Responding to Terry Mortenson on "Old-Earth Creationism -- Is It a Sin?"

In an article for Answers in Genesis (Aig) entitled “Old-Earth Creationism – Is It a Sin?”, young-earth creationist Terry Mortenson argues that “despite sincere intentions to the contrary,” old-earth creationists have “severely damaged the Bible’s teaching about death and unknowingly assaulted the character of God, thereby undermining the authority and reliability of the word of God and subverting the gospel.”[1] The point of the article is to argue that, even though old-earth creationists may be sincere, they are still sinning by teaching (in Mortenson’s opinion) false doctrine:

“Let’s consider whether error must be intentional to be sin. Deceiving others is clearly sinful because it is deliberate and premeditated. But what about the times we are unintentionally wrong due to our finite knowledge, human weakness, and sin nature? Few, if any, Christians are intentionally deceiving others about the age of the earth. In fact, few have studied the topic or seem to care.

Yet, doing wrong or teaching what is false, whether done intentionally or unintentionally, is sin. God required sacrifice for unintentional sins as He did for the other sins (Leviticus 4:2-3, 13-14, 22-23, 27-28).”[2]

In all candor—and, I think, without malice—I have to say that this is a ready example of the type of over-simplified biblical treatments and sweeping denouncements that characterize the young-earth movement. Yes, under the Law of Moses it was possible to sin unknowingly, and sacrifices were required for such sins once they became known, but let’s look at a few examples from the list of scriptures that Mortenson cites in support for his claims. Note especially the phrases in bold:

“Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘If a person sins unintentionally in any of the things which the Lord has commanded not to be done, and commits any of them, if the anointed priest sins so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer to the Lord a bull without defect as a sin offering for the sin he has committed. – Leviticus 4:2-3

“Now if the whole congregation of Israel commits error and the matter escapes the notice of the assembly, and they commit any of the things which the Lord has commanded not to be done, and they become guilty; when the sin which they have committed becomes known, then the assembly shall offer a bull of the herd for a sin offering and bring it before the tent of meeting.” – Leviticus 4:13-14

The issue of unintentional sin in the passages Mortenson references is not a matter of exegetical misunderstanding. It has to do with known aspects of the Law that the people, whether individually or corporately, had unknowingly violated. An example of a provision of the Law that might be unknowingly violated is found in Numbers 19:16:

“Also, anyone who in the open field touches one who has been slain with a sword or who has died naturally, or a human bone or a grave, shall be unclean for seven days.”

Jesus references this commandment in his indictment of the Pharisees in Luke 11:44:

“Woe to you! For you are like concealed tombs, and the people who walk over them are unaware of it.”

Here, Jesus is talking about innocent people who had been defiled by the teachings of the Pharisees, just as those who unknowingly walked over a grave were considered ceremonially unclean under the Law of Moses, and might afterward unwittingly enter the Tabernacle or the temple in that unclean condition.

Yes, false teachings can lead us into sin, but as the apostle Paul states in Romans 4:15, “where there is no law, there is no violation.” Sin results from false teaching when that teaching somehow causes a person to violate some clearly stated biblical principle, prohibition, or admonition, just as the “Jezebel” of Revelation 2:20 led some of the people of the church at Thyatira to commit sexual immortality. God is not in the “gotcha” business. He doesn’t spring traps on people for fun. As the apostle John writes in I John 3:4, “sin is lawlessness.” One cannot violate the law unless there is a law in the first place.

Furthermore, Jesus himself shows us that being mistaken about something does not automatically equate with sin. In Mark 12, when the Sadducees present him with a parable concerning a woman who died after having seven husbands, they ask him: “In the resurrection, whose wife will she be, since all seven had her?” Jesus responds that they are “mistaken” about the resurrection because they do not understand the scriptures or the power of God. He corrects them from the scriptures and finishes his reply with “You are greatly mistaken.”

Compare this account with how Jesus rebuked the Pharisees, whom he accused of setting aside the Law of God in favor of their traditions (Matthew 15:3-6). In his indictments of these religious leaders, Jesus was telling them that they knew the provisions of the Law and had purposely set them aside in favor of their own mandates. Had the Sadducees been likewise sinning in their misunderstanding of the resurrection, there is no reason for us to believe that Jesus would not have plainly told them so.

In lumping those who hold to inaccurate views of scripture in with those who sinned unknowingly under the Law of Moses, Terry Mortenson is drawing an unnatural and entirely unjustified comparison. There is no biblical mandate of any kind to affirm any particular view of the creation account. No particular understanding of animal death and the fall of man are required to be a Christian or to qualify for Christian service. One may think that the young-earth perspective is the correct interpretation—even obviously so—but that is a far cry from establishing that it is actually sinful to believe otherwise. Nor can it be demonstrated that the old-earth interpretation somehow leads to sin, or as AiG president Ken Ham likes to argue, to unbelief:

However, we also know that around two-thirds of young people are leaving the church in America by college age, and the research we detailed in the book Already Gone shows clearly that the teaching of evolution and/or millions of years is a major factor in these young people doubting and then disbelieving the Scripture. The solution to this problem is not to offer them a contorted creation “story” that claims to accept the truth of Scripture while all the time denying it![3]

Young people who are leaving the church over faith versus science conflicts are doing so because they see the Bible as teaching things that have been disproven by modern scientific discoveries, and the specific sticking point is the young-earth interpretation of Genesis. I have seen the testimonies of a number of believers who nearly forsook the faith because they were taught that accepting the Bible as God’s authoritative revelation also meant accepting a young creation, which was entirely incompatible with the findings of the rigorous scientific disciplines in which they were trained. Discovery of the old-earth interpretation ended a tremendous crisis of faith for these believers, allowing them to embrace and defend Genesis—and theism as a whole—with a new vigor. Indeed, some have even come to faith in Christ as a direct result of old-earth teachings, after having been hindered by the perception that they had to embrace young-earth teachings to be a Christian

The following story from well-known Christian apologist William Lane Craig demonstrates this quite clearly:

I remember when I was speaking at the University of Northern Ireland once, and a student after my talk came up to speak with me and he said to me, “My friends have been sharing with me about Christ. In order to become a Christian, do I have to believe that the world was created in six twenty-four days?” And I said, “No, you don’t have to believe that to be a Christian.” And this kid threw up his hands in the air and said, “Hallelujah! That’s been the one thing that’s been keeping me from giving my life to Christ.” So, just explaining to him that there’s a range of options was all he needed to hear...

