Lies Masquerading as “The Truth”, Part #7
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!
Nero was born in Antium. His given and family names were Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus, and his father was Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus, a nobleman. Agrippina the Younger was Nero’s mother, and the great-grand-daughter of Augustus Caesar. After Nero’s father died, he being a child was adopted by Claudius, who had married Nero’s mother, Agrippina. Claudius adopted Nero as his eldest son, naming him Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus Germanicus. Nero married Octavia, Claudius’ daughter by a previous marriage. Later Claudius died, some believing he was poisoned by Agrippina, so her son Nero could become emperor. Later Nero’s insanity came to the fore when he had Agrippina murdered. After that, Nero divorced Octavia and had her killed. He then married a jewess Poppaea Sabina, whom he also had killed a few years later. Nero then took two male lovers, and treated one as his husband and the other as his wife. [Gleaned from The First Apostles & The Founding of the Churches West-France, Britain & Rome by John David McElhaney, Jr., p. 12.] The moral of the story is, one must be very careful of anyone claiming to be God or the archangel “Gabriel”!
This alias-gabriel’s flawed premise is that the “man” at Genesis 1:26-27 is a different person than the “man” at Genesis 2:7. He goes further to claim, as the title of his book indicates, that there were two different creations by two different beings, one by “God”, and the other by “the Lord” (Yahweh). In his book The Two Creations, alias-gabriel continues his “Two-God, Two-Creation theory” until he reaches chapter 15 on page 31, where he starts using Lord (i.e. Yahweh) and God (i.e. Elohim) interchangeably! Here in part is what alias-gabriel said on page 31: “After these things the word of the Lord came unto Abram ... Abram had one request of the Lord ... Even as Abraham believed God ...” Now which was it alias-gabriel, the Lord (i.e. Yahweh) that created Adam or the God (i.e. Elohim) that supposedly created the non-Adamic people? Then from pages 31 to 147 alias-gabriel continues to use “Lord” and “God” interchangeably, as if they were the same entity! This goes on page after page for the rest of his book! I hope the reader is beginning to comprehend just how dangerous this alias-gabriel is.
Then on page 32 alias-gabriel states in part: “The Lord then told Abram that his seed would be in captivity for four hundred years in a nation that wasn’t theirs. But they would come out, with great substance, when God would judge that nation ...” Again, alias-gabriel, which is it, Lord or God? If alias-gabriel is correct with his hypothesis on Genesis chapters 1 & 2, it would appear that Abraham had two gods! Again on this same page alias-gabriel makes the comment: “... The lesson is that the Lord causes wars, and the elimination, or chastisement, of any nation that becomes too wicked ... Of course, most of our ‘blind guides’ attribute war to their pet ‘Satan,’ and thereby deny the power and sovereignty of Almighty God ...” Again alias-gabriel, which is it, Lord or God? Why are YOUR two gods of Genesis chapters 1 & 2 now suddenly spoken of by YOU as the same entity?
Then on page 35, alias-gabriel states in part: “We can only guess why Abraham would have known this was the Lord ... For those who believe God, and what he (sic He) has promised, no matter how long it takes, or how bleak the circumstances look, are known as the faithful ...” Question: Are we to believe what alias-gabriel is saying here, that the Lord and God are the same entity, or are there two entities like he insists back at Genesis chapters 1 & 2? It would appear that alias-gabriel speaks with a forked-tongue! If he is truly an Israelite, he must be from the tribe of Reuben, as he surely has the attribute of being as “unstable as water” (Gen. 49:3-4)! Mal. 3:6 says of Yahweh, “... I change not ...”
On page 47 alias-gabriel states in part: “Isaac built an altar there. He called on the name of the Lord, and also digged another well, and dwelt at Beersheba ... Abimelech came up to Beersheba to ask Isaac not to do him or his people any harm, for he recognized that God was with Isaac.” Well if the Lord and God are two different entities as alias-gabriel insists at Genesis chapters 1 & 2, why did Isaac pray in the name of the Lord, and why did Abimelech believe that it was God who was with Isaac? It appears that alias-gabriel makes up and changes his own rules as he goes along his rampaging way.
At pages 50-51 alias-gabriel comments thusly: “The Lord went on to promise Jacob that he [sic He] would be with him wherever he went and would protect him ... Jacob then took the stone he had used for a pillow and set it up, and poured oil on it. He named the place Bethel, meaning: House of God.” If one will very carefully read alias-gabriel’s narrative here, it is proof positive that he is declaring that Lord and God are the same entity. Therefore, how could Lord and God be two different entities as he demands at Genesis chapters 1 & 2?
