A Plague of Locusts

This post is from my previous blog, Ear to the Heavens. Enjoy.

The Revelation Chapter 9, Verses 1-11

“1 Then the fifth angel sounded: And I saw a star fallen from heaven to the earth. To him was given the key to the bottomless pit. 2 And he opened the bottomless pit, and smoke arose out of the pit like the smoke of a great furnace. So the sun and the air were darkened because of the smoke of the pit. 3 Then out of the smoke locusts came upon the earth. And to them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power. 4 They were commanded not to harm the grass of the earth, or any green thing, or any tree, but only those men who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads. 5 And they were not given authority to kill them, but to torment them for five months. Their torment was like the torment of a scorpion when it strikes a man. 6 In those days men will seek death and will not find it; they will desire to die, and death will flee from them.

"7 The shape of the locusts was like horses prepared for battle. On their heads were crowns of something like gold, and their faces were like the faces of men. 8 They had hair like women's hair, and their teeth were like lions' teeth. 9 And they had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the sound of chariots with many horses running into battle. 10 They had tails like scorpions, and there were stings in their tails. Their power was to hurt men five months. 11 And they had as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in Hebrew is ‘Abaddon,’ but in Greek he has the name ‘Apollyon.’”

Recently, I have completed a screenplay based on the book of The Revelation. Unlike many other screenwriters who have previously tackled the material, I have wanted my tale to be a matter-of-fact action/adventure/thriller that adhered more-closely to the original text.

My brother and I have seen just about every movie there is about the end times and have yet to see one done well or one that didn’t stray so far from the source material as to be downright ludicrous. My ultimate goal for the screenplay is to see it made into a professionally done film with quality that is on par with Hollywood's best. I have also hoped to make an accurate telling of the story that will entertain and maybe educate - not merely to convert unbelievers through the medium of fear.

So, I studied a lot. I've already taught the book of The Revelation many times before and I felt I had a solid grasp of the material. But of course, every time I've studied or taught the book, I've discovered something new that alters my understanding of it. So it was, during the time I worked on the screenplay, I discovered many little things in the text that made me pause to consider my then-current understanding. But there is one thing in particular that really stood out.

When I got to dealing with the locusts in Revelation 9, I had no idea where to start or how to work them into the storyline. The passage has always been one of interest. I can hearken back to those who believed The Beatles were somehow connected to Revelation 9 because of John Lennon and Yoko Ono's avant-garde piece on The Beatles' White Album called Revolution 9. They also believed the locusts were The Beatles because of the description found there in the passage: they had long hair like women, but faces of men; their breastplates were interpreted to be electric guitars and the stinging tails were the cables that ran from their guitars to their amps; their loud music affected two thirds of the world and caused pain for 5 months, etc.

This particular interpretation was of little or no use to me. I was quite sure I couldn’t get Paul McCartney to appear in my movie.

I needed to fictionalize the account of the locusts without betraying the original meaning of the text. I didn't want to allegorize them as helicopters, etc. It was obvious, to me, from their description that they were demonic at the least. So I began to meditate on the locusts and who they might be.

What I ultimately discovered helped me put together some of the most bizarre passages of scripture into a clearer picture that I had never seen before.

Genesis 6, verses 1 and 2 read, "Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose"

Genesis 6:2 says that the sons of God - the ben elohiym - took whichever women they wanted as wives because they were beautiful. The Hebrew "ben elohiym" is a term that speaks directly of the angelic realm. “Ben elohiym” translates to “Sons of God” and is used only of those beings that are “directly” created by God: Adam and the Angels.

Let's hold our thumb here in Genesis for a moment and look at an interesting verse in Jude. Jude verse 6-7 says, "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”

I believe that the passage in Genesis 6 speaks of the same angels spoken of in Jude - angels who left heaven, took on a human-like form, and then took for themselves human wives.

Genesis 6:4 reads, "There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown."

These unions of fallen angels and humans resulted in numerous mutations - giants that were the “mighty men who were of old, men of renown.” I suggest that this is the historical basis for Greek and Roman mythologies. Apollo, Hercules, and Zeus: these characters were likely based on the genetically corrupted offspring of human women and angels. The giants spoken of in this passage were the ancestors to the Moabites, the Ammonites, and in particular, those like Goliath.

The Hebrew word that is translated as “giants” is “Nephilim” from the root word, “naphal” which means “cast down, or fallen.” “Nephilim” means “fallen ones.” Are these giants the offspring of “fallen” angels, the ben elohiym – those spoken of in Genesis 6:1&2 and Jude verse 6?

