The Plurality of the Gods

At the declaration that one believes in more than one God, one is branded a heretic, lunatic or a pagan.  However, in this brand of theology, the word “God” no longer carries the connotation that it has held throughout church history. 

If one believes that the God of the Old Testament is a saucerian, it is logical to suppose that He is not the only being who developed to that point of eminence.  Therefore, one can surmise that there are also other gods of like nature.  This thought brought to its conclusion is the basis on which “Spaceship Theology” rests.

Other Writer's Ideas

For the benefit of those astronomers who are searching outer space for signs of intelligent life;  for scholars, and sceptics, who say there is no evidence that extra-terrestrials have ever visited our planet, let me quote, people throughout the Early World believed that E.T’s, from the Pleiades, civilized their people and that these beings were worshipped as gods. 
Alien contact – Fact or Fiction. By: Leonard Farra

Concerning the multiplicity of the gods, the Epic of Gilgamesh tells us that the gods are created beings. When on high the Heavens had not been named, firm ground below had not been called by name...when no gods whatever had been brought into being, uncalled by name, their destinies undetermined - then it was that the gods were formed within them.

Archaeology and The Old Testament, James B. Pritchard, (Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.)

Here we might insert one of the verses Mr Meek mentions, Thus says the Lord God of Israel: ‘Your fathers, including Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side of the River in old times; and they served other gods. the most we can claim for Moses in it, (Joshua 24:2), is monolatry. Neither here nor anywhere else does he deny the existence of gods other than Yahweh, nor does he assert the sole existence of Yahweh. 

Hebrew Origins. Theophile James Meek, (Harper Torchbooks. 1960)

Monolatry means, worship of only one God, although others may be believed to exist.

Mr Asimov agrees with Mr Meek by saying, It is clear from the Old Testament that the early Hebrew religion was a very primitive one… The religion was polydaemonistic (many demons) and polytheistic (many gods), so the Old Testament explicitly affirms.
Guide To The Bible. Isaac Asimov, (Avenol Books. New York)

What The Bible Says

In the beginning God. Gen.1:1.  Even fundamentalist believers accept that the word, God, is a plural form of the word.  Dr James Strong, a Methodist Theologian, in his Dictionary of Hebrew Words of the Old Testament gives this definition of the word "God".  The plural form of the Deity, in English, especially used with the article.  So we should really read Gen.1:1 like this, in the beginning, the gods created the heaven and the earth.

The word, God, according to Dr Strong was the same word, at the time the Old Testament was being written, as the word that was used in speaking to or about magistrates.  Therefore, the word, God, is not as majestic a word as Bible teachers have told us to believe it is. 

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image”. Gen. 1:26    The obvious questions are; 

1. to whom was God talking when he said, let us make man in our image?  He must be speaking to more than himself.  
2. Why would He say our image if there were only one God?  If these gods were only one God, why would he speak to Himself?  
3. Why not just think, “I will make man in my own image”, and then proceed to do it?

About the plurality of the gods, Mr Roop, in his commentary on Genesis, wrote, God speaks to a group, stating that the man and the woman have become ‘like one of us.’  …Yahweh sits in the company of other divine beings. 
Believers Church Bible Commentary – Genesis. Eugene F. Roop, (Herald Press. Scottdale, Kitchener, Ontario.)

Then, it seems that, almost as an afterthought, because that statement does not fit church theology, he adds, for example, angels.  Surely, no traditional or evangelical Bible student believes that angels are divine beings.  His study led Mr Roop to state that there is a plurality of Gods, but then he tries to diminish that finding by calling those other gods, angels.  It seems, that Mr Roop is trying to cover up the truth he uncovered in his Bible study; not that this is unusual among Bible students!  

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.  Gen. 1:27  Again, changing the singular to the plural, as Dr Strong says we need to do, we read it like this, So the gods created man in their own image, in the image of the gods created they them; male and female created they them. 

