Winman quit arguing.

no one said God didn't create animals. I only said the word create was not used in association with it.

If you want to start another thread for this let's do so or drop it.

if Lucifer was create five days or so before Adam. And Adam didn't need but a few hours to sin on the first day of the next week. so it would seem only once did Lucifer lead worship before he fell which is before the first day of the week after the seventh day of rest. according to most on the day he separated the water from the earth to create dry land.

Winman,

True, as I stated, scripture doesn't say he did it in one day, I was just pointing out that there would be far less species (types?) of animals then as compared to now.

As for robins and bluebirds, perhaps you'd end up with the all-American eagle for all I know, and for sure I don't imply that there was only one kind of bird. I'll bet there were hundreds, just not thousands and thousands. After all, God didn't spare with the creativity during creation ;)

There used to be a theory among some Christians shortly before Evolution became a popular religion, called fixidity of the species, which meant that the variation we have now is exactly how they were originally created. This lousy science was almost fuel to fire up scientifically-sound observations of variation and partially pave the way for Darwinism.
It still rings out today from the scoffers: "Do you really believe in the fairy tale that Noah could fit all 30 million species onto a boat? get real!"
Of course they are willingly ignorant of many details of the flood, variation, and the actual scriptural account.

Anyways, I just wanted to point out that it wasn't millions of species in the Garden of Eden, nor was it a tiny number either.
And by the way, Adam could probably kick all our butts in just about any contest. He would have been one awesome dude :cool:
(No disrespect to Adam intended)

Chette, this is where you go wrong. Where in all the Bible does it say that Adam sinned on "the first day of the next week"?? That is nowhere in scripture. Adam may have been sinless for as much as 100 years or more before Satan deceived Eve. There really is no way to know for sure.

We do know that AFTER Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden, that Adam knew Eve and she conceived and bore Cain. Now it is possible that Adam waited many years after they were cast out of the garden to come together, but it is very unlikely. I am sure that Adam and Eve were very healthy and even handsome and beautiful individuals. I am sure that Adam went to Eve very soon after they realized they were naked.

So, it is more likely that Satan did not deceive Eve until they had been in the garden for some time. But we know after they were cast out that Cain and Abel were born, they grew enough for one to till the land and the other to raise flocks, Cain slew Abel, and then Seth was born when Adam and Eve were 130 years old.

Now we do not know how long after Satan rebelled against God that he tempted Eve. He may have done so right away, or he may have waited years. There is no way to know.

I'm not sold on the gap theory, but I am not against it. I see the evidence for and against.

However, Chette, you have made an assumption here.

You are assuming there is no gap between Genesis 2 and Genesis 3, and that on Day 8, along comes Satan to decieve eve, but there is no mention of that.

Adam and Eve could have been in the Garden for almost a hundred years. They could have had fellowship with God (In fact, the Bible says that they did walk in the garden with God in the cool of the evening, and they did this regularly). It also says that Satan was in the garden with God.

Now, I have a theory - Satan was also in the garden of God (Ezekiel 28). Perhaps Satan's iniquity was his desire to have fellowship with man, and have man worship him, and observing God's fellowship with Adam and Eve only served to incite his jealousy. He waited for his chance and struck. And now EVERY SINGLE MAN in the world worships Satan through his deception.

Of course, that theory doesn't sit with the gap ruin-reconstruction theory.

EDIT: - Amen winman. I didn't even read your post until after I posted mine :P

EDIT2: Another thing to consider is that Adam names his wife in Genesis 3, calling her Eve
Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

He called her Eve because she WAS the mother of all living. It's possible that they had children in the Garden, and that Abel and Cain were the first two born OUTSIDE the garden. It could also refer to a motherly figure over God's creation (man was given dominion).

What happened to her children born without sin? Two possibilities - 1) Taken by God or 2) For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners.

Round 2: Gap Interpretation
 

Good day to all!! I thought that the topic on Gap was already finished. All in a sudden it has been resumed. I see this topic is so hot...:boxing: but before that lets pause for a moment to give way for the sponsors:cheer2::cheer2::cheer2: and eat some pop corn:popcorn:

The Gap topic won't go away because there is a fundamental question of truth at issue: Was there a previous world on the face of the earth before the seven days of Genesis, or not...and where does Lucifer fit into the equation?

Ok, let me interject this point:

Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

That is our English language translation from the Hebrew.

Génesis 1:2 Y la tierra estaba desordenada y vacía, y las tinieblas estaban sobre la haz del abismo, y el Espíritu de Dios se movía sobre la haz de las aguas.

This is the SRV translation into the Spanish language (from the Sword Searcher software).

For those of you familiar with the Spanish language you will see that the SRV renders this as feminine and plural tense "the darknesses" (bad English rendering). In other words, it speaks of more than one darkness. How about both physical and spiritual darkness at this same time?

The Hebrew: choshek kho-shek' - the dark; hence (literally) darkness; figuratively, misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness:--dark(-ness), night, obscurity.

If, as this passage seems to suggest, that there was both literal darkness and spiritual darkness present, at this time, then that supports the notion that Lucifer had already fallen in time past.

