Once again, thanks, Jerry.
On a slightly different topic, I was pondering "Is night evil?" In man's eyes, the night is seen as evil, because that's when the "more evil" things are committed usually (rape, murder, grand theft, etc). However, God made the night, didn't He? It's not the darkness OF NIGHT we fear, it is the sin. Truly, if night is evil, then why did God make the moon and stars so glorious to be seen only at night?

Solomom was so appauled at the evil done "under the sun" (Ecclesiastes), not because he was so surprised at the evil being done, but that people were bold enough to do it without the cover of night. (Is my thinking correct here, jerry?)

And in Song of Solomon 3:8, 'They all hold swords, being expert in war: every man hath his sword upon his thigh because of fear in the night."

Is it, then, the blackness-the void that is evil (if not, what is it?). God created the light and the darkness, calling them day and night, and it was good. So darkness is not evil-God said that it was good.

This is not meant to change the subject, I just wanted to share one of my ponderings (and invite you to criticize my theological logic)

I like Peter Ruckman because he tells it like it is and defends the King James Bible. He is not perfect and I think we need to start looking at our sins before we start pointing out what everyone else is wrong about. Ruckman has got me to study my Bible more than any other man on this earth. His dedication to the word of God is an inspiration to me.

A lot of people tend to question Ruckman because of his attitude. It seems they would rather hear lies that are preached with love, than truth that is preached with firmness. I'm sure the people that ignore Ruckman would be just like the people that ignored Paul because of his rude speech.

1 Corinthians 2:4
"And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:" KJV

2 Corinthians 3:12
"Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:" KJV

2 Corinthians 10:10
"For his letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible." KJV

2 Corinthians 11:6
"But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have been throughly made manifest among you in all things." KJV

Sure Ruckman uses some words that can be done away with, but does that really take away from the truth that he preaches? People need to realize that Ruckman is not perfect and he is going to sin and say things he shouldn't. He has dealt with cult members, Catholics, Bible correctors and etc all of his life and believe it or not that might be the reason he can be so cranky sometimes. I don't blame him for getting mad at people that mess with the Book. I'm glad there are people like him that stand for God's Word without apology.

God Bless

Is God's original creation "void"? (Gen. 1:1 cf. Job 38:4-7)

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.

Numbers 30:12 But if her husband hath utterly made them void on the day he heard them; then whatsoever proceeded out of her lips concerning her vows, or concerning the bond of her soul, shall not stand: her husband hath made them void; and the LORD shall forgive her.

Numbers 30:13 Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her husband may make it void.

Numbers 30:15 But if he shall any ways make them void after that he hath heard them; then he shall bear her iniquity.

Deuteronomy 32:28 For they are a nation void of counsel, neither is there any understanding in them.

1 Kings 22:10 And the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah sat each on his throne, having put on their robes, in a void place in the entrance of the gate of Samaria; and all the prophets prophesied before them.

2 Chronicles 18:9 And the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat king of Judah sat either of them on his throne, clothed in their robes, and they sat in a void place at the entering in of the gate of Samaria; and all the prophets prophesied before them.

Psalms 89:39 Thou hast made void the covenant of thy servant: thou hast profaned his crown by casting it to the ground.

Psalms 119:126 It is time for thee, LORD, to work: for they have made void thy law.

Proverbs 7:7 And beheld among the simple ones, I discerned among the youths, a young man void of understanding,

Proverbs 10:13 In the lips of him that hath understanding wisdom is found: but a rod is for the back of him that is void of understanding.

Proverbs 11:12 He that is void of wisdom despiseth his neighbour: but a man of understanding holdeth his peace.

Proverbs 12:11 He that tilleth his land shall be satisfied with bread: but he that followeth vain persons is void of understanding.

Proverbs 17:18 A man void of understanding striketh hands, and becometh surety in the presence of his friend.

Proverbs 24:30 I went by the field of the slothful, and by the vineyard of the man void of understanding;

Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Jeremiah 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

Jeremiah 19:7 And I will make void the counsel of Judah and Jerusalem in this place; and I will cause them to fall by the sword before their enemies, and by the hands of them that seek their lives: and their carcases will I give to be meat for the fowls of the heaven, and for the beasts of the earth.

Nahum 2:10 She is empty, and void, and waste: and the heart melteth, and the knees smite together, and much pain is in all loins, and the faces of them all gather blackness.

Acts 24:16 And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Romans 4:14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

1 Corinthians 9:15 But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.

Or was it "void" in Genesis 1:2 because of judgment?

What did the Holy Spirit do?

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.

Psalms 104:30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou [B]renewest the face of the earth.

Compare "renewest" with "renewing"/"regeneration" of the believer (Tit 3:5) and of the earth (Mt 19:28).
Compare "renewest" with the command to "replenish" (Gen. 1:28; 9:1).

As the late Dr. Reagan explains, the Holy Spirit's work is described as a "renewing" and a "regeneration".

What did the Holy Spirit "renew" (Ps. 104:30) in Genesis 1:2?

Why "replenish" (Gen.1:26) when it should have been "fill"?
Does "fill" (Gen. 1:22) mean the same as "replenish"?
Why didn't God say "fill" if He means "fill"?
Why did He say "replenish" if He means "fill"?

Answer:
God will say "grave" when He means "grave", and He will say "Hell" if He means "Hell" even if both words came from the same root in Hebrew or Greek.
God will say "church" if He means "church", and He will say "assembly" if He means "assembly" even if both words come from the same root.
God will say "deacon" if He means "deacon", and God will say "servant" if He means "servant" even if both words come from the same root.
God will say "Easter" if He means "Easter", and He will say "passover" if He means "passover" even if both words was translated from the same word.

:)Just some thoughts

I'm just getting into Ruckman and I've read only the newsletters that he printed that I've borrowed from my church. I have one of his books, more like a pamphlet concerning the tribulation period, which was a good read. I forgot the title of it though. I am planning on getting a couple of his commentaries in the future Lord willing...

There are certainly a lot of "I believe"s in this without scripture to back it up. God gave us ALL we need to KNOW in His Word. :o

Does anyone sense preterism here?

that's right he did give all we need to know. his highest idea for man was not Lucifer (a cherib, nor Adam. it is redeemed man. and that is all what the bible is about. once you have your life in Christ you are to have daily victory.

as far as theorizing as to eternity past we don't have any Bible to back it up. God will reveal all when we are in our perfect state in the likeness of Christ. in the mean time have fun. that is what God would want. his word and Holy Spirit (which by the way says, Will lead you into all truth and will teach you all things).

