Alphabetical Listing of Papers

Lies Masquerading as “The Truth”, Part #1

Category: 

 A Critical Review Of The Book, THE TWO CREATIONS 

Why would anyone write a book of 147 pages in a letter size format (8.5" x 11" - equivalent to a 300 page book 5" x 7") and not sign his name to it? Instead the author of this book uses the fictitious pseudonym of “Gabriel”! While this cloak-and-dagger author does bring forth a few important truths, he offsets those truths with deceptive lies. If he were aboveboard about everything he was putting forward, why did he not openly claim authorship? What’s worse, this author uses the name of “Gabriel” the archangel to legitimize his dogmas. If you will remember, it was the archangel Gabriel who was sent to Daniel to cause him to understand his vision (Dan. 8:16). It is evident that the author of The Two Creations is attempting to make the reader believe that his utterances are on the same high level of importance as Gabriel’s were to Daniel! All of this should wave a red flag at the reader!

In this book The Two Creations, on page ii, the address is given as Gabriel’s Enterprises, P.O. Box 513, Albert Lea, MN 56007. Now according to J. Richard Niemela, one Lloyd Palmer sells this book, which can be ordered from Gabriel’s Enterprises, P.O. Box 507, Albert Lea, MN 56007. Though the P.O. box is slightly different, could Palmer be the author, or is he just a distributor of the book? Since I’m not completely sure who wrote the book (but I suspect it is Lloyd Palmer), I will simply hereinafter refer to the author simply as “alias-gabriel”, as I see no need to capitalize a fictitious alias.

Lies Masquerading as “The Truth”, Part #2

Category: 

A Critical Review Of The Book, THE TWO CREATIONS 

This is the second part of a critical review. As I explained in part #1, since the author didn’t use his own name but instead used the pseudonym of “Gabriel”, I will continue to refer to the author as “alias-gabriel”. And since this book has been distributed to a number of people, even if I discover who the actual author is, I will continue to use this pseudonym so the reader can recognize the book to which I refer. To foster ones own agenda by using the name of “Gabriel” is nothing new, for Mohammed did likewise to promote his false doctrine, and should wave a red flag! In part #1, I showed where the author made many serious errors using flawed reasoning, rather than discovering the true context of the various Biblical passages. In this issue, I will continue to show more of these tragic miscalculations. The reader should be informed that alias-gabriel is an insidious no-Satan, no-devil advocate. I would also remind the reader that I have addressed this same no-Satan subject with a series of six brochures entitled Mark Downey’s Phony No-Satan Dogma.

To get started with this second paper on this critical review of alias-gabriel, and his tirade, I will cite a passage on pages 115-116 in Appendix E, “Job And Satan”:

“The word ‘Satan’ is a Hebrew word, signifying ‘to oppose, to be an adversary.’ The word ‘Satan’ is translated by our English translators ‘adversary,’ ‘withstand,’ ‘resist,’ and also transliterated as ‘Satan,’ in many places in the Bible.

Lies Masquerading as “The Truth”, Part #3

Category: 

A Critical Review Of The Book, THE TWO CREATIONS 

This is the third part of a critical review. As I explained in part #’s 1 & 2, since the author didn’t use his own name but instead used the pseudonym of “Gabriel”, I will continue to refer to the author as “alias-gabriel”, whoever he happens to be. With this issue, we’ll see more of the serious errors which this alias-gabriel makes. I’m not talking about some minor infractions, but departures from the truth of the utmost catastrophic kind! On pages 5-6, alias-gabriel states in part:

“In order to understand the rest of the Bible, one has to comprehend this very critical point ... In [Gen. 2] verse 19, we also discover that Yahovah [sic Yahweh] God calls this especially endowed man ‘Adam.’ To get more light on this name we must look up the meaning of Adam in the language the Old Testament was written in, because all the names in the Bible have a definite meaning. Adam aw-dam is the Hebrew word meaning: to show blood in the face, able to blush, rosy, ruddy, #119 (Strong’s Concordance).”