Sensible Understanding of God’s Holy Word
“So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.”
Nehemiah 8:8


In chapter 7 of the book of Nehemiah, the wall was finished, and here followed the listings of the genealogy of God’s people.

Nehemiah 7:1 Now it came to pass, when the wall was built, and I had set up the doors, and the porters and the singers and the Levites were appointed,

Then on chapter 8, the people of God (Israelites) were gathered and Ezra being both the scribe and the priest brought the law and read before them upon the pulpit of wood.

Nehemiah 8:1 And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water gate; and they spake unto Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the LORD had commanded to Israel.
Nehemiah 8:2 And Ezra the priest brought the law before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, upon the first day of the seventh month.
Nehemiah 8:3 And he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the book of the law.
Nehemiah 8:4 And Ezra the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, and Urijah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchiah, and Hashum, and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam.


Following down on verses 7-8, was the Preaching Service, so that Jeshua, Bani, and Shrebiah et.al. caused the people to understand the law.

Nehemiah 8:7 Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law: and the people stood in their place.
Nehemiah 8:8 So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

I believe that, God has given us a pattern to follow in an in-depth study of God’s Holy Word like a miner digging its ore. The following are the rules that may help:
1. The ability to make a distinction.
2. The ability to create a sensible interpretation.
3. The ability to form a spiritual application.

In the case of the words in the book of Genesis like created, made, and formed may show a relation yet do have a distinctions. Below are the distinctions:

1. Created – the Hebrew word used was “Bara”. This is the word expressing creation in its strictest sense. This is to bring something into being out of nothing. This is used primarily in relation to the activity of God. Here it was used in Genesis 1:1, 21, 27; 2:4 indicating the creative acts of God. Interestingly, in the New Testament it was also used in reference to the results of our salvation.

Ephesians 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

2. Made – the Hebrew word was “Asah”. This indicates the making of something from the already created materials (Genesis 1:16,25,26; 2:2). Likewise, the New Testament told us that we were made us sit together in Christ Jesus.

Ephesians 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

3. Formed – Hebrew “Yatsar” means to fashioned or to make it beautiful. (Genesis 2:7, 19).

My KJV bible in Genesis 1;1 told me that “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth”. Perfect is the Word of God that I am not able to see Adam or Eve created by God in the beginning of His word or text while it is true that they were created in God’s image as in verse 27, but the sense here is that they were actually made out of the dust or have been taken out of the ribs. Our KJV with its built-in dictionary safely defined the word created here in relation to mankind as made.

Further, in Genesis 1:5 stated “And God called the light Day and the darkness he called it Night…” There’s no disagreement at all that we live in a 24 hours a day in 7 days a week but I am pretty unsure that the Day and the Night do have an equal hours or 12 hours each. For in some place, their day would extend up to more than 12 hours and vice versa. In verse 5 is the first day where light was diffused. God did not create light because he is the light and when God called the light it made visible or it appeared. Not to be confused the sun gives light to the moon and to the earth after they were made in Day 4. Bro. Chette your 24/7 is a term usually used in a banking institution but nevertheless it makes a sense.:cool: Also, I usually prefer to use a biblically sound "Gap Interpretation" than the evolutionistic "Gap Theory".

In addition, it is true that there was a six(6) day to complete the creation starting on v 3 as the first day but there is also no denying about the v 1"In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth." as the original creative act of God. Is there a partial creation here? No. The bible stated clearly as "created" which is in the past tense implying a completed creation of the heaven and earth. Again, it is to be remembered that at the end of verse 1, it ended in a period (.) not a comma (,) to link the word "And" in verse 2.

Now in verse 2, our KJV used the word "was" instead of "became" while it is true that the Hebrew "hayetha" could well be said as the same meaning, the KJV translated it as "was" simply because it was proper to do so which will complete the thought.But the sense, was it "became". Another thing is that the word "without" will be included.

Verses 1 and 2 were said to be linked because of the word "And" but it must be noted that in verse 2 it was only the earth that was without form and void and left "heaven". The sense is that it must mention not only the earth but heaven as well . is there a gap here? You be the judged.


Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.


Jude 25
www.fredsite.weebly.com

actually how long do you think it would take for man to be tested? 3 minutes? 3 hours? 3 days? when I say the first day of the week I mean the second week. but again it all lays in how long does it take for man to be tested. anyone who thinks that a completely natural man could have been in fellowship with God 100 years before ever disobeying and eating the tree of Knowledge of Good and evil, might want to ask why didn't he eat of the tree of life sometime in that 100years? I mean it wasn't forbidden for him to eat until after his fall.

I say it was (if you don't like first day of the following week) the 8th day. he sinned by noon lunch when his wife made him his first meal. God came a few hours later in the cool of the day found them in sin (but he already knew anyway) and sacrificed an animal to make them clothes by evening sacrifice. the next morning he put them out of the Garden that was east in Eden and sealed of the entrance with a cherubim and a flaming sword. 9 months later they had twins (Cain and Able) and well you know the rest.