God bless

Or was it "void" in Genesis 1:2 because of judgment?

look at the majority of context of the verses you posted. most voids are a result in something of disobediance, judgement or wrong being done. either wrong practice wrong thinking.

God will answer. but remember ihe is to be all in all. that is a fulness that many don't understand.

to everyone I say this. Have you not experienced God's all in all in your daily walk or are you void of yielding to Him, his presence, guidance, and leading.

what I a=have discovered is we are not right with God in living in the fulness of HIs Holy Spirit. if we were we would not be here on this site waisting our times sharing views and opinions we would really be out there capturing void souls for God through the Holy Spirit.

the more I yield the less I post.

Re: Peter S. Ruckman – Crackpot or Crusader?
 

Aloha all,

Re: Peter S. Ruckman – Crackpot or Crusader?

From my last post on Peter Ruckman:


“I have noticed that there is one thing that this King James Bible Forum has in common with some others that I have seen - and that is a tendency on the part of some members (Bible believers to be sure) to dissociate or distance themselves from, or even criticize and tear down brother Peter Ruckman.

I also have noticed that many, if not most, of the negative comments that I read were based on "hearsay". So - before I make my comments I have 3 (three) questions to ask of any and all of those who have commented.

#1. Have you ever read any of the many books, commentaries, booklets, pamphlets, etc. that brother Ruckman has written? (And if so - how many? You don't have to list the names just the number -I'll trust you to be honest and truthful).

#2. Have you ever heard any of Peter Ruckman's numerous preaching and teaching tapes? (If so - how many? You don't have to list the names just the number -I'll trust you to be honest and truthful).

#3. Have you ever actually met brother Ruckman or been at any of his meetings where he has either preached or taught the word of God? (If so - where and when? I'll trust you to be honest and truthful).”

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.


As promised earlier, I will answer the three questions that I posed to Forum.

#1. I read almost all of brother Ruckman’s Commentaries & Books, and most of his Booklets, Pamphlets, and numerous articles from 1968 up until 1988. From 1988 up to 2004 I hardly read anything of his until a good Christian friend moved from California to Kauai with many of brother Ruckman’s later books. I have borrowed about six of his books since then. (Including brother Ruckman's auto-biography)

#2. From 1969 Until 1975 I accumulated almost all of his Bible Class (School) material (approximately 2000 hours on Reel to Reel tape) and listened to most of the lessons. At the same time I also acquired approximately 100 preaching (cassette) tapes by him.

#3. In 1973 I moved (temporarily) from Kauai to Oahu to build a building for Koolau Baptist Church. During the summer of 1973 brother Ruckman came to Oahu for a week of meetings. Every day he taught Bible and Bible history for at least 3 hours in the morning and held preaching services every night. He spent more time with my family than he did with anyone else. We ate lunch together (he loves Chinese food) and several times after the preaching service we would play tennis (12;00 a.m. at night). I never “pumped” him; or “badgered” him; or “doted” on him; or called him” Doctor” or “Pastor”; most of the time we talked about Hawaii, the people, the food, the fishing, etc. He probably spent more time with our children, especially our oldest daughter (Naomi – 8 years old at the time), than he did with me.

You could have labeled me a “Ruckmanite” from about 1969 through 1975 and not been that far from the truth, although I have never blindly followed any man (not even when I was lost).

I have given this personal testimony because I believe that, given the above information, I am as qualified to judge or comment about brother Ruckman and his teachings and his doctrine, at least as well as anyone in this Forum.

In addition to the above information I have three close Christian friends that have visited brother Ruckman in Pensacola, Florida and attended his school for awhile and know some details of his personal life.

First, his marriages: In 1972 brother Bob Lescelious (Baptist pastor) came to the Anahola Baptist church on Kauai and taught for a week. Later on in the year brother R. E. (Dusty) Rhoades (Evangelist) and preached for a week. Both of these men personally knew brother Ruckman. And after inquiry, and in private, before several men of the church, both men testified (at separate times) that they believed that brother Ruckman’s 1st. wife was Demon Possessed! (Remember he married her BEFORE he was saved). And they both testified that she abandoned him and forced an acrimonious divorce on him.

In regards to his 2nd. wife, I rely on the testimony of my three friends that visited brother Ruckman at Pensacola and attended his school (one friend in particular kept in touch with some of the men involved the ministry there for over 17 years.). After about 10 years - Brother Ruckman married the sister of his assistant pastor and his father-in-law ran his Bookstore. After about 14 years his wife ran away with a cop from the congregation and abandoned him. In addition to that tragedy, the assistant pastor (his brother-in-law) ran away with about 1/3 of the congregation and there is some question about his father-in-law possibly misusing funds from the Bookstore (since brother Ruckman cares little about financial matters).

The question of whether brother Ruckman should serve as a pastor I leave up to the Lord. I just thank God (having been married to the same woman for 47 years) that I never have had to go through such an experience as he has. The fact is that the divorce rate among “Christians” in America is nearly as high as unbelievers, since most American Christians are so shot through with Humanism & Psychiatry & Psychology that they can’t discern between good and evil and have so little understanding and wisdom that they no longer are willing to obey God’s commandment concerning marriage (Matthew 19:6 & Mark 10:9).
{ Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.}

Next, brother Ruckman’s “attitude” and “harsh” language in his writings. First off: Everyone I know who have known him and been around him say that he is not like his writings (2Corinthians 10:10). Second: I can testify that in all of the books and tapes that I have read and heard almost all of brother Ruckman’s invective and harsh criticism is reserved for one class of people – Bible Critics & Correctors (Lost or Saved). And admittedly that criticism is at times extremely tough. In our PC Humanistic culture this kind of an attitude is frowned upon and generally put down as “unloving” or “divisive”.

Of course one has to remember that brother Ruckman lived a “full life” before he got saved at 27 years of age. He says that he has read on average “a book a day” for most of his life. He has been a drummer in a dance band; a disc jockey on the radio; and most importantly – during World War II he was an Infantry Combat Instructor. In other words, as a Lieutenant in the U.S. Army he taught young Americans going off to war in the Pacific Theater how to KILL the enemy! You might ask – why is this so important? The answer is quite simple: As a soldier, who taught other soldiers, brother Ruckman knew the value of a time warn truth in war – “often times the best DEFENSE is an OFFENSE!” (The United States has not won a war since World War II because our politicians and many leaders in the Armed Forces no longer believe in this maxim.)

