     The Gospel according to Matthew. I don't have a--where it is, right
there. Somebody get it for me? Good. Don't know of a place for it. The Book of
Matthew is the first Gospel in the New Testament, according to the King James
order.

     All the scholars say Mark was written first, and then Matthew and Luke
borrowed from Mark. But I don't subscribe to that. I think it's a lot of hot
air. I think Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all wrote separately, as the Lord
told them to write. But, at any rate, Matthew's the first. The old question
is, "What order do the Gospels come in?" They come one after another--that's
the order. And it's Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

     Now, the first three Gospels together are called Synoptic Gospels--
Matthew, Mark, and Luke. S-y-n-o-p-t-i-c, which is a long way of saying
nothing. They try to get Matthew, Mark, Luke together, to make John separate,
to make you think there's something wrong with John. And the idea behind that
is, Matthew, Mark, and Luke say so much about the humanity of Christ, they
accept them as genuine Gospels. But John says so much about the deity of
Christ, they don't want to put him in the same class with them. So the
scholars talk about the "Synoptic" Gospels, and John's Gospel--which doesn't
mean anything.

     All right, now, the Gospel of Matthew has 28 chapters, and it has 1,071
verses, and 23,684 words. Most of the scholars say it was written about 66
a.d. I don't believe that; I think it was written much earlier than that, but
I couldn't prove it. What does the Scofield note say on that? What? 37? Well,
that's good. I've got 46 possible--it might be even earlier than that.

     Yes? 26? Impossible, man! Oh, no, you're looking at the margin. You've
got to look at when the Book was written; it couldn't have been written four
years before Christ died.

     Yes? 60? Yeah, most of them have around 60, or even 66. And I don't
believe that. I think it's much earlier than that, and I couldn't prove it,
but I'd say around 47 or 45. And the date 37 might be right; it might even be
earlier than that.

     All right, now, the four Gospels present Jesus Christ in four different
aspects. John presents Jesus Christ, the Son of God. And since God has no
ancestry, there's no genealogy in John. Luke presents Jesus Christ the Son of
man. And, since man has a genealogy, the genealogy in Luke goes clear back to
Adam, because Adam was the first man. Mark presents Jesus Christ as a servant.
And since a servant or slave has no genealogy, there's no genealogy in Mark.

     Matthew, we're going to study. Matthew is the King. Jesus Christ as the
King. And, if a king has a genealogy, it has to go back to the first king, and
you have to trace the crown through. So, Christ's genealogy in Matthew goes
back to the first Jew. And the first Jew is Abraham. And, because He's the
Jewish King, Matthew presents Jesus Christ--quote--as "the King of the Jews."
And that's the thing you ought to remember in dealing with the Gospel
according to Matthew.

     Now, Abraham, coming down, his great-great-granddaddy is Noah. Noah is a
Gentile. Out of the Gentiles comes Shem. From Shem come the Shemites, or
Semites--Shemitic people. All right, from them--one branch of their race is
Eber, from which comes the Hebrews. Abraham is a Hebrew. Therefore Abraham,
when he is called out of Ur of the Chaldees, is a Hebrew, and his ancestry is
a branch of the Gentile race called Shemitic--or, our word is "Semitic,"
hence, "anti-Semitic." If a man is "anti-semitic," technically, he's against
Orientals. Now, when we say "anti-semitic," we mean "anti-Jewish," but that
isn't proper. Because the Shemitic or Semitic people are Japanese, Chinese,
and everybody else. So, if a man is anti-semitic, he's anti-Oriental.

     All right, from that group came Abraham. Then Abraham is circumcised when
he is ninety years old, and with the covenant of circumcision. That fellow
becomes a separate, called-out, peculiar people from any other group, and he
begets Isaac, and Isaac begets Jacob, and Jacob begets the twelve tribes.

     Now, we know that later on one tribe, Judah, and Benjamin--the two
southern tribes--are called Jews. But, when Paul talks about the Jew and the
church and the Gentile, and the oracles of God going to the Jew, it's any
descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob--and it's traced to Abraham. Abraham
is the father of the Jewish race. And the Jewish circumcision begins with
Abraham--it doesn't begin with Judah, and it doesn't begin with Jacob. It
begins with Abraham.



