While most commentators identify falling stars only as Lucifer, in his Concise Commentary Matthew Henry provides a second, human identity. Human falling stars are tepid, indecisive, weak or apostate clergy who, having ceased to be a minister of Christ,
"... he who is represented by this star becomes the minister of the devil; and lets loose the powers of hell against the churches of Christ. On the opening of the bottomless pit, there arose a great smoke. The devil carries on his designs by blinding the eyes of men...putting out light and knowledge, and promoting ignorance and error. Out of this smoke there came a swarm of locusts, emblems of the devil's agents, who promote superstition, idolatry, error, and cruelty...the true believers...should be untouched (but) a secret poison and infection in the soul, should rob many others of purity, and....peace. The locusts had no power to hurt those who had the seal of God. God's all-powerful, distinguishing grace will keep his people from total and final apostacy." (Commentary on Revelation 9: 1-12)
Evolutionary theories (cosmogonies), whether theistic or secular are inseparable from pagan and pantheist nature and Mystery religions. This is why over eighty years ago, Rev. C. Leopold Clarke wrote that priests who embrace evolution are apostates from the 'Truth as it is in Jesus.' (1 John2:2) Rev. Clarke, a lecturer at a London Bible college, discerned that evolution is the antithesis to the Revelation of God in the Deity of Jesus Christ, thus it is the greatest and most active agent of moral and spiritual disintegration:
"It is a battering-ram of unbelief – a sapping and mining operation that intends to blow Religion sky-high. The one thing which the human mind demands in its conception of God, is that, being Almighty, He works sovereignly and miraculously – and this is the thing with which Evolution dispenses....Already a tremendous effect, on a wide scale has been produced by the impact of this teaching – an effect which can only be likened to the...collapse of foundations..." (Evolution and the Break-Up of Christendom, Philip Bell, creation.com, Nov. 27, 2012)
The faith of the Christian Church and of the average Christian has had, and still has, its foundation as much in the literal and historic meaning of Genesis, the book of beginnings revealed 'mouth to mouth' by the Angel to Moses, as in that of the person and deity of Jesus Christ. But how horrible a travesty of the sacred office of the Christian Ministry to see church leaders more eager to be abreast of the times than earnestly contending for the Faith once delivered unto the saints (Jude 1:3). It is high time, said Rev. Clarke, that the Church,
".... separated herself from the humiliating entanglement attending her desire to be thought up to date...What, after all, have custodians of Divine Revelation to do making terms with speculative Biology, which has....no message of comfort or help to the soul?" (ibid)
The primary tactic employed by priests eager to accommodate themselves and the Christian Church to modern science and evolutionary thinking is predictable. It is the argument that evolution is entirely compatible with the Bible when we see Genesis, especially the first three chapters, in a non-literal, non-historical context. This is the argument embraced and advanced by Pope Francis, Hugh Ross and mega-church pastor Timothy J. Keller.
With a position paper Keller published with the evolutionary 'Christian' organization Bio Logos he joined the ranks of falling stars (Catholic and Protestant priests) stretching back to the Renaissance. Their slippery-slide into apostasy began when they gave into the temptation to embrace a non-literal, non-historical view of Genesis. (A response to Timothy Keller's 'Creation, Evolution and Christian Laypeople," Lita Cosner, Sept. 9, 2010, creation.com)
This is not a heresy unique to modern times. The early Church Fathers dealt with this damnable heresy as well, counting it among the heretical tendencies of the Origenists. Fourth-century Fathers such as John Chrysostom, Basil the Great and Ephraim the Syrian, all of whom wrote commentaries on Genesis, specifically warned against treating Genesis as an unhistorical myth or allegory. John Chrysostom strongly warned against paying heed to these heretics,
"...let us stop up our hearing against them, and let us believe the Divine Scripture, and following what is written in it, let us strive to preserve in our souls sound dogmas." (Genesis, Creation, and Early Man, Fr. Seraphim Rose, p. 31)
As St. Cyril of Alexandria wrote, higher theological, spiritual meaning and by extension, spiritual regeneration is founded upon humble, simple faith in the literal and historic meaning of Genesis and one cannot apprehend rightly the Scriptures without believing in the historical reality of the events and people they describe. (ibid, Seraphim Rose, p. 40)
In the integral worldview teachings of the Fathers, neither the literal nor historical meaning of the Revelations of the pre-incarnate Jesus, the Angel who spoke to Moses, can be regarded as expendable. There are at least four critically important reasons why. First, to reduce the Revelation of God to allegory and myth is to contradict and usurp the authority of God, ultimately deny the deity of Jesus Christ; twist, distort, add to and subtract from the entire Bible and finally, to imperil the salvation of believers.
Scenarios commonly proposed by modern Origenists posit a cleverly disguised pantheist/immanent or evolver-god subject to the space-time dimension and forces of evolution. But it is sinful man who carries the burden of time, not the Holy Triune God. This is a crucial point, for when evolutionary 'Christians' add millions and billions of zeros (time) to God they have transferred their own limitations onto Him. They have 'limited' God and made Him over in their own image. This is not only idolatrous but satanic.
Do you really thing anyone has read your post, I mean past the first two sentences? Who are you writing for, yourself or the intended reader? I ask not to be unkind, but to point out that you are not communicating at all.
Evolutionary theories (cosmogonies)...
Cosmogony I thought was about the origins of the natural universe or cosmos rather than the evolution of life after life started however it started. This is an issue I have with naturalists/materialists who conflate "evolution" into an explanation for life and the cosmos. Its obviously inadequate to do so. Of course there is usually a lot of equivocation on this point. When many materialists argue that the universe is all there is, they will commonly cite evolution as an explanation of life. But when defending evolution as a theory its proponents treat the problem of the first self replicating life as a separate issue....which is the hard part. I mean 99.99999999999+% of the problem is how the heck we got the first replicating life. But they focus all their time trying to argue for the tiny part of the problem that plausible. Kind of like a committee of people "bike shedding"
While I don't want to be critical of people who take the Genesis narratives as literal and infer a 6000 year old natural universe, it seems to me less likely than a very old 15 billion year old universe, and independent of how old I think the universe is, I think some of the narratives were not intended to be taken literally. I don't think Lucifer is a snake. I do not think there is a place on the face of the Earth we live on where Eden is still there but our access is blocked on the east side by cherubim swinging flaming swords back and forth. When I read language like: "the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil" I do not think of the narrative as literal historical events but as a poetic or prophetic representation. And I consider this all common sense, but I do not consider any of it my own personal doctrine, since I am not a clergy member and just a layman. I have what I think most likely, and that is all.