Lies Masquerading as “The Truth”, Part #4

Category: 

A Critical Review Of The Book, THE TWO CREATIONS 

As I explained in part #’s 1, 2 & 3, since the author didn’t use his own name but instead used the pseudonym of “Gabriel”, I will continue to refer to the author as “alias-gabriel”, whoever he happens to be. This alias-gabriel is quite a Scripture-twister, as I demonstrated in part #3, where he demanded that the “Adam” of Gen. chapter 3 was the Strong’s #119. As I explained in part #3, Strong’s #’s 119, 120, 121 & 122 are all the same identical Hebrew word, but represent different parts of speech. Strong’s #119 is a verb, hence alias-gabriel attempts to convince us that the verbal form of Adam is rather a separate and distinct noun! Since alias-gabriel claimed to have a Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, he had absolutely no excuse for making such a claim, as Strong does not list a single entry for #119 under the words “Adam” or “man”. If that doesn’t classify one as running a pretzel-factory, I surely don’t know what it would take! Either Strong is lying, or it’s alias-gabriel, take your pick! And when alias-gabriel eats too many beans, J. Richard Niemela is one step behind, ready to sniff the exhaust!

With this paper, we’ll see more of the mishandling of Scripture which alias-gabriel wittingly or unwittingly perpetrates. I am going to quote a portion from this book on page 2, and as you read it, you may not at first see the significance of what he is promoting, after which I will expose his agenda:

“Gen. 1:3-25 ... describes the order in which God [Elohiym] created the component parts of the universe – our earth, and the living beings that dwell on it. The English word God used in the Bible comes from the Hebrew word Elohiym. From Gen. 1:1 through Gen. 2:3 this name appears as the entity doing the creating. ‘Elohiym,’ has a plural meaning, which means the interaction. of the Godhead. Knowing this, helps explain the meaning of verse 26 ...”

Lies Masquerading as “The Truth”, Part #5

Category: 

A Critical Review Of The Book, THE TWO CREATIONS 

As I explained in part #’s 1, 2, 3 & 4, since the author didn’t use his own name but instead used the pseudonym of “Gabriel”, I will continue to refer to the author as “alias-gabriel”, whoever he happens to be. This alias-gabriel is quite a Scripture-twister as I demonstrated several times in this series. His flawed premise is that the “man” at Genesis 1:26-27 is a different person than the “man” at Genesis 2:7. This is what alias-gabriel said on page 4 of his The Two Creations: “Moving on to verse 5 of chapter 2, we notice the Lord (Yahovah) [sic Yahweh] God came into the picture, apparently acting alone now.” What alias-gabriel is intimating here is that the god Elohim was primarily the creator of Gen. ch. 1, and that Yahweh was the god that made Adam in Gen. ch. 2. By saying “... acting alone now ...” alias-gabriel is insisting that in Gen. ch. 1 there were two gods, and in ch. 2 only one (a two-god theory). So with alias-gabriel there are two gods working in tandem to create the “man” at Gen. 1:26-27, and only one at Gen. 2:7. Yet in his “Author’s Explanation of Title” on page ix, he states: “Elohiym is the plural written name of the Godhead who did the creating in Genesis 1.” It seems that alias-gabriel can’t make up his mind on how many Almighty Gods he thinks there are, and who did what!

What alias-gabriel doesn’t seem to grasp is the fact that both the terms “Lord” (Yahweh) and “God” (Elohim) as used in the Bible address a singular deity. Yahweh is simply His name, and Elohim simply means “Almighty”. What it amounts to is: the heathen have their (plural or singular) false elohim, and we have our (singular) Elohim (cf. Micah 4:5)!

Lies Masquerading as “The Truth”, Part #6

Category: 

A Critical Review Of The Book, THE TWO CREATIONS 

As I explained in part #’s 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5, since the author didn’t use his own name, but instead used the pseudonym of “Gabriel”, I will continue to refer to the author as “alias-gabriel” whoever he happens to be. This alias-gabriel is quite a Scripture-twister as I demonstrated several times in this series. His flawed premise is that the “man” at Genesis 1:26-27 is a different person than the “man” at Genesis 2:7. I fully verified this idea to be in error as the Hebrew word for “man” in these passages is exactly the same in form and parts of speech.