1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of
Abraham.  2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas
and his brethren;  3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares
begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;  4And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab
begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;  5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab;
and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;  6 And Jesse begat David
the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her [that had been the wife] of
Urias;  7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;
8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;  9
And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;  10
And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;
11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were
carried away to Babylon:  12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias
begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;  13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud;
and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;  14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and
Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;  15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and
Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;  16 And Jacob begat Joseph the
husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.   17 So all the
generations from Abraham to David [are] fourteen generations; and from David
until the carrying away into Babylon [are] fourteen generations; and from the
carrying away into Babylon unto Christ [are] fourteen generations.



      So, in Matthew chapter 1, verse 1, you read: "The book of the generation
of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." Now, it doesn't take
Him back to Adam, because Adam is not a Jew. It doesn't take Him back to Noah;
Noah is not a Jew. The Jewish King's genealogy goes back to Abraham.

     "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of
Abraham." Now, that expression, "the book of the generation," occurs only
twice in your Bible. And it's highly significant of where it occurs. It occurs
once here, and it occurs once in Genesis 5:1. And that's the only times it
occurs in the Bible. Now, many times--I think about ten times--you'll read,
"These are the generations of," "These are the generations of..." But only
twice does it ever say "the book of the generation." The only times it says
that are in Genesis 5 and Matthew chapter 1. 

     Now, that's highly significant. In the first place, five is the number of
death--never grace. So, in Genesis 5, everybody dies. And, when you read
Genesis 5, it says, "This is the book of the generation of Adam." And then,
three verses later, "And he died." Three verses later: "And he died." Three
verses later: "And he died." Three verses later: "He died."

     Romans 5--five is the number of the death--Romans 5 says, "As in Adam all
die." Genesis 5: "And he died...and he died...and he died..." And the next
time that thing occurs up, it occurs up in Matthew 1. I want to have you look
at Matthew 1 and tell me who died. Nobody dies! "In Christ all shall be made
alive." That's a nugget, man! That ain't a clinker, man--that's a nugget!
That's the unsearchable riches of the Elizabethan English--that one.

     So, there are two times that thing occurs--once in Adam's genealogy, once
in Christ's genealogy. In Adam's genealogy, everybody dies; in Christ's
genealogy, nobody dies. You say, "Well, they really died!" Yeah, they died,
but isn't recorded that they died. In Genesis 5, it's recorded. It's Genesis
5, it says, "And he died...and he died...and he died...and he died..." and in
Matthew chapter 1, it doesn't say anything about anybody dying.

     I'll tell you another strange thing about the New Testament. The New
Testament never mentions anybody's sins. That list you're getting ready to
read is some of the biggest reprobates that ever lived. Folks talk about a
godly line. There isn't any "godly line" in the Bible. That's a Scofield joke,
that "godly line." There's no "godly line" in the Bible. There's a Messianic
line; there's a line that leads to the Messiah. But there's no "godly line."

     Let's look at this "godly line." Matthew 1, verse 3. Do you know who
Tamar was? She was Judas's daughter-in-law. That's incest in the family. You
see down there, along about verse 5, you know who Rahab was? She's a harlot.
Come on down there in verse 6. That's David committing adultery with
Bathsheba. That's some "godly line," isn't it? Look at verse 9. You see
"Ozias"? That's Uzziah. You know what happened to him? He got hit with
leprosy. Don't you know the Azariah meeting that Roloff had? That's the fellow
going into the temple, and leprosy hitting him. Come on down a bit further.
You see "Joram" in verse 8. Why, Joram was such an apostate that the Lord
knocks out his line for three generation after he's through, for tying up with
the house of Ahab.

     So, there's no such thing as a "godly line." Now, there's such a thing as
a Messianic line. When we say "Messianic," we mean the Messiah, Jesus Christ,
has a line He comes from. But it certainly isn't godly.