At page 50, alias-gabriel blunders again where he quotes Gen. 28:13 from the KJV: “And behold the Lord stood above it, and said I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed.” Then alias-gabriel comments thusly: “The Lord went on to promise Jacob that he [sic He] would be with him wherever he went and would protect him ...” This verse that alias-gabriel quoted here uses the words Lord and God together as one deity and is simply Yahweh Elohim, and Elohim simply means the Almighty. Not only this, but alias-gabriel, in his comment on this verse, recognized that the God spoken of at Gen. 28:13 was indeed the Lord (or Yahweh). In the Old Testament the words “Lord God” (Yahweh Elohim) are used together to refer to one deity extensively in the Hebrew! And, although Elohim is plural in form, when it is used in this manner it is always singular, thus Yahweh singular-Elohim! Simply put, alias-gabriel is not an authority on the Hebrew language! Neither am I, and that is why I go to sources which do understand the Hebrew, and I will never use a bad-fig-Canaanite-jew for such language instruction. But as for alias-gabriel, he takes instruction from Yar Davidy, a Canaanite-jew, as he admits on page 91! That’s like taking instructions from Satan himself. Didn’t Yahshua Christ Himself warn us against the leaven (doctrine) of the Pharisees and Sadducees, Matt. 16:6?
I have a copy of a letter from Lloyd Palmer to a Mr. Scott, and in the upper center there is a heading “Straws In The Wind”, followed by a telephone number, followed by Gabriel’s Enterprises, P.O. Box 531, Albert Lea, MN, 56007, and the letter is signed by Lloyd Palmer, and dated 12 July 2007. Then I have a yellow, letter size paper with the same letterhead. On the back of this yellow paper is an advertisement for the book The Two Creations with a subtitle “Elohiym and Yahovah in Genesis”, by “Gabriel”. On the letterhead of the letter to Mr. Scott, on the upper left-hand side there is an American flag, and printed under the flag are the words “One God, One People, One Nation”.
This is very two-faced of alias-gabriel to advertise his “enterprises” as “One God”, and then turn around and insist that there were “Two Gods and Two Creations”! It is also very hypocritical to insist that there were two gods at Genesis chapters 1 & 2, “Lord” and “God”, and then in the rest of his diatribe to use Lord and God interchangeably as though they were the same entity! One of the synonyms for hypocrite is “pharisee”, which in turn means a self-righteous or hypocritical person! On the reverse side of Gabriel’s Enterprises yellow book and tract list, it is stated: “All major Bible doctrines originate in the Book of Genesis.” Question: Why then, does alias-gabriel abandon Genesis 3:14-15 concerning two seedlines of people, the very foundation of the rest of the Bible?
ALIAS-GABRIEL’S FAILURE TO DEBUNK GEN. 3:15
On pages 14-19, alias-gabriel exposes several of his badly flawed premises concerning Biblical Two-Seedline doctrine. It is glaringly evident that he hasn’t really done his homework on the subject! He first quotes Gen. 4:1, not realizing that that verse is a corrupted passage, and nothing can be gained by quoting it. I fully explained this in my brochure The Problem With Genesis 4:1, and several other articles. Here it is again:
The Interpreter’s Bible, a twelve volume collaborative work of 36 ‘consulting editors’, plus 124 other ‘contributors’, makes the following observation on this verse, vol. 1, page 517: “Cain seems originally to have been the ancestor of the Kenites ... The meaning of the name is ‘metalworker’ or ‘smith’; here, however, it is represented as a derivation of a word meaning ‘acquire’, ‘get’ – one of the popular etymologies frequent in Genesis – hence the mother’s words I have gotten a man. -- From the Lord (KJV) is a rendering, following the LXX and Vulg., of ’eth Yahweh, which is literally, ‘with Yahweh’, and so unintelligible here (the help of [RSV] is not in the Hebrew). It seems probable that ’eth should be ’oth – so, ‘the mark of Yahweh’ – and that the words are a gloss ...”
Secondly, The Interpreter’s One-Volume Commentary On The Bible, edited by Charles M. Laymon, makes the following comment on this passage, on page 6: “... under circumstances which are obscure (vs. 1b can scarcely be translated, still less understood). His younger brother was named Abel, which suggests the Hebrew word for breath.”
Therefore, if Genesis 4:1 is “unintelligible” and “can scarcely be translated, still less understood”, how can one prove anything by quoting it? Additionally, if the words are a gloss, where is the foundation for such a premise? What a blunder on the part of alias-gabriel! The next failed attempt by alias-gabriel to debunk Two-Seedline doctrine is a cheap shot at John the revelator thusly on pages 15-16:
“Then they use Revelation 12:9, to ‘prove’ that the devil, Satan and the ‘old serpent’ are one and the same.
“Now let’s demolish their ‘second witness’ in Revelation 12:9. First off, we must establish that the book of Revelation is written, for the most part, in symbolic language. John was seeing visions of the future here on earth, as he gazed into heaven. So when you read that he saw a wonder in heaven, you know what is meant. All symbols represent something other than what John saw.
“John wrote this book in approximately 90 A.D. To prove to you that his visions were future events, I’ll quote Rev. 1:1:
“‘The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass’ ...”
