[Winman]

I have tried to explain myself as clearly as I can. I am a bit "tentative" about this because after 50 years reading my Bible, this is the first time that this explanation has occurred to me (I have never read this from any one else). It seems like it is sound Scripturally, but I wouldn't fight over this issue, and if someone could show me where I may be wrong, I sure wouldn't feel bad.

Your explanation was very clear and I understood it. And it does make sense really. I also believe that baptism is a picture of Romans 6:4.

I heard a tape years ago, I believe it was Curtis Hutson. He was explaining that baptism is not necessary for salvation, but as you said, it is us publicly identifying with Chist. But I laughed because he said if baptism saved you, then he would hold people under and get them into heaven quick.

Years ago we had a missionary from India come to our church. In India, when they receive Christ, they make a very formal and public profession. They walk through the center of town so everyone can see, then they go down to the river and are baptised. For some this is a life-changing event, because friends and family often shun them, they can even have difficulty getting work. But these people are so brave and sincere, they shame us really. They are willing to risk all to show their love for Jesus.

[Debau]

Dr. Sorenson takes George's "tentative" view and employs the context of the following verse to it for a further "twist".

Else what shall they do which are baptized
for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then
baptized for the dead?

The Mormons to this day advance that
living person may be baptized in place of departed loved ones.
That is heresy and certainly not what Paul is advancing.
The key to its understanding lies in the significance of
baptism itself. In Romans 6:4-5, the Apostle notes that we are
“buried with him by baptism into death.” He continues noting,
“for if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death,
we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.”
Believer’s baptism is an identification with Christ. As the
believer is dipped beneath the water, it is a likeness or illustration
of Christ’s death. In being raised out of the water, it is a
likeness of the resurrection. Moreover, it should be remembered
that in the early church, all baptism was done in view of the
public whether in a river, lake, pond, or the sea. It was literally
and very publicly identifying with Christ. The climate of impending
persecution made public baptism a very real statement
of faith.
His point is this. If there is no resurrection, why do new
believers risk persecution and even death by being publicly
baptized. The word translated as for in verse 29 (‘uper huper)
can also have the sense of ‘in behalf of,’ or ‘for the sake of.’ As
new Christians were baptized, they were identifying with the
death of Christ and placing themselves at risk of death from
persecution to follow. The thought might be loosely rendered,
‘Else why do they which are baptized risk death, if the dead rise
not at all? Why are they baptized for the sake of death?’ (A
alternative thought might be, ‘why are new Christians risking
death and persecution in baptism as they replace the ranks of
departed saints?’)
15:30 The thought begun in the preceding verse is extended.
And why stand we in jeopardy every hour? The word
translated jeopardy (kinduneuw kinduneuo) has the sense of
‘danger.’ As in the thought above, if there is no resurrection of
the dead, Paul asked, why are we willing to continually face the
danger of persecution (if there is no resurrection)?

15:31 I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ
Jesus our Lord, I die daily. The word translated as protest (nh
nay) is actually an elliptical form of a solemn oath. The thought
essentially is, ‘I affirm your rejoicing which I also have in Christ
Jesus our Lord, but I die daily.’ The latter phrase is Paul’s
reference to facing death from persecution on what seemed to
be on a daily basis. Some in the Corinthian church were at one
and the same time rejoicing in Christ while at the same time
questioning the possibility of the resurrection. His point is,
‘while we rejoice in Christ, I face the prospect of death regularly.
Why would I continue to do so if it were not for the
resurrection?’

Originally Posted by tonybones2112

Brother Parrish, I had an interesting childhood.

The "family" doctor I had as a child was an alcoholic. His prescription to everything, colds, flu, puncture wounds, was sulfa drugs and penicillin. At the age of 39 during my 19th bout of pneumonia, I discovered I was allergic to both, along with onions and marijuana. I had 18 bouts of pneumonia, in varying degrees, till the age of 25. This unknown allergy to penicillin only made me more susceptible to the virus, according to my pulmonologist.

WOW... that is interesting,
strangely enough I am also allergic to penicillin. Go figure...

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish

WOW... that is interesting,
strangely enough I am also allergic to penicillin. Go figure...

As I understand it an allergy to penicillin is common, I used to take Tetracyclin till they withdrew it. I'm all for anti-biotics brother, they saved my life several times.

Grace and peace to you.