I will pass through the land of Egypt...and I will smite all the firstborn...and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment.  Ex. 12:12.  Mr Strong says that the definition for the word, gods, in, gods of Egypt, is the same as the definition for, God, in the phrase, in the beginning God created heaven and earth.  If the Egyptians called on Ra, Isis or Osiris by name; and if they believed that their gods heard them; are we really in any position to say that their gods were only idols and not real forces?  In this instance, are we going to take the Bible literally, or are we going to say, as the church at large does, “it doesn’t mean what it says”?

This argument, of course, does not diminish the fact that the Bible very clearly speaks of idols; those things made of inanimate objects that are worshipped as gods.  The prophets of the Old Testament, speaking to the Jews, made it a point to denounce the worship of such items because Jehovah, their God, had told them not to make any graven image to worship.  That simple fact indicates that some other real, living gods, did not mind if their followers made images of them.

The Akashic Field

Two Levels of Divinity

The affirmation that the gods spoken of in the Bible are in fact super-human beings from other planets does leave a very important question unanswered. 

Namely, if those beings the Bible calls, gods, are only super-human beings they must admittedly be creatures.  If they are created, we come back to the problem, who is their creator.  Obviously, a created being, even the first, cannot be the creator of all things.

If one reads the Bible with an open mind, one comes to the same conclusion as the philosophers, Plato and Plotinus held, who taught that above the Gods of traditional belief was, "The One" also called God. "The One" is the impersonal unifying principle of divinity. 

The following quote is also from Wikipedia. To believe that there is “The One” seems necessary to the human mind, for without that belief we cannot imagine the origin of the universe.  However, to try to fit what the Bible says about Jehovah into what is “The One” is not at all possible.

When Moses met Jehovah at the burning bush Jehovah told him to go and tell the Israelites that the God of their forefathers had sent him, Moses said, they will ask me which God of our forefathers sent you.  Jehovah replied I am who I am.  Much has been written, and more has been preached, about this statement by Jehovah to Moses. 

We have always heard that it means, I am the self-existent, eternal God.  I was so surprised to learn that it does not mean this at all.  Karen Armstrong writes, He certainly did not mean, ... that he was self-subsistent Being. Hebrew did not have such a metaphysical dimension at this stage, and it would be nearly 2000 years before it acquired one. God may have meant ... "Never you mind who I am!"
Karen Armstrong. A History of God, Ballantine Books, New York.

For far too long we have, without thinking, believed what preachers and priests have told us.

The Akashic Field

The following two paragraphs are duplicates of part of a post I did in April 2012. 

Erwin Laszlo in Science and the Akashic Field: An Integral Theory of Everything writes: The akashic records (akasha is a Sanskrit word meaning "sky", "space" or "aether") is a term used in theosophy ... to describe a compendium of (mystical) knowledge encoded in a non-physical plane of existence. These records contain all knowledge of human experience and the history of the cosmos. They are metaphorically described as a library; other analogies commonly found in discourse on the subject include a "universal supercomputer" and the "Mind of God”.

Mystics and sages have long maintained that there exists an interconnecting cosmic field at the roots of reality that conserves and conveys information, a field known as the Akashic record. Recent discoveries in the new field of vacuum physics now show that this Akashic field is real and has its equivalent in the zero-point field that underlies space itself. This field consists of a subtle sea of fluctuating energies from which all things arise: atoms and galaxies, stars and planets, living beings, and even consciousness. This zero-point Akashic-field-or "A-field"- is not only the original source of all things that arise in time and space; it is also the constant and enduring memory of the universe. It holds the record of all that ever happened in life, on Earth, and in the cosmos and relates it to all that is yet to happen. 

ttp://wwwthinkagai.blogspot.com/2012/05/creative-force.html

To try and fit that creating force into the Bible narrative is, to say the very least, confining the nature of that force.   The church throughout history has faced the problem of reconciling the Bible with the teaching that there is only one God since the God written about in the Bible does not meet the criteria of the Omni everything God.  Conversely, the Omni everything Akashic Field cannot be made to fit into what the Bible says about Jehovah.