I do say…in all candor, at least in my talking with high school kids and college students…they think that if you’re a Christian you’ve gotta believe the world was created six thousand years ago in six consecutive twenty-four hours days, and they can’t believe that. Even good-willed kids, like my friend in Northern Ireland, they just can’t believe that. For them, it’s like committing intellectual suicide.[4]

As this story illustrates, old-earthers are not running young people out of the church. It is Ken Ham’s young-earth-or-nothing dogma that is creating the conflict that is resulting in this exodus. He has persuaded many that they must either accept his interpretation of Genesis or else reject the Bible entirely. It’s a tragic state of affairs, and all the more so because it is completely unnecessary. The Bible does not impose any sort of test of orthodoxy with regard to creation.

The conflict that we find here in the church is no different than other theological conflicts that have arisen among Christians throughout the centuries. Calvinists and Arminians have long disagreed on what the Bible has to say about the sovereignty of God and the nature of salvation. Proponents of various prophecy schools—such as pretribulationism, posttribulationism, and preterism—read the same passages of scripture, pronounce them “perfectly clear,” and yet come to radically different conclusions as to their meaning, sometimes even denouncing their opponents as heretics and agents of the devil.

All of these groups—and others that could be named besides—believe in the authority of the scriptures. All of them see themselves as defending what God has said against what men have said to the contrary. Thus, contrary to what Ham, Mortenson, and others are arguing, authority is not the central issue in these debates; interpretation is the central issue. Unfortunately, this truth is often obscured in the heat of debate, just as it has been obscured in other theological controversies over the centuries.

For my part, I would argue that it is Terry Mortenson who is mistaken about creation and the related issues of sin and death. I would argue that he does not understand the character of God as well as he thinks he does. I would argue that he and other young-earth teachers have unwittingly undermined the authority of scripture and discredited the gospel message by tying the faith to hyper-literal interpretations and pseudo-science. Yet, I do not accuse them of sin in these matters. I believe that they are acting in good faith, genuinely trying to uphold the authority of scripture against what they perceive as attacks by liberalism and atheism.

Where I would caution Mortenson and others in the young-earth movement is that some of their material and rhetoric drifts dangerously close to slander and bearing false witness. They know very well that their old-earth brethren hold a high view of scripture and its authority, and that we affirm the gospel, yet they consistently behave as though we twist scripture and “compromise” from the corrupt motivation to earn the praise of men.[5] Some of their rank-and-file followers carry the rhetoric even further, actually asserting that anyone who does not share the young-earth view is probably not even a genuine believer.

I call upon young-earth leaders to dial this rhetoric back to a more responsible and productive level. Accusing a brother of sin is a weighty matter, and you have not met the burden of proof required to sustain the charge. Your interpretations are potentially as fallible as anyone else’s. It’s time you admitted this.

***

For those who are interested, I have been writing a series of articles on aspects of the creation controversy in the church, beginning here. In this series, I explain in detail why I believe that Terry Mortenson and other young-earth leaders are wrong in their interpretations and the conclusions they derive from them.

* Unless otherwise noted, all scriptures are taken from the NASB.

** If you enjoyed this article and would like to support the author, you can donate via PayPal to rhawes73@gmail.com (or send an email to this address if you would like to donate by some other method).

*** Click here to visit my YouTube channel.

---

[1] Terry Mortenson, “Old-Earth Creationism—Is It a Sin?”Answers in Genesis, July 1, 2012, accessed July 23, 2020. https://answersingenesis.org/hermeneutics/old-earth-creationism-is-it-a-sin-to-be-wrong/

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ken Ham, “Hugh Ross Twists The Bible to Fit Man’s Fallible Opinion,” WVW Broadcast Network.com, September 29, 2014, accessed July 23, 2020. https://www.worldviewweekend.com/news/article/hugh-ross-twists-bible-fit-mans-fallible-opinion.

[4] “Doctrine of Creation: Excurses on Creation and Evolution Part 12,” YouTube video, 23:51 – 24:23, 26:36 – 27:03, posted by “ReasonableFaithOrg.” July 12, 2013.

[5] Ham, “Hugh Ross Twists the Bible.”

Making Gods of Men

It’s fascinating to me that every society that has ever declared war on God and religion has ultimately erected its own temples in which to house its own sacred pantheon. The Soviets tore down the churches and mocked their sacred rites as corrupt monuments to futility, but day after day in Moscow citizens who had been told “There is no God” were ushered in silent awe past the body of a man named Lenin, whom the state had preserved and displayed as reverently as any Catholic relic you might find in a cathedral or an abbey. They railed against religious indoctrination in classrooms and state-run media, and if you didn’t get the point you'd be sent to a re-education facility where one of the party priests would drill the catechism into your head with drugs, electro-shock, or blunt instruments.

Try as he might, man cannot escape the sacred. He will always hold some person, place, thing, or creed to be inviolable, untouchable. He will always be initiating converts into his rites, always be railing against the unbelievers, always be seeking to purge the heretics from the congregation. He mocks the cross and erects in its place the swastika, the hammer-and-sickle, the fist of power, or the image of some icon and demands that all bow down and worship.

Never be so foolish as to believe that anyone who wishes to dethrone God isn't eyeing that seat for himself. Look closely and you’ll find that his temple is the ground he occupies, his idol is a mirror, and his scriptures are the sound of his own voice.

* Image: The preserved body of Lenin, which is still on display in Moscow.
** If you enjoyed this article and would like to support the author so that he can create more such content, you can donate via PayPal to rhawes73@gmail.com (or send an email to this address if you would like to donate some other way). Thank you for your support!
*** Click here to visit my YouTube channel.

Echoes of Eden

For many, the biblical story of God’s judgment on Adam and Eve in Eden must sound like an overreaction of epic proportions. After all, what’s the big deal with eating fruit? Even if God really said not to, what’s the big deal?