I don't need scriptures for that I like you am a sinner and I say it wasn't even a day when the Natural man failed to keep Gods commandment. I haven't gone wrong anywhere. it is quite possible you assume more than I do when it comes to how long it was before Adam sinned. Like I said before we can stretch our Bibles as long as we know God has the final say.

So how long do you think Adam was in the garden before he sinned and where are your Bible verses for it?

when it comes to Pipes and tabrets on a perfect being. all of this fits into the Gap because Lucifer would of had possibly only one time to lead worship before he fell if he was created in the 6 days and tempted Eve. for he would have only been five days maximum older than Adam, who, was as it looks in Gen 1 and 2 was only a few hours older than Eve.

Go to the link to David Regan's site CKG posted http://www.learnthebible.org/search/node/gap his view is the same as mine and he has already stated the gap view and why from the doctrine of the Devil and it all makes sense and is scriptural. most of which I agree and hold too.

we don't have to go to the Hebrew because the same meanings can be found tot he English words employed in the KJV 1611 Bible anyway

Fredoheaven

Fred, what you are doing here is wresting the scriptures. One reason I came to this forum is because I believe God is absolutely perfect, that he promised to preserve his word in perfection, and that the King James Bible is that perfectly preserved Word of God.

If God said the earth "was" void and without form, then that is exactly what God means. When I hear people say things like "well, the verse says "was" but it really means "became"", then I stop listening to that person.

Now, I believe you are a sincere person who loves the Lord. But you need to take God at his word and not insert your own private interpretation.

Well, I don't know of anybody who is saying the day and night had to be exactly 12 hours each, as we know from experience that days are longer in the summer and nights are longer in the winter because of the tilt of the earth.

But the Bible does say light was "formed".

Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

And we know that the darkness and light are both alike to God.

Psa 139:12 Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.

So, if God says he formed the light and created the darkness, I believe it. I am not saying I understand it, God's thoughts are much higher than ours and we cannot always understand it, but I believe it.

Isa 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

And Chette, I am not saying you are wrong to believe that Adam sinned on the 8th day. That is completely possible. But it is also possible that Adam and Eve were sinless in the garden for a period of time before they sinned. We have no scriptures to support or refute either view.

And Luke, it is certain that Adam and Eve had other children besides Cain, Abel, and Seth, because Cain was married.

Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

So Adam and Eve probably had many children who are simply not mentioned in the scriptures. But I don't think Adam and Eve had children in the garden while still sinless, because of Gen 3:22-24 together with Gen 4:1.

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

And then only after Adam and his wife were expelled from the garden are we told Adam and Eve came together.

Gen 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

I believe that after Cain and Abel were born, that Adam and Eve had many children, perhaps dozens that are simply not mentioned in the scriptures.

Like a Bereans
 

Yap, Bro. Chette, Our KJV, English bible is so complete that we should understand the meaning of it. Sorry for offending every body using other tongue other than our KJV English but even thanks for your reminder.:):):)

Yes Bro. Winman, before I came to know our Lord Jesus as my Saviour, all I have, was to "believed" to understand but when I came and join here in this Furom, I have to "understand" before I believe. So that before I believe your interpretation or anyones interpretation, I must see to it that "I understand to believe". Well, you have a nice try in intrepreting God's Word and you have many verses to prove them but like anybody in this forum, they have also the verse/s to prove and "caused to understand." Like it or not I should be just wise enough be like a Bereans...:eyebrows::confused::eek::)

Fred

I am not sure I understand what you are saying, but I am not trying to offend you.

Neh 9:6 Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.

Now, here God says he "made" the heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things therein, the seas, and all that is therein.

Now, that's pretty inclusive of EVERYTHING. The "heaven of heavens" surely means the highest or 3rd heaven. It also says "with all their host" immediately after which would include the angels. And at the end of the verse it says the "host of heaven" worshippeth thee. This surely is speaking about the angelic beings in the 3rd heaven, I seriously doubt it is speaking of birds flying in our atmosphere.

But do you see it says "made" here? It does not say "created" as in Gen 1:1. So here it is made very plain that when God says he "made" as in Gen 1:16, it is speaking of creation.

Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

And I am not interpreting this to suit myself. If you were to take any new believer and have them read Genesis chapter 1, they would believe that all creation from Gen 1:1 thru Gen 1:31 took place in six literal days. That is simply how it reads. There is absolutely no mention of a gap between verses 1:1 and 1:2 and nothing even faintly hinting at it.

It is only when people have been exposed to the gap theory that they begin to question the language like the word "was" in Gen 1:2.

Here is a good article on the language used in Genesis 1. I personally do not go for studying the meanings of words in the original languages, I believe God wrote the King James Bible in English for a purpose, that purpose to spread the Gospel across the world as Britain colonized on every continent. But this article goes into some depth on the subject.

http://ldolphin.org/gaptheory.html

Wrest God's Word
 

wrest (rst)
tr.v. wrest·ed, wrest·ing, wrests
1. To obtain by or as if by pulling with violent twisting movements: wrested the book out of his hands; wrested the islands from the settlers.
2. To usurp forcefully: wrested power from the monarchy.
3. To extract by or as if by force, twisting, or persistent effort; wring: wrest the meaning from an obscure poem.
4.
a. To distort or twist the nature or meaning of: wrested the words out of context.
b. To divert to an improper use; misapply

Ok, here are a few and I would like to borrow as quoted:

We know Lucifer was perfect when he was created.