Concerning this same thought, Madam Blavatsky wrote, the English (word) God … may be said to represent the Creator of physical "Humanity," on the terrestrial plane; but surely it had nothing to do with the formation or "Creation" of Spirit, gods, or Kosmos.

The Secret Doctrine, H.P. Blavatsky. Vol. 1, Bk.2, ch. 4.

Earlier I wrote that the Bible is not without what seem to be contradictions; the following is another example of this. On the one hand, we have verses such as, No one has ever seen God. John 1:18.  Not that anyone has seen the Father. John 6:46.  You cannot see my face, for no man can see my face and live. Ex. 33:20.  

On the other hand, we have verses such as, I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne. Is. 6:1. After this I looked, a throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne, and he who sat there appeared like a jasper. Rev. 4:2-3.

The answer to this dilemma could be that the Akashic Field, that force which created the universe, which includes the saucerians of the Bible, is the God that is invisible.  However, the God of the Jews, whose name is Jehovah is physically visible.  It is Jehovah, not the Akashic Field, that was seen by Jacob, Isaiah, Moses, Daniel and John. 

In spite of the fact that Jacob said that he had seen the Lord and Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel and Daniel later wrote that they had seen the Lord; Saint John, who must have known the Old Testament, wrote, No one has seen God at any time. 1 John 4:12.  If we believe that the Bible does not contradict itself, we are forced to believe that John was not writing about the same God that his ancestors claim to have seen.  Maybe John was writing about the Akashic Field and not about Jehovah.

The Epic of Gilgamesh was probably written before any part of the Bible was written, and makes some statements that are in total accord with the theories presented in my upcoming posts.  Therefore, I will quote from The Epic of Gilgamesh from time to time.  Considering that Moses probably copied, or at least borrowed from that epic, it seems incongruous to so completely reject that epic while accepting the writings of Moses as being completely without error.

Controversial Premises

In these posts, Bible quotations are printed in red.  Quotations from other writers are in blue, and my own quotes and paraphrases are printed in pink. 

Narrow-Minded?

If one is to accept that the God written about in the Bible is a superhuman being who came in a spaceship from another planet, one must put aside many traditional prejudices and views.  One must open-mindedly look at these new ideas, and realize that they do not stand in opposition to the actual written records found in the Bible.  However, our ancestor’s rigid beliefs, now in us, stand in opposition to the possibility of seeing “spaceships” in the Bible.

A quote from a book by Mr Wilson, emphasizes my point. Chance evolution will be preferred to creation; the Bible will be accepted only as a good human book instead of what it is, the inspired Word of God; The death of Jesus Christ will be regarded at best as only an heroic but unfortunate event in Roman times, whereas, in fact, it was the culmination of God’s great plan of redemption for fallen man. Other doctrines such as the virgin birth and the resurrection of our Lord will be ruled out with no effort to consider the case seriously.

Gods in Chariots and other Fantasies, Clifford Wilson, (Creation-Life Publishers, San Deigo).

It is thinking, exactly like this, expressed by Dr Wilson, which I am opposing here.  Even a person who believes in the active presence of UFO’s can accept the Bible as the inspired word of Jehovah.  However, spiritualizing the Bible or treating its message as symbolic, as the church at large does, is unacceptable. 

If one believes that the Bible means what has been written, of course, one will believe that Christ is the Son of God and that He died to pay the penalty for our sins.  One will also believe that He rose from the tomb, ascended and will be returning.  No doubt, the frame of reference will not be the same as that held by Mr Wilson and others of his mindset.