With this paper it will be necessary to repeat a couple of very closely related short excerpts from alias-gabriel on page 2, inasmuch as he overlooked (or should I say ignored), a very important portion of Genesis chapter 1:

“Gen. 1:3-25 ... describes the order in which God [Elohiym] created the component parts of the universe – our earth, and the living beings that dwell on it. ... Before we move on to verses 27-28 of Genesis 1, it should be pointed out that verses 3-25 give a very definite order to the creation process. Each creative process helped sustain the next step of the creation.”

Lies Masquerading as “The Truth”, Part #7

Category: 

A Critical Review Of The Book, THE TWO CREATIONS 

As I explained in part #’s 1 through 6, since the author didn’t use his own name, but instead used the pseudonym of “Gabriel”, I will continue to refer to the author as “alias-gabriel”, whoever he happens to be. Since this alias-gabriel neglected to comment on Genesis 1:1-2, I demonstrated in part #6 that if one will go outside during the dark of the moon and find a location away from the interference of city lights and observe the stars, some of the light coming from those far distant stars were generated long before the time of Adam. The Milky Way alone is 100,000 light-years in diameter, made up of billions of stars like our sun, and one can observe them as a cloud of light with the naked eye. Though one may not be able to see each individual star, nevertheless much of the cloud of light we see coming from the Milky Way is 133 times older than Adam. Where were you and I, or alias-gabriel for that matter, 100,000 years ago? You must also remember that the starry heaven was created before the earth, according to Gen. 1:1!

Also, far back in time before the time of Adam, Satan and a third of the angels rebelled against the Almighty, as described at Rev. 12:3-9. Of course, alias-gabriel doesn’t believe that there is a Satan, but Christ Himself said at Luke 10:18: “And he [Yahshua] said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” So it’s either Yahshua Christ who is a liar or it’s alias-gabriel! Rev. 12:7 indicates there was a war between Satan and Michael the archangel. Are we to believe that Michael was fighting with thin air? This is the same Michael that had to come to the aid of [the real] Gabriel to help fight against the prince of the kingdom of Persia. Maybe that is also imaginary in alias-gabriel’s estimation! Since alias-gabriel would deny Yahshua Christ’s own words, he evidently would do the same with the prophet Daniel. Who is this alias-gabriel anyway, that would place his own word above that of both Christ and Daniel? Maybe alias-gabriel is like the lunatic Nero of the Roman empire who had heard about Christ, and proclaimed that he was Christ reincarnated, thus being God!

Mark Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma, #1

Category: 

I have This series of brochures is not only directed personally toward Mark Downey, but to all those who are promoting this same fallacious doctrine of “no-devil”. By promoting this heretical concept, it expunges the foundation of Genesis 3:15 upon which all the rest of the Biblical Gospel story rests. For if there is no Satan, then there was no physical seduction of Eve, and in turn no “seed of the serpent”. And if there was no “seed of the serpent” to bruise the “seed of the woman”, we as Adamites have no salvation! And without being redeemed by a bruised Messiah, we shall forever remain in our graves! As you can clearly comprehend, the implications of such a diabolical heresy are utterly un-Christian. I don’t know what kind of bloodless “christ” Downey and his ilk venerate, but my “Christ” was “bruised” by the lineal descendants of the serpent (i.e. the Satan). Repeating: If there is no Satan, Christ was not bruised and we are still in our sins without any hope of a resurrection!

In rebuttal to Mark Downey and his no-Satan concept, I will cite several of his faulty remarks from eight articles he has posted on the Internet: Suppose Satan is Real, What Difference Does It Make?; What If Satan Isn’t Real, Can Christianity Survive?; Why We Hate Jews (Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5) and The Fallen Angel Theory.

Because page numbers can vary when viewing or printing out articles from the Internet, depending on the size of the browser window, I will give the number of the paragraph (“¶”) of the article instead. To find Mark Downey’s website, type kinsmanredeemer.com into the URL line. Because Downey takes the “no-Satan” position, it subtracts in merit anything truthful he might express. In other words +2 plus  -2 = Zero.

