Why I Posted My Resume On The Blog

I am currently in the search for new employment. I am taking the unusual step of placing my resume on my blog because I felt compelled to do so as you will note the two most recent posts are my business and ministry resumes. Perhaps there is something of value to some of those reading the blog. I am putting both up for viewing because I am beginning to sense that the Lord wants be to be preaching the Gospel full-time while also being bi-vocational in my alternate career as a Quality Engineer, Quality Manager or Project Manager.

Blessings and thanks, Andy

Andrew W. Pierson - 2015 Ministry Resume

Andrew W. Pierson

1xx xxxxxxxxxxxx Rd.

Boyertown, PA 19512

(484) 949-xxxx

Objective ______________________________________________________________________

I am a motivated Scripture and Spirit guided individual that seeks role in ministry due to the Lord calling me to ministry. I currently view myself as bi-vocational as Paul the Apostle was. I am a management/engineering professional w/background in servant leadership, supervision and instruction and/or teaching. I’ve taught Biblical principles and engineering/science in vocational atmosphere. I have a Christ and Gospel-centered focus and pastoral heart to serve in conjunction with well-rounded skill sets should lend itself well to service in pastoral related functions that include: Sermon research, preparation and delivery and counseling/listening. Repertoire includes willingness to serve, self-starter, large knowledge base, experience and continued education (others noted below). I believe Christ/Gospel-centered focus, prayer, service, humility, adaptability, communication and accountability are key factors for maintaining a buoyancy in ministry and for effective evangelism.

Profile ________________________________________________________________________

Excellent communication skills and verbal articulation

Have begun work as Itinerant Pastor where services are requested/required (list below)

Extensive past experience in management directing resources to support goals

I understand that leadership is ability to serve others to help them accomplish goals

Capable of handling emergency conditions / Prefer instituting preventative measures

Goal-oriented individual with service/leadership capabilities

Highly organized, highly motivated, and detail-directed problem solver

Team player, proven ability to work with people or all ages, backgrounds

Skills Summary ________________________________________________________________

Christ/Gospel-centered Family Oriented Communication/Articulation Skills Teaching/Education abilities Servants Heart

Excellent Organization Holistic/Individual Visionary Preaching/Homiletics Research/Interpretation Greek/Grammar

Experience ____________________________________________________________________

Ministry & Pastoral (2010 to Date)

Itinerant Pastor/Preaching

•        Nineveh Church-Pottstown PA (Preaching, Street Preacher 2015)

•        Pottstown Bible Church-Pottstown PA (Sermon Sample 5/3/2015)

•        Living Faith Lutheran Church (AFLC)-Boyertown, PA (2011-2012)

•        NorthPointe Community Church (Baptist)-Limerick, PA (2008-2011)

Bible Study

•        Nineveh Church-Pottstown PA (Hermeneutics, Systematic Theology)

•        Pottstown Bible Church (Sexual Immorality)

•        Harvest Fellowhship-Boyertown PA (alternate to Ron Mioni)

•        Living Faith Lutheran Church (AFLC)

•        NorthPointe Community Church

•        Apologetics

•        Philemon, Philippians, Luke

•        Hermeneutics/Interpretation

Non-Ministry (2005-Date)

Agape Precision Manufacturing 320 Circle of Progress, Pottstown PA 19464 (2012-2015)

Quality Administrator (DQR)/ Post Production Quality Manager (4/2015-9/8/2015):

Co-Manager on Post Production Quality Team for aerospace components. Company portfolio included FSP (flight safety parts). Responsible for Quality Source Inspection Requirements. Responsible for outgoing quality on all finished components and associated documentation. Reported directly to CEO. Customers included Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Piasecki Aircraft Corporation, Lifeport Inc, AgustaWestland Philadelphia Corporation. Also in charge of metrology lab. Acted as lead inspector.

Quality Specialist (2012-2015)

Accountable for all First Article Inspections on high tolerance (±.0001) aerospace components. Required ability to think on-the-fly for creating in-process fixturing. Responsible for all calibrations on approx. 200 item gage list (micrometers, height, drop indicator). Root Cause Analysis requiring understanding of manufacturing/machining. Included responsibility for INCR/ENCR corrective actions. Local vendor audits when necessary due to non-conformance. Intermittent trigonometry to ascertain angles/lengths based on known(s)/variable(s).

Ultraflex 237 South St, Pottstown PA 19464 (2011-2012)

Quality Engineer:

Accountable for all aspects of corporate quality control including 5S, Kaizen, TQM, TPM, CAPA, FAI, SOP, SPC, PDCA, RCA, KANBAN, creating work instructions, inventory maintenance, quality inspection, metrology lab, calibrations, systemic operations related to quality such as non-conformances, deviations, etc. Addendum: Also acted as on-site health & safety representative.

Mack Trucks Inc. 2100 Mack Blvd Allentown PA (1999-2009)

Project Management-Engineering (2005-2009)

Worked w/key stakeholders to release new custom product for production.