The devil here is quite literally in the details. Go back and look at the temptation that came to Eve again, and how she reacted to it:

“The serpent said to the woman, ‘You will not surely die! For God knows that in the day you eat from it [the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil] your eyes will be open, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’ When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.” – Genesis 3:4-6

Here are the key elements in this passage: “You will be like God, knowing good and evil,” and “the woman…saw that the tree was desirable to make one wise.”

In these few words, we have the real downfall of the Adamic race. Prior to this time, Adam and Eve were dependent upon God to show them what was right and what was wrong. The temptation they responded to was to become as wise of God, to know good and evil so that they might judge for themselves. In so doing, they cast off the authority of God and became their own authorities.

Beyond this, they also sought to cast off the consequences of their rebellion. God had told Adam, “On the day you eat of the tree, you will surely die,” but the serpent assured Eve that this was not so. Some have been confused by God’s statement because Adam lived on for many more years after he fell, but if you examine the underlying Hebrew and how the same terminology is used elsewhere in scripture, it becomes apparent that God meant that Adam’s death would become certain on the day that he ate from the tree. Prior to that time, Adam had access to the Tree of Life, and as long as he had access to it he could live indefinitely. But after this incident, God cast Adam and Eve out of the garden, denying them access to the Tree of Life and thereby ensuring their ultimate deaths.

By choosing to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, they not were not only rebelling against God but asserting that they could escape the consequences of their rebellion. Doubtless, they thought they could keep going back to eat from the Tree of Life and go on forever, making their own decisions and benefitting from God’s provision on their own terms.

The refusal to acknowledge any authority beyond oneself, even principles of conscience, is at the core of every form of evil in the world, including man’s own inhumanity to man. In this way, the first sin of man has become the defining sin of mankind. The rebellion of Eden echoes down to the present time. The New Testament tells us that the last era of human history will be characterized by lawlessness, a wholesale casting off of authorities and limitations beyond the satisfaction of one’s own desires. As a result, Christ said that “the love of most will grow cold” (Matthew 24:12). A person who is totally absorbed in himself has the capacity for the most astonishing forms of cruelty and indifference.

The New Testament also tells us that the rebels of the last days will think they can go on getting by with it forever, enjoying the all things that God has provided while they spit in his face. They will think that they can escape the consequences God has declared against them simply because he hasn’t moved against them yet. And so they act like nothing is wrong.

“For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away, so will the coming of the Son of Man be.” – Matthew 24:37-39

“Know this first of all that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of the creation’…

“But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.” – II Peter 3:3-4, 8-9

Just as Adam’s ultimate death became certain when he rebelled, so death is also certain for this lawless, self-absorbed final generation, but God has not acted yet because he is giving everyone a chance to turn from their rebellion and be reconciled to him through Christ. Christ is able to perform this because he reversed the fall of Adam through his obedience to God, consistently setting aside his own will in favor of the Father’s will. In the Garden of Eden, Adam effectively said, “My will be done.” In the Garden of Gethsemane, Christ said to the Father, “Your will be done.” For this reason, scripture refers to Christ as “the last Adam” (I Corinthians 15:50), and all who are in him are reconciled to God through him, for God has imputed his righteousness to them (II Corinthians 5:21). There is a beautiful symmetry here. Whereas death became certain for Adam on the day he rebelled, life becomes certain for us when we are reconciled.

“Because I live, you will live also.” – John 14:19

“I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die.” – John 11:25

* All scripture references are from the NASB.

** If you enjoyed this article and would like to support the author so that he can create more such content, you can donate via PayPal to rhawes73@gmail.com (or send an email to this address if you would like to donate some other way). Thank you for your support!

*** Click here to visit my YouTube channel.

The Mad and Fickle Mob

“But to what shall I compare this generation? They are like children in the marketplace, who call out to the other children and say, ‘We played the flute for you, and you did not dance; we sang a dirge, and you did not mourn.’ For John [the Baptist] came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon!’ The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Behold a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is vindicated by her deeds.” – Matthew 11:16-20

Every revolutionary movement claims to throw off the yoke of some oppression, to break the bonds of some expected conformity that stifles freedom in one way or another. Yet, for all their lofty talk, I find that most such movements have very exacting standards of conformity. Those who would dialogue with them must agree to their definitions or there can be no ‘real’ dialogue. Those who would try to accommodate them must agree to their demands entirely or there can be no ‘real’ accommodation.

They are most merciless of all within their own ranks. Dissent from the prevailing group opinion is sacrilege, treason—not merely to the group itself but to the higher ideal it supposedly represents. While they speak of freedom, they demand the most exacting standards of obedience. If they say, “March!” you had better ask “How far?” If they say, “Jump!” you had better ask “How high?”

Mobs are fickle by nature, and as prone to devouring their own as anything else that gets in their way, if not more so. This is the unfortunate lesson that awaits those currently stirring up agitation and grinning while it does the work they dare not do themselves. They’ve lit things on fire, and, fools that they are, they think it will burn only where and what they see fit. Because they have no regard for any history other than the one they envision, they’re unaware that the winds of revolution change frequently, and will, sooner or later, blow the fires they’ve lit back on themselves. Today’s saints may well be tomorrow’s heretics.

The point of what Jesus is saying in the text I quoted from Matthew 11 is that the mob is fickle and never satisfied. If they want to find fault with you, they will, and the standards by which they do so will change by the day—for the only real standard they have is the need for finding fault. Wisdom, on the other hand, does not bow to the mob. It’s not afraid of being called names or having its motives questioned. Truth is not afraid of lies. Lies, however, are always afraid of truth. In this way, wisdom is vindicated. It holds to truth and does not change because truth does not change. John and Jesus came preaching the same message with different ministry styles, yet the mob found fault with both them, demonstrating that it was chiefly the message they hated rather than the men.

If you want to see what a person or a movement is really made of, start agreeing with them and see what they do. They may have criticized you in the past for one thing or another, but if you get on-message with them, you’ll likely find that they will either excuse what they used to condemn as faults in you, or else they’ll portray those things as peculiar types of strength—“It takes all kinds, you know. This just demonstrates the diversity of our movement!” Pamper their egos and you’ll get even better results. In this way, you will see what they truly value.

If you want the praise of the mob, it’s easy enough to get. Just be prepared to change quickly, and often, and keep your real self hidden well out of sight.