Eze 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

Satan must have rebelled against God after the six day creation, because God said every thing he had made (which would include Satan) was "very good" in Gen 1:31

And we see Satan as evil in Gen 3:1

So, Satan must have rebelled sometime during Genesis chapter 2. Gen 2:1 begins at the end of the sixth day, start of the seventh day.


I saw some wresting of God'S Word here by incosestent used of the word "Lucifer". The comment was said to be "Lucifer" ie perfect when he was created 'til iniquity found on him. In this case and for clarity sake, it must be "Lucifer" rebelled, and to believe that Satan must have rebelled sometime during Genesis chapter 2 is not a clear interpretation. The bible is silent as to this one so that we cannot conlude it as a "must". I think we used the prhase "may have" so that it cannot be said to be observing your own private interpretation especially when the Bible is silent on the matter.:tsk:

Fredoheaven

I actually agree with you, there is no way to know for certain if Lucifer in Isaiah 14 is speaking of Satan. But the name of Lucifer has been associated with Satan by the church for centuries.

And besides, it is those that believe in the gap that claim Satan was cast to the earth between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. You don't find that in Ezekiel 28:

Eze 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. 15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. 16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. 17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.

First of all, we do not know that this "annointed cherub" is Satan. Second, if you read carefully, if this is indeed Satan, he had not been cast down yet. All references to him being cast down are future.

That contradicts the gap theory that claims Satan was cast down between Gen 1:1 and 1:2.

It is the gappers that actually use Isaiah 14 to support their theory.

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. 15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

It is gappers that claim verse 12 supports their view that Satan was cast down between Gen 1:1 and 1:2, citing the word "fallen". But if you read down to verse 15 you will see that it is in the future that he will be brought down.

I personally do not believe Satan has been cast down yet. I believe he will be cast down in Rev 12 which is future.

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

There is no mistaking here, Satan is named. This is future. And we have scripture such as Job showing Satan in heaven long after the creation account.

Again, scripture contradicts the gap theory.

I have seen an inconsistency with those who believe in the gap. When it suits their purpose, they believe Lucifer is Satan. When it is shown to contradict the theory, then they argue otherwise.

I actually agree, Isa 14 may be only speaking of the King of Babylon.

Again Winman you lump one Gap theories view of the casting down into a pot and say all those who believe in a Biblical Gap believe this.

The Casting down of Satan is two part like other doctrines of the Bible (i.e. the visitation of the Lord, the chastisement of Israel and others). He was indeed cast down from his position in heaven as anointed Cherub (as far as the duties of that position go) he may still claim the Title. his access to heaven is limited today to only being able to accuse the brethren. he has no general access as to mingle with the Holy angles of God on a daily basis. we believe his current home is actually our outer space or deep space. to which he will be cast down from 2 nd heaven during the 7 years Tribulation to face his maker.

Go to David Regan's site and read is anti-gap and gap study. he has done a great job of putting it together and I will borrow from some of his understanding to help in the final formulation of the Non-evolutionary Gap view.

http://www.learnthebible.org/search/node/gap

OK, here we go again. Fredoheaven criticizes me for saying that Lucifer is Satan. The you accuse me of lumping all gappers alike. Then you recommend David Regan's site (which I've seen before). And lo and behold, what does it say?

I am getting tired of this debate. If Ezekiel 28:14 is Satan, then he was not cast down yet in Ezekiel's time, if Isaiah 14 is Lucifer, he was not cast down yet at the time of Isaiah.

Neither of these passages show either "the annointed cherub that covereth" or "Lucifer" as being cast down at the time these scriptures were written which was long after Gen 1:1.

So both of these passages clearly contradict your gap theory. I really don't understand why you can't see this, it is very clear if you read those passages closely. Go back and read my post #94 where I show these passages and highlighted the words that show neither the annointed cherub of Eze 28 or Lucifer of Isa 14 as being cast down yet.

And I had seen that site quite awhile ago, and noted the similarities to your own beliefs. You really should just read the scriptures and not follow the doctrines of men.

Ezk 28 is only a description of what he was before he was cast down. He is no longer the Cherub that covers or the covering Cherub. many believe what he covered the throne of God like the four that surround him.

At this moment of your reading Ezk 28 is Satan still in his perfect State?

Are you saying he still hold that covering position today? If so then you believe he is still leading worship in the third heaven using his Pipe and tabrets because he is not cast down yet.