Genesis 6:9 reads, "This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God."

Finally, Genesis 6:12 reads, "So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth."

It would seem that Noah was pure and undefiled as described above in verse 9. Yet, as indicted in verse 12, the rest of the world had, “corrupted their way on the earth.”

Was God’s reason for destroying the Earth to purify it of demonic corruption and to save Noah and his family from it? There are those who suggest that Satan hoped to corrupt the human race by defiling it and, in so doing, prevent the coming of the Messiah. Although his evil plan was delayed by the flood, it would seem that Satan tried again as indicated in verse 4, where it reads, “There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward…”

It would seem that these fallen angels were involved with human-kind not only before the flood, as described in Genesis chapter 6, but also after the flood. Did their corruption of the human race involve not only intermarriage, but also the promotion of godless sexual behavior, like that described in Genesis 19 and spoken of in Jude verse 7? Was the godless hedonism of Sodom and Gomorrah demonically influenced?

Sodom and Gomorrah were huge cities and would be ideal places to concentrate a plan devised to corrupt all of human flesh once more.

Let’s leave Jude for a moment and go to Romans, the first chapter, verses 26 and 27.

“26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

“27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.”

In context, Paul is talking about those who have forsaken the self-manifested evidence of God and sought after the lusts of the flesh. God “gave them up” to the basest acts of hedonism, including homosexuality.

A side note…

God is a God of passion and conviction and desires that we be people of passion and conviction.

The Revelation 3:15-16 reads, “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then, because thou art lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth.”

If we love Him, he desires that we love him with all our heart! “And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment.” (Mar 12:30) As a result, the scripture is clear that if we seek God and love him, He will reinforce that love.

Likewise, if we hate God, it would seem He wants us to do it with our all. In the Exodus story, Pharaoh hardened his heart 7 times before God hardened his heart even more.

It’s as though the Lord is saying, “Do you love me? Then love me with all you have! Be passionate about it. Here, let me help you love me more. Do you hate me? Then don’t be wishy-washy about it- hate me with passion. Here, let me help.”

Now, let me get back to my original point.

In Jude verse 6, we read “kept not their first estate” and verse 7, “going after strange flesh” which reminded me of Romans chapter 1, verse 27, “leaving the natural use.” How are angels related to human homosexual behavior?

It was interesting to me that Jude verse 7 likens “the angels which kept not their first estate” to “Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh.” Jude seems to make a correlation between the two.

With this in mind, there seemed, to me, to be a tie-in between the homosexual behavior in Sodom and Gomorrah and “the angels which kept not their first estate.” So again, I ask, was the godless hedonism of Sodom and Gomorrah demonically influenced? Were the fallen ben elohiym there in Sodom and Gomorrah encouraging “fornication, and going after strange flesh?”

Remember that screenplay?

I began with the premise that perhaps someone was spelunking in a deep cave when suddenly confronted by escaping winged demoniacs. So I asked the question, “where is the deepest cave on earth.” My research led me to discover that most deep caves have very narrow passages and forcing a thick black cloud of demoniacs through such tight spaces didn’t seem very viable from a story-telling perspective. So, I killed that idea. (After all, I’m claustrophobic and climbing around in caves is not my idea of a good time.)

Out of frustration, I went to my favorite internet search engine and I searched on the phrase, “deepest place on earth.” Every search engine return was about some deep underwater trench. Wet demoniacs didn’t seem viable, either. I tried again.

This time, I entered the phrase, “lowest place on earth.” I was surprised at the returns I received. It seems the lowest place on earth, below sea level, is the Dead Sea. The Dead Sea is the location of the former Sodom and Gomorrah. It is a place of destruction. Standing there, on its shores, is like standing at ground zero in Hiroshima, or at the World Trade Center.

Needless to say, The locusts from Revelation 9 aren’t locusts as we know or understand. They have a King! “And they had as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon.”

Apollyon appears only this one time in scripture, and it is a proper name. This King of the locusts is named, Apollyon. But, the meaning of that name is closest to the Hebrew word Hebrew word found in Job 31:12, “'abaddown” which translates, “place of destruction, destruction, ruin, and abyss.” His very name means “place of destruction.”

The place where Sodom and Gomorrah once stood is most definitely a “place of destruction.” This is another apparent connection between Sodom and Gomorrah and Revelation 9.