Managed contract projects for NYC Dept. of Sanitation-NYC Fleet-1800 units ($200 mil)

Integrated US07 Emission deliverables into NYC contract on tight deadline (adaptability)

Managed project risk for project teams including US07 & US10 emission projects (cost savings)

Seamlessness improved workflow across department lines (cost savings)

[For all older employment history please reference my vocational resume]

Education _____________________________________________________________________

Valley Forge Christian College (2010-Date) Spr. 2013 (GPA 3.83)

Major: Theological Studies/Biblical Studies-Greek

Minor: Business (18 credits)

Montgomery County Community College (1999-2009) Evening

Major: Business Management (GPA: 3.9)-Transfer to VFCC

Montgomery County Community College (1987-1988) Evening

Drafting/Design (w)

Personal/Community ___________________________________________________________

Nineveh Evening Church-Pottstown PA

Pottstown Bible Church & Mission-Pottstown PA

Harvest Fellowship-Men’s Bible Study-Boyertown PA

Living Faith Lutheran (AFLC)-Family Bible Study 2011-2012-Facilitator

Northpointe Community Church-Men’s Bible Study-Facilitator

Ministry Blog: SoulJournlaer (Personal /Educational)

References  Upon Request

In Their Own Words XXXVI: Science Is Restricted To The Material World...

Alright folks, it's time to re-post a critical analysis of modern scientific presuppositions and the endgame of some of their presuppositions. Quite frankly I am doing so to startle you into an of awareness that the philosophy of modern science purposely ties its own hands and limits its resultant "knowledge". They truncate their own conclusions by limiting their knowledge on the "front end" of the scientific method. They preclude the metaphysical when formulating a hypothesis and stating propositions they wish to prove. They also exclude the supernatural totally from their reasoning process during the scientific method. This of course is not just intellectually and epistomologically disingenuous, its extremely close-minded and dangerous. The resultant data therefore will be incomplete and by the measure of logic will need to be corrupt.

I now offer video proof that not only is modern science not being honest with all the facts but they are purposely negating or ignoring entire aspects of the human experience to try and keep their flawed worldview intact. They are willfully ignoring things to maintain their myopic, categorized and nicely cloistered reality. 

Today's video comes to us from the prestigious Lehigh University. It is an interview with Michael Behe (of Intelligent Design; Darwin's Black Box fame). It is also an interview with University of Maryland's professor Dr. Tamra Mendelson.

Please note two telling quotes from Dr. Mendelson in this piece from CNN.

(@ 2:44) we hear this statement: "Intelligent Design is unscientific." As if the sole defining aspect of reality and truth is the scientific method. The study of epistemology says otherwise.

The second...and more telling comment starts approximately (@ 5:05): "Science is restricted to the material world...and it has been that way for 900 years...and it works really well that way..."

Dr. Mendelson then goes on to say, "...to propose supernatural explanation just isn't scientific." Here again we see that science is the end all in terms of determining truths. Is it really? How pretentious and intellectually arrogant. As a whole, without a unified human consensus, modern science has made itself the end-all to every discussion when it comes to facts about the world (therefore reality in general). 

Is this the same mentality of science that created Social Darwinism, Physiognomy and Phrenology (considered legitimate science 100-150 years ago)? Whether or not scientists today want to admit it, these "sciences" would of course lead to the bastard child of evolutionary theory...eugenics. Phrenology along with atheism would heavily influence a man named Michael Hennessey Higgins who would heavily influence the thinking of his feminist and racist daughter: Margaret Sanger. The same Margaret Sanger who would (pardon the morbid pun) give birth to American death factories named the American Birth Control League which would later be renamed Planned Parenthood. These sciences would also lead to the much more notorious genocides of Nazi Death Camps under the guise of what appeared to be a combination of Phrenology, Physiognomy and Anthropometry (same bad science, slightly different name). 

Please consider (below) a page from Samuel Well's book How To Read Character: A New Illustrated Handbook of Phrenology and Physiognomy for Students and Examiners originally penned in 1868 purporting itself to be "science". 

Samuel Wells' book compared the difference between 18th century philosopher Immanuel Kant and an unnamed "Negro" showing that the philosopher Kant was more advanced due to contrived and predetermined scientific criterion. The criterion? It was a decision based solely on the shape and size of a person's head in the book's Intellectual Faculties: The Reflective Group.

We should be appalled by this today and rightly so but this was considered science based in naturalist and evolutionary principles 150 years ago. Not only was it stupid, it was downright evil and, well, unscientific. We would see where this type of mentality led by the time of the Extermination Camps in Nazi Germany.

So this obviously begs the question: What "science" do we hold near and dear to us today that we are willing to stake life or death on because we believe it is true---only to find out in a 100-150 years that it was as bogus as Phrenology was? Evolution perhaps?

Science being a human creation is in-and-of-itself, flawed because its source of data and observation comes from a flawed being---mankind. To preclude the use of non-material and the supernatural, you drastically narrow down what you need to explain. This woman and those like her clearly state their narrowed criteria for what they will consider in their corpus and body of evidences.