Tony

[chette777]

Originally Posted by Winman

And Brother Chette, you know that you and I are never going to agree on this gap theory. Maybe I should be like Tony and just let it go. As he said, nobody has ever gotten saved by arguing either for or against this gap.

But there are several things about this gap theory that really bother me. Most importantly, it casts doubt on God's Word. I have seen several of those that support the gap make statements saying the word "was" in Genesis 1:2 should more properly be translated "became". Now that bothers me, and bothers me a lot. I believe God has preserved his Word, I believe it to be infallible. That's why I came to this forum in the first place. I believe God is much wiser than all of us, and that God clearly knows the difference between the word "was" and the word "became". God did not say, "And the earth became without form and void;" the Bible says,

And the earth WAS without form and void;

Now, maybe I am being picky, but this is a pretty big deal to me. We haven't gotten two verses into the Bible, and those who support the gap theory are telling honest Christians who simply take God's Word as literal, that they lack the spirtual discernment to understand the "deep" things of God. Well, all I can say is consider Nehemiah. He believed the earth "became" without form and void;. And look how messed up he was.

And you are not reading Proverbs chapter 8 properly. The whole chapter is about wisdom and understanding. It was wisdom and understanding that God possessed before his works of old.

And Proverbs 8 is not chronological. Genesis 1 is chronological. That's why God takes us step by step, the first day, the second day, the third day, the fouth day, the fifth day, the sixth day. There is no mistaking that Genesis chapter 1 is a chronological account.

Now, Genesis chapter 2 is not chronological. In Genesis chapter 2 it tells of Adam being created before the beasts of the field and every fowl of the air. In Genesis 1 the fowls were created before the beasts of the field, and the beasts of the field were created before man. So Genesis chapter 2 is not a chronological account.

And Proverbs chapter 8 is not a chronological account either. So, this is not something to base your gap theory on.

And you forever talk about this timeless eternity between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2 without a single verse anywhere to support it. You say creation "began" at Gen 1:3. Well, I beg your pardon, I believe creation began when God said,

IN THE BEGINNING

I really don't care what you, or some preacher somewhere says. My Bible says everything began in Genesis chapter 1, verse 1, and I believe God.

First, I only use the term "Gap theory" lightly. I truly believe the Bible reveals a Gap but is limited in its revelation because it was before the establishment of the 24 hour time measurement Gen1:3.

Second, I have never doubted God's word as per a Gap. Nor have I ever hinted at doubting Gods word. You propose that I doubt God's word but I have never made such a proclamation ever! I do know there are Gap arguments that do doubt God's word but that is not my position. Nor have I ever proposed that the word WAS would be better translated to BECAME. Show me one instance where I have made such a remark. I believe the word was is indicative to the state the earth WAS in at Gen1:2 but not Gen 1:1 and if Prov 8:22-24 can be trusted to be preserved show the sequence.

Third, I never said Creation started in Gen 1:3 (that is your view and young earth). I believe God created way before Gen1:3 1:2 and 1:1. And Proverbs 8 makes that clear(more on Proverbs eight later).

Fourth, as far as "without form and void" I have already shown in another post the meaning of it by comparing to the only other place those exact words are used. So the safe and Biblical meaning is there was a destruction see Jer 4:23 for God's inspired meaning of without form and void.

Fifth, Proverbs eight is no different than other scriptures which give us glimpses of past events. Isa 14 and Ezk 28 both give glimpses of Lucifer and the Anointed Cherub. Isa 12-15 speak literally not about the King of Babylon but figuratively. the same with Ezk 28:12-16 they speak literally of the Anointed Cherub and figuratively of the King of Tyre.

Having shown two scriptures which speak of something outside their immediate context of judgment of an earthly king, we can learn of a being from the past and I believe prior to Gen 1:2. most likely some time just after the Fountains of water were created (proverbs 8 is the only hint as to when that was and it was after the heaven, the Earth and the deep were created.

While I agree Proverbs 8 exalts wisdom, does it not also give understanding to any man who would search out the deeper things of God concerning the creation of the heaven, the Earth, the deep and the fountains of water? Which are not mentioned to have been created, made or established in the 6 day works of old, the works of God after the establishment of the 24 hour day. I believe the answer to that question to be yes.

