New Insights into Old Theology
By Ike Fehr
Over the centuries, since the Christian Church was born her
theology has slowly, but completely changed in some very important
areas. There are few doctrines in the Church today which have
remained as they were in the Church of the first century.
Among the grossest of heresies in the modern Church is the idea
that, “Mary is the mother of God”. It is a good thing that Mary
was there to give birth to God, otherwise, God would not have been
around to create the world into which Mary was later born! Such
atrocious teaching would not happen if preachers and priests would
content themselves with teaching what the Bible says. The Bible
does not teach that Christ is God. Christ himself said, “The
Father is greater than I”. It seems as if that statement, by
someone who knows, should forever settle that debate. That
statement by Christ can only mean that Christ is not God in the
traditional meaning of the word “God”.
Another false teaching that the Church insists on is that there
is only one God. The Bible clearly teaches the plurality of the
gods, but we must approach the subject with an open mind to see
it. By using the word “gods” one does not mean “idols”. In looking
at the meaning of the word “God” as found in Geneses 1:1 “In the
beginning God” Dr. James Strong, a former Lutheran theologian,
said , it is the plural form of a word that means “a divinity”.
That definition alone declares that there are more than one God.
The argument is made that the plurality refers to the Trinity.
However, that idea cannot stand, because, as already pointed out
the Bible does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity! Further to
which, when Jehovah, the God of the Jews, threatened to destroy
the gods of the Egyptians, (Exodus 12:12) the Bible uses the same
word for the Egyptian gods as it used in Genesis 1:1. Namely, a
plural form of a divinity. God was not speaking of Egyptian idols,
He was speaking of their gods.
Those who believe that there is only one God should have a
problem with the first and second commandments. Why would God have
said, “You shall have no gods except me”; if there are no other
gods to chose from. The second commandment would be redundant if
the first one also referred to idols. It is true that the Jewish
Bible says that there is only one God, and for the Israelites,
this was to be true, because Jehovah had claimed this people as
His own; so they worshipped Him as the only God. Deuteronomy 6:4
reads, “Hear, oh Israel:The Lord our God, the Lord is one”. This
verse is sometimes used to argue that there is only one God.
Actually it argues just the opposite. In effect it says, There are
other gods, but for you, Israel, there is only one God.
The Bible speaks of Jehovah as being a God with human qualities
such as abilities and emotions. Of course, this is true because He
made us like He is. But why do Bible scholars deny this and call
them anthropomorphisms; why not just believe what the Bible says?
Having shown from the Bible that Jehovah is one of many gods, of
course, takes us directly to the theory of Ancient Astronauts.
Seeing Jehovah as such, puts Him into a realm where a person with
faith can actually accept Him as a personal God. From that point
of view it is easy to see that many of the miracles in the Bible
could have happened with the help of a crew from a UFO. It is easy
to believe that Christ is the son of a virgin and yet the son of
divinity. It is easy to believe that an ancient astronaut has
called a group of people together, a people who, because of their
faith in a crucified and resurrected Christ have received a new
spiritual life by the ministry of the Holy Spirit; that group of
people is now called The Church. In this respect also many
ministers and priests have taken the wrong road in theology and
they now preach that church membership, baptism or a good life are
the fundamentals for Christianity. This is not true. The basis for
becoming a member of The Church is belief in the fact that Christ,
the son of a God, died and rose again to pay the penalty for sin
that he or she owed.
- - -
When the Protestant
reformers renounced many of the heresies of the Roman Catholic
church they stopped short of the distance they should have gone.
It is difficult to successfully grapple with things that are
deeply ingrained in us from our earliest days. Perhaps it was a
bigger step than one should expect the human mind to make. Maybe
we can forgive them for not going further. But it is now five
hundred years since the religious reformation. Dare we concede
that the Church leaders still have the right to teach those
heresies which the reformers did not, or could not, overcome.