Like I said he can claim the title but he is no longer covering as he was created to in the beginning. Ezk 28 says he was perfect UNTIL iniquity was found in him (past tense). which means he is no longer in that state and he no longer is covering, and he is no longer leading worship. he was cast out of the abode of God and currently lives in the second heaven and one day will be cast out of heaven during the tribulation to fulfill Ezk 28. and He was cast down in Ezkiels time you forget God is using this description to tell what he will do to the king of Tyre (who never was in heaven to be cast down). he will cast him down to the ground (the earth) and lay him before men. speaks both of the King of Tyre and Satan. not only that it does not say heaven in Ezk 28 it says cast tot he ground. you changed the word of God again to make ground the earth and the casting down to be from heaven. the mount of God might be in heaven but the word in Ezk 28 does not say heaven. I will cast thee to the ground, I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God out of his position and thought Lucifer was the King of Tyre was yet in Ezekiel's day to be cast out of his position and to the ground. your mixing two events as one (you have a tendency to do that)

there is nothing hard to see there. but you are blinded to Satan's current position. He is corrupt and he is not serving God as the anointed cherub that covereth. he has limited access to God throne and clearly the scriptures teach his current employment is accusing the brethren. and at one time in the past he came with the sons of God who had come to present themselves before him. as soon as he came he was asked where he had been. walking to and fro upon the earth. why the earth? why not to and fro amongst the stones of fire? they are in heaven and he is cast out to the earth just as Satan says in Job 1.

if you think he is living free in God's abode you are wrong for what fellowship can holiness have with wickedness, light with darkness, and it says that no sinner can come before the face of God without a covering of blood and Christ blood does not apply to Satan.

I am following scriptures no man has convinced me yet. I disagree with David Reagan on some points. the Gap is Biblical supported by many scriptures here a little there a little precept upon precept line upon line. only those blinded by God or pride cannot see it.

Chette.
Let's face it, all of us (gappers and non-gappers) are handicapped by our personal bias' and viewpoints. Even between us gappers we have sharp differences of opinion on certain matters.

Try and keep the topic focused, otherwise we are all wasting our time.
Thanks

how true how true

As usual Chette, you go on at length with your personal opinions and teachings of men, without a single scripture to support your view.

Truth is, I don't know what Satan is doing in heaven other than accusing the brethren. But scripture shows that he is still there day and night.

Rev 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. [/B]11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. 12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. 13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. 14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. 15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. 16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth. 17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Now this is Revelations, which I am sure you would agree is future. And Satan who is clearly identified in vs. 9 and his angels are warring against Michael and his angels. Then in verse 10 it says Satan accused the brethren "before our God" day and night.

So I don't care what your personal opinion is, or the opinions of false teachers. The scriptures are very clear. Yes, in Job Satan did say he was walking up and down on the earth, and we also know that Satan approached and tempted Jesus in the wilderness. So Satan does come down to earth. But he also seems to have free access to heaven day and night as vs 10 clearly says.

I am not wresting scripture. Your David Regan argues that "was" in Genesis 1:2 should be interpreted "became", Fredoheaven said the same thing. You said David Regan's did a "great job" of putting together the gap theory.

I hope everyone here sees this. The gap theory is not harmless, it argues that the Bible has mistakes as David Regan and Fredoheaven both said.

In Eze 28 God says "I will cast thee to the ground". That is future Chette. What do you do? You argue that "ground" does not mean the earth. Well tell me, where is this "ground" located? Is that in the 3rd heaven? Is it in space, or our atmosphere? It is you who twists scripture to try and make it accomodate your false theory. Anybody would know that is the earth, even unbelievers.

And in Isa 14, yes, it does say "fallen" and it does say "cut down to the ground". But when you get down to verse 15 it says "Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit". That is future Chette. And that is fulfilled in Revelations.

Rev 9: 1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. 2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit. 3 And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.

This angel falls unto the earth and has the keys to the bottomless pit. That is the "sides of the pit" in Isa 14:15. And how do we know this is Satan?, from verse Rev 9:11

Rev 9:11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.

These names mean "destruction" and "destroyer"

Isa 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; 17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

I personally don't care if you believe this false theory, that is your individual right. But it does bother me that you teach others this falsehood which casts doubt on God's word such as questioning the word "was" in Gen 1:2 which Fredoheaven did, and so does David Regan.

It is one thing to be in error. None of us understands God's Word perfectly, and we all can err. But to be shown your error and still continue in it is very bad. You should consider that.

I assume you are familiar with the scriptures enough to find them your self. I did post Ezk 28.

Rev takes place in the future.

again cast to the earth not out of Heaven - the ground is not heaven as you made it to be in Ezk 28 I will cast thee to the ground is the exact words of Ezk 28 not I will cast they our of heaven as you have stated.

Things that are different are not the same.

Hell is the pit for 1000 years and then lake of Fire for the Devil.

but for the King of Babylon (Isa 14) or the King of Tyre (Ezk 28) they have been cast into hell already and fulfilled the scriptures as they relate to them. remember both Isa 14 and Ezk 28 are giving us glimpse of a personal Devil and at the same time God's word is attributing those things, attitudes and pomp to these two earthly kings as well. we must be active in rightly dividing these things.