In Jude 6 we read that the angels are “reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.” The word “unto” is from the Greek word “eis” which can be translated “for” or “towards.” The implication is that there is a purpose in the reservation of these fallen angels. They are being held for some future event – in chains which must be unlocked at some point.

I believe the future event is the torment of mankind for 5 months during the Great Tribulation.

I believe that the angels reserved in chains (Jude 6) were in Sodom and Gomorrah when God destroyed it. I think that they were in the great cities of that day, continuing to do all they could to corrupt mankind and somehow thwart the plan of God.

I believe those same fallen angels have been imprisoned in that very spot, under the Dead Sea, awaiting the moment when an angel from heaven will descend into that “abyss” – that place of destruction - with a key to release them onto mankind during the Great Tribulation.

In short, I believe that Jude’s angels in chains are the locusts of Revelation 9. And those angels have been imprisoned in chains and darkness for 4000 years awaiting their release upon humanity. Imagine their hostility and their rage!

Now, I was able to write the scene in the screenplay. What is the premise I wrote surrounding these locusts? You’ll have to see the movie.

But wait!

Some will argue that none of this is possible because angels are not corporal beings. Yet there is no biblical evidence to support that idea. Are angels spiritual beings? Yes. Are they bound to that dimensional realm? Apparently, they are not. Can they take on a corporal form when they cross into our dimensional realm? Apparently, yes. There is enough scriptural evidence of human and angel interaction to suggest that angels can take on a physical human form.

There are a lot of bible scholars who reject this. They seem to be ashamed of spiritual or supernatural things. Their intellect stands in the way of accepting what the scripture clearly seems to state. To them, for the sake of reason, there must be a rational, temporal explanation for things and anything with the slightest hint of the “strange” or “unusual” is shunned.

What I find strange about this attitude is that we're talking about a religion in which we believe that one man paid for the sin of the entire world by hanging on a Roman cross and that that man rose from the dead amidst angels 3 days later - causing the dead to rise and walk the streets of Jerusalem - and then 40 days later ascended without mechanical aid into the heavens and there, He sits at the right hand of God as our advocate against the accusations of a fallen angel. How much more bizarre can you get?

Many scholars try to explain that Genesis 6: 1-2 is referring to a “Godly line” of Seth that intermingles with pagan women of the line of Cain, etc. How that possibly explains the gigantism described in verse 4 is a mystery to me. Not only that, but there is no indication that there was ever any Godly line and how Godly could they be if they married ungodly women? No, the corruption spoken of in Genesis 12 was far greater than sinfulness. They had corrupted all flesh. There was more going on here than mere disobedience.

The reality is, there are some very strange things going on in the Bible, and Paul states clearly, that our battle is not with flesh and blood, but with the spiritual realm. There is real power and activity behind the scenes that must be recognized and appreciated. Our God is greater than all of that, and He resides in us by His Spirit, so we need not fear that realm, but we must also acknowledge that it exists and that it interacts in a very real way with our temporal dimension.

I will not give spiritual minions more prominence than they deserve, but I will not turn a blind eye to it either.

Noah's Lonely Calling

This post is from my previous blog, Ear to the Heavens. Enjoy.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language defines "typology" as:

1. The study or systematic classification of types that have characteristics or traits in common.

2. A theory or doctrine of types, as in scriptural studies.


It is widely held by biblical scholars that the scripture contains literary "types."

One of the definitions in that same dictionary for "type" is: "a figure, representation, or symbol of something to come, such as an event in the Old Testament that foreshadows another in the New Testament."

Noah is often regarded as a "type" of the Christ. This is not to say that Noah was the same as Christ, but that Noah foreshadowed the coming One in character and circumstance.

I believe typology, literary foreshadowing, is further evidence of the Bible's divine nature. There is no way that Moses could have known or predicted the person of Jesus accurately enough to have written such striking similarities in the character of Noah. And even if one were to argue the authorship of Genesis, there is no doubt that the text existed 275 years before Christ in the form of the Septuagint.

There are several ways in which Noah is generally regarded as a type of Christ.

Noah’s name means "comfort". Jesus Christ came to be or comforter.

Noah built the ark of wood through which his family was saved from God's wrath and ultimately the ark “came to rest.” Jesus' death on the wooden cross saved the family of God from the coming wrath of God and He delivers them into His rest.

Noah was a righteous man, "upright in his generations." Some believe this means Noah's genealogical line was undefiled by the Nephilim. Whether this is true, or not, Noah followed and trusted God, regardless of a defiant and unrepentant world he lived in. Jesus was undefiled, having lived a perfect and sinless life. And, like Noah, Jesus was a righteous man in the midst of a Godless world.