She clearly states that science restricts its knowledge. This is not educational nor is it truly scientific in its approach. When I say science I mean true science as it was originally intended before the Enlightenment and the anti-God movement that came from it. The newest definition of science is as follows:

"Science is the pursuit of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence."

The question remains: “What evidence?” If it is purely natural evidence then science has restricted themselves to an incomplete body of evidence. This is like trying a case against a murderer of your children without all the evidence and the man eventually walks free. Why would you not use all the evidences? When we as human beings proclaim that only science has the true evidence and we deny Scripture…we might as well have murdered our children anyway. By saying the Bible isn’t valid we damn our children and those in society.

True (honest) philosophy of science seeks to understand the nature and justification of scientific knowledge. Since it is difficult to distinguish science from non-science, there are legitimate arguments about the boundaries between science and non-science. This is known as the problem of demarcation. Where does science really begin? According to this woman, science it is purely based in physical and empirical truths. Conversely, true science (the science I believe in) allows natural AND supernatural origins because the original definition of science from as far back as Aristotle was:

"A body of reliable knowledge that can be logically and rationally explained."

Classical antiquity science believed knowledge was closely linked to philosophy. In some cases “science" continues to be used in a broad sense denoting reliable knowledge about a topic, in the same way it is still used in modern terms such as library science or political science.

"In modern use, science is often treated as synonymous with ‘natural and physical science’, and thus restricted to those branches of study that relate to the phenomena of the material universe and their laws, sometimes with implied exclusion of pure mathematics. This is now the dominant sense in ordinary use. This narrower sense of "science" developed as a part of science became a distinct enterprise of defining "laws of nature", based on early examples such as Kepler's laws, Galileo's laws, and Newton's laws of motion. In this period it became more common to refer to natural philosophy as "natural science". Over the course of the 19th century, the word "science" became increasingly associated with the disciplined study of the natural world including physics, chemistry, geology and biology.

The problem with the scientific community, or judicial systems and our educational systems today is that they have now overstepped their bounds and imposed (in faith) a methodology they feel is the right/correct one. A methodology that is godless to its core. They and their mostly godless brethren have made the decision which is the proper one to teach. They do this knowing there are flaws and major irreconcilable gaps in their knowledge. They are now allowing only forms of Methodological Naturalism or science that will not allow for the supernatural or God, into our schools.

The largest bone of contention in this is that, according to the scientific community itself, differences between natural and supernatural explanations should be made according to scientists, and that science should be restricted methodologically to natural explanations by people who deny the supernatural (see David Hume's definitions of miracles).

That means that science should not consider supernatural explanations itself...BUT should not claim them to be wrong either.

Unfortunately scientists, politicians and the teachers of this once great country (and other countries) have done just that. There have been recent court cases that forbid the teaching of Creationism in the classroom including one here in Pennsylvania. If Creationism or some form of it is no threat to their theories and ideas...why is there such hostility towards teaching it? Not only is this seem illegal it is morally reprehensible. Science has claimed for itself the upper hand in this intellectual battle unjustly.

True science by its definition (the old one that was honest in its assessment of all the variables, not the new one that constantly changes definitions and restricts itself) needs to entertain all the possibilities…and modern science is just not doing that. Thereby they have made themselves intellectually arrogant and propped themselves up on pedestals they have no right to occupy.

These people (scientists) are clearly not being honest, not with us...nor themselves.

Tools In the Toolbox IV: Chasing Holiness Not Happiness

As I stated in the first post in this series the premise is pretty simple. Paul Tripp made a list for an article on The Gospel Coalition website found here. It was an article on advice to young pastors. So this is the fourth question in a continuing series about things a person of God can add to their relational repertoire to properly help themselves and others in the church. 

What is the level of their biblical literacy and theological knowledge?

When a person does not fully understand why suffering and discomfort enter their life I have personally witnessed the internal struggle that ensues. People cannot understand why God hates them or plagues them with discomfort. Had they read the Bible, some of the answers would come through clearer. The Bible does not teach instant gratification nor smooth sailing all throughout life. People that believe life will be this are often the first to drift away from the Faith or their faith falters outright.

When false teachers and prosperity preachers constantly preach a message that everyone should be having their best life now, people start to think that they have not prayed enough, gave enough or loved God enough. At the root of all these misunderstandings is either an over-reliance on others to interpret Scriptures for them or they are Biblically illiterate. When one is biblically illiterate, they do not even know when others are illiterate. The blind end up leading the blind and people get hurt, some permanently and irreparably. Sadly, I have seen people walk away from the Faith due to not understanding the Bible properly. Reading and understanding your Bible matters. Contrary to the emotive squishy study groups, theology matters.