Why is this so important? Because from 1881 (RV) until the early 1960’s many men have “stood in the gap” {Ezekiel 22:30 And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none.} and were not very successful in stemming the tide of unbelieving “scholarship”; among them:

IN THE PAST:
John W. Burgon, Edward Miller, F. H. Scrivener, Herman Hoskier, Bishop Wordsworth, Canon Cook, Sir Robert Anderson, Philip Mauro, Joseph C. Philpot, George Sayles Bishop, Benjamin C. Wilkinson, Robert Dick Wilson and Edward F. Hills, etc.

PRESENT DAY:
J. J Ray, Terence H. Brown, Henry Coray, Zane C. Hodges, Alfred Martin, David Otis Fuller, David Fountain, Gordon P. Gardiner, Wilbur N. Pickering, Donald T. Clarke, Bruce Cummins, Dick Cimino, Barry Burton, Perry F. Rockwood, , Billy Bartlett, Larry Bartlett, Herbert Noe, William P. Grady, and Michael Maynard, etc.

Most of these men were academicians – NOT SOLDIERS! God needed a Soldier to fight this battle and take it to the enemy. (Another German like Martin Luther, who was not known for being “sweet” and “loving”, but who broke the back of the Roman Catholic Church’ s strangle hold on all of Europe).

Practically all of the men listed above tried to stem the tide and were largely unsuccessful because they were unwilling to expose the pride and the prejudice of the Bible critics. They were unwilling to “take it to the enemies of God” (just like our modern day politicians are unwilling to take it to the enemy.)

Brother Ruckman has exposed the Bible critics for what they are – hypocrites, sophists, and prideful scribes that have no fear of God, and who will not hesitate to “correct” His Holy Scriptures whenever and wherever they please. (And he has made no allowances or excuses for “Christian” Bible critics, just because they are saved). And for “standing in the gap” he has paid a tremendous price – the criticism, shunning, and rejection of many so-called KJVO believers who have no idea as to what God has wrought through this man and his ministry.

And now to brother Ruckman’s Doctrine and “peculiar teachings”: After all of the preaching and teaching that I have either heard or read of brother Ruckman’s, I can truthfully testify, namely that he is circumspect about distinguishing between what he says is Clear Bible Doctrine and any speculation on his part. He does not “mix” his speculation with Bible Doctrine. He is extremely careful to point out which is which.

However, it would be real easy to lift “quotes” from his books, etc. (out of context) and “prove” that he is a “kook”, IF someone were dishonest enough not to distinguish between what he teaches as true Bible Doctrine and those things he “thinks” may be true. (See Stewart Custer's booklet - BJU)

The following is my personal testimony in regards to Peter Ruckman and his ministry: I was saved in 1958 (age 18) from reading a King James Bible (for the first time). From 1958 up to 1968 I attended various churches (searching for the truth) – Plymouth brethren; Independent Bible; Congregational; Assembly of God; Southern Baptist; and Independent Baptist. I was handed a “Philip’s Bible & an Amplified (by the brethren) – both of which I never took to. In all of the rest of the churches not one pastor, assistant pastor, Sunday school teacher, etc., (church leaders all) ever taught me about the Bible issue or how to study the Bible.

That is, in ten years, outside of some preaching and a little “Denominational” teaching, the only person who taught me anything about the Bible was a little old Japanese man (brother Fukushima - an ordinary Christian) who was dying of stomach cancer and who introduced me to Dispenstional Teaching and Charts in his home in Kapaa, Kauai for a few months before he died. And then:

In 1968 I started reading Peter Ruckman’s books. He was the first man to introduce the issue of which Bible to me. I didn’t just accept his word – I checked him out and after hundreds of hours of study and research I and found out that he was telling the truth. The issue of FINAL AUTHORITY became clear in my heart and my mind and I have never wavered from believing in the King James Bible being the final authority for God’s people in this age of apostasy.

Also, after having read “The Kingdom of God vs. The Kingdom of Heaven” (Now called “The Sure Word of Prophecy”) and a couple of his Commentaries (Primarily – Matthew) I learned how to “rightly divide the word of truth”.

The scorecard up to this time: Various churches and pastors, etc. = 0. Brother Fukushima & brother Ruckman = 3.

Since 1968 my wife and I have been ostracized from several churches (always by the church leaders/”pastors” – never by a congregation) and it has taken me a long time (too long) to accept God’s will and realize that in this age of apostasy - false teachers and teachers having itching ears are going to wax bolder and bolder and that it is my duty to stand in the gap, and testify to my Saviour, and to God’s goodness, and to His Holy word, and to His coming again - come what may.

To those who criticize and castigate brother Ruckman – a word of warning: WHAT IF? What if God has called brother Ruckman to the ministry to break the backs of the Bible critics? God uses sinful men, flawed and imperfect, to do His will. He even used Pagan Kings to fulfil His will (Darius) and called some of them His “Servant” (Nebuchadnezzar & Cyrus).

On my web page I have nearly 90 Bible lessons (70+ are mine). I only have two lessons where I reprove and rebuke a so-called Bible believer by name (The so-called “Doctrine of Submission”) and Dr. Stewart Custer (The Truth about The King James controversy"). I have not been called by God to “correct” the body of Christ. My ministry has been one of Reconciliation (if possible – 2Corinthians 5:18); and Edification (Romans 15:2). I thank God that I wasn’t called to brother Ruckman’s ministry. I would have needed skin as thick as a rhinoceros to bear up under his load.

We have got to get to the point where we Christians recognize each other’s callings and talents – and unless there is clear sin involved, we got to stop criticizing each other and each other’s ministries and devouring one another.

{ Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.}

Let me state for the record: I am not a Ruckmanite, I follow no man; I regard no man above another, (after all we are all brethren), and have stopped using “Titles” or calling men “pastor” or anything else used to elevate men. I follow the Lord Jesus Christ; I am a Bible believing Christian trying to follow my Lord according to His Holy Scriptures.

Psalms 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

Joshua 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

I would be happy to answer any of your questions if I can.

