The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Evolution, The Flood, and God’s True Nature


Yes indeed. Satan is merely a fallen angel. Nothing more. He is not some sort of “evil God”.

Good Catholic J. R. R. Tolkien had one of his elven heroes almost kill Satan in one-on-one combat.

I am confident that Satan cannot read minds (as all too many seem to assume). Frankly, I doubt that Satan is even aware of your existence as an individual. That is, I do not doubt he knows about how many people there are in the world (just as does anyone with access to an encyclopedia), but if he were asked, “Could you point Andrew McGalliger out in a crowd?”, Satan would have to say no.


Dave, yes I agree that evil people have limited power and knowledge, however the problem is that we join in with them via our own sin or ignorance, increasing their power, growth and spread.


Geoffrey, If I am understanding you correctly, I can agree that the better definition of Satan would be a gathering of individuals operating as one “body” in sin. Thus it is a beast of our own making.


I affirm that Satan is a literal person who is an angel who fell into sin.

And that is all he is.

He is very, very limited in terms of power, knowledge, and presence.

All too many people imagine Satan as a quasi-equal with God, envisioning Satan as individually tempting each and every person every day, and even being privy to the thoughts each of us think. That’s all nonsense.

Satan is more like a super-villain in a comic book than that.


I may be guilty of overgeneralizing, but I suggest that to the same extent a Christian minimizes or dismisses the devil (formerly known as the archangel Lucifer), he most likely minimizes or dismisses:

-The complete victory of Jesus at the cross over the (very real) forces of darkness, and our own delegated authority over them

-The “divine exchange” at the cross, which includes health and prosperity:

Isaiah 53 indicates that Messiah would TAKE our sin and suffering, and GIVE us his righteousness and “shalom”—shalom being variously translated as “health,” “prosperity,” “safety,” “contentment,” “friendship,” and “peace.”
(And, of course, 3 John 1:2 says, “Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your soul prospers.”)

-The Baptism in The Holy Spirit, and the Gifts of The Holy Spirit, still being available and necessary for us today

-Grace completely replacing legalism

(These convictions seem correlated, and tend to hang together, or fall together.)

He sure sounds mighty powerful to me! Outside of Christ, we are no match for him. (But obviously he is as nothing in comparison to God.)

I would definitely encourage each of you to invest the time to read Murray’s article Is Satan Involved In Every Evil Occurrence? (Thank you for doing so already, LLC)

Two short quotes from it:



Hermano - pm sent.


Speaking of evolution, if the Spirit( love, truth, etc.) that we find inside of ourselves evolved, then that means the Spirit of God was not eternally in existence. Likewise, to say that our Spirits were created by God suggests that there was no Spirit prior to the creation of man. I believe that we are made of the very essence of our Father and Creator. So to me, evil would be the thing that is created by man. It is going against our true nature.


You have more power over Satan and the unholy angels - then you think. Just by invoking the name of Christ. And I also believe, that brings help from the holy angels. And I would guess that they outnumber, Satan and the unholy angels. Just food for thought. :exclamation: :smiley:


I am not dogmatic about evolution, nor creation. But it seems to me that evolution is plausable. Evidence points, in my opinion, to a very old earth. To those who think it is only 6,000 years, I day: That is also possible, for God has the power to do it. But it does not naturally follow that God would merely create the illusion of an old earth, while making it young. I mean, to do so is basically deception on some level, or perhaps our evidence is flawed. It seems so highly unlikely that dinosaurs existed during the time of humans. If so, surely some glyphs would display this? Young earthars like to demonize the opposition. From my vieepomt, God could have done it anyway he pleased, but is that how he did it? Why the dogma?


On my phone, so excuse typos above. But, another question. How do we know angels are immortal? Perhaps I am nitpicking, but only God is immortal. He might choose to sustain angels for ages, but that does not make them immortal.


Actually, that question has been asked, on the secular Yahoo forums at:

Are Angels immortal or mortal?