A couple of paragraphs later on page 16, alias-gabriel quotes Rev. 12:9 as follows:
“‘And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him’.”
Here the flawed premise of alias-gabriel is that everything in the book of Revelation is future from the time that John wrote it. IT IS NOT! While by-and-large the greater part of the book of Revelation is indeed in John’s future, there are portions that refer to the past. I will now quote one such passage that, in part, refers to the past at, Rev. 12:1-5:
“1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. 3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. 4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. 5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.”
Here the woman with the crown of twelve stars upon her head represents the twelve tribes of Israel. Then the dragon that stood before the woman to devour her child as soon as it was born was Herod the Edomite, whose lineage is traceable back to Cain in the Scriptures. Then the man child at verse 5 is none other than Yahshua Christ, and He will indeed rule with a rod of iron! Now I ask you alias-gabriel: Was not Christ born and crucified before 90 A.D.? Though I will concede that Christ’s rule is indeed in the future, alias-gabriel’s future-only premise for the book Revelation is just another case of lies masquerading as the truth!
Next, alias-gabriel goes gung-ho on another one of his flawed premises by stating on pages 16-17:
“Now let’s check out the word beguiled, as it is used in the Bible, and see if it’s used to mean sexual intercourse. Beguiled, from the Hebrew word nasha meaning: to mentally delude, or (morally) to seduce: beguile, deceive ... Well, obviously, we can’t determine from this which applies for sure. We know Eve was mentally deluded, but was she morally seduced?
“To get more light on this we’ll have to see the application, as explained by Paul in 2 Corinthians 11:3,
“‘But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.’
“So there is the truth of the matter, It was Eve’s mind that was beguiled not her body. The people who teach that the serpent actually had a sexual union with Eve, which conceived Cain, should step back for a moment, and really investigate what they are saying. If the serpent was really the embodiment of a ‘fallen angel’ called Satan, this ‘Satan’ had the power to violate God’s law of reproduction. Remember the command back in Gen. 1? Now any geneticist will tell you that it is impossible for a serpent to implant sperm in a woman that would conceive a child. And if they insist that the ‘Satan’ has, or had, this power to create a corrupted mutation out of the likeness of God, they have, in effect, made their mythical Satan, devil, or serpent, into a God! At this point, what are these people going to do with the 1st Commandment of Moses?
“‘Thou shall have no other God’s [sic gods] before me’ (Ex. 20:3). Perhaps they never thought of it, but the Bible says, only God has the power to create! There are over sixty references in the Bible that tell that God was the Creator. Many mention the fact that He created all things (Eph. 3:9). If the serpent had any part in this, why isn’t it mentioned?
“Yes, my friend, if you’re part of this sect that is teaching the sexual seed-line doctrine, you have become part of what Paul said would come in 1 Tim. 4:1,
“‘Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils’.”
This alias-gabriel forgets one very important thing here. That is the fact that God created the horse and He created the donkey, but He didn’t create the mule! Another thing that alias-gabriel doesn’t seem to realize is that the angels are recorded to have the ability to change their being into the form of other creatures as well as the form of Adam-man. It’s like the two angels that went to Sodom to rescue Lot and his family before Yahweh rained fire and brimstone down on the cities of the plain. If you will remember the men of the city wanted to commit homosexuality with the angels who appeared as men!
I will now demonstrate a case in point where it is recorded that an angel did in fact change to the form of an owl, found at Josephus’ Antiquities 19:8:2:
“Now, when Agrippa had reigned three years over all Judea, he came to the city Cesarea, which was formerly called Strato’s Tower; and there he exhibited shows in honour of Cæsar, upon his being informed that there was a certain festival celebrated to make vows for his safety. At which festival, a great multitude was gotten together of the principal persons, and such as were of dignity through his province. On the second day of which shows he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theatre early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun’s rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him: and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another (though not for his good), that he was a god: and they added,– ‘Be thou merciful to us; for although we have hitherto reverenced thee only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to mortal nature.’ Upon this the king did neither rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery. But, as he presently afterwards looked up, he saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head, and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger of ill tidings, as it had once been the messenger of good tidings to him; and fell into the deepest sorrow. A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner ....”
This is the same incident as recorded at Acts 12:20-23:
“20 And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king’s chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king’s country. 21 And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. 22 And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. 23 And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.”
With this it is clear that we have an incident where an angel appeared to Herod in the form of an owl. In doing so it was potentially only one step away from procreation. But it is recorded that only the rebellious angels engaged in this sort of thing at Genesis 6 and at Jude. The story of the angels that left their first estate would take another whole series of papers. I would like to have answered more of alias-gabriel’s accusations, but space does not allow. Yet with these seven papers, I believe that I have covered enough so the reader can be wise enough to see through his lies masquerading as the truth! The ball is now in the reader’s court!