Yours for the Lord Jesus Christ and for His word,

George Anderson
. . . . yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, . . . . Romans 3:4

George,

God bless you my friend. Thank you for telling your story. I was blessed by reading it.

:D


Atlas

Scripturally, we have every right and responsibility to test Ruckman and his writings by the Word of God. The holy men of God that He used in the Bible didn't go around calling people ungodly names and slandering them - when they called someone something it was because they WERE being fools, or hypocrites, etc. - whereas Ruckman resorts to name calling. Plus, he also slanders those who do not stand where he stands - though who may be just as strong (or moreso) in defending the Bible.

What IF God is using Ruckman? I choose to separate from his ungodliness, as the Bible commands me to. You can do whatever you want with him.

2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

2 Thessalonians 3:14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.

In light of what I know about Ruckman, I choose to have no company (fellowship) with him - and that includes his writings. He has discredited himself in my sight - and I have no desire to read someone who wings it in their theology, even if they state it is their opinion - an opinion that doesn't line up with the Word of God is worthless and unsafe.

I know we may be confusing things by interspersing discussions about the gap theory with discussions about the character of Dr. Ruckman.

Anyway void means "void". It doesn't say "made void" or similar as many of the other verses mentioned. For what it's worth, the Hebrew word translated "void" in Gen 1:2 is only found three times in the Scriptures.

I agree that speculation can be interesting, but I want to make sure that I can keep straight what the Word says and what weird things my corrupt mind can come up with (it might scare you if you knew :))

Re: Peter S. Ruckman – Crackpot or Crusader?
 

It seems that there are a couple of brothers here that have an extreme personal dislike for brother Ruckman. This animosity towards a fellow Christian, a brother in Christ, must be based on something.

I wonder whether he has insulted them or their wives or their children personally or has he perhaps insulted someone that they admire? :rolleyes:

I will have more to say on this matter later.

I own about five books of Ruckman's, I have read other material of his. My opinion is he is saved but not always yielded to God (his tongue (members)) that is according to Roms. 6:12,13.

but as I give others I give him GRACE. you know all our sins are taken care of, it does not give any right to sin. I do believe that Cynisism is sin. and I have seen it alot on peopels posts. Criticism ok but Cynisism is not it is sin. cynisism puts people down and degrades them to the building up of the one doing it. Self centered in sin.

Maybe you raised you hand to receive Christ, or you prayed to ask him in your heart. that is not the Gospel. you need to analyze your selves to see if you are really in the FAITH. for by GRACE are ye saved through FAITH. not raising your hand or coming forward, not praying a prayer not repenting first, not changing your life style but pure unadulterated FAITH, Belief alone on the work of God the Son on His Cross. Some of you just sound as lost as Howard Stern in your cynisism. you may have all the Bible Knowledge and All the relegious activities but you may still be lost.

Ruckman's loves the saints, though his dispute with them is legit over the Holy BIBLE the KJV. he himself is not always led in, filled with, guided by, or living in the Holy Ghost. but the same can be said of all of us. what is missing from our Christianity? It is Gods work, let him work and you keep your pond muddying hands off his work. just yield and recognize you can't complete his work in your life. it is all by FAITH everyday not just once after you prayed a prayer, or Asked Jesus into your heart.

Everybody is so critical of Ruckman, and others they don't take time to look at themselve on daily bases. Christians will be judged. but they cannot be condemned for there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. we have an advocate our propitiation. no sin will ever send anyone to hell because it was all taken care of on the cross. after that the scriptures says he condemns them all in unbelief so he may have mercy on all.

only Belief (not raising hands or praying prayers) can save you. he who believes is saved already but he who believes not is condemned already.

lets learn to be grace filled and Spirit led men of God. and not some kind of Christian Howard Stern.

Not so fast! Part 2
 

Jerry…I’ll never forget the response of my roommates to a question I asked them in the mid-70’s while attending Tennessee Temple University. We were passing in front of the library headed back to our dorm returning from attending a church service. I inquired to how did an OT saint get ‘saved’? Their response was that theologians were still debating that issue! I was majoring in theology in the college division…they were in seminary.

Why am I not surprised that you did not come up with a single case demonstrating an OT saint getting ‘saved’ via Rom 10:9-10, and I see you’re still insisting that OT saints looked to the cross for salvation. I thought you would have at least gave demonstration of what ‘by faith’ salvation looked like in the OT, but you didn’t (or couldn’t) even do that!

Jerry…your treatment of Romans 4, in previous post #15 that triggered my response, is identical to that of the NIV.

AV1611.com is an excellent website showing abundance evidence from various perspectives and sources why we should accept the KJV as the Word of God; now I’m going to prove doctrine that you can’t get from other translations and from those who claim to believe it, but keep running to the Greek to make it say what they want to, or from those who fail to rightly divide it.

The book of Romans is a book of distinctions contrasting what was doctrinally true before the mystery of Godliness and after; 1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV) And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

The following are contrasts that Paul makes in his letter to the Romans, all being made for a case Paul is proving in chapter 4 in citing Abraham and David, all in which I am laying the ground work for in future posts:

The gospel of God according to prophecy – Rom 1:1-2
The gospel of Paul according to mystery – Rom 16:25

Faith of God – Rom 3:3
Faith of Christ – Rom 3:22

The righteousness of God with the law – Rom 2:13; 3:21; 10:5
The righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ – Rom 3:22; 10:4

Law of works – Rom 2:13; 3:27
Law of faith – Rom 3:27

God of the Jews – Rom 3:29
God of the Gentiles also – Rom 3:29

Justification by faith – Rom 3:30
Justification through faith – Rom 3:30

A remnant of Israel then – Rom 11:1-4
An election of Israel now of grace w/out works – Rom 11:5-6

As Paul seeks to make these distinctions as seen here in the KJV the NIV being the perversion that it is seeks to destroy a most important doctrinal distinction in justification between Jew and Gentile.

Romans 3:30 (KJV) 30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
Romans 3:30 (NIV) 30 since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

Jerry…this is outright heresy! In the context of these chapters, I’ll prove the distinction between ‘by faith’ and ‘through faith’ and that ‘through faith’ is not the same faith as ‘by faith’ so indicated in the NIV. In fact, there are those who preach a ‘by faith’ salvation today which is a false gospel and of course I believe there are those today who preach a ‘through faith’ gospel, but call it by the wrong name. I would tend to give you the benefit of doubt and put you into the later category. In a future post, continuing on this same subject, I’ll again compare more passages in the NIV to the KJV relating directly to this topic.