Noah walked with God and was obedient even as others most likely laughed and scorned him as he built the ark. Jesus was laughed at and mocked, too, but that didn't keep Him from being obedient – even unto death.

I'm sure there are other ways, too, in which Noah can be considered a type of Christ. Noah planted a vineyard. Jesus is the vine. It can be inferred that Noah was a prophet-preacher and a voice of righteousness in his day. Jesus was a prophet-teacher and most definitely a voice of righteousness in His day.

There is another way I believe that Noah is a type of the Christ that requires a little digging and a little help from our counselor to find.

As I have written before, I believe that every number, every word, occurs in the scripture for a purpose. There are many theologians and scholars who agree that numbers in the scripture often have a meaning.

For example: the number 1 is often representative of God, the beginning, or unity. 3 can represent the Godhead (trinity), divine completeness, or perfection. 6 is the number of man (666 is the number of man elevated to the place of God). 7 can symbolize perfection, completeness, the day of rest (used 600 times in Bible). And the number 8 often speaks to a new beginning, or resurrection.

Jesus lived for 33 years. .33 is one third. The scripture is full of the number 3 and things that are divided into thirds. Three appears in nature over and over again. We are created in three parts: body, mind (soul), and spirit.

Is it a coincidence, or was Jesus’ death at that age intentional to point to His being one third of the Godhead? Being of the third heaven? Rising from the dead on the third day? Coming into the last third of human history?

Jesus laid down his own life. He could have done so at any age. Jesus spoke often of “His time.” Was there intent beyond our understanding in the time which He laid down His life?

Let’s get back to Noah for a moment.

There is a lot of information about Noah’s age and the time of the coming flood, etc. that must be there for a reason. If this were just a historical account written by men, one might understand the occasional interjection to point out someone’s age. But, if we believe that this is a manuscript authored by God Himself, then we need ask, why are the years recorded there?

The scripture tells us that Noah was 600 years old when the flood came. (Gen. 7:6)

When God told Noah to build the ark, the scripture tells us that there would be 120 years until the flood. (Gen. 6:3) (Many argue that this is the Lord declaring the age to which man would live. However, this makes no sense in context of the passage. God is talking about man’s wickedness and the coming destruction. In context, it makes more sense that God is telling Noah that he has 120 years to accomplish the task that God is giving him. See Psalm 90:10, also.)

Simple arithmetic reveals, then, that Noah was 480 when he first learned of the coming flood. (600 – 120 = 480)

In the midst of all this narrative, we are reminded that Noah had sons. In the fifth chapter of Genesis, we are given one of those long genealogies that many just skip over. But at the very end of this particular genealogy, we are told that Noah was 500 when his sons were born (Gen 5:32) – a fact we might miss if we read the story of Noah out of context, apart from the surrounding text.

In the Jewish culture, there is a thing called Bar Mitzvah, which means “son of the commandment.” The Bar Mitzvah celebration is rather new, but the concept of a boy becoming a man at the age of 13 is an ancient one. It is suggested that it far precedes Abraham and the birth if the Jewish nation.

If such a custom were in place in Noah’s culture, then his first-born son, Shem, would not have been of an age to help Noah with the Ark until he was 13.

If Noah was 480 when he first learned of the flood, and began work right away on the Ark, then he would have worked for 33 years before his son Shem was of age to assist him. (500 + 13 = 513 – 480 = 33)

I know the scripture doesn’t come right out and say it, and therefore, I can’t be dogmatic about it, but…

Is it possible that just as Jesus worked alone and completed his work on the cross in 33 years, that Noah worked alone and completed his work on the Ark in 33 years?

Could Noah’s Ark have been completed and stood as a testimony of the coming judgment for 87 years? Is this another hidden yet discernable way in which Noah is a type of the Christ?

Afterthought.

My brother recently suggested that when Jesus spoke of “this generation,” that He might have meant 80 years, and not 40 as many have previously suggested. My brother draws this from Psalm 90:10 where David defines a full life as 80 years.

In reference to the end times, if Jesus was talking about a future generation that was 80 years, plus seven years of tribulation…87 years.

Coincidence?

Some references:

Authur W. Pink, "Gleanings in Genesis," Chapter 12, Kessinger Publishing

Patrick Fairbairn, "The Typology of Scripture," Kregel Publications