our alien ancestors? Watch Ancient Aliens Season 9 Episode 15 | HISTORY Channel
Tesla was a undoubtedly a genius. I put very little credit into the paranormal stuff. But I do wonder what he would have accomplished if he had simply revised his contract with Westinghouse for pennies on the dollar.
I’m not seeing the connection here. Whether Earth is young or ancient has no impact on whether rebellious divine council members taught some crafts to humans that I can see.
Or had a deep understanding of physical Creation since they were there to watch God make it.
Assuming the “dinosaur winter” impact theory, aquatic critters would have a better survival chance because the whole land can freeze over but the seas and large lakes don’t might be a possibility.