Narrow-minded Bible teachers repeatedly accuse Ufologists of being literalists; this is an accusation that is well deserved.  Many Ufologists, studying the Bible, notice things that they have never heard in church, and they accept those Biblical statements as facts simply because they are in the Bible, and because the church has not yet taught them how to bend those facts out of shape. 

Bend it Till it Breaks

For example, notice what one Bible teacher wrote about the UFO which Ezekiel saw: Ezekiel looked and saw a whirlwind (a great rushing or tempest) coming out of the north (hidden or secreted for God's use), a great cloud (covering a wide area) and a fire infolding itself, (truth and glory of God). Out of the midst of this fire (God's glory and truth) came the likeness of four (worldwide, as in the four corners of the earth) living (spiritually) creatures (people). Every one had four faces (to uphold or stand to face) and four wings (overspreading, an army). Their feet were straight (not wavering from their stand) and they shone like burnished brass (tried and purified by the glorious Truth of God). They were united and went straight forward (didn’t stray from the truth). 

In verse 24, we are clearly told that the wings (overspreading) made noise (God’s Word) like the noise of great waters (God’s people) as they speak the truth and stand for it. 

The symbolic meaning of the words in Ezekiel chapter one are not meant to be taken literally any more than when they are used spiritually elsewhere in God’s Word. Ezekiel 1:4: 

Unravelling False Images. WWW

If fundamentalist Bible teachers are so eager to symbolize what the Bible plainly states as fact, why do they not follow through with that method of interpretation, throughout the Bible? 

Some of the results would, of course, include the teaching that: 

• Christ was not born to a virgin, but rather to a chaste woman (symbolically, she was a virgin).  
• Christ did not really raise Lazarus from the dead.  Lazarus was only symbolically dead; he represented the Jewish race. 
• Christ did not really die on the cross, He died symbolically to indicate that He was finished preaching to the Jews. 

On and on those lies would go.  Those of us who are literalists do not condone that kind of Bible teaching!  Whenever possible we try to take the statements in the Bible at face value.

Why, on the one hand, do those authors accuse us of being literalists and then, on the other hand, accuse us of not believing the plainly stated facts about Christ?  

For example, 

• the virgin birth of Christ, 
• His atoning death, 
• His resurrection 
• His ascension. 

Those facts are all in the Bible for us to read, and if we are literalists, of course, we will believe them.  If those authors are going to accuse us, they should at least decide, first, for what they are going to defame us!  

Are we wrong for believing what the Bible says?  Or, are we wrong because we do not agree with the narrow-minded authors who symbolize or spiritualize everything that does not fit into their preconceived, blindsided way of thinking? 

Anyway, who gave them the authority to tell us, Ufologists, what we believe or do not believe?

Mr Seagraves, a creationist, throws the literalist blanket of accusation over all Ufologists.  He takes it a step further and says that to believe in spaceships and the saucerian's involvement with humans requires aeons of human existence, and the Bible allows for only six thousand years of human existence.  Therefore, he maintains that Ufologists cannot accept the idea of the great deluge, consequently, he says, we do not accept the Bible and therefore UFOlogists are not Christians. 

Sons of God Return, Kelly L. Segraves (Fleming H Revell, New Jersey). 

In any case, there are many Christians who believe that humankind has been around much longer than 6,000 years, in spite of the fact that Mr Seagraves says that if one believes that, one cannot be a Christian.

The Premises

It is easy to see the idea of comparison throughout the Bible.  If we do not allow the Bible to use comparisons we face impossible contradictions in it. 

One example will suffice to prove the point, You who laid the foundations of the earth, So that it should not be moved forever. Psalms 104:5.  Contrast this with, For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Matthew 5:18.  

However, if we think of these contrasting words, in terms of comparison, there is no problem.  For if the earth lasted only a mere 100 million years, any poet or songwriter would be forgiven if he wrote that the earth will last forever even though it won't.  Let's, once and forever, get past the point where we think that everything in the Bible must be taken at face value.