I don't care for the false theory of there not being a Gap between Gen 1:1 and Gen1:2. I don't change the word I only divide the word. I have pointed out several times where you have changed the word of God. the scriptures do support a Gap and you refuse to look and see so take a hike already.

And not only that I never said the KJV Bible has any mistakes. I have never said that it does and I don't agree with anyone who says it does ( I did say I didn't agree with David Reagan on every point read my previous post before you try to associate me with that statement). I disagree with your interpretation not with the accuracy of the Bible. But then again you can't separate the different Gap views from one another and you have shown you can't rightly divide the scriptures. you keep lumping me and our view with others and you are confusing the whole mess as heretical you are truly a man of today's USA you should be on Obama's staff.

So all of a sudden everyone that disagrees with you is a false teacher. David Regan happens to be a very sound teacher and so is Peter Ruckman both these men believe in a Gap (neither of them is perfect). so to you they are false teachers because they like I believe in a Gap? Boy you really are a piece of Work Winman or should your name be Winbag. you sound like an Obamaite anytime anyone doesn't agree with you call them names and be bigoted towards them and sling mud.

But you are so perfect and so right and everyone else is wrong but Winbag er Winman.

good night Irene

stop arguing about the Gap we were talking about a tabrets and pipes. Go and start another thread where you can call us all heretics and you can wallow in you pride

Reasoned with them out of Scriptures
 

Learning From the Apostle Paul

Acts 17:1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews:
Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
Acts 17:3 Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ.
Acts 17:4 And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.

Ever notice how Paul preached and persuaded the people of Thessalonica where there was a synagogue of the Jews. V 2, Paul as his manner, reasoned with them OUT OF THE SCRIPTURES. No doubt here that he(Paul) read them and quoted them as people listened. V. 3 Apostle Paul was about to expained and proved by "opening and alleging" Christ to suffer and rise again from the dead. The results of his reasoning, opening and alleging is found in verse 4, that is some of the Jews believed and consorted Paul and Silas, great multitude of devout Greeks and many chief women did in like manner.

Two(2) Points to Ponder so that People Might Believed

1. It must be Scripturally based. It must be a Bible based. Well, the Bible is the Word of God and preserved to us in the form of KJV and it is said to be our final authority of faith and practice. Outside God's Holy Word is no longer an authority. Experience, feelings, or church creed, is not to be compared with the Word/s of God.
2. It must be Explained and must be proven. This is why we need to interpret them. Expound to understand.

Once again, I joined this forum in order to understand more about God's Word and I am not here for sure to debate you as you do. I am of course, giving my own explanation and its either you reject it, nothings change. I am very willing to be of silence as warrant but what you want is to agree with your shallow explanation.You should have done more to convince me. You also said you are already tired of this but how true is that. In one of another thread on this forum, you seems to point us, well you should have give your best to prove your point. By the way, I just close my eyes to those so called people know it all but appears no real conviction on God's Holy Word.

Winman, you said:

I actually agree with you, there is no way to know for certain if Lucifer in Isaiah 14 is speaking of Satan. But the name of Lucifer has been associated with Satan by the church for centuries.

Ok, you said you agree with me but then you insisted that the name of Lucifer has been associated by the church for centuries. My point is that you have shifted your authority from God's Holy Word to the church. Strange teaching, somehow you have borrowed that to the Roman Catholicism where the church and not God's Word is their final authority. I'm sorry to say but that's what you believed.

FYI, I don't believe in changing the text of our KJV is necessary. It is the interpretaion, that we may differ. You charged me with that by interpreting "was" as "became" was wrong. If that's wrong, then it's wrong but I do not alter the text of the KJV as as said in my other post. Here is a tip: When I defined the word "Eggplant" what did I mean? Do you think "eggplant" is literallly a plant with an egg? :pound::pound:

Winman you said:

I actually agree, Isa 14 may be only speaking of the King of Babylon

You actually agree that Isah 14 may be only speaking of the King of Babylon?

Isah 14 was not only for the King of Babylon.

Isah 14:1-2 = the topic is about Isarel to be preserved
Isah 14:3-23 = the proverbs against the king of Babylon
Isah 14:24-28 = Assyria will be destroyed
Isah 14:29-32 = the warnings to Palestina

Like :pizza: i am more than willing to share it to you if you like...:):):)

One thing is for certain; all of the new versions don't want you to know who Lucifer is.

First of all I apologize to Winman for calling him winbag.

Secondly I apologize to the forum for my childish display in my last post. Even I hate being constantly called a false teacher and a Heretic over a non essential Doctrine.

Thirdly Fred you brought up a good point Winman, you accused me of trusting in the Doctrines of men yet you trust in the doctrines of the church concerning Lucifer. With that the Pot calls the kettle black.

CKG, exactly the teaching of Lucifer's fall in Isa 14 has been changed to keep the masses from seeing that God has in a time Past judged sin (p[lease Winman don't go there anymore) and he will again. Most who use the perversions are teaching God loves all and will save all.