* Scripture taken from the NASB.
** If you enjoyed this article and would like to support the author so that he can create more such content, you can donate via PayPal to rhawes73@gmail.com (or send an email to this address if you would like to donate some other way). Thank you for your support!

*** Click here to visit my YouTube channel.

Photo credit: Unknown

The Creation Controversy, Part Eleven: The Other Realm and the Other Fall

Also in this series:

Introduction

Part One: Biblical Authority

Part Two: Authority from Tradition – the Jewish Sages and the Early Church Fathers

Part Three: The Weight of Traditional Views

Part Four: Man’s Fallible Opinions

Part Five: Clues in the Text

Part Six: More Clues in the Text

Part Seven: What are the Days of Genesis?

Part Eight: Misconceptions of Paradise

Part Nine: Life and Death in the Pre-Fall Animal World, I

Part Ten: Life and Death in the Pre-Fall Animal World, II

“For now we see in a mirror dimly…” – 1 Corinthians 13:12

As I’ve discussed in previous chapters, debate over how the Fall of Man affected the physical universe has had the unfortunate consequence of blinding many believers to the greater purposes of God in creation. The young-earth interpretation has produced a narrow, overly simplistic, man-centered theology in which God ordains a particular plan for creation, man messes it up, and then God has to go about cleaning up the resultant mess. By that model, the creation goes from Perfection to Ruin to Restoration.

By contrast, in the old-earth interpretation, creation is a place of testing and refinement, where perfection is not the beginning state but rather the end result. Creation begins with Sufficiency and then progresses through Refinement to Perfection. This is not a result of some inadequacy on God’s part, whereby he requires time to achieve perfection, but rather reflects how he has chosen to deal with the creatures he created with intelligence, free will, and a moral capacity.

As it happens, however, apart from Gap Theory proponents, most old-earth creationists have also limited the bulk of their thinking and apologetics to man, all the while overlooking another class of created moral beings: that is, the angels.[1] The purpose of this chapter will be to examine what the Bible reveals about angels and how they fit into the created order.

God’s Elder Children

On the whole, the Bible tells us relatively little about angels. The following are some of the more important things that it does tell us concerning them:

 

1. They existed before the creation of the earth (Job 38:7), and in all likelihood, before the creation of the universe itself (see Ephesians 3:8-11, John 17:5). John 17:5 is particularly important here given Jesus’ statement that he wished to return to the “glory” that he shared with the Father “before the world [kosmos] was.” The word “glory” is translated from the Greek word doxa, which in the New Testament always refers to something held in a position of honor. For the Son to be held in a position of honor with the Father “before the kosmos was” implies that others were present from whom the Son was differentiated and before whom he was exalted.
2. They are intelligent beings with will and a moral capacity. The Bible records several instances of angels talking with humans, conveying messages, and engaging in activities such as warfare. Some angels are holy and serve God, while others have fallen and are now under the sentence of condemnation, meaning that they have free will and are held responsible by God for their actions (for example: Psalm 82, Job 4:18, Luke 1:8-20, Jude 1:6-9, Revelation 12:7-12; 9:13-15).
3. They were created to serve God in both heaven and on earth, and they are divided into ranks with varying areas of responsibility and degrees of power and authority (Daniel 10:10-13; Ephesians 6:12, Revelation 12:7-12). They bring regular reports to God of their doings (Job 1:6-7, 2:1-2; Matthew 18:10) and are at times employed to carry out judgment on humankind (Genesis 3:24, 19:1-22; II Samuel 24:15-17; Psalm 78:48-49; Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43).
4. They are not all-powerful, nor are they of one mind, nor do they possess perfect wisdom. In Daniel 9, the angel Gabriel tells Daniel that he was held at bay for twenty-one days by a supernatural being called the Prince of Persia, and required assistance from the archangel Michael in order to break through, indicating that some angels are more powerful than others. In I Kings 22, the Lord puts the question of how to kill Ahab to his heavenly host, “and one said this, while another said that” (v 20), indicating that angels think as individuals rather than as members of some kind of supernatural hive mind. The imperfect wisdom of angels is seen in Matthew 13, where Jesus gives his Parable of the Wheat and the Tares. In this parable, a farmer (who represents the Lord) rejects a suggestion by the reapers (who symbolize angels) to root up tares from his field, on the basis that they might accidentally damage the wheat as well.
5. They watch over human nations to some extent and engage in warfare over the affairs of mankind (Daniel 10:12-13, 20-21). Gabriel specifically mentions that Michael (one of the “chief princes”) “stands” or contends for the people of Israel (Daniel 10:21, 12:1). Following the Tower of Babel incident, God apparently gave the rebellious nations over to the rule of various angelic powers (see Psalm 82, along with the Septuagint translation of Deuteronomy 32:8-9)[2], while setting aside the Hebrews for himself. We seem to find a glimpse of this in Daniel 4, where Nebuchadnezzar describes a dream in which “an angelic watcher, a holy one,” descends from heaven and decrees judgment against Nebuchadnezzar, stating, “This sentence is by decree of the angelic watchers, and the decision is a command of the holy ones” (Daniel 4:13-17).[3] Finally, although it isn’t mentioned in Exodus, Paul and the writer of Hebrews tell us that angels actually facilitated the giving of the Law to Israel at Sinai (Galatians 3:19, Hebrews 2:2).
6. They engage in the worship of God, and appear to act in a priestly role to at least some degree (Isaiah 6:1-7, Revelation 8:3-4).
7. At least some angels are part of what has been referred to as “the divine council,” an angelic body that sits as a type of court, sometimes assisting God with decision making (I Kings 22:19-23, Psalm 82:1 (LXX), Daniel 7:9-10, 21-22). It’s my opinion that the twenty-four elders of Revelation are in fact the divine council, the same heavenly court for which thrones are set up around the Ancient of Days in Daniel 7.[4] [5]

As these scriptures demonstrate, angels do not simply stand around in heaven looking spiritual. They are actively involved in the plan and purposes of God in the creation. They are also keenly interested in the affairs of mankind. In fact, the New Testament tells us that God is demonstrating certain things to the angels via his dealings with the church, and that the ministry of Christ had effects that resonated in the spiritual world as well as in the physical:

 