Jehovah's Infinity

When speaking of God, one is tempted to put on a cloak of reverence for fear that God’s dignity will be stepped on.   Surely, one cannot come to honest answers if one does not face questions squarely.  Just as surely the gods are able to protect themselves from the errors of those who in all sincerity seek Him.  Without any disrespect intended to Jehovah, these posts dare to challenge the church’s statements and beliefs concerning “the Almighty”.

In speaking of the attributes of God, it is also well to think of the terms in comparison.  For example, when the Bible writers recorded the events, which had been orally passed on for hundreds of years they still spoke of the astronauts with awe and wonder.  They gave the impression that the gods were all-knowing, for, by comparison to the early man who knew nothing of the science by which the saucerians carried out their missions, the gods were omniscient. 

Suppose we were to place a hinterland aborigine, who had never encountered our complex culture in any way, next to a scientist who had at his disposal a computer.  It is not hard to imagine that that aborigine could go back to his people and tell them that he had met a man who knew everything.  For anyone with access to a computer search engine, this is almost true; hence, the idea of omniscience.  If those natives were so inclined, they might start worshipping that scientist as one of their gods.

The ET's, whom the early man called gods, may well have used rocket belts similar to the ones that science is building today.  Using methods of mobility like that, the gods could soar through the air or transport themselves from one place to another in a matter of seconds.  It is easy to see how this mode of transportation could have led to the belief that "God" is everywhere at the same time, for comparatively speaking, that was surely true.  Early man, who did not race around as we do, could easily have seen air transportation as the basis for omnipresence. 

Those astronauts, using electronic devices to speak to humans could speak without being seen by the ancient humans, and so it is no wonder that the humans spoke of them as being invisible and spiritual; without a material body. 

We will look at these, and other facets, of the nature of the gods, in more detail in future posts.

The Setting

Our Bible Is An Old Book

This blog is called Spaceship Theology; a study of theology must start with the nature and attributes of God, since the word, theology, in Greek means, treating of God.

Christians commonly accept that only the Bible of the Christians is the inspired Word of God and that Jehovah especially chose the Jews to write His message.  Therefore, the supposition is that all other writings are man-made or even inspired by Satan. 

Among those credited to Satan are The Hindu writings, The Koran, The Greek Myths, The Book of Mormon and the New World Translation of the Bible.  This list, could, of course, be made much longer.  According to some, it should include almost everything ever written except the King James Version of the Bible.

My purpose here is not to defend or to condemn ancient writings.  My intention is to look at some ancient literary works, which were written long, long before Western minds were even aware of the idea of ufos.  

Reference will be made throughout these posts to some of those writings, including the Bible, and an attempt will be made to show how they might have been speaking of spaceships, aliens and other theories presented in these posts.

Some argue that the age of the Bible verifies its inspiration.  They say that parts of the Bible are about 3,500 years old; therefore it is inspired by God.  If we are using that kind of rationale, it is good to remember that the Vedas of the Hindu religion are about as old as the books of Moses.  Hence, that argument would mean that the Vedas of the Hindus are also inspired by God.

The Epic of Gilgamesh, according to some scholars, is about 1200 years older than the Bible’s creation story.   Is it, consequently, more inspired than the Bible? 

The Atrahasis Epic is believed, by some, to have been composed in the period 1646-1626 B.C.E. They also believe that Moses wrote Genesis, but Moses did not come along until about 1500 B.C.  So, is The Atrahasis epic more inspired than the Bible is?  Simply put, we cannot use the age of the Bible as an argument for its divine origin.

Throughout history, if any teaching that comes along has not agreed with what the Bible scholars have taught, that teaching is, by default, attributed to Satan.  Such an approach is to take the easy, thoughtless way out of a doctrinal problem.  That is what the Pharisees did with the teachings of Jesus when He denounced them for not hearing the words of God. Then the Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon!" John 8:52.