The remainder of this post is dedicated to the investigation of the justifying of the circumcision ‘by faith’ in establishing what exactly justification ‘by faith’ looked like in the OT. We will be considering the ‘faith of God’, the means of God’s righteousness prior to the incarnation and man’s responsibility to each.

Under the OT the Jew was obligated to God because unto them were committed the oracles of God (Rom 3:1-3). Israel committed to this covenant relationship via Moses and here were the terms:

Exodus 19:5-8 (KJV) 5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: 6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. 7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him. 8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

There were two sides to the equation of this covenant…Israel’s obedience and God’s faithfulness. It is to this equation that Paul speaks to:

Romans 3:1-3 (KJV) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. 3For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

This faith (faithfulness) of God that an OT saint was to rely on is so clearly demonstrated in the life of Sara.

Hebrews 11:11 (KJV) Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.

Jerry…though we’re dealing with the faith of God in relation to the nation of Israel in Romans, the ‘by faith’ principal existed from day one of creation. God created man, placed him in the garden with instruction and then expected simple obedience. Well, we all know the end of that story…1 Samuel 15:23 (KJV) For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king. Okay, different story, but same disobedience got them thrown out of the garden and we’re paying the price today!

Simply put, from the creation of man and continuing through God’s dealings with the patriarchs and nation of Israel, God expected to be believed and obeyed. The Jewish Christian book of Hebrews picks up on this marvelous theme of ‘by faith’ in reflection back on the fathers and OT faithful:

Hebrews 11
4 By faith Abel offered
5 By faith Enoch pleased
7 By faith Noah prepared
8 By faith Abraham obeyed
9 By faith he sojourned
17 By faith Abraham offered
20 By faith Isaac blessed
21 By faith Jacob blessed
22 By faith Joseph made mention
23 By faith Moses was hid
24 By faith Moses refused
27 By faith he forsook
29 By faith they passed
30 By faith the walls were compassed
31 By faith the harlot Rahab had received

(In a future post I’ll also demonstrate the marvels of the KJV translators in how deliberate they were in translating and inserting ‘by’ & ‘through’ in this chapter. Compare verse 11 with the above and see if you can tell a distinction? Then for the fun of it, check out ‘by’ & ‘through’ in same chapter in a NIV.)

First mentions in the Bible usually set precedence and the record of Cain and Abel is an exact demonstration of righteousness ‘by faith’.

Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

1 John 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

The issue at hand isn’t a belief in the existence of God for even Cain conversed with God (Gen 4:9-16), as did his father Adam. The issue is what is justification ‘by faith’? There are three essential components that make up righteousness ‘by faith’ as seen here in these two passages regarding Cain and Abel:

1. The first of three components found in ‘by faith’ is that of believing what God has said or established. Without the shedding of blood is no remission of sins (Heb 9:22) is a principle God laid down from the very fall of man seen in the preparation of coats for Adam and Eve, by God himself. When Abel responded ‘by faith’ it first meant he believed God concerning this blood principal.

2. The second component of ‘by faith’ is obeying and Abel carried through with what he believed by offering a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, a blood offering (Gen 4:3-5; Job 1:5).

3. The third component of ‘by faith’ is seen in the ‘faith of God’, or God’s trustworthiness to hold up His side of the deal and counted Abel righteous, God testifying of his gifts.

Now Jerry, I can sense you throwing a real fit on this point, but the fact is the means in which man obtained the righteousness of God’s was in what God commanded and expected to be carried out in obedience. Abel obtained witness that he was righteous in offering unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain...God testifying of Abel’s gifts! Cain’s own works were evil and his brother's works righteous. Jerry…you cannot separate the three components of ‘by faith’ listed above in this scenario or else ‘by faith’ ceases to be ‘by faith’! No Jerry…we’re not debating which came first, the chicken or the egg. Simply put, these elements cannot be separated! I’ll demonstrate latter in another post what happens when they get separated. Solomon sums it up nicely from a ‘by faith’ OT viewpoint:

Ecc 12:13-14 (KJV) Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Consider Noah… Genesis 7:1 (KJV) And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. Why Jerry? Because Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and walked with God (Gen 6:8-9). Jerry…this is exactly opposite of Eph 2:8-9 (KJV); For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9Not of works, lest any man should boast. Let me tell you something about yours and mine salvation; neither of us Jerry found grace in God’s eyes before we ‘got saved’ because we were just men and perfect in our generation and walked with God!

Rahab is an example of ‘by faith’ extending beyond Israel to a Gentile. Rahab simply believed the spies, obeyed their command, trusted and was rewarded when she and her family was rescued before the walls of Jericho came down. Rahad ended up a resident in Israel (Jos 6:25). Her attitude towards Israel’s God and treatment of the spies is recorded in Jos 2. … 11 for the LORD your God, he is God in heaven above, and in earth beneath. 12 Now therefore, I pray you, swear unto me by the LORD, since I have shewed you kindness, that ye will also shew kindness unto my father's house…

Jerry…exactly what aspect of the mystery of Godliness (1Tim 3:16) do you suppose Rahab figured out in recognizing the LORD…Israel’s God or from what the spies may have shared with her? Think the spies took her down the Roman’s road before being let down from the window? Speaking of Gentiles…how much of Jonah’s preaching the word of the LORD to Nineveh included the mystery of Godliness that caused Nineveh to repent (Jonah 3:1-10)? Jonah 3:10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not. :rolleyes:

Before dealing with Abraham and David, in the context of Roman’s 4, I need one more post to prove just the opposite of your claim that OT saints weren’t ‘saved’ by the works of the law:

“Abraham, David, and all OT believers were saved by faith, by grace - not by the works of the Law.” Post #15

Stvvv1611
2Timothy 2:15

Unique
 

Thanks Stvvv1611! We need to see "the mystery". Otherwise, we are "searching what or what manner..."

Ephesians 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

The KEY that opened my understanding is when I recognized three things:
(1) Paul is a UNIQUE apostle - the apostle of the Gentiles, separate from the 12
(2) With a UNIQUE gospel - the gospel of the grace of God
(3) And a UNIQUE ministry - for the first time, to GENTILES (since salvation had always been of the Jews, not until NOW)
(4) To a UNIQUE group of people - ONE BODY

Gap - Theory or Doctrine?
 