To point out just a few of
those heresys. A careful study of the passion week, according to
the Gospels, shows that it is impossible that Christ was crucified
on a Friday. Have you ever heard any preacher even suggest a
Thursday crucifixion? The Roman Catholic church has for centuries
taught a Friday crucifixion, and one must suppose that the
Protestants have never bothered studying the Bible with that
question in mind! There are many reasons why the teaching of a
Friday crucifixion should be ditched. One of them is Christ's own
statement, “For as Jonah was in the great
fish for three days and three nights, so I, the Messiah, shall be
in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.”
(Matthew 12:40) The
argument is made that in Roman times even part of a day is called
one day. Allowing that arguemnt to stand it still does not solve
the problem of three days AND three nights. There is just no way
that Christ's statement can be made to fit into the setting if He
died on a Friday!
The church has
always taught us that Satan is a bad angel. I have news for you!
NO WHERE IN THE 66 BOOKS OF OUR BIBLE WILL YOU FIND A STATEMENT TO
THAT EFFECT! A short excerpt from New
Insights into Old Theology
shows the absurdity of such a teaching. ”Now there was a
day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the
Lord, and Satan also came among them”.
(Job 1:6) We notice
that “sons of God” is written in plural and that Satan is among
those named as sons”. He is
not referred to as an angel! No where in the Bible is the word
“angel” confused with the words “son of God” (even though Bible
commentators tell us it is). If the Lord, Jehovah, is good and if
He made all the angels, how is it that there are bad angels? It is
much more believable that there are various Gods and that each one
of them made “robots” or “helpers”, which in the Bible are called
angels. Satan is one of those Gods that created robots to help
him. The Apostle Paul even called Satan, “the God of this world”.
Surely, it is agreed that angels do not have thrones. The Bible
does not mention any throne for Micheal or Gabriel (the highest of
the angels) but Isaiah writes of Satan as having a throne, he
wrote, “O Lucifer … you have said in your heart; I will ascend
into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God”.
(Isaiah 14:13) This may not be a vital doctrine but it does
demonstrate a truth that is stated in New Insights into
Old Theology; “Perhaps this
teaching also shows how ingrained our beliefs are. We almost
cannot let go of the ideas we grew up with although the Bible
tells us otherwise”. The church father's have mislead us again!
In thinking about
the birth of Christ and the star that appeared to the magi we have
always been led to believe that it was just an unusually bright
star. To overcome that impossible scenario some have suggested
that Jupiter and Saturn “were in conjunction” which then appeared
as a bright star. Even so, how could the light of those two
planets guide the magi exactly to Bethlehem? The light of the
planets would have shone on the whole area not just upon the town
of Bethlehem! It is much more feasible to believe that there was a
spaceship in the area at that time to guide the magi. The light
from the UFO enlightened the path the magi were to take. To the
Bible writers way of thinking, and in their frame of referance, a
light from the sky must be the sun, the moon or a star. Therefore
the Bible writers must call that light a star. For a fuller
treatment of these ideas, and many others, read the book, New
Insights into Old Theology;
For a fuller, in depth look at these doctrines and many others,
you should read the book New Insights into Old Theology.
This book looks at many Biblical incidents and teachings from the
point of view of those who accept the theory of Ancient Astronauts
visiting the Earth. The author has read many of the books arguing
for and against that theory. He has drawn his own conclusions from
his readings and correlated them with the Biblical chronicle. It
was reworked, rewritten, and it matured for 27 years before it was
published. It has 283 pages, it is bound in soft covers with an
easy to read print and a logical style. To order this book go to
www.volumesdirect.com
The price is $17.55 (US) plus shipping and handling.
The author of this book is a graduate of an evangelical Bible
college. He has preached in churches across Canada, but he has
never come to a point where he would rather accept the churches
teachings than to look for the truth in the Bible.
Copyright by Ike Fehr
Presented with permission of the author
Related Links
Subject Related Books
|
New
Insights into Old Theology looks at many Biblical incidents and
teachings from the point of view of those who accept the theory of
Ancient Astronauts visiting the Earth. The author has read many of
the books arguing for and against that theory. He has drawn his own
conclusions from his readings and correlated them with the Biblical
chronicle. It was reworked, rewritten, and it matured for 27 years
before it was published. It has 283 pages, it is bound in soft
covers with an easy to read print and a logical style.