     All right, Matthew chapter 1, verse 1. You have to be careful of these
people who are talking about "godly" people. "Good, godly" men. "There was a
man from God, it was me." The idea of a guy writing a book about himself, "A
man sent from God, and it's me." Oh, boy! What a thing!

     I had a meeting up in someplace--Indiana--it may have been Mishiwauk,
Indiana, Mohawk, Indiana--Gary?--no--no, it isn't Hobert; it's over east of
Hobert, and further south. What's the big town up there? No, it isn't Hammond;
it's east of Hammond, southeast of Hammond. I'll be up all night trying to
think of that, it'll hit me about three o'clock Thursday. No, it's a pretty
big town. Ah, it'll come in a while.

     All right, one: "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of
David, the son of Abraham." Now, notice how the Bible will use the word "son."
A "son" can be fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth generation. If he's
anywhere in the line, he can be called a "son."

     "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of
Abraham.  Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas
and his brethren." Now, notice the word "Judas," which is obviously what? It's
Judah. And that means when the King James translates, it translates correctly,
and the other new bibles translate incorrectly. If you had new bibles, they'd
change all those words to spell like they're spelled in the Old Testament. And
that's fudging. Because, when you come from Hebrew into English, and come from
Greek into English, you don't get the same spellings. Now, for example, here's
a word here; in Russia, it is spelled that way; in Greek, it's spelled this
way; in France, it's spelled this way; in Germany, it's spelled that way; in
Spain, it's spelled that way; in English, it's spelled this way; in Italian,
it's spelled this way. Now, that's the same word, see? And if you're coming
from French into English, you're spelled that way. If you're coming from
German into English, you spell that way. If you're coming from Italian into
English, you spell that way. So, when they say "Judas" there, they're coming
from Greek into English, instead of Hebrew into English. If you're coming from
Hebrew into English, it would be "Judah." If you're coming from Greek into
English, it isn't Judah; it's Judas. Your King James is right and the new
bibles are wrong--which you might have well known that to start with.

     All right, "Jacob begat Judas and his brethren. And Judas begat Phares
and Zara of Thamar." And of course, we'll cover that in much detail, that
business, when we get into the book of Genesis a little bit later. "And Phares
begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram." Slight difference in spelling; some "z"s
for "s"es. And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson;..." spelled
with an "h" in the Old Testament "...and Naasson begat Salmon;  And Salmon
begat Booz..." Here it's spelled "Booz." And that's the Boaz of Ruth. "...Booz
of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; And Jesse
begat..." Now here, it's going to tell it "...David the king." That's the
first time that word occurs in the New Testament. And the first time it
occurs, it's aligned with David. David "the king." Nobody's called a king
until David.

     Then David is the first official king of Israel God approved of. Saul was
allowed to be king by the permissive will of God, but God's first anointed
king that He wanted was from Judah--"the sceptre shall not depart from Judah"--
and the first king is David.

     So, this Gospel is going to present Jesus Christ as a Jewish King, and as
a Jewish King, He is the Son of David the king.

     Now, notice how the word "king" keeps popping up in this Book. Look at
chapter 2, in the middle of the verse: "Herod the king." Look at chapter 2,
verse 2, in the middle of the verse: "The king of the Jews." Verse 3: "When
Herod the king..." See it go again? Now, that thing keeps popping up and
popping up. Verse 9: "When they heard the king." See that business?

     So this thing is going to present the Lord Jesus Christ as the King.

     All right, Matthew chapter 1, verse 6: "And Jesse begat David the king;
and David the king begat Solomon of her [that had been the wife] of Urias."
Notice how the King James Bible is put in italics when they're needed. The
Greek text said, "Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon
of her of Urias." Now, what are you going to do with that? Urias isn't "her."
Urias is the male. You have to put in italics. Now, there's a great lesson for
you to start with from manuscript evidence. Good Greek doesn't always make
good English. If you're going to translate it into English, what are you going
to do with that sentence? A fellow says, "Well you're not, you know, to add to
and take from." Well, we all believe that. But, when you're coming from
language into another, and God wants you to have the Bible in your language,
you're going to have to trust God to give you the words He intends for you to
have. And the King James translators--at least they admitted it wasn't in the
text. They put it in italics, so you would know it wasn't in the text. The new
bibles leave out the italics. They put all kinds of words in there without
telling you what was put in and what wasn't.