Theology matters because it shows an omniscient and omnipotent God that sees things over the long haul. It shows a holy God that is concerned with our eternal destination in salvation, not a constant focus on our immediate physical needs that often make us lose sight of the eternal. In other words God is primarily interested in us becoming holy not necessarily happy. When we frame the two as opposites (holiness and happiness) we do a horrible injustice mostly to holiness. We pit an eternal state of being against a transient  and often capricious emotion. Holiness in God’s eyes is happiness because it sets us on the path to eternal life with Him. If we align our happiness to holiness, our happiness will take on eternal attributes because we've anchored it to that which is God's and God's alone: Holiness.

Psalms 1:1-3 ~ “Blessed is the one who does not walk in step with the wicked or stand in the way that sinners take or sit in the company of mockers, but whose delight is in the law of the Lord, and who meditates on his law day and night. That person is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season and whose leaf does not wither—whatever they do prospers.

Those that are truly happy are those who are in some measure, truly holy, and it’s a theme that is all throughout the bible. Those that are wicked or plagued by sin…waste away.

Psalm 32:1-5 ~ Blessed is the one whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. Blessed is the one whose sin the Lord does not count against them and in whose spirit is no deceit. When I kept silent, my bones wasted away through my groaning all day long. For day and night your hand was heavy on me; my strength was sapped as in the heat of summer. Then I acknowledged my sin to you and did not cover up my iniquity. I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord.” And you forgave the guilt.

In this last passage we see a tremendous truth in why the preaching of a happy life and plentitude all the time (prosperity preaching) is so horribly detrimental to believers. Teaching that a person’s life should be good all the time promotes a mentality of entitlement and expectation. The entitlement and expectation comes at the cost of the truth.

The entitlement mentality that says a person is deserving of the reward of blessing nearly all the time evades a painful reality of being human. Blessing assumes one is righteous. Blessing comes through righteousness. Righteousness is the product of holiness…and an absence of sin. Biblically and theologically sound teaching tells us that the root of our humanity is wickedly depraved and sinful. The reality is that we are not deserving and it is only through God’s grace that we receive God’s righteousness for ourselves. What we feel about ourselves, is interesting but mostly irrelevant to the biblical and theological conversation.

This is why we need to establish the level of theological and biblical literacy in our brothers and sisters. It will help us gauge how spiritually mature they might be. Biblical illiteracy equals spiritually immaturity. Conversely, biblically literate does not always equate to spiritual maturity. Biblical head knowledge needs to seep into the heart to be effective. I myself knew a ton of information about the bible and went to seminary to build on it but until I truly humbled myself and turned my life over to God in a contrite manner recently…I was head smart and heart dumb. There is a balance.

When the bullets start flying and life starts to grind away at us stripping us of things we believed we needed, we end up left at a loss not understanding what is actually happening to us.  The difference between giving up completely and giving it to God is often what we understand about God and the Scriptures. If we had read the Bible properly and understood it we would have noted that oppression and trials come upon everyone, even those that were most blessed by the Lord. In actuality, trials specifically came upon those the most blessed and those trials were usually the most vicious and hardest to overcome. David’s life is a perfect example. He was the anointed of God but was pursued by Saul for years. His own son Absalom turned against him and he had to endure the loss of his son, the rape of his daughter and forfeited the right to build the Temple to his son due to his sin. Yet David was one of the most blessed men to ever have walked the Earth, then or now.

When things get really horrible it is our character or what the Bible knowledge has made us into that allows us to overcome the intense trial periods. If you don't have the Bible in you, it will clearly show in a faulty character under duress. How we react under severe duress is who we have become in the Spirit of God and the knowledge of Scripture. It isn’t so much thinking at that point…it is a matter of living it out and doing. Soldiers in the heat of battle are not really thinking so much as they are reacting in a manner in which they were trained in and conditioned to. The training has conditioned them to react in a positive manner under fire. So too the Christian under the weight and oppression of trials and temptations. What we do and how we react is a product of our Biblical and Theological training. We’ve become what we learned. We’ve embodied the Word. We’ve embodied the teaching and character of Christ who Himself was tested and never failed.

Hope In the Deepest Dark - Sermon From Lamentations 3

Pottstown Bible Church

Speaker: Andy Pierson

Lamentations 3:1-25, 31-40, 57-58

May 3, 2015

Audio Here: Hope In the Deepest Dark

Video Here: Hope In the Deepest Dark

Lamentations 3:1-25 ~ I am the man who has seen affliction because of the rod of His wrath. He has driven me and made me walk in darkness and not in light. Surely against me He has turned His hand repeatedly all the day. He has caused my flesh and my skin to waste away, he has broken my bones. He has besieged and encompassed me with bitterness and hardship. In dark places He has made me dwell, like those who have long been dead. He has walled me in so that I cannot go out; He has made my chain heavy. Even when I cry out and call for help, He shuts out my prayer. He has blocked my ways with hewn stone; He has made my paths crooked. He is to me like a bear lying in wait, like a lion in secret places. He has turned aside my ways and torn me to pieces; He has made me desolate. He bent His bow and set me as a target for the arrow. He made the arrows of His quiver to enter into my inward parts. I have become a laughingstock to all my people, their mocking song all the day. He has filled me with bitterness, He has made me drunk with wormwood. He has broken my teeth with gravel; He has made me cower in the dust. My soul has been rejected from peace; I have forgotten happiness. So I say, “My strength has perished, and so has my hope from the Lord. Remember my affliction and my wandering, the wormwood and bitterness. Surely my soul remembers and is bowed down within me. This I recall to my mind, therefore I have hope. The Lord’s loving kindnesses indeed never cease, for His compassions never fail. They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness. “The Lord is my portion,” says my soul, “Therefore I have hope in Him.” The Lord is good to those who wait for Him, to the person who seeks Him.”