Let me share, what was voted the best answer :exclamation: :smiley:

This is also discussed on the secular site Quora at:

Are angels immortal? Why or why not?

Now as a** free bonus**, I share this from Quora: :laughing:

What joke will make one burst into laughter for at least 30 seconds?


Gabe/All: of course, from the moment they were created as adults, Adam and Eve had the appearance of age. And here are some ancient dinosaur depictions.

I believe that everything that was created by God, both the physical and the spiritual, was created during Creation Week. For both angelic and human people, I think our existence within the classroom of time affords us the opportunity to choose to freely receive the love of God, and to obey Him. After Judgment, the Lake of Fire is a continuation of opportunity for rebels to be healed and free to accept Jesus. Then, when death has been totally eradicated, there is no more need for linear time: we will all be fully conscious of our eternal place with our loving God. And then the real adventure begins:

There is a lot of evidence for a young earth—depending on your scientific paradigm. Here is a short article based on the work of John D. Morris, Ph.D. (His father Henry, also a young earth creationist, was department chair of civil engineering at Virginia Tech, my alma mater): “Arguments for a recent creation.”

Also, a fascinating book I studied in a course on the history of science was called The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), by physicist and philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn. Kuhn’s book argues that “the evolution of scientific theory does NOT emerge from the straightforward accumulation of facts, but rather from a set of changing intellectual circumstances and possibilities. Such an approach is largely commensurate with the general historical school of non-linear history.” (Wikipedia.)

Kuhn coined the term “paradigm shift” to describe a fundamental change in the basic concepts and experimental practices of a scientific discipline, leading to a scientific revolution. This is in contrast to the activity of “normal” science, which he described as scientific work done within a prevailing framework (or paradigm).

Kuhn’s examples of paradigm shifts are primarily from the physical sciences: Aristotelian dynamics, Copernican astronomy, Newtonian optics, and Einstein’s theories of relativity. A paradigm shift is a crisis brought on by conflict between two or more paradigms, in which the best paradigm survives. Wrong presuppositions and prejudices must be recognized and abandoned, in deference to a new paradigm that explains the data better.

But, I would argue, there is a spiritual dimension to seeing the right paradigms, and letting go of false paradigms, even in the physical sciences.



I read the article, and I have no idea how to find arguments contra each one of them.
The propositions might be right, but I have no way of knowing.

So ‘duelling propositions’ are not going to help me as a layman. I try to keep an open mind about these things but, in the loooooooooong run, I don’t think my deciding either way matters at all. But it is interesting. :smiley:


Hermano means brother in Spanish. And sometimes, I have no idea what he believes. Perhaps: :laughing:

He sides with the Seven Day Adventists on wine in the bible is grape juice
He sides with the fundamentalists on young earth and 7 days.
He sides with the miracles you find in the Charismatic churches, and among the saints of Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism

And he’s very much a crusader, for what he believes in. :laughing:

I could. But it would take some time to research. And take me away from non-redeeming things. Like watching tonight **The Librarians ** battling supernatural forces. Or the **Walking Dead **crew battling zombies and non-redeemable bad guys. :laughing:

There is a whole website devoted to Christianity and science. Their articles are along the lines of Christianity, coexisting with big bang, evolution and old earth. The website is They also have articles blasting atheism.

Just an observation. One can be a believing Christian (i.e. especially the orthodox type, with creeds and such). And they can side with creationism, intelligent design, old earth, young earth, big bang, no big bang, climate change a hoax, climate change real, etc. - and coexist as Christians :exclamation: :smiley:




I am no scientist by any means, but from reading the Bible I get the idea that perhaps they viewed time as going in a circular pattern?? I don’t think prophecy was “seeing in the future” things that had not yet taken place, but rather the foretelling of events that will occur via the things that have taken place in the past. As Ecclesiastes says, “There is nothing new under the sun.” There are a lot of verses in the Bible that indicate those who know God are to know certain things through wisdom. There is also talk being able to discern the future by seasons, such as the parable of the fig tree. Luke 19:41-44 speaks of knowing the time of our visitation, and Matthew 24:15 says this: “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place…” From what I understand, history basically repeats itself.