     "And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her
[that had been the wife] of Urias." That's Uriah the Hittite. "And Solomon
begat Roboam;..." spelled "Rehoboam" in 1 Kings "...and Roboam begat Abia;..."
spelled Abijah "...and Abia begat Asa;  And Asa begat..."
Jehoshaphat..."Josaphat" here..."and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat
Ozias."

     No, as a matter of fact he didn't! Let's go back and look at Chronicles.
Now, there's a break in Christ's genealogy where three kings are omitted. And
those three kings are all omitted right after good ol' Ahaziah shows up. Good
ol' Ahaziah, bless his heart. He was 22 when he came on in one place, and 42
when he came on in the other. And every Christian school in the world is so
glad that error is in the Bible, so they can mess you up on your belief in the
King James. How many have ever heard that one before? Let me see your hands?
Yeah, that's been around.

     All right, 2 Chronicles 22. Now, here, when they come on the throne here,
here's the order. In 2 Chronicles 22:1, a man named Ahaziah comes on the
throne. Now, right before him, the king is Jehoram. Look at 21:16. "Jehoram."
Spelled "Joram" in Matthew. Now, keep your hand in 2 Chronicles 22, and go
back and look at Matthew, where it says "Joram. "And Joram begat Ozias." All
right, according to 2 Chronicles 22:1, he didn't beget Ozias. He begat
Ahaziah.

     Come back to Matthew chapter 1, and look at verses 8 and 9, and notice
there's no Ahaziah there. He's missing. All right, go back to 2 Chronicles 24,
and look who follows Ahaziah. Second Chronicles 24:1: "Joash." Now, go back to
Matthew 1, and see if you can find Joash. He isn't there. All right, now, come
to 2 Chronicles 25:1, and look who followed Joash. Second Chronicles 25:1:
"Amaziah." Come back to Matthew 1 and see if you can find Amaziah. Amaziah is
missing.

     So, when sometimes in the Bible it says somebody begets somebody, it can
step clear down there to refer to their great-great grandchild. Now, the list
in the Old Testament runs Joram, Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah. And the next one in
2 Chronicles is Uzziah, spelled "O" in Matthew.

     Now, go back to 2 Chronicles 25, and here comes Uzziah finally. Make it
26:1. 26:1: "Then all the people of Judah took Uzziah, who [was] sixteen years
old, and made him king in the room of his father Amaziah." Now, come to
Matthew. And in Matthew chapter 1, look at verse 8, and look what he did. He
came down to here, and when he got to here, he skipped clean over there--and
omitted that one, and that one, and that one. There are three kings missing
out of that line.

     The Bible says in one place, "The Lord will visit the iniquity of the
fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation." And there's a
case where somebody really made a mess of things, and the Lord knocked out
three generations. When He knocked out three generations, He knocked out one
of the greatest, best kings you ever had--Joash--and the greatest priest they
ever had--Jehoiada. Jehoiada was the best priest Judah ever had, and they're
not even in the genealogy. As a matter of fact, Jehoiada is not even listed in
the Levitical genealogy, and he's a Levite. So something went all to pieces
with Joram. And when you read your Bible, you find Joram joins up with the
house of Ahab and has the daughter of Ahab to wife. And this fellow here has
the daughter of Omri to wife. And there's a linking up there with Ahab in the
northern kingdoms--Baal worship--that is something so terrible, the Lord
knocks out three generations.

     And I haven't got it all figured out yet. I've been working on it about
28 years, and I'm beginning to see a little bit of light, but it's a rough
light on those family relationships there. But it looks like Joram married
Ahaziah's mother after Ahaziah was 22 years old. That's what it looks like.