For, I think, God has exhibited us apostles last of all, as men condemned to death; because we have become a spectacle to the whole world, both to angles and to men. – 1 Corinthians 4:9

 

To me, the very least of all saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Christ, and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things; so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places. This was in accordance with the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord. – Ephesians 3:8-11

 

For by Him [Jesus Christ], all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him…When He [God] had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him [Christ]. – Colossians 1:16, 2:15

 

It was revealed to them [the Old Testament prophets] that they were not serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things into which angels long to look. – I Peter 1:2

 

The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. – 1 John 3:8

Indeed, the apostle Paul tells us that, in spite of how things may seem to us on the physical level, the warfare in which we are engaged is primarily “against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 6:12). Thus, it is plain from scripture that the human side of the story is only part of the whole picture of creation. The angelic realm is playing a major role in the eternal drama as well. Angels were on the scene before man, and given what little we know of the role they play now, we can only wonder what role they might have played in ages past. God’s purposes include them as well. In fact, given that God is testing and refining man through his experiences in this world, it seems at least plausible that the angels may be experiencing a similar work of God in their own affairs.

This seems all the more likely when you consider that the Bible implies that there has been more than one fall amongst the angels. Both Peter and Jude tell us of angels who sinned and were cast down and are now imprisoned, whereas we know that other fallen angels (such as Daniel’s princes of Greece and Persia) are freely roaming about. So while all fallen angels have sinned, it seems evident that they did not all sin in the same manner or at the same time.[6]

Consequently, it is not just the foreknowledge of God with regard to man and his fall that we must contend with in the creation controversy. There is also the question of the angels and the divine foreknowledge of their fall(s) as well. For this reason alone, we do well to take a humble approach to what God meant when he ordered his creation and called it “very good.” Man is not the only force in play here, nor was he first on the scene. We do not share God’s mind, nor do we understand the entirety of his purposes, nor do we have access to the spirit world to see what is happening there now or what may have transpired in ages past. On the whole, I believe we know far less than we would like to think we do. The angelic realm represents a critical gap in our understanding of creation and of the causes and effects that preceded man.

In fact, it’s entirely possible that physical reality somehow mirrors certain conditions in the spiritual realm. The Bible reveals that this was true with the respect to the Old Testament Tabernacle. At Sinai, God gave Moses a pattern to follow for the Tabernacle and its furnishings:

 

Let them [the sons of Israel] construct a sanctuary for Me, that I may dwell among them. According to all that I am going to show you, as the pattern of the tabernacle and the pattern of all its furniture, just so you shall construct it…See that you make them after the pattern for them, which was shown to you on the mountain… – Exodus 25:9, 40

 

Now this was the workmanship of the lampstand, hammered work of gold; from its base to its flowers it was hammered work; according to the pattern which the Lord had shown Moses, so he made the lampstand. – Numbers 8:4

The author of Hebrews tells us that this pattern was based on objects in heaven:

 

Now if He [Christ] were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer gifts according to the Law; who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, “See,” He says, “that you make all things according to the pattern which was shown you on the mountain.” – Hebrews 8:4-5

Lastly, the apostle John speaks of a temple that exists in heaven:

 

And the temple of God which is in heaven was opened; and the ark of His covenant appeared in His temple, and there were flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder and an earthquake and a great hailstorm. – Revelation 11:19

 

After these things I looked, and the temple of the tabernacle of testimony in heaven was opened… – Revelation 15:5

The Bible does not tell us how the heavenly temple functions; we know only that it exists and that the Tabernacle of the Jews was based upon it. However, we might well suppose that other aspects of the earth and creation as a whole may reflect realities in the spiritual realm. Only on the other side of “this present age” are we likely to understand the whole truth of the matter.

Servants in the Creation?

Given that we know that angels serve God in many different ways in the present time, and given the clear biblical indications that he takes council with them in aspects of decision making, it seems at least plausible that angels may have played a role in planning creation. They may also have played an active role in bringing it about and managing it before man came on the scene. If this is so, it would help to explain why the work of creation went on for so long. As we’ve already seen, angels are not all-powerful nor are they perfect in their wisdom and understanding. It is reasonable to think that they have gone through a learning process of their own over time. It is evident that they know more about the purposes of God than we do, since they are able to view events in both their realm and ours, but some things are hidden even from them (I Corinthians 2:7-8, I Peter 1:12).

Consider for a moment here that God has been using flawed human beings to build up the body of Christ for the last two thousand years—and we do not have the advantage of immortality, such as the angels enjoy. If he has allowed so much time to pass in order for men to carry out limited aspects of his will here on this one planet, how much time might have been required for the angelic host to manage the entire universe through its various stages of development? In thinking on this, I’m reminded that, when Satan appears before God in Job 1 and 2, God asks him, “From where have you come?” Satan responds that he has come from the earth. This would seem to necessitate that there are other places from which he might have come. In considering this, we should bear in mind that we know very little of the universe beyond our own earth, and almost nothing of the spiritual realm. Creation may be far more complex than we realize.

Now, I imagine it will be immediately objected here by some that the text of Genesis clearly tells us “God created,” “And God said…and it was so,” etc. No other agencies are said to be involved in the creation process beyond, of course, the pre-incarnate Word (see John 1:1). In response, I point out the following:

First, I am not being dogmatic on this issue. I am merely suggesting what seems to be a plausible scenario, given what we know of angels and their activities. God does act directly in his creation at times, but scripture demonstrates clearly and repeatedly that he also uses the angels to carry out his will. In the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares, Jesus himself likened the angelic host to the slaves of a landowner who employs them in his field to help with his crops (Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43). While explaining the parable to his disciples, Jesus said that the angels will be sent forth at the end of the age to remove “all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness” and cast them into Gehenna. God is capable of doing all of this by himself, but Jesus said that he will use the angels to do it.