Are we reading Scripture into these passages, or is there a gap in them?

Is there a gap theory here?
Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Is there a gap theory here?
John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Is there a gap theory here?
Isaiah 61:2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

Is there a gap theory here?
Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Great - maybe a bit more studying in the Word of God will show you where you are wrong. All the best.

comparing scripture
 

Brethren, I heard a story of a Chinese, who after reading the Four Gospels, concluded that the man Jesus was born and died four times.
(By the way, is there a gap theory in Matthew, or are we read Mark-Luke-John into it, too?)

Now let me share some that I have noticed in Scripture. This made me realize the importance of comparing Scripture. What happens if we don't? If we refuse to compare Scripture and just read the "plain English" and not "read Scripture that is not there", the ORDER OF EVENTS as revealed in Isaiah would be this way:

ISAIAH 2:1-5 The Messiah will REIGN
ISAIAH 7:14; 9:6 After that, He will be BORN.
ISAIAH 9:7; 11:1-9 Then, He will RULE again.
ISAIAH 53:1-10 After that, He will DIE.

Back to the GAP between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
Did Lucifer rebel (Isaiah 14; Ezek 28) between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?
If not, when? Somewhere between Genesis 1-3?
Are we reading passage into Scripture that is not there?
If we are not going to "read Scripture that is not there", then there were no angels created in Genesis 1. Lucifer did not rebel in Genesis. He rebelled in Isaiah's time (Isa. 14).

I believe in reading the "plain English" and "not reading Scripture that is not there" (as Bible twisters do), but I also believe in searching the Scriptures, comparing Scriptures, and rightly dividing Scriptures.

Ok Jerry, just a friendly discussion.

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.


According to John 5:28-29, the HOUR (singular) of the resurrection of ALL is coming. The resurrection of life and the resurrection of damnation will both happen in that hour.
Question: When is the resurrection of life and when is the resurrection of damnation? Is there a GAP between them, or are they going to happen in one hour or in one day or at one time?

I have to go now but I'll be back later.

More creation gap theory
 

What interest did satan, a spiritual being, have in the earth, a physical creation, before God made man in His image and placed him in Eden?

God made the earth as kind of a zoo for His pleasure, then satan destroyed it, then God remade the earth to let satan destroy it again?

I know there's a lot my mind can't fathom, but my belief is that God created the physical universe in six literal days. I think a lot of the theorizing is to try to make the scriptures fit the "geological evidence", the so called "fact" of evolution, and such.

What was God doing before creation? I don't know, I imagine there were things going on in the spiritual realm that didn't need a physical creation that are, again, WAY beyond my comphrehension.

We know there is 1000 years between these two events. Why? Because the Bible plainly teaches there is in other passages. The Bible does not teach the "Gap Theory" in other passages.

The following is an excerpt from "To Gap or Not to Gap" by Dr. Reagan (http://www.learnthebible.org/gap_or_not.htm). This article answers some objections to the Gap FACT.

Major Objections

My first objective in this study is to establish the possibility of a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. In order to do this, I will answer the objections to the gap that I am familiar with. We will look at these objections one at a time.

Objection One: No Direct Biblical Statement Teaches the Gap

I agree that no simple scriptural statement can be found that declares the gap—at least not any that I have found. However, this is true of several doctrines. Where do you find the single verse that teaches the age of accountability or the pre-tribulation rapture? God teaches us to study the scripture by laying precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little and there a little (Isaiah 28:10). Many doctrines must be established by comparing spiritual things with spiritual (1Corinthians 2:13). This objection holds no water.

Objection Two: Scripture Limits Creation to Six Days

I count this as the strongest objection to the possibility of an original creation and destruction. Two verses especially stand out:

q “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” – Exodus 20:11

q “It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.” – Exodus 31:17

I realize the strength of these verses. However, they often seem so strong to those who oppose the gap because they assume certain things about those who believe in it. I, for one, do not believe that the stars presently in the sky existed before the gap. For reasons I cannot go into now, I believe the original universe was much smaller than the one we see today. I also believe that the destruction to the original world was so great that everything had to be entirely remade. The world as we know it today began with the six-day creation but that does not preclude an earlier world.


Notice also the distinction between the words created and made. The above verses declare that the heaven, the earth, the sea and all that is in them were made, not created, in six days. However, in the beginning (Genesis 1:1) God created the heaven and the earth. A careful study of scripture will show that these differences should not lightly be dismissed.

The Bible has three common words for making something: create, make and form. These words are similar and their meanings often overlap. God created the world (Genesis 1:1); He made the world (Genesis 2:2); He formed the world (Psalm 90:2). You might assume that this makes the three words identical in meaning. However, this is not the case. They are distinct words having distinct shades of meaning. Consider the following:

Both create and make (made) are used in reference to general creation (Genesis 2:3-4; 5:1; 6:6-7). All three words (create, make, form) are used to describe the creation of man (Genesis 1:27; 2:7; 5:1). The common thought in all three words is to bring something to a finished or completed state of being. But there are important distinctions between the words as well.

q To create means to bring into being; to cause to come into existence. This word emphasizes origin and the originator (Creator). Its use is exemplified in Genesis 1:1, 21, 27; Psalm 89:12; Isaiah 42:5; Ephesians 2:10; Revelation 4:11; 10:6.

q To make means to put together; to produce an end result by putting parts or ingredients together. It emphasizes process. See Genesis 1:7, 16, 25, 31; 2:2, 22; 3:1.

q To form means to give shape; to bring to its final form. This word emphasizes a finished product. See Genesis 2:7, 8, 19; Job 26:13; Psalm 90:2; 94:9; 95:5.

Pay close attention to how these words are used in scripture. They can all be applied to the same item but they emphasize different aspects of the act. In some cases, the difference may be minor. In other cases, the distinction is very important. A man can make a chair because he can put the pieces together. However, he cannot create a tree. Always notice what God is saying. Therefore, to say that God made the heaven and earth in six days does not necessarily mean that He originally brought them into existence at that time.