     All right, Matthew chapter 1, verse 8. We won't go into all that tonight.
You'll get that in "Problem Texts" anyway. Matthew chapter 1, verse 8: "And
Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;..."
That's the Uzziah of the Old Testament "...And Ozias begat Joatham; and
Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;  And Ezekias begat Manasses; and
Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias." Called "Josiah." Again, see,
you're coming from one to another. It's a common thing. You take this word,
you take my name, it'll come out the same way. You get this thing in one
language this way, in one language this way, in one language this way, in one
language this way, in one language this way, and in one language this way. All
right, so he says "Josias" for "Josiah."

     Verse 11: "And Josias begat Jechonias." Now, that's the fellow in
Jeremiah chapter 22, where the Lord knocked the "Jeh" off his name and cursed
his seed, and said, "No man of his seed any more would prosper sitting upon
the throne of David." Jechoniah. Called just "Koniah" in Jeremiah 22. "And
Josias begat Jechonias." And if you had it in Sunday school, you know, Sunday
morning in Jeremiah, you'd know what that's a reference to.

     "And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were
carried away to Babylon." That's the first deportation. "And after they were
brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel." Now, see what he's doing? He's
taking the king's line on after they went to Babylon. After Jechoniah, there's
no more king. I mean, Zedekiah comes on--his seed is cursed, and he goes into
captivity. So the Lord is taking you from the line now, through the kings in 2
Chronicles and Jeremiah, and through the captivity to Christ.

     "Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;  And Zorobabel
begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;  And Azor begat
Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;  And Eliud begat Eleazar;
and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;  And Jacob begat Joseph
the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

     Now, the Lord Jesus Christ is the only one who has His genealogical
papers and His register at the town hall, with all the record of dates and
birth clear back to Abraham. There's no other man in the world who can trace
his genealogy back that far. There's no man in this building who can trace his
genealogy back that far. You notice how far that thing goes back? That
genealogy is traced back--every individual in that genealogy--is traced back
for 1,900 years. Is there any man in this building who can trace his ancestry
back to the birth of Christ? There isn't a German, Russian, Swede, Frenchman,
Spaniard, Italian, American on the face of this earth who can trace his
genealogy back 1,900 years. There isn't one. There's only one Man who can do
it. And that's Jesus Christ.

















     Did you ever stop and think about this? The Jews, when they're trying to
get rid of Christ as their Saviour, and didn't want to trust Him as their
Saviour, those Jews couldn't find their own genealogical records clear back to
Moses. When they came back to Ezra and Nehemiah, they sought them in the
register, and couldn't find them. And, to this day, the fellows who were
called "Cohen," they are supposed to have come from the tribe of Levi, because
"cohain" means "priest." But there's no Jew today who can trace his genealogy
back, because when the Romans came and destroyed Jerusalem in 70 a.d., they
burned everything to the ground. And there's no Jew now who even knows he
can't even trace his time back to the time of Christ.

     So the Lord is still the only One who has a genealogy that's good for
1,900 years. But, you see, the Lord's genealogy goes back even further than
that. Turn to Luke. You talk about a unique Man! Why, Mohammed professed to
only be able to trace his birth back to Abraham--and he couldn't do it. Naming
everybody there, he just knew he came from that line. Look at Luke 3, verse
38. That's the genealogy through Mary. How far does it go back? It goes back
to Adam.

     So Jesus Christ can name every ancestor He had for 4,000 years.

     All right, Matthew chapter 1, verse 16: "And Jacob begat Joseph the
husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." The RSV has a
footnote here, saying that Jacob begat Joseph, "who gave birth to Jesus
Christ." And says this footnote was from an "ancient source" without telling
you what the ancient source was. And it's Theodotian's guess from Origen's
Hexapla. And when the RSV translators were asked about their bible, they said
to Kenneth Go, a reporter for the Washington Post October 1952, quote: "We
wouldn't put anything into a footnote that was remote from the truth." So they
admitted that he could have been born of Joseph.