I have to admit, watching myself preach the Gospel for the first time is really awkward. Really awkward. First, because it is me. Second, because it is the Gospel. If someone told me ten years ago that I'd be doing this in center-city Pottstown I would have never believed it and chalked it up to insanity. 

I've learned never to say never.

Did God Create Evil When He Created Lucifer?

Subtitle: Why Did Satan Fall? Is Satan to Blame for His Own Wickedness

I guess the question needs to be asked. Was the Devil evil and wicked by the responsibility of his own will or did God make the Devil that way at the very point of his creation? Well, whatever applies to created man applies to a created angelic being like Lucifer on this topic. This is almost an exact parallel to the fallacy of the “God made me this way” arguments of homosexuality and transgenderism. God by his very holy nature would not be able to create something evil or wicked. He might allow evil or wickedness in patience because God wishes that none perish in sin but He would never deliberately create it. This is a misunderstanding of God and His will.

If God could He would therefore go against His own attributes and Word doing so. He would therefore be contradictory. If an omniscient God was in contradiction to His attributes and His word, this would be illogical. He would also end up being unjust because divine justice demands that evil be punished in the face of a perfect God. 

So to answer immediately in a theological manner, God did not create Lucifer (nor mankind) evil. They were originally created holy. It isn’t until they begin making volitional choices, specifically volitional bad choices that they fall away from God. Apostasy/αποστασία literally means to leave from a previous place of standing or desertion. There is a conscious decision taking place here.

Some will cite Jesus' own words in John 8:44 saying that, "He was a murderer from the beginning." Based on this citation they will then claim that Satan was indeed evil since the beginning or since his creation. The person that would say this appears to be confusing different concepts or types of “beginnings”. This is not a beginning in the sense of a chronological start point in history. John is saying that since the Devil’s first sin the first time…he has been sinning ever since then and has not stopped. Since the first murder until now…he is still killing.


The reality of the situation is that Lucifer is unrepentant and the historical track record shows that he never will repent. It is now ingrained in his very nature. He has been totally given over to his sin. You see, unrestrained sin is not going against God more so much as it is God totally removing Himself from the actions of the sinner. The restraining hand of God is removed so that the one sinning is free to pursue their sin with reckless abandon. That is why unrestrained human sinner is so akin to the Devil and so distant from God. There is a direct correlation of proximity to God and level of sin. Evil being the a parasite of holiness cannot occupy the same place. Just as cold is an absence of heat, so too sin and evil is an absence of holiness.

Those that say the Devil and rebel angels were evil from the exact point of their creation have an incorrect view and contrary to Scripture. Satan’s original nature was not a proclivity to sin and evil (nor was man's). The form of Gnosticism known as Manicheanism is wrong (as if being under the subheading of Gnosticism didn't clue you in). The Devil’s nature was not evil itself. The prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 14:12 is clear when it states:

"How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low!" 

This is clearly spoken to Day Star or Lucifer and the verbiage specifically says he fell from a given position at a given time. It would probably be better understood as fell away from God both in physical proximity and spiritual proximity. That is literally a description of apostasy. Lucifer’s sin was a willful act subsequent to his creation. 

That is the argument of Scripture.So here is the much wordier logic of this argument for the person that prefers a more naturalistic or reasoned argument. 

We must go back to the idea of motion and cause, cause and effect. Movement must be measured not only in distance, but also in time. You need both for it to have full relevance to Creation-bound reality (space-time continuum). It stands to reason therefore that for actions in time must be measured in a sequence or successively. If God by His holy nature can logically have nothing to do directly with evil other than to judge it because of His just and holy nature He could not be the impetus or origin of said evil from a logical standpoint. 

It must therefore be reasoned that there was a gap in not only spiritual/physical proximity…but also chronological time. There needs to have been complete separation in both the being created and Creator (which there was) but also a separation in time, will and being (ontology).


Therefore, logically, there had to have been self-will (choice) in the created being (Lucifer/Man) to make a decision (to sin) independent of the Creator. In a society that is never willing to take accountability for their own actions and blame everyone else, I can see how this is a tough concept to accept and process. If there are two successive acts one followed by another and the second does not have the same source of will as the first…this constitutes a change. The original impetus (of holiness from God) is then terminated and a new line of effect from a different cause ensues: Evil (in Satan and men). That change…was/is volitional choice of a sentient created being given the ability to choose and cannot be attributed to God. If this ability to choose is not given, then the creature or creation is nothing more than a proxy of the creator like a limb is to a paraplegic. I am sorry to use this analogy but it is apropos in relation to my next thoughts. 