Mark Downey shows his puffed up pride and a judgmental spirit in his writings. This is what I designate as a “god-syndrome”. To demonstrate this I will quote from ¶8 of his What If Satan Isn’t Real, Can Christianity Survive?: “If satan is not real, the dual seedliners are not only wrong, they are in grave danger of forfeiting any chance of redemption to enter the Kingdom. It would be better for them to do nothing and shut their mouths, than to be barking ‘satan is real’ outside the New Jerusalem with the rest of the dogs, idolaters and whosoever loves and makes a lie (Rev. 22:15).” Question: What is going to be Mark Downey’s destiny if he is wrong? For Downey, “god- syndrome” is an understatement, and at the judgment it will be rather late to take his inflammatory words back! One can always discern a person with a “god-syndrome” as they will habitually talk down to one (i.e. big me and little you).

Mark Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma, #2

Category: 

As I demonstrated in brochure #1 by this same title, Mark Downey and all his cronies, professing this same erroneous theory of “no-Satan” theology, are sadly lacking an understanding of the parts of speech in English and have little comprehension of the grammatical rules of both Hebrew and Greek. Yet in their deplorable ignorance, they pretend they are authorities on the subject. By proclaiming that the term “Satan” is a pronoun, as Downey did, he clearly exposes his appalling, lethargic mentality. If you don’t already have Mark Downey’s Phony No-Satan Dogma, #1, you should get a copy to examine his gross error for yourself.

It is my opinion that what motivates Downey to promote a “no-Satan” position is to undermine the truth of Genesis 3:15. For if he can manipulate Scripture to somehow make it appear that Satan is but a figment of the imagination, he can falsely argue that there is no such thing as “the seed of the serpent”. What are Downey and his ilk going to do with Romans 16:20, where Paul said to them: “And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Prince Yahshua Christ be with you.”

This is already history, for when Titus and the Roman army besieged Jerusalem in 70 A.D., the Romans represented “the seed of the woman” and the bad-fig-jews represented “the seed of the serpent” of Genesis 3:15, for which see Dan. 9:26. It takes a total imbecile to deny that this historical event was not a conflict between the two seeds of Genesis 3:15. Moreover, it was a physical bruising of a physical people, and not a figment of someone’s imagination! If the great Mark Downey is so god-almighty intelligent, let him point to the event Paul was alluding to when he said: “And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.”

Mark Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma, #3

Category: 

As I demonstrated in brochure #’s 1 & 2 by this same title, Mark Downey and all his cronies professing this same erroneous theory of “no-Satan” have little knowledge of the parts of speech in English and lack comprehension of both the Greek and Hebrew. I am keeping Downey’s statements in italics.

To get started with this third composition, I shall quote from Downey’s What If Satan Isn’t Real, Can Christianity Survive?, ¶12: “So, where in the devil is a real supernatural Satan in all of this? ‘For this purpose the Son of God was manifested (the Word was made flesh), that He might destroy the works of the devil’ ( I John 3:8). But, in verse 5 it says, ‘He was manifested to take away our sins.’ ‘He put away (abolished or destroyed) sin by the sacrifice of Himself’ (Hebrews 9:26). Well, which is it, the devil or sin?

“From the foregoing evidence it is obvious that it is not either/or, but rather synonymous terms. The real satans of the Bible are not fallen angels, but in fact the carnal sin nature of man. ‘He that practices sin is of the devil’ (I John 3:8). In other words, when we transgress the Law of God, it’s from our own sin nature, being enticed by our own desires. ‘For the devil sinned from the beginning’, meaning Adam and Eve ...”

Well, if Downey is correct that Adam and Eve were the devil, inasmuch as Christ was genetically of Adam, and in the image of Adam, and often referred to in the New Testament as “the son of man” meaning “son of Adam”, that would make Yahshua Christ the devil also. Many, along with Downey, scoff at 1 John 3:12 which says: “Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.”

Pages