     "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who
is called Christ. So all the generations from Abraham to David [are]
fourteen..." Well, not exactly! "...and from David until the carrying away
into Babylon [are] fourteen..." not exactly! "...and from the carrying away
into Babylon unto Christ [are] fourteen..." well, not exactly! They are as he
gave them. As he gave them, they're fourteen. He left out three of them--right
there. See that?

     You know what that shows you? See, you have to be careful with this Book!
This Book's a bomb. That shows you God has His own way of figuring a
generation. And He doesn't always figure a generation just by a man giving
birth to a man in that time. You figure out the time right there, from Abraham
to the captivity, and divide that thing by fourteen, and you'll find how many
years are in a generation. And I divided it out one time, and I think it comes
to about 47 years to a generation--and not necessarily just from one man to
another. So, you have to be careful. The Lord has His own way of figuring
time.

     Somebody said, "There's an error right there." Well, there's an error if
you judge it by your standard. But He has His own standard. A year in Genesis
is 360 days. Now, you'll find that out when we get to studying Noah. Noah is
in that ark twelve months of thirty days each. And that constitutes a year in
the Bible. It doesn't constitute a year outside of the Bible.



18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was
espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the
Holy Ghost.  

19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just [man], and not willing to make her a
publick example, was minded to put her away privily.  

20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord
appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to
take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the
Holy Ghost.  

21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he
shall save his people from their sins.  

22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the
Lord by the prophet, saying,  

23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they
shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.  

24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden
him, and took unto him his wife:  

25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he
called his name JESUS.



     All right, verse 18: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise."
Now, isn't it amazing how much of the Bible you can read without having helps?
I mean, where are all these "archaic" words you've been hearing about? Tonight
you've had about ten verses in Romans, and about nine in Galatians, and
seventeen in Matthew--and where are these archaic words? Isn't that strange?
This fellow said, "Well, so many words are hard to understand." You haven't
any particular problem with words, any of you. 

     Now, some of you have had some particular problem with the way a thing
was worded. And some of you ask some questions about what a thing meant. But
it wasn't because the words were archaic, see? That ain't the problem with the
Bible. They say, "This outdated English Bible--you got to bring it up to
date." You don't have to bring it up to date; you have to believe it! You have
to catch up with it anyway. "Bring it up date!" Why, it's so far ahead of
everybody around here, they'd have to get a motorcycle to catch it!

     Verse 18: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise." Now, do you
understand that? Does that bug you? "On this wise"? You can understand that,
can't you? You having trouble with that? "The birth of Jesus Christ was on
this wise." I mean, you having a problem with that? That's archaic. I mean,
people don't say, "Well, my going downtown was on this wise." They don't say
it that way any more. What if they don't? You don't have any problem with it.

     You know, I was going along there, and some guy telling me that, "to
wit," you know, "to wit, the redemption of the body." He said, "'To wit'? Who
says, 'to wit'?"

     Why, every legal paper in the county courthouse says "to wit," man!
That's a legal document in 1978. Some folks are awful archaic.

     All right, 18: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise." Well, it
means going like this. Now, see, when you fellows get called to preach, and
you run into something like that, and you think your people are going to have
trouble with it, explain it to them. But you don't have to change it. Let me
show you two ways to handle a thing. First, I'll handle it like a man that's
got, you know, a fifth grade education. Then I'll handle it like some of these
educated nuts. All right, now, if I've got any sense at all, and I'm
preaching, I say, "'Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise.' That is,
it was like this. He's getting ready to tell you how it was." See? That's the
right way to handle it.

     Now, suppose I said this: "'Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this
wise.' Well, it's very unfortunate the King James translated this word 'on
this wise.' But, back in 1600, when the Elizabethan English, with its rhythmic
poetry, was used in the way Shakespeare used it, people understood expressions
like this. A better rendering from the original would be: 'in this manner.'"
See?

     Now, you know what I've done? I've said, one, the AV translators were
outdated or stupid. And, number two, I'm smart and can figure it out. And,
number three, you can't trust what you read.

     Isn't that a stupid way to handle things? I mean, if you know what it
means, why don't you tell them what it means? You don't have to change it.