Imperfection like (evil) cannot be attributed to a perfect, omniscient, omnipotent God and still be logically tenable. That God would then have to be less than perfect, all-knowing and all-powerful…and that is not God. So we end up with a completely separate being created holy by God but given the will to choose. Being given the will to chose is the ability to also choose wrongly. This appears to be the case with Lucifer and mankind. God cannot be blamed for the evil because it is caused by a sentient being distinct from God with its own will. 

Please pay close attention here and try to understand this next paragraph (it was tough to word). Make no mistake about this…that is exactly why Jesus used the image of Him being the Vine and man being the branches. There is a hard physical connection with no break or separation in this imagery. Please note that to be able to maintain our holiness/righteous one must maintain a grafted in a solidified connection to God. To sever said connection yet still try to maintain close contact (but no direct contact to Jesus) allows for sin and evil to creep back into our lives through the "spaces in-between".

Some would say this is a duplicitous double-standard or a contradiction to what I just said about evil until one realizes that holiness…is unidirectional or can only flow top down from God to the creation. Evil on the other hand is a negative or a parasite of holiness which I said earlier. It cannot exist unless holiness already did. The absence of holiness is the only place evil can exist. To say evil is a two-way street back and forth to God from man or is like trying to get a lesser power/current of electricity to push upstream against the greater electrical power/current of holiness coming down from God. This image shows how God can maintain his holiness and man remains in His ignorant sin unless God chooses to reach down and pull him out of it.

Evil and sin in the original scheme of things just didn't belong. Sin and evil are quite literally a deliberate attempt through volitional rebellion against God to short-circuit God's intended plan...like sticking a knife in the outlet socket. Yet the rebellion that would allow that to happen is overridden in the Gospel of Christ because God foreknew that sin would take place and always had a plan in place to override the short-circuit attempted by errant angels and errant men.  

Please note also that angels and men that would attempt to intentionally stick that metaphysical / metaphorical fork into God's intended planned circuit by sinning always ended up paying a heavy price by getting the shock of their life through God's wrath. Just ask Lucifer or a sinner reaping the payoff of their sins. Ashley Madison anyone? Abortion anyone? Sexually transmitted diseases because of immoral sexual practices?

It therefore follows that if God’s full holiness and righteousness through Christ flows downward through a repentant sinner…it will eventually push out all evil and unrighteousness. That is why when we observe Jesus’ ministry and the righteousness He brought, the evil of the world in the 1st century appears to have been pushed back and held at bay. Until Christ and the Kingdom comes in full sin will still hold sway and be the state of the world under influence of Satan. It is also why John said the following in 1 John 3:9:

"No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God."

Literally, the seed of God remains within the believer to gestate to become a full-blown image of Christ. Through an act of faith we assent to what Jesus Christ did on the Cross and is then are indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The indwelling of the Spirit pushes evil out of our hearts. The Spirit is the power that pushes unrighteousness out. the inverse or opposite of his is what happens with man and it is most likely what happened to Lucifer. We/he became so puffed up with his own sin and depravity (like a balloon) that the sin pushed out all truth about God. If I follow the logic of an earlier statement, God actually withdrew is restraining hand from Lucifer once he willfully chose to rebel.

So to conclude, Lucifer (or man) was not created evil, nor, in any way could he have “inherited” or “derived” an anomaly or defective cause from the Creator directly or indirectly. This important distinction needs to be made because further arguments are often made that perhaps God, didn’t create the Devil evil but instead created him with a defect. Freewill is not to be viewed as a defect. Freewill needs to be viewed as a necessary start-up condition of a volitional/sentient creature. 

Otherwise it is not a creature distinct and separate from that which created it. If it was we would become locked in a circular logic trap that would again implicate God and make Him complicit in evil acts. This is logically untenable and it is also an unbiblical position. To have a distinct volitional creature make freewill decisions requires that they be independent to do so both in being and will. To blame God for their actions is therefore logically incorrect. To assert as much would be the same as blaming the law-abiding father for the criminal acts of the child when the child is a murder. That would be non-sequitur and does not follow.

Did God Create the Universe?

Genesis 1:1 ~ “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

John 1:3 – “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.”

Colossians 1:16 ~ “For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.”

I intend to address a handful of issues concerning the Creation which I believe actually took place and can be reasoned for through logical understanding and outside of the Cosmological Argument. This will be a intellectual blending of logic/reasoning and theological understanding. I will pose three questions for this post with commentary. Did God create everything? Has Creation and creatures of the Creation always existed and Did God Create Time [Did time start at the Creation]?