It might help to look at the other end of time—when God destroys the present earth and creates a new one. Consider the following verses:

q “One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.” – Ecclesiastes 1:4

q “But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” – 2 Peter 3:7

q “Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” – 2 Peter 3:13

As is clearly taught in 2 Peter and in other passages (Isaiah 65:17; Revelation 21:1-5), the heaven and earth of today will be utterly destroyed and a new heaven and earth will replace them. These new heavens and earth are even said to be created. Yet, God must see a continuance in His creation of some sort because He says in Ecclesiastes 1:4 that “the earth abideth for ever.”

Although the old earth is destroyed and a new one is created, what He creates is still called earth and the earth, as such, abides forever. Now that is a Bible-believing view of Ecclesiastes 1:4. However, I challenge you to check with your favorite Bible teacher on this verse. More than likely, he will tell you that “for ever” in this verse simply means a long, long time. If he is anti-gap, he probably believes that forever means about 6,000 years. The biblical use of forever does create some puzzles, but I am convinced that we are too quick to minimize its meaning for our own purposes.

In conclusion, all the things mentioned in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 as having been made in six days could easily have been made during that time without denying a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. The original world was destroyed almost to the extent that this world will be destroyed. Even the word creation would fit it in most cases.
Objection Three: The Gap is an Accommodation to Godless Geology

I admit that many of the early proponents of the gap compromised with modern science in their beliefs and teachings. They used the gap to explain the geological ages, the fossil record and the existence of dinosaur skeletons. Obviously, this was wrong.

There is no reason to bow to modern science in any of these areas. Creation with apparent age (meaning things looked mature at the time of creation just as Adam was created as a mature adult and not as a baby) and Noah’s flood could easily explain the geological structures as we have them. However, a weak argument in favor of a position is no reason to reject it. The gap I am talking about is not a scientific accommodation but a biblical doctrine.

Objection Four: The Grammar of Genesis Rejects the Gap

This argument takes various forms but usually centers on the opening of Genesis 1:2 – “And the earth was without form, and void.” This argument states that the “And” which begins the verse and the “was” that describes the earth immediately connects the statement in Genesis 1:1 with the description in Genesis 1:2. In other words, the grammar of the verse does away with any possibility of a gap. The earth is being described as without form and void at the point of its creation by God.

The simplest answer to this objection is a comparison of the structure of this passage with one found in Genesis 4:2, which states: “And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.” Notice how these two passages line up in their basic form.

Genesis 1:1-2
Genesis 4:2

Noun followed by period

the heaven and the earth.
bare his brother Abel.

New sentence begins with…

And
And

Original noun repeated

the earth
Abel

Followed by “was”

was without form, and void
was a keeper of sheep

In practically every way, the grammatical structure of Genesis 4:2 is the same as that of Genesis 1:1-2. But consider this. If this wording requires the earth to be without form and void at the very moment of creation, then it also requires Abel to be a keeper of sheep at the very moment of his birth. We naturally assume a period of time between Abel’s birth and the taking up of his life occupation. Certainly, the grammar of Genesis 1:2 allows for a period of time between the original creation of the earth and its description.

Objection Five: Adam Must Be the First Man

The objection states that Adam is clearly called the first man.

* 1Corinthians 15:45 – “And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.”
* 1Corinthains 15:47 – “The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.”

The answer is simple. Obviously, the original inhabitants of the earth were not men. Perhaps they were angels or some other God-created being. But they were definitely not men.
Objection Six: The Origin of Death and Sin in the World

Adam is responsible for bringing sin and death into the world:

* Romans 5:12 – “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:” –see also 1Corinthians 15:21-22

Therefore, the argument goes, there could have been no earlier destruction of the world since this would require sin and death before Adam.

Clearly, Adam’s fall brought sin and death into this present evil world (Galatians 1:4). However, Christ is declared to be the maker of the “worlds” (Hebrews 1:2). There must be more than one world and the scripture bears this out. The following worlds are found in scripture:

1. The “world that then was” in 2Peter 3:6 – “Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.”
2. The “old world” in 2Peter 2:5 – “And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;”
3. This “present evil world” in Galatians 1:4 – “Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:”
4. The “world to come” in Hebrews 2:5 – “For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.” (also Hebrews 6:5)

No doubt the sin and death in this present world traces back to the sin of Adam in the garden. However, this does not mean that Adam brought sin into existence. The serpent was already in rebellion when he tempted Eve. Neither does it mean that there could not have been an earlier world which had sin introduced into it and was totally destroyed.

Interesting. Is there any limit to the ways that learned scholars can wrest with the scriptures to make them fit their theories?

It's possible Abel was a blacksmith in a previous life. :)

At what point do we violate Hebrews 13:9?

Brother Steve,
That was awesome! It just makes so much sense in alowing the scripture to interpret itself. This is why every word is important!
As is said in 1Sa 3:19 And Samuel grew, and the LORD was with him, and did let none of his words fall to the ground.

Tim

Jerry

if replenish the earth in Gen 2 is filled then what did it mean to Noah in Genesis 9:1? to fill or refill?

Study it out.

Do you know why I know angels were created in Genesis 1 even if it is not stated in Genesis 1?
Do you know why I know some angels rebelled in Genesis 1 even if it is not stated in Genesis 1?
Do you know how I know that angels sinned after Genesis 1:1 before Genesis 1:2?
If they didn't when and where? How do you know it? Did you read it in Genesis 1?

The problem is when we call things we do not know as "strange doctrine", or when we choose to believe passages we want to believe and reject the other passages we do not want to believe.
Is the gap fact a "new doctrine" to you?

Mark 1:27 And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What thing is this? what new doctrine is this? for with authority commandeth he even the unclean spirits, and they do obey him.
Acts 17:19 And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is?

Are we to call what other Bible believers believe "strange"? I'm sure some have extremes, but I notice some have not yet arrived at the truth.

I think if it is truth, it will answer questions. But there have been many questions posted that receive no answer. Why is that so?

I think if it is truth, it will not contradict any part of Scripture. What passage has been violated by the gap fact?

Show me where I'm choosing to believe some passages and rejecting others.

So you know when the angels were created and when they rebelled? Is this stated in the Bible? If not isn't it strange doctrine? You know there's a gap "fact" even though it's not stated in the Bible. Again, isn't this strange doctrine?

You try to prove the gap theory with facts like I was born sometime many years ago, I haven't yet died and the Bible states it is appointed unto man once to die; therefore there's a gap there and therefore the creation gap theory is a fact.