     Don't get me going; I'll get rabid!

     Verse 18: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his
mother Mary was espoused to Joseph..." There's Old English--espoused. How many
of you know what a "spouse" is? You do? Well, then, obviously, she's engaged
to be married. She "...was espoused to Joseph." Now, watch it: "...before they
came together..." There isn't any doubt about the virgin birth. The Lord says,
"Before they came together." There isn't any question about it. If somebody
questioned it, it's because he can't read. It is "...before they came
together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost."

     "Then Joseph her husband." Now, notice how a Jewish man is called a
woman's husband some time even before they came together. That is, once the
"espouse" was made, and he agrees with the father to marry, then sometimes
he's called her husband even before they come together. That's a Jewish thing,
and that's an Old Testament thing. "Then Joseph her husband, being a just
[man], and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her
away privily." Old English. What does it mean? Privily? Why, sure! You can
figure that old. Some people! I mean, this is such a tough book to understand.
Obviously it means "privately." I mean, that's what it is. And folks use the
word now for a different kind of thing, talking about a "privy." When they say
"privy," they mean a place off that's quiet and private, see? That's the same
thing.

     I don't know why they call an Army private "private." There's nothing
private about his life at all! I never could figure that out!

     "Minded to put her away privily." That is, secretly. And, of course, he
does that according to law. Come to Deuteronomy 22. We'll have to close here
for tonight. Deuteronomy 22. The law here is in Deuteronomy 22, beginning at
verse 13: "If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,  And give
occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say,
I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:  Then shall
the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth [the tokens of]
the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:..." a gross
thing "...And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my
daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;  And, lo, he hath given
occasions of speech [against her], saying, I found not thy daughter a maid;
and yet these [are the tokens of] my daughter's virginity. And they shall
spread the cloth before the elders of the city.  And the elders of that city
shall take that man and chastise him;  And they shall amerce him in an hundred
[shekels] of silver, and give [them] unto the father of the damsel, because he
hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his
wife; he may not put her away all his days.  But if this thing be true, [and
the tokens of] virginity be not found for the damsel:  Then they shall bring
out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city
shall stone her with stones."

     So Joseph had two options. He can privately get his divorce papers, on
the ground that she stepped out on him--Deuteronomy chapter 24, fornication,
grounds of divorce. He could do that privately. Or he could bring her out in
public and have her stoned to death, according to the law.

     "And...being a just man, not willing to make her a publick example." See?
He's not going to have her stoned; he decides to get a bill of divorcement on
the side.

     Verse 20: "But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the
Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not
to take unto thee Mary thy wife:..." considered already done, according to
Deuteronomy 22:24 "...Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of
the Holy Ghost."

     All right, we'll stop there at verse 20. Any questions?

     QUESTION: "Would that mean that Jesus actually appeared to Joseph before
Jesus was born, telling him that Jesus was inside of Mary?"

     ANSWER: Yes, in the sense of the angel of the Lord, yes.

     "Wow, that's wild, I can't fathom that!"

     Yeah, I can't either. The reason why that's wild is God, being who He is,
can manifest Himself a number of different ways at a number of different
times. A good example is in the Book of Revelation, there's a Lamb before the
throne as slain, one. And he goes up to the Person on the throne and takes the
book out of his hand, two.

     A good example is Paul on the ship, Acts 27. The Lord is in him. And that
night the Lord appears outside him and says, "God's given you and all these in
the ship."

     A good example is the Lord is in the water. And the Holy Spirit comes
down on Him, and the Father in Heaven says, "This is my beloved Son." He's
three different places at the same time.

     QUESTION: "Can you give a verse on God dealing with three generations?"

     ANSWER: All right, Exodus chapter 20. It had to do with idolaters
specifically. Exodus chapter 20, verse 5. Exodus 20, verse 5.

     All right, dasis allis guten nacht!