Why bother? Because today there are many “learned” men respected and venerated in the culture that are claiming the Universe (Creation) has always existed or permutations thereof that support an eternal universe. They cling to these convoluted and tenuous arguments even though the underlying concepts in things like the Cosmological Argument, Kalam Cosmological Argument [1] and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics can refutes these assertions. Among these men are Stephen Hawking, Saurya Das and Ahmed Farag Ali. We also had Baum–Frampton who supported the cyclic or rebounding or oscillating universe theory and even the least probable of the Big Bang avoidance theories: String Theory.

String Theory that theoretically could have an infinite “string” of possible universes. A premise that would most certainly demand that science consider infinitude in reality. Infinitude that could only be attributed to an infinite series of regressive universes or more specifically, parallel universes. This of course would be a violation of logic. According to most physicists, it appears it would be a violation of physics also. Most physicists would disclaim infinity in Physics because it has no empirical measurable quantity. For example, presumed impossible for any type of body to have infinite mass or infinite energy. Concepts of infinite things such as an infinite plane wave exist, but there are no experimental means to generate them. Their naturalism comes full circle to shoot them in the foot.

Also as I have stated in older posts, Newtonian physics indirectly hints at the need for existence of a God-like being to have a Creation/Universe with an inception point. If we consult Newton's First and Third Laws of Motion we read that: (Law 1) An object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by an external force. We know that the universe is in motion and is expanding. It is not at rest. It therefore has been acted upon and is in action. It is no longer at rest but put in motion by something. (Law 3) When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body. If the universe is in motion (which it is), that means something in equal magnitude to the matter of Creation had to have exerted and immense amount of initial force to get the Creation/Universe in motion. That is a rather extraordinary force. Perhaps the proper term should be super-ordinary or supernatural force?

That being said, I pose the further question under the assumption that God does indeed exist…

Did God Create Everything? Yes

I believe that everything that has being (ontologically) and is in existence…is from God. Anything that is in motion and is involved in the Universe must be caused directly by that which it is associated with. In essence: A spark ignites the flame that draws the moth. A series of causal events. God being a self-sufficient/existent is the simplest explanation of a self-subsistent Being. Just as God is infinite, God therefore is the source of the irreducible regress of causation. 

Slaves to Cause

In all things that exist and have their being…their origin of being is found in the ontological source of God. They are not of their own being, they are dependent on their existence. Said another way, all things that “are” or all beings apart from God are not their own being, but are beings by partaking or involvement with another: God. They are essentially ontologically owned. They are servants or slaves of God. We are all dependent beings…and all things are dependent things. Slaves to causation.

If all beings and all things are dependent we again resort back to Aristotle’s Uncaused Cause because if we say something existed eternally other than a self-sufficient/existent being forces us into an infinite regress of causation. Logic forbids this. Philosophically, the greatest thinkers said it this way. They pointed towards God either in their statements about unity or about the greatest Being/Truth (infinitude). Plato said that unity must come before multitude, or from the One, the many (Plato's Parmenides xxvi) and Aristotle said (Metaphysics ii, book 4) that whatever is greatest in being and greatest in truth, is the cause of every being and of every truth; just as whatever is the greatest in heat is the cause of all heat.

Furthermore not only is God the source of all existence, He is also the One who sustains all of it according to Scripture.

Hebrews 1:1-3 ~ “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word

Along the same lines a similar question is often asked.

Have Creation and Creatures always Existed? No

Nothing except God a non-dependent self-sufficient/existent Being can be eternal. This is far from a statement that cannot be substantiated. The will of God or the self-sufficient/existent Being that is the source of all causation is the cause of all things. By the power of His word/will sustains all things. If He sustains them (Hebrews 1:3), He most certainly created them by speaking them into existence.

Psalm 33:9 ~ “For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm.”

Hebrews 11:3 ~ “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible."

All things are necessary. They are necessary in accordance with God’s decrees and God’s will. Just as the effect is dependent on a cause, so too being is dependent on not just Being…but a being that has a will to create what exists now. We exist because of a volitional action of a self-sufficient/existent Being/Cause with a will. Since God needed nothing other than Himself in Trinity in eternity past, it would require volitional act of will for God for any thing to exist other than Himself…being the ultimate cause of being and reality (ref: Aristotle; Metaphiscs V, Book 6)

Because of my love of the science fiction premise of time travel I pose one last question of great interest to me personally.

Did God Create Time? [Did Time Start at The Creation]? Yes

I am going to sidestep the entire idea of space-time continuum here made so popular by the likes of Carl Sagan, H.G. Well’s Time Machine and Dr. Who. I will do so by delving directly into the theological and philosophical, logical explanations.

Genesis explicitly says, "In the beginning God created heaven and earth.”

The Bible explicitly says beginning or start. There was a start or beginning of a sequence of events. This stands in the face of those that will make the claim that the Creation (or creatures within it) always was. The word here in Hebrew is reshith which literally means first in place and time. In the Greek Septuagint it is ἀρχῇ. The word arche/ ἀρχῇ is a word used to designate beginnings in a temporal or time-bound sense of the word. It is referring to a particular time. In this case, when God called Heavens and Earth into existence as He willed them ex nihilo [out of nothing]. Therefore anything “previous” to this temporally was God and only God. That includes the absence of time as we understand it. 