It is obvious to anyone who has studied the Bible, even a little, that not everything in the Bible can be taken at face value.  For example, God is said to be spirit but the Bible also speaks of Him as having physical attributes.  Why not, for a fresh outlook, let us emphasize the physical attributes, and ascribe the true, biblical meaning to the spiritual aspect as shown in the phrase, God is spirit. John 4:24. 

The intelligent beings from another planet developed scientifically and became astronauts. Being curious, like humans are, (for we are created in their image), they needed a habitable planet to use as a laboratory.  At certain intervals, the gods must leave the earth (if, for no other reason than to keep from ageing at earth’s tremendous pace).  If this idea sounds too preposterous to accept, notice that Psalm 47:5 says, God has gone up with a shout, the Lord with the sound of a trumpet.

Nibiru

Perhaps the ET's who, after "upgrading" the subhuman apes into humans went back to their home planet.

Some say the tenth, some say the twelfth, in our solar system, which many astronomers now agree, that over the course of three thousand six hundred earth years orbits much closer to earth than it does the rest of the time.  

That planet, known as Nibiru, is believed to pass between Mars and Saturn on its very elliptical course around the sun.  Some also believe that there used to be a planet where the rings of Saturn now are and that on one of its passes Nibiru crashed into that planet and fragmented it.  That planet’s name was Tiamat.  A large section of Tiamat was flung into a circular orbit around the sun and it became the planet we lovingly call Earth.

The breakthrough on understanding the extinct Akkadian language which is the mother of the Semitic tongue revealed more basis pertaining to the making of the first humans. The account of the creation of mankind began when the Anunnaki/Elohim (Those who from Heavens to Earth came) “splashed down” at the Persian Gulf. The Sumerians believed that these “gods” came all the way from the outer edge of our solar system. It is a well-documented fact that the Sumerians believed that their “gods” practised a two-way travel from their heavenly abode to Earth. The olden writings also indicated the familiarity of this people on the celestial system such us our sun and the planets in our solar system. The Sumerians always depicted in their pictograph writings an extra planet called Nibiru- the abode of the Annunaki race. This massive planet often referred to as the “Winged Planet” or “Woodworm” possesses an elliptical orbit that crosses our very own home every 3,600 years (Sar). Its expected comeback is in less than 120 years. 

Creation of Mankind – Sitchin’s View — World Mysteries Blog 

In the preceding paragraph one of the names of the planet is given as, woodworm, that should probably have been written as, wormwood, as it is in other articles about this subject.

After having been gone for thousands of earth years they come back to earth; they investigate to ascertain how the experiments have progressed.  They find a humanoid animal without the ability to reason, so the astronauts ‘revamp’ the animal.  The Bible says, God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. Gen. 2:7.  This statement is not made about any other animal, although they also breathe.  It distinctly sounds as if, by direct involvement by the ET's, at that point man became a being with an eternal spirit.

Notice, also that man existed before he became a living soul.  First, he was an animal, then a living being (a being with a soul).  After man became a living soul, he looked, and for the first time with understanding, sees that there is an astronaut near him.

Of course, he does not understand what is happening, but to his infant reasoning, this saucerian appears to be all-knowing and all-powerful.  The human begins to understand that he owes his very existence to the supernatural beings and so he worships them as gods.

The early humans were absolutely overwhelmed by the saucerians and their capabilities. The people were superstitious, and superstition leads to religion.  It seems only natural that in their superstitious fervour they would worship these beings as the gods who, according to their immature thinking level, also had made the world and the universe.

The Planned Layout of this Blog:

1. The Setting
2. The Premises
3. The Akashic Field
4. The Plurality of the Gods
5. The Humanoid Gods
6. The Creation of Humankind
7. The Biblical Cast of Characters
8. Conclusion

Introduction

Not at Odds With Each Other

The following material is a study of the biblical content from the point of view that superhuman beings came from another planet, maybe planets, to start and maintain life on this globe of ours. 