On another front, when Jesus was taken by soldiers in the Garden of Gethsemane, what did he tell his disciples would happen if he prayed to the Father for help? He said that the Father would put twelve legions of angels at his disposal (Matthew 26:53). Thus, he did not portray the Father as intervening directly, but as dispatching the heavenly host to do what was necessary.[7]

Second, as was demonstrated previously, Exodus makes no mention whatsoever of angels with regard to the giving of the Law at Sinai. Going strictly by the text there, it would seem that God himself literally handed over the tablets to Moses. Yet, as we have already seen, two passages in the New Testament tell us that angels acted as facilitators in the process. In light of this, we might wonder whether angels were involved in other notable events in the Bible, even where they are not actually mentioned. They are capable of performing what we call miracles to at least a limited degree, as evidenced by the angels who struck the men of Sodom with blindness (Genesis 19:11) and the satanic powers that worked through the magicians of Egypt in their opposition to Moses (Exodus 7:8-8:7). Bearing this in mind, it’s possible that, acting at God’s direction, they were responsible for at least some of the miracles and other divine acts mentioned in scripture.

Going back to Sodom for a moment, observe what one of the two angels who escorted Lot and his family from the city says in Genesis 19:22: “Hurry, escape there [to Zoar], for I cannot do anything until you arrive there.” Verse 24 says that “the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven,” but in verse 22 it seems that the angel is talking about taking some type of action himself. Indeed, the angel granted Lot’s request to spare the city of Zoar so that Lot and his family could flee to it (verse 21). The full extent of the angel’s involvement here is unclear. Did he merely ‘give the signal’ for the judgment to be poured out once Lot and his family were clear, or did he do more than that, acting in the Lord’s stead? Which brings me to the next point…

Third, throughout scripture, various kinds of acts are attributed to the people who instigated or supervised them, although others actually did what we would call “the grunt work.” For some prominent examples of this, see I Kings chapters 3, 6, and 7, where we’re told that Solomon spent seven years building the house of the Lord, thirteen years building his own house, and that he built a wall around Jerusalem. No one seriously believes that Solomon got up every morning, strapped on his tool belt, and went off to build these things by himself. It would actually be misleading to read the text so literally in these instances. No, we understand that the text attributes these projects to Solomon because he initiated and oversaw them. This is still a common practice today. For instance, Americans often say, “The founding fathers built this country,” because a group of prominent individuals led the effort that resulted in the United States of America; but those individuals did not do all of the work by themselves, or even most of it. They had a great deal of help from many people whose names have long been forgotten.

In light of these things, I suggest it is possible—and I stress possible—that angels may have played a role in planning the creation with God and executing some of the commandments found in Genesis chapter one. In fact, the text of Genesis itself may hint at this.

The statement recorded in Genesis 1:24, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind,” seems a bit odd in the way it’s phrased. It doesn’t read like a direct command to the earth—for instance, “And God said to the earth, ‘Bring forth living creatures after their kind…’.” It seems uncertain exactly how this act of creation was carried out. To whom or what was the command given? And then there is also the fact that Moses comments afterward, “And God saw that it was good,” suggesting that God had to review the outcome of his creative act. But if God acted alone in creation, why was it necessary for him to see whether the outcome of his action was good or not? How could it be anything but good?

And why would God specify that animals must reproduce “after their kind”? This could simply be a matter of God ‘thinking out loud,’ as it were, for the benefit of the reader, or it could be a specification for those whose job it would be to look after his creations, indicating that kinds were to be preserved and not mixed with one another. The latter would make sense, if, as I have suggested, Genesis 1 is depicting God in the role of a landowner organizing his property, and particularly if the landowner in question is using servants to help him do so. Naturally, he would specify how the work was to be done and would follow up on it to see if it were satisfactory.

Let me be clear: I do not suggest here that angels actually created life. The Bible seems to indicate that this is something only God can do, given the inability of the Egyptian magicians to bring up gnats (or lice) from the dust of the earth (Exodus 8:18-19). Indeed, the Bible repeatedly refers to life as the “breath” or “spirit” of God, going forth and returning to him at his will, with the result that organisms either live or die. But angels may very well be able to alter existing forms of life. Even we humans can do this. We’ve been cross-breeding animals in order to promote and eliminate certain traits for thousands of years now, and the strides we’ve made in genetic engineering of late demonstrate that far more radical alterations of life are within our grasp. Angels, who are “greater in might and power” (II Peter 2:11), could surely do even better. In Daniel 4, when the “angelic watcher” descends from heaven and proclaims the judgment decided upon Nebuchadnezzar “by the decree of the angelic watchers,” the angel states: “Let his mind be changed from that of a man, and let a beast’s mind be given to him” (Daniel 4:16). Clearly, angels had the power in this instance to cause a man to think and act like an animal. This may be only a sampling of what they can do with living things.

The Creative Progression

It’s evident from Genesis that God used a process in creation. What is not so evident is why he did this. The Almighty didn’t need six days, six hours, six minutes, or even six seconds to create the universe, the earth, and life. Had he wished to, he might have established everything in finished form instantaneously, just as some of the ancient Jewish and Christian writers believed that he actually did. Genesis 1 and Job 38 make it clear that he used a progressive approach, however. He created everything in stages; and as I discussed at length in chapter five, that progressive approach makes little sense with a literal, calendar-day interpretation. Why would God create certain conditions, and then reverse those conditions almost immediately? Why create the earth, wrap it in darkness, and then dispel the darkness in only about twelve hours? Why flood the earth and then disperse the flood waters almost immediately?

The creative process makes more sense to me if God, after establishing certain initial conditions, instructed his servants to modify those conditions over time. Each stage of the creative process reached completion when God stepped in, reviewed the progress that had been made, and pronounced it satisfactory—just as any ancient landowner or modern corporate boss would check up on the work done by his employees. Again, I’m not being dogmatic in asserting these things. I am simply laying out a case that seems biblically consistent and removes the textual oddities I’ve pointed to previously.

The First Fall

Scripture reveals that the Fall of Man was not the first time that God’s intelligent, moral creations turned against him. The angels were God’s first children, as it were, and they were also the first rebels. Exactly when and how this angelic rebellion happened, we don’t know, but scripture gives us some clues about it that may be helpful in our understanding of creation issues as well.

Isaiah 14:1-23 and Ezekiel 28:11-19 have long been thought of as describing the fall of Satan.[8] This is a disputed matter in evangelical scholarship, however, with some maintaining that these passages merely speak of human rulers in symbolic terms. I cannot get into the details of that controversy here, as it goes too far afield of my focus on creation. For the purposes of this discussion, I will simply say that I believe that Isaiah 14:1-23 is primarily about the human king of Babylon but also speaks somewhat to the satanic power behind him, whereas Ezekiel 28:11-19 is purely about the devil himself. For this reason, I will focus more on Ezekiel 28:

 

You had the seal of perfection

Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty,

You were in Eden, the Garden of God;

Every precious stone was your covering…

 

You were the anointed cherub who covers,

And I placed you there.