I disagree with you both. I have never argued that either Eze 28 or Isa 14 are definitely speaking of Satan. Now, having said that, I do strongly lean in that direction. But Satan is not mentioned by name in either account, so I cannot say with absolute certainty. I believe these are both examples of a double prophesy, where they are speaking to a man living at the time, and also speaking of Satan in the future.

It is actually those who believe in the Gap theory that use both of these passages to argue for the Gap. It speaks of Lucifer at David Reagan's site, I copied and pasted in answer to Fredoheaven's post from his site. He speaks of Lucifer as being Satan.

What I am saying is that IF indeed Eze 28 and Isa 14 are speaking of Satan, then they both contradict your belief that Satan fell between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 In both passages if you read carefully, the predictions of their fall and being cast down is future. And in both cases the men (King of Tyrus, King of Babylon) were not cast down either at the time these scriptures were written. So neither passage can be speaking of Satan falling between Gen 1:1 and 1:2.

No Use
 

Winman, good day!!! thanks for your post at least you have made an explaination. It just made me simple and plain to misunderstand you but anyway I am not here to make an all out war and play with words. You made yourself clear on this matter. However, my suggestion is, you should have placed/made a QUOTATION MARK to what you have "cut and paste" or since you quoted others comments you should have a remarks like "I quote", "Quoted from" etc. because what you did was a hard evidence for you to refute. Well, this is not an actually a forum of anyone who knows it all that WINS. To remind, I am here for EDIFICATION and post some what I know. There are times we differ in our interpretion or disagree with some other things but we should not be found disagreeable.:cool::cool::cool:

No to :boxing::boxing::boxing: but this one :popcorn::tea::peace::peace::peace: hehehe....

- Ezekiel 28:1-11 is talking about the prince of Tyrus.

- Ezekiel 28:12 changes the topic to the king of Tyrus.
- This king of Tyrus is not a man because scripture calls him the anointed cherub (V. 14) and O covering cherub (V. 16).
- This individual was in Eden the garden of God.
- This individual's covering (V. 13) resembles that of a priest (see Exodus 28).
- Ezekiel 28:13 & 15 mentions "the day that thou wast created".
- This individual's down fall was pride (V. 17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty)

1 Timothy 3:6 tells us, "Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil."

Isaiah 14:12-15 tells us, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."

There is no verse that specifically says the church will be caught up prior to the 7 year tribulation period, but if you rightly divide scripture, understanding what scripture says about Israel and the church, you will conclude that the church will be caught up prior to the 7 year tribulation period.

There is no verse that says Lucifer = satan, but its hard to see who else Ezekiel and Isaiah are referring to plus I still say the fact that the modern versions omit Lucifer ought to raise a flag.

CKG

I agree with you 100%. I have a family member who does not believe in the Rapture, and argues the word Rapture is not found in the Bible. I have shown this person the many verses that do point to the Rapture.

And really, I also strongly tend to believe that Eze 28 and Isa 14 are indeed speaking of Satan for the very reasons you pointed out. And I tend to agree with those who think Satan had musical instruments as part of his being.

My argument with Chette and Fredoheaven is that if they read these passages clearly, they will see the prophesy of being cast down is future at the time these scriptures were written, so these passages cannot be speaking of Satan between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2

Eze 28:16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. 17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.

It is pretty easy to see that if this is Satan, he was still in the mountain of God when this was written, and he was not yet destroyed as the covering cherub from the midst of the stones of fire. It is very simple and straightforward language and should be read as such.

Isa 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Same rule applies here, the word "yet" and "shalt" point to the future, not the past or present. Simple.

I believe some would claim that Isa 14:12 shows Lucifer already cast down, using this to claim support for the gap theory. But I see this as a figure of speech, as when someone exclaims to another "You are finished now!" . We can even find expressions like this in the Bible as in Exodus.

Exo 12:33 And the Egyptians were urgent upon the people, that they might send them out of the land in haste; for they said, We be all dead men.

Now, were the men who said this actually dead? Of course not. They were speaking future. They were saying to each other that if we do not let the Isrealites go, that God was going to kill them all. This was said after the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Eygpt.

Chette and Fredoheaven accuse me of not rightly dividing the word, I say that they fail to understand relatively easy and straightforward scripture.

At the time Eze 28 and Isa 14 were written, neither the king of Tyrus nor the king of Babylon were either dead or cast down from their positions. I am not a historian, but I believe the king of Babylon had not even arisen yet when this prophesy was written of him. So both of these are prophesies of future events to come, not something past. And if you read carefully you will see they cannot support the gap theory either.

Valid Statement / Invalid Argument
 

CKG, thanks for the Post. This is really a valid statement. Here I quote:

There is no verse that says Lucifer = satan, but its hard to see who else Ezekiel and Isaiah are referring...

Winman:

What else, do I have to say more? No longer, lest Satan should get advantage of us.
2 Corinthians 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

Here is my thought of this verse:
1. Satan is Gaining Advantages through His Devices.
2. His devices may in the form of the ff:
A. An openAttack to the believers. Eph. 6:10-16:fencing:
B. A continues Accuse of the brethren. Rev. 12:10:boink:
C. Uses a long Argumentative spirit. 2 Cor. 12:20:blah:

I just hope you can gleaned some truths. God bless you!!!