The problem I have with Hermano, is he likes to go on a crusade. And he will keep bringing up studies and “experts”, to back his crusade. Well, Hermano, alcohol is here to stay in Christianity. Same goes for evolution, old earth, and big bang. Scientists will embrace these ideas, even if they are Christian. And they will present evidence, studies, etc., to back their scientific ideas - and embrace it with their Christian theology. All sides will argue for their positions, until the end of time.

So Hermano, what practical difference does this make? A Christian embraces Christianity, via the Orthodox, historical creeds…but they are also scientists, who embrace evolution, big bang and old earth :question:


In one sense, I think I see what you’re saying LLC: when we understand the cause and effect relationship often seen in God’s Word, much of what we consider prophecy actually shows general principles to live by. A prophetic message is “a word fitly spoken” (Proverbs 25:11).

But I think you’re missing the **supernatural **nature of the gift. God knows everything, and can make pieces of the future known to us, as He deems appropriate, suited to the needs of the moment. For example, in Acts 11:28, we read, “Then one of them, named Agabus, stood up and showed by the Spirit that there was going to be a great famine throughout all the world, which also happened in the days of Claudius Caesar.”

You can’t study Scripture without studying prophecy. Prophetic passages are found throughout the Bible; for example, Ezekiel, Daniel, the Olivet Discourse, and Revelation. In many cases we can see the fulfillment of prophecies in the historical portions of the Bible, and in the historical secular records. But in other cases, the prophecies are yet to be fulfilled.

Psalm 22 gives very great detail about the crucifixion of Christ, over a thousand years before the event, and over eight hundred years before the Romans ever began using that method of execution!

-The First Coming of Jesus Christ was prophesied, and fulfilled
-The Second Coming of Jesus was prophesied, and is yet to be fulfilled

Prophecy demonstrates that God is in control and there is a plan—but I believe the high level of apathy and ignorance of Bible prophecy is helping pave the way for a literal future Antichrist.

1 Cor. 14:1.**
The Bible is a finished book. BUT prophecy for the Church today is the “contemporary Word of God” to encourage and guide His people; it comes directly from God, and “he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men” 1 Cor. 14:3. A fresh word of prophecy may be extra biblical, but it will not be anti-biblical.

Friends, I am not a cessationist, but rather a continuationist: these gifts are still available today. Reconsider the experiential steps laid out in Scripture:

-First, Jesus breathed on the disciples, saying, *“Receive the Holy Spirit” * (John 20:22), and they were then “born again.”

-Second, the disciples willingly received the Baptism-filling-immersion in the Holy Spirit, after which the Holy Spirit was able to flow out of them and manifest himself through imparted supernatural gifts. Acts 2.

(Of course, these two distinct experiences no longer have to be separated by time—if one is informed, and willing.)
In conclusion, to reiterate Peter’s warning about ignoring prophecy,

Deliberately forget”? Sounds to me just like Darwin’s conscious choice to let go of the supernatural, in order to more fully embrace the natural.



This may surprise some. Somethings I’m in complete agreement with Hermano. Sometimes I am not. But my mother - now deceased at 92.5 years (in Oct. 2013), had the gift of prophesy. She was a lifelong Protestant Christian and was told by her mother, that she was born with a veil over her eyes. Not sure what that means. Or why she was born, with the gift of prophesy. But I had plenty of opportunity to witness its truth and practical application - in my life.


I love hermano, but I agree with your sentiment. Rejecting scientific consensuses and appealing to dissenters who are on the fringe any time a literal interpretation of the Bible conflicts with the scientific consensus is IMO borderline conspiracy theorist behavior.