You were on the holy mountain of God;

You walked in the midst of the stones of fire. – Ezekiel 28:12-13, 14

Satan is described here as being present in the garden as a royal figure, full of beauty and authority. He was the “anointed” (chosen) cherub who “covered” in the mountain of God.[9] The translation given here from the NASB is based on the Hebrew Masoretic Text, from which most modern English Bibles derive their Old Testaments. The Septuagint translation of Ezekiel 28:14 reads a bit differently: “From the day that thou wast created thou was with the cherub,” suggesting that Satan may not have been the anointed (or guardian) cherub himself, but rather, was a companion of that being. In the Masoretic Text, Ezekiel 28 goes on to say: “Therefore I have cast you as profane from the mountain of God, and I have destroyed you, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire” (v 16). By contrast, the Septuagint reads: “Therefore, thou hast been cast down wounded from the mount of God, and the cherub has brought thee out of the midst of the stones of fire.” Thus, in the Hebrew Masoretic Text, Ezekiel seems to present Satan as the guardian spirit of Eden, whereas the Septuagint makes him a companion of that spirit instead.[10]

As to the “mountain of God,” this is a phrase that appears a number of times in scripture, and is identified with several known mountains, including Sinai, Horeb, and the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (Exodus 3:1, 24:13; I Kings 19:8; Isaiah 2:3). The plural form “mountains of God” is also used in scripture (Psalm 36:6). Taken together, these are references to places that are set aside for the worship of God, or where his presence is located or else represented.

Thus, Eden is portrayed as both a garden and a mountain in scripture. The garden description seems quite literal, whereas the mountain aspect may be more figurative. As mentioned previously, the Garden of Eden’s location is disputed. Some feel it may have been located in what is now southern Turkey, at the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.[11] If so, then the “mountain” reference may in fact have a literal application, as that particular region is mountainous. This is not to say that the garden was located on the top of some high mountain, however, like a type of Olympus. It may simply be that it was located at a higher elevation than the surrounding land. If this is true, lingering cultural memories of the Garden of Eden may explain why so many pagan religions depict the gods living in high places. Whether this is literally so or not, however, the garden was still the “mountain of God” in that it was the place of his presence on the earth.

Thus, Satan was placed in Eden by God, either as the guardian/overseer of the place of divine worship on the earth, or as a companion to that being; but he ultimately sought to turn the worship of God into the exaltation of himself.

 

But you said in your heart,

“I will ascend to heaven,

I will raise my throne above the stars of God,

And I will sit in the mount of assembly

In the recesses of the north.

I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,

I will be like the Most High.” – Isaiah 14:13-14

Note the “mount of assembly” here, as well as the reference to ascending “above the heights of the clouds.” This high place imagery is reminiscent of the “mountain of God” mentioned in Ezekiel 28, and is also consistent with what the New Testament says concerning how Satan will work through the end-time Beast:

 

Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. – II Thessalonians 2:3-4

 

And the dragon gave him his power and his throne and great authority…and the whole earth was amazed and followed after the beast; they worshipped the dragon because he gave his authority to the beast; and they worshipped the beast, saying “Who is like the beast, and who is able to wage war with him?” – Revelation 13:2-4

Okay…So, When?

So, if Satan ruled in Eden, when did he do so, and when was he finally “cast as profane from the mountain of God”?

As I mentioned in chapter five, the statement in Genesis 2:8 that God “planted” a garden in Eden is in the Qal Imperfect tense, meaning that it could be translated “had planted.” Since plant life was created on Day Three, I think it likely that this is when the garden was actually planted, even though it is not mentioned until the events of Day Six. For this reason, Satan’s rule in the garden could have been anywhere from Day Three up until Day Six.

At this point, things get a bit murkier. There are those who feel that Satan fell through his temptation of Eve in the garden, but there are problems with that idea. First, when God created man he specifically said that man would be given dominion over the earth and its creatures, and he directly commissioned Adam to be caretaker of the garden. For this reason, it does not seem that angels were present in the garden at that time, at least in any kind of authoritative or protective capacity. Indeed, after Adam and Eve fell, Genesis 3:24 tells us that God stationed cherubim in the garden “to guard the way of the tree of life,” which seems to imply that they were not present beforehand.

A second issue that arises with the idea that the devil fell in the garden is the fact that Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 do not appear to parallel the Genesis 3 narrative. They do not describe Satan as trying to lead man astray. Rather, they describe him as trying to elevate his throne “above the stars of God”—stars being a biblical metaphor for angels (see Job 38:7).[12] For this reason, it seems that Satan’s fall came when he attempted to elevate himself to rulership over the angelic host in the place of God. This does not fit well with Genesis 3, leading me to believe that the fall Isaiah and Ezekiel describe took place before the Fall of Man.

But if this is so, then what about Ezekiel 28:17, which reads:

 

“Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty;

You corrupted your wisdom by reason of your splendor.

I cast you to the ground.

I put you before kings,

That they may see you.”

This seems like a natural counterpart to the curse on the nachash (“serpent”) of Genesis 3:14:

 

“Because you have done this,

Cursed are you more than all cattle,

And more than every beast of the field;

On your belly you will go,

And dust you will eat

All the days of your life.”

But note the following in verse 18:

 

By the multitude of your iniquities,

In the unrighteousness of your trade

You profaned your sanctuaries.

The Septuagint translation of Ezekiel 28:17-18 reads:

 

Thy heart has been lifted up because of thy beauty; thy knowledge has been corrupted with thy beauty: because of the multitude of thy sins, I have cast thee to the ground, I have caused thee to be put to open shame before kings. Because of the multitude of thy sins and the iniquities of thy merchandise, I have profaned thy sacred things…

The key phrases I focus on here are “multitude of your iniquities” and “multitude of thy sins.” The Hebrew word translated “multitude” here (rob) can reference a number, as in a great number of people, or a thing of great significance, as in “a great battle.” In light of this, the text seems to be telling us here that Satan is either guilty of numerous transgressions or of a particularly significant transgression. Most Bibles translate rob in this passage as either “multitude” or “abundance.” Again, the issue seems a bit vague. It could be that God viewed Satan’s temptation of Eve in the garden as particularly egregious, or else that it was the last straw in a series of events, whereupon God pronounced final judgment and made an example of him.