Jude 25

Fredoheaven

That's funny. Have I ever called either one of you a name as I have been called? And what is this last post? Are you implying that I am Satan? :pound:

That's OK, I am not offended, because I know when a person realizes they are losing an argument, they will often deflect by attacking the person making the successful argument.

And I am argumentive? Then so are you. It takes two to argue.

I do not like to argue with you or any other person. But if I feel someone is introducing false teachings, I will speak out against it. And I would hope that if I err someone would correct me. I have presented numerous scriptures to support my view, if you see fault with these scriptures or the way I have presented them to make my argument, then show me where I am wrong. Show me how I am reading or understanding these scriptures wrong.

Sure you're not
 

Sure you're not. I hope this end the meeting. Sorry you ought to forgive me if i made some mistakes or erred in one way or another and as I said, I just close my eyes but not my heart... God bless... I guess that's all, bye.


Jude 25

Well, I disagree. You probably have the wrong impression of me. I like both you and Chette very much. We all trust in Jesus Christ as our Saviour, and that makes us brothers. Now that said, if I believe you or someone else to err, I will speak up. And I have been corrected here myself. And that's good, I want to understand God's Word as God intended, not my own private interpretation. I hate being wrong as much as anybody, maybe more. But when it comes to God, I fear. I pray every night, and one thing I always pray is that I never misrepresent God's Word, or that I have the wrong motives in my heart. God's Word means everything to me. It was God's Word that showed me I was a terrible sinner. It was God's Word that showed me Jesus loved me even though I am ungodly, and that he died on the cross, taking my sins upon himself. It is God's Word that taught me if I open my heart and receive Jesus, that he freely gave me eternal life though I in no way deserved it. God's Word is serious business, it is the difference between spending eternity with the Lord, or spending eternity in torment. So I fear. And I do not ever want to misrepresent God's Word or lead someone else astray.

We have spoken enough on this subject, although I am sure it will come up again. Don't worry that we've squabbled over this, I have two brothers, we used to fight like cats and dogs when we were young boys. But I tell ya, we love each other and have been the very best of friends all our lives. Brothers fight sometimes, that's what brothers do, but that doesn't mean they don't love each other.

You may not believe this, but I in no way have meant to offend you or Chette. I still absolutely disagree with both of you about this theory, but I have not meant to offend you. I have tried to show why I think the scriptures disagree and contradict this theory, that's all.

Talk to you later.

Actually my post was not intended to be a statement about the gap. They were just some thoughts that came to mind and I decided to post them, not checking to see that someone else had pretty much already posted these same points. Personally I don't see how anyone can say Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 is not talking about Satan regardless of whether or not there are any gap implications.

well name calling can be a subtle as saying a person is a heretic or false teacher or even implying they are.

winman fails to discern certain aspects are not false teaching i.e. a Biblical Gap is not false but he likes to say it is and as he feels such he will argue to the end and insinuate you are a false teacher or a heretic.

CKG, I agree with your gap statement of Isa14 and Ezk 28. but winman fails to see it.

Chette

I am not going to keep going with you on this subject, it is more than enough.

But when I say false teaching, one of us must be guilty of false teaching. If the gap is true, then I am guilty of false teaching. If the the gap is false, then you are guilty of false teaching. We cannot have opposing views and both be correct.

When two people disagree, there are only 3 possibilities.

Person 1 is correct and person 2 is incorrect
Person 2 is correct and person 1 is incorrect
Both person 1 and person 2 are incorrect

But two people cannot have opposing views and both be correct

The way I see it, Winman just did everything he could to close this with a little class and an expression of love, (post 112) and yet here you are again with your quips. I for one am getting SICK of your argumentative spirit over there in the Phillipines brother. PLEASE LET IT GO. And let's please stop obsessing over that gap theory, it never amounts to anything but endless debate. :mad:

"Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers." 2 Tim 2:14

say what you may broP but Winman had left me no choice but to answer as throughout his posts he accused me of false teaching, unable to teach others, a heretic and numerous other insinuations so answering them was to put to silence his false accusation.

I am not being argumentative but defensive. of which you have mistaken as endless debate and a argumentative spirit (sounds like a pentecostal approach). best for you just to stay OUT OF IT and go back to Susan Boyle's GOT TALENT!!!

Please don't tell me where to post, Chette.
I'm sure you would like to, but that kind of attitude won't fly here and it only further erodes your online character.

Again, Winman clearly tried to close this with a thoughtful expression of brotherly love for you, (post 112) and clubbing each other with hurtful comments is not going to solve anything, so just let it go.

And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. -- Eph. 4:32

sure he tried to close it with insinuations and false claims. An it has been dropped before you made your post. But you need to keep you "emotioncons" under control and learn your place no matter what your age.

Again I will remind you brother...

And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. -- Eph. 4:32

I suggest you abandon this path---it's not edifying for anyone, why not come over and assist Tandi with some of her questions on the Book of Hebrews:
http://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1171