That combination resulted in the title Spaceship Theology.  These superhuman beings are often called saucerians because they came in vehicles commonly known as flying saucers. Sometimes they are called ET's (extraterrestrials) because they are from other planets.  It is here affirmed that it is these ET's that are the Gods of the Bible.  A close study of the Bible, from this point of view, will show that it is not as wild as it sounds.

If you are not interested in, or adverse to, studying the Bible, this blog will not be to your liking; but before you leave, let me assure you that I do not teach the Bible the way your Sunday School teacher did!

My purpose in this blog is to ask some of those questions that church leaders will not let us ask, without shunning or shaming us, because these questions do not succumb to their memorized answers. The problem is, their “stock” answers do not even begin to delve into the depth of these questions.

Here Bible quotations are printed in red. Quotations from other writers are in blue, and my own quotes and paraphrases are printed in pink.

I believe that the Christian's Bible deserves a lot of credit for teaching high moral standards and for explaining, in a non-scientific manner, how the world and people came to be. 

However, in spite of its high standards the fact remains, that the Bible says one thing, and at a different place, it says the exact opposite.  

For example: in the Old Testament we read, Then Moses went up, also Aaron, ... and they saw the God of Israel. Ex. 24:9-10.   However, later, Saint John wrote, No one has seen God at any time. 1 John 4:12.  There is a misunderstanding somewhere.  

Both of these Bible writers cannot have meant what we read them to have said. Perhaps more details from each writer would have clarified what each meant to express; there is no doubt, based on the Bible record, that Moses was writing about Jehovah and that perhaps John was referring to the Akashic field.  We will have much more about these topics in future posts.

Scoffers: of course!

It is to be expected that the majority of religious or scientific people will not accept “spaceship Theology”.   This is because it is contrary to their religious beliefs or because the existence of spaceships is still unproven to most people’s satisfaction.  This is nothing to be alarmed at, for neither did the religious people accept Christ when he came as the Messiah. 

Many hours of reading and gathering of facts have gone into this joining together of spaceships and theology.  To date, I have found no facts which cause any obstacles between a close union between UFOlogy and a real and vital acceptance of the Scriptures. Therefore, the attempt will be made to combine current thoughts concerning spaceships and the Scriptures into harmonious unity. 

The following posts make no effort to verify or explain the existence or the presence of spaceships.  It takes, as fact, their verity and presence as the basis on which to stand. 

There are hundreds of books available to prove and to disprove the reality or meaningful association of humans with saucerians.  Anyone interested in being influenced by those books will find them on a computer search engine, in any good library or in any substantial bookstore.

Whether it is right or wrong “Spaceship Theology”, as a teaching, has come to visit the modern church; and the church must eventually take a serious look at it.  Clearly, these ideas disagree with the teachings of the church, but many are not contrary to the teachings of the Bible.  

Let us dare set aside the trite answers the church has taught us and let us be willing to ask dangerous questions and express viewpoints other than we have learned from church leaders.

The following is a statement made by Charles Hunting in a radio talk show in 1988 on WKIS, Florida.

But I think I've gained a great empathy for people who stop thinking for themselves and start believing what they hear, have heard, and are hearing over and over again. People can believe almost anything. This includes a student I had at Ambassador College who had been taught from his youth that the world was flat. This was in the age of merchant marines and Sputnik. His father had taught him and it was so deeply ingrained in his mind that the earth was flat that he still had a difficult time with it. … We have learned so much by habit pattern, and thinking in that habit pattern makes the world a lot simpler to live in."  Bold emphasis mine. 
 http://www.hwarmstrong.com/hunting.htm

I am saying, if you believe the Bible to be the Word of God, read it carefully, with an open mind and trust it.  Do not trust what you read in my posts.  Do not trust your preacher or priest.  Find out, for yourself, what the Bible really says. I did and have been so very, very surprised at the results.