Either way, the one who longed to rise to the heights of glory was cursed to sink to the lowest depths, even beneath the beasts of the earth. It may be that Satan had previously lost his position of rulership in the garden due to his ambitions, and later tried to reassert himself after God handed the earth over to new management. Really, either interpretation seems plausible.

While I would like to offer something more concrete here, the biblical text seems prohibitively vague. As already stated, I believe that Satan’s fall occurred sometime between Days Three and Six of the creation timeline, but it may have been a slow decline rather than one momentous event. Indeed, a slow decline seems more likely, as Satan would not have acted without first gathering support. In the process, a degree of deviance and contention would have arisen within the angelic ranks. How this might have affected the creation is difficult to say, but if angels were managing the earth and its creatures, the influence of their decline may have been reflected in the earth as well. Either way, I imagine Satan’s fall occurred between Days 5 and 6 of the creation week, but that is speculation on my part and not worth delving into here in any detail.

Conclusion

This foray into the spiritual realm may have generated more questions than answers, but I hope that, at the very least, it has served to deepen the reader’s appreciation for the complexity of the creation issue. We actually know very little about what goes on behind the scenes of our world, and even less about what may have gone on there in the past.

Throughout the ages, angels have been the intimate servants of the Most High, carrying out his will and acting in his stead amongst the things and creatures that he has made. We may not know the extent of their involvement, but we cannot afford to ignore the veil simply because we cannot see everything behind it. There is no exegetical reason why angels could not have played a role in creation. In fact, there is much to suggest that they could have. They may have been the superintendents of the earth for ages before man came on the scene, helping to create the just-right conditions the human race required in order to flourish. Let us therefore be humble in our assessment of ourselves; for although we are favored, we are not the sole recipients of our Lord’s attentions. We are not the first children he has raised.

 

Next in this Series: Tracing the Advent of Man, I

---

[1] Angel – From the Greek angelos, meaning ‘messenger.’ The reader should understand that I use the term generically here to refer to the heavenly host—celestial beings, those who dwell in heaven. There are at least three types of heavenly being: cherubim, seraphim, and the messenger class. Strictly speaking, cherubim and seraphim are not “angels” because we have no record of them serving in the capacity of messengers. Referring to them as “angelic beings” is more a matter of linguistic convenience than exegetical accuracy. Most of what I say about angels in this chapter applies to the messenger class.

[2] “When the Most High divided the nations, when He separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God. And His people Jacob became the portion of the Lord, Israel was the line of His inheritance.” The Translation of the Greek Old Testament Scriptures, Including the Apocrypha. Compiled by Sr. Lancelot C. L. Brenton, 1851.

[3] The word angelic is added by the translators in these instances in order to clarify what is meant by the term watcher.

[4] For a detailed explanation, see the following article by the author: “The Rapture and the Church in Revelation, Part Three: Who are the Twenty-Four Elders?” at:

https://takeupyourcross73.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-rapture-and-church-in-book-of.html

[5] Dr. Michael Heiser is probably the foremost expositor of the divine council worldview amongst evangelicals. For more information on the subject, see the following introductory presentation by Heiser: “The Divine Council 101”: https://youtu.be/CGU9v7Ik20g, and/or his book The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible.

[6] If you believe that the “sons of God” who sired the Nephilim with the “daughters of men” in Genesis 6 were angels, then scripture appears to describe three different angelic falls: Genesis 6, Psalm 82, and Isaiah 14/Ezekiel 28.

[7] God’s habit of using his servants to do his will and manage his affairs rather than intervening himself is probably why the devil and his fellow fallen angels initially rebelled. Certainly, they would have understood that they could not defeat God himself; these entities are evil but they are far from stupid. No, it seems more likely that they imagined they could defeat opposing angelic forces—either outright or else by persuading more to join them in the uprising—and thereby gain control of creation.

 

[8] I am aware that the term “Satan” merely means “opposer” or “adversary,” and may not necessarily refer to the entity the New Testament calls “the devil” and “the ruler of this age.” The supernatural entities referenced here may be fallen divine council members that had power over the nations and kings mentioned in these passages. That said, the similarities in these passages make it appear that they are talking about one being in particular, most likely the devil himself.

[9] The word “anointed” used here is translated from the Hebrew word mimshach, which appears only once in the Old Testament and has the sense of “expansion.” Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon relates the function of the word with the cherubim covering the Ark of the Covenant with their wings in Exodus 25:20. The word “cover” is translated from the Hebrew word cakak. It refers to something that is placed either with or over another thing in order to shade it, contain it, shelter it, defend it, or mesh it together. Examples of its use in scripture include the reference to cherubim that were carved to cover the mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:20 again), the barrier the Lord set upon the sea in order to hold it back from the land (Job 38:8), and how God protects those who trust in him by covering them “with his feathers” (Psalm 91:4). The picture Ezekiel paints here is of a cherub protecting the garden with its outstretched wings.

 

[10] The Septuagint is vague here. It may be saying that Satan was cast out by the guardian cherub of Eden or along with him.

[11] At present, I think this is the most likely location. Genesis 2 tells us that a river flowed through Eden to water the garden, and from that point divided into four rivers. Thus, we have one river going into the garden and dividing into four rivers sometime after leaving it. This necessitates that the four rivers (including the Tigris and Euphrates) flowed away from the garden. Models that place the garden in the Persian Gulf, where the Tigris and Euphrates meet, reverse the biblical description by having four rivers meet and flow into the garden. The southern Turkey location seems more consistent with the geography of the region as described in Genesis. Further, the archaeological find at Gobekli Tepe, which is currently the oldest temple complex ever discovered, may support civilization beginning in this region roughly 11,500 years ago. By contrast, nothing in the proposed Persian Gulf location remotely approaches this date. For more information, see:

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-05/afot-ggc051220.php.

[12] It was also commonly believed in the ancient world that stars were divine beings.