Sixth, Prove that God did not preserve sequential chronological order in Proverbs 8? if He wrote it that way he did so for a reason and the obvious is to see his order before the works of Old(the six day work of God).

On that not also, I never said that Eternity was "Timeless". Again that is your understanding. I have stated that Eternity has a time measurement but it is not equal to our current 24 hour 7 - 365 day year time measurement. you can learn that it is not the same by reading Psalm 90:4 and 2Peter 3:8. to scriptures that show that an eternal god in eternity has a time measurement unlike our 24 hour TQ. 24/7 is not a made up doctrine it is clearly established in Gen1:3-5 and is carried out through all of Scriptures until Rev 22.

Seventh, the beginning of Proverbs 8 is not the same as the beginning of Gen 1:1. a simple comparison of the two scriptures reveal this truth.

Pr 8:22-24The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.

Ge 1:1-3 ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

you will notice IN proverbs 8:23 the beginning was before the earth ever was and the beginning of Gen1:1 has the beginning associated with the earth that is already created.

So this is a two part beginning. not unlike other doctrines of the Bible the two comings or visitations of the Lord as well as others.

Proverbs 8 "beginning of his way" is before the works of Old in sequential order. that would indicate that "his way". the word way is used to represent a mans life or conversation of life in the bible. to numerous of scriptures to even list. but the "your ways" of Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. is a clear representative of the fact that "his way" speaks of things God was doing before there was a earth, the depth, the fountains(plural=waters) of water. surely no man experienced "his way" except the man Christ Jesus HIs Son from everlasting (eternity past) before the earth was created showing the wisdom of God in possessing his Son.

the heaven is not mentioned in Proverbs 8 only the fact of its depth was not yet created. andof course what father would not first establish an abode for his family (his son) to live in? so by implication the heaven was created before the earth, then the earth, then the depth as the earth was found in the deep in Gen 1:2 (when did it get into the deep? HOw did it get into the deep), and before the fountains of water (waters) were created so how id a earth get covered in waters when there was no water when the heaven and the earth were created.

Gen 1:1 "beginning" is the starting point of (now pay attention) God's Revelation for mankind given to Moses to record for us and preserved in the KJV full intact and without error. it is not equal to the beginning of Proverbs 8 in any way. the term begining meaning "a starting point" can be found in numerous places the first usage to line up with that meaning is in Gen 10:10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.

I would not put the Beginning of John 1:1 as a starting point of Gen1:1 but I would put it with Proverbs 8:22 the beginning of his way. . .

However I would put the Beginning of John1:2 as that of Gen1:1 because the following verse would be indicative of the six days of the work of God his works of old that were all done within the 24 hour Time measurment. So here in John 1:1-2 you have the word beginning with both representations of Proverbs 8 and in verse 2 Gen1:1. All I did was actively rightly divide the word of truth.

Conclusion:

Your Bible speaks of greater and more things than you give it credit for. Martin Luther could not reconcile Romans and James because he failed to be actively rightly dividing the world of Truth. and as such he was blinded to how the two books fit together as a whole unit.

I did not mention a Gap at all in my above post. but apparently you saw one.

you trust not the words of men but only the Bible. But when you go to here a preacher speak (especially Baptist) most are teaching topically not verse by verse (as I do from my pulpit). which makes there teaching 90% their explanation of the Bible verse they are expounding. Yet you take their words to be true and possibly without as much scrutiny as you have given my words of explanation.

[peopleoftheway]

Originally Posted by Winman View Post
And Brother Chette, you know that you and I are never going to agree on this gap theory. Maybe I should be like Tony and just let it go. As he said, nobody has ever gotten saved by arguing either for or against this gap.

Brother your post should have ended there. There is a post on the forum that has become the venue for this discussion, keep it there Brother.

[chette777]

Peoples,

Sorry but I had to answer his(Winman) statements in my above post for by leaving his statements as the last words he is able to insinuate I don't know how to study my Bible, that I am a false teacher, and places words into my mouth (post) I never said.

Originally I only remarked I didn't agree with his statement the earth was created first. I never even mentioned a Gap.

[peopleoftheway]

I know Brother Chette I know. I was just reminding Brother Winman that there was place on the forum for that subject and I realise you had to answer.
Maybe both of you, well all three of you (Fredo) should part company on that topic for the sake of fellowship in the future.
I am just offering counsel as an impartial Brother and taking no side but the side of fellowship.