You keep stating as a fact that animal life exsisted before man. I beleive you're right; they were made on the 6th day, just before man. What proof do you have otherwise?

Even Dr. Reagan has to twist unrelated verses to try to bolster the theory. If we knew the gap theory was fact I could use his argument to show that Abel was something else in a previous life before he was reborn to become a shepherd.

What questions is your gap "fact" going to answer? Are you going to appease the scientists and scholars of our day who are calling themselves wise? (Rom 1:22) You think if we come to some kind of an agreement with them they'll suddenly recognize that it was God that created everything?

If you're seeking answers to the "problems" of geological evidence, evolution, etc., I again suggest you read books such as An Ice Age Caused by the Genesis Flood and check out those other sites I mentioned.

God created the heaven and the earth. "Created" means called the material out of nowhere, it didn't exsist before. Then He formed it; took the material and shaped it. Then he made the other works of creation; fashioned them out of the material he had created on the first day.

At least that's what I believe no matter how much we play word games with "created", "form", and "made".

Of course one objection is always, "Wouldn't he have created it with perfect form instead of creating it and then forming it?" How am I to say what He would have or should have done? Couldn't He have done in one instance what He did in six days? God had his reasons, and I believe it's at least partly for our instruction. Why did God rest on the seventh day? Do you think He had to because He was tired? Do we know the ways of God to such an extent that we know how He must have done things?

Are we to know everything? Are there to be no mysteries with God? Does your gap fact allow you to understand all of God's ways? It appears that you do, but I can't make that same claim.

Again, I challenge you to show me what passages I'm purposely rejecting as you claim. I also challenge you to prove the gap "fact" as it appears you're claiming that you can, unless you just "know" all these things without any proof other than serpentine arguments.

I'll throw this question back at you. What passage had been violated by a literal six day creation fact? If you can show me I'll believe in the gap "fact". In the mean time I'll take what the Bible seems to say over what it can forcibly be made to say.

I have to keep reminding you that I don't believe in the gap THEORY. So don't accuse me of believing what these gap theorists, or atheistic evolutionists, or problematic geologists teach. I believe in the gap FACT.

1. I believe that animals were created after Genesis 1:19 and before Genesis 1:26.
2. I believe that the Ice Age is caused by the Flood in Genesis 7 & 8.

What else do they believe? Anything that they believe that contradicts the Word of God I reject.

I NEVER claimed I know it all. I'm simply saying deal with the questions. There's nothing wrong with saying we don't know, but to say something as "strange" if it is "new doctrine" for us seems unfair to me.

When the angels were created? Before Genesis 1:2
Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

The sons of God already existed and they shouted for joy when God laid the foundations and the corner stone of the earth.

Now, show me that angels were not created before Genesis 1:2. If that is a mystery to you, just give me an honest guess and that will be fine.

I don't know everything, neither does anyone here.

The following is to the "king of Tyrus". Whoever he is:

1. He was perfect in beauty.

Ezekiel 28:12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.

2. He was in Eden, the garden of God.
3. He was covered, not necessarily with flesh but with precious stone.
4. He had a built-in musical instrument in him.

13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

5. He was the anointed cherub that covereth. (Then he can not be a king in Tyrus living during the time of the prophets.)

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.

6. He was perfect when he was created.
7. He was found to have iniquity later. (How long? 1 day? 5 days?)

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

8. He had a multitude of merchandise.
(How long? With whom? With Adam?Where? In heaven? Or in Eden? Where is Eden? In Heaven or In earth? When was the time we had Eden? Is there only one Eden? Is this the one who said "I will ascend into heaven?)

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.

Notice that he had merchandise BEFORE he sinned.

9. His heart was lifted up and wisdom was corrupted. (How long did it take for him to be corrupted? Instantly? in 5 days? or longer?)

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.

Is this "king of Tyrus" the same as "Lucifer, son of the morning" (Isa. 14)?
Is he one of the "morning stars" who shouted for joy when the earth was created in Genesis 1:1?
How long did it take for him to rebel against his creator?

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

That's it. In the beginning they were CREATED. Past tense. Finished. The heaven and the earth were CREATED IN THE BEGINNING. No twisting of Scripture here. It says created and it ends with a PERIOD. That's it. It's through.

After that what?

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.


Without form...void...darkness. Is this creation? or DESTRUCTION?

The Spirit of God moved upon the FACE OF WATERS. Why? To RENEW the FACE OF THE EARTH.

Psalms 104:30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

Who were the first inhabitants of the original earth in Genesis 1:1?
Wasn't the earth made to be inhabited?
Why were the "morning stars" and the "sons of God" rejoicing when it was created in Genesis 1:1? Was it for them? Did they have merchandise and traffick and thrones then?

Why was the earth without form and void and dark in Genesis 1:2?
Why was there waters in the earth that has no form and void and dark?
Did God create in the dark?
Did angels sing in the dark?
Or was it judgment?
Why did the Spirit of God moved and RENEWED the face of the earth?

Why was Adam told to REPLENISH the earth after Genesis 1:3?

Finally, I'm not forcing anyone to believe in what they consider as theory. I'm presenting what I believe to be fact. But I find it not acceptable to call "strange" what is "new doctrine" to some.

Is there a possibility that the "garden IN EDEN" or the "garden OF EDEN" God "planted" for Adam in Genesis 2
was not the same as
"Eden, the GARDEN OF GOD" God could have created in the earth of Genesis 1:1 for "the king of Tyrus" to occupy?

I already did study it means to RE-plenish to fill again. I checked into the Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries (unabridged version 1590 and 1623) the word ment to fill and to refill, also it meant to refresh, to make full, and to make ful again.

if there was a race before the six day creation(recreation) is was not men. It was a Chrubim named Lucifer and some Angels. they would have had God permission to be here for some reason. and it could have been a reptilian race.

since Lucifer is no longer in his place the Covering Chrub. there is only one type of animal not deplicted in the other four you have an OX, you have birds, you have men, Lions. cross reference the discriptions of a cherubim and the Seraphim ox in one and Chrub in the other. no reptiles but he did appear to Eve as a serpent (a reptile).

a chrub had a face of an ox and stood on two legs that have hoves like an ox. when you see the deplictions of Satan with horns like an ox hoved feet and a tail (like an Ox)

buT GEE GUYS all that is speculation as to IF there was a pre Adamic race of beings.