Since science claims space and time are on a continuum, we should not find this surprising. If there was a beginning of material existence, there logically had to be a beginning of time attached to it. The Apostle John placed the same words at the commencement of his Gospel to force our minds to an absolute but inconceivable “beginning,” when the work of creation had not yet even commenced. When in the whole of existence…there was only God in the form of the Trinity. Which is exactly what John is alluding to when he said The Word/Jesus was face to face or towards God (the Father) in an intimate relationship.

Footnote:

[1] The Kalām Cosmological Argument is derived from the “normal” Liebnizian Cosmological Argument from Gottfried Leibniz that says that: (1) Anything that exists has an explanation of its existence (2) If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God (3) The Universe exists (4) Therefore, the universe has an explanation of its existence (1 & 3) (5) Therefore, the explanation of the existence of the universe is God (2 & 4). If we add to this the stipulation that the universe is not eternal but actually had a beginning. If it had a beginning it therefore is contingent or dependent and therefore…has a cause (or creator God). This argument reinforces Liebniz’s original argument by adding an additional step of logic making it harder to refute.]

Is God Unchanging?

Is God Unchanging or immutable?

Yes, He is.

First, in a previous post I posed the question: Can it be demonstrated that God exists? I believe I answered this question convincingly in the affirmative. In it I explained that there is some first being or first cause that is necessary logically for existence since true existence cannot come from nothingness (ex nihilo). I have referred to that first cause as God. Even Creation didn't really come from nothing, it came from what I have concluded is God in my previous post (not some nameless godless origin-less "force").

To add to that statement, I add that first cause must be pure action, without the addition or mixture of any potentiality (or impetus to act) based on Aristotelian philosophy. For the reason that, absolute potentiality is subsequent to act/action. They are separate and distinct. Therefore everything which is in any way changed, is in some way in potentiality. It is obvious then that it is impossible for God to be in any way changeable. Creation on the other hand which is in action is another story all together. 

Secondly, because everything that is moved in the Universe/Creation has substance; it stands to reason that in everything that is moved there is some kind of composition to be found. But it can be shown that in God at the Creation there is no composition or matter as we understand it. He is Spirit (John 4:24). God cannot therefore be moved according to Newtonian physics (but He can move things through varies means). Thirdly because everything which is moved acquires something by its movement (momentum). Also, since God is infinite, comprehending in Himself all the plenitude of perfection of all being, He cannot acquire anything new (attributes) nor extend Himself to anything He was not extended previously (attributes). Hence previous movement in no way belongs to Him as He is the impetus of all movement. So, constrained by logical truth, I must conclude God is unmovable or immutable unless He choose to change. He has already said in the Scriptures that He does not though.

In opposition to this divine truth some people (including many Christians) often point to the Incarnation or coming of Jesus in the flesh (John 1:14) as an example that God is not immutable. He changed to become human at the point of the conception by the Holy Spirit in Mary. Many will state or imply that the very act of the Incarnation is in itself a violation of immutability because God became something He had not been before. They claim He changed at the point of Incarnation. This is a profound misunderstanding of theology, God’s attributes and His is being. We must understand that God is also timeless among other things including infinite and immutable.

So the real question I suppose that should be asked is: What does this mean to an entity that is constrained by time like humanity and their perception of what God is. It is an issue of human perception and time. Being infinite, timeless and not of the Creation, God stands outside of time or distinct from it. He is diachronic and before Creation, existed independent of time. The Bible says He is from everlasting to everlasting (from the vanishing point to the vanishing point). Therefore He is capable of standing distinct from it. God therefore sees all of time as the eternal “now”. God was the Creator of time. God is not subject to time unless He allows Himself to be for our benefit. Time is subject to Him. He is therefore manifesting to us, in time, an attribute that He chose to show us at a specific time in our existence. It is not that he hadn’t had the attribute of humanity “before”, it is an issue of our recognition of it at a given time the way He chose to reveal it and how He chose to reveal it. That which is timeless does not change. Only that which resides within time and is subject to time can change because change requires a sequence of events that only time can allow. God had decreed at some infinite point in the past that He would eventually take on the attribute of humanity.

In this we see that it is not that God didn't have an attribute of humanity previous to coming in the flesh, He merely took on the attribute of humanity that had been planned at some point previous to the foundation of the world [1 Peter 1:20]. Just as those who had been elected to salvation had been in the Lambs Book of Life [Ephesians 1:4, Revelation 13:8; 20:15].

 Psalms 33:11~ The counsel of the LORD stands forever, The plans of His heart from generation to generation.

Psalms 102:25-27 ~ "Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. "Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. "But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end.

Malachi 3:6 ~ “For I, the Lord, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.

Titus 1:2 ~ “…in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago”

Hebrews 13:8 ~ “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”