[chette777]

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

[Fredoheaven]

Originally Posted by Winman

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.

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?

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 i am more than willing to share it to you if you like...

[CKG]

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

[chette777]

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.

[Winman]

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.

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.

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.

[Fredoheaven]

Originally Posted by Winman

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.

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.

No to but this one hehehe....

[CKG]

- 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.

[Winman]

CKG

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.

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.

[Fredoheaven]

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
B. A continues Accuse of the brethren. Rev. 12:10
C. Uses a long Argumentative spirit. 2 Cor. 12:20

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


Jude 25

[Winman]

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?

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.