     All right, Matthew chapter 1, we're down to verse 12. I pointed out last
time how there are three kings missing from this list following Ahaziah. And
Ahaziah is Jehoram's son. So, when you get down to verse 8, it goes Jehoram to
Uzziah. And there are three kings missing in that line. Then it goes on to
verse 9: "And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat..." Ahaz--Achaz, it's
called "...and Achaz begat Ezekias;..." "Ezekias" here is Hezekiah in the Old
Testament "And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat
Josias;  And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were
carried away to Babylon:  And after they were brought to Babylon,..." So the
genealogy goes on to the kingly line through Babylon, and the only record of
this line is a Bible. Did you ever stop to think about it? The only record of
the throne of Judah, of the kingly line to their King, the Gentiles have the
only copy. Because the Jew doesn't believe the New Testament. So a Jew doesn't
have the Book of Matthew. So a Jew doesn't know what happens to his line after
the captivity. The only person who knows is a Gentile.

     The Lord sure mess 'em up, boy, He'll mess you up good!

     So, here in the New Testament, is the genealogy of a throne, and the only
people who have it are the Gentiles. The Jew rejects it; so he doesn't know
where it goes after it goes there. It's just gone.

     All right, so the line goes on, Salathiel, verse 12: "Salathiel begat
Zorobabel; And Zorobabel begat Abiud;..." And down to Zerubbabel, this line
matches Mary's line. Now, Mary's line in Luke chapter 3, when it comes off
verse 6, look at verse 6: David begets Solomon, down comes the line. In Mary's
line, David begat Nathan. And Mary's line comes down from Nathan. But they
cross again at verses 12 and 13. And in 12 and 13, Mary's line crosses with
Joseph's line, with Salathiel and Zerubbabel. Then they separate again. Verse
13: "Zerobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;
And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;  And Eliud
begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;  And Jacob
begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called
Christ. So all the generations from Abraham to David [are] fourteen
generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon [are]
fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ
[are] fourteen generations."

     So,...that is, so, according to what he listed. So, what he listed is
fourteen, fourteen, fourteen. Now, he left out three generations on purpose.
So, it goes to show you that God doesn't always count a generation like we
count a generation. Fourteen, fourteen, and fourteen. Now, if you take that
time span and run it, Abraham, and make his time about 2000 b.c., and then run
fourteen, fourteen, fourteen, you'll find out how many years are in a
generation. Because three times fourteen is 42. And, you take 42 and divide it
into 2000, and that'll give you the number of years in a generation. 

     Now, the reason why that's interesting is because Christ says in Matthew,
"This generation shall not pass away until all be fulfilled." So, if you
divide 2000--but then again, maybe Abraham's birthday is 1900. I've seen them
vary on it. But that would give you the number of years in a generation.

     Verse 18: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise." That is, it
was like this. "When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph,..." we talked
about this last time "...before they came together,..." we mentioned it last
time "...she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." The virgin birth. "Then
Joseph her husband,..." Old Testament sometimes called husbands when they're
engaged, before they come together "...being a just [man], and not willing to
make her a publick example,..." he could have had her stoned "...was minded to
put her away privily." She's guilty of fornication, and fornication is grounds
for divorce. So he has the perfect right to put her away. And he's thinking
about doing that.

     "But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord
appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to
take unto thee Mary thy wife." Now, why that's so interesting, it shows the
Lord can appear to people in dreams and speak to them before the Scriptures
are written.

     The Lord told Aaron and Miriam when they rose up against Moses, "I can to
a prophet in a dream." When Abimelech took Abraham's wife, the Lord appeared
to him in a dream. When Pharaoh took Abraham's wife, the Lord appeared to him
in a dream. When Lot got in trouble, two angels showed up.

     Now, that shows you, when God wants to reveal Himself, He's got all kinds
of ways of doing it. And He'll never reveal Himself contrary to Scripture;
He'll never say anything in a dream contrary to Scripture. If you have a dream
that's contrary to Scripture, the Lord is not the author of it. But it goes to
show you, the Lord's hands are not as bound tight as some people think they
are.

     I mean, if there's somebody over in Russia who is under conviction,
wanting to get saved, there's nothing to prevent the Lord from revealing
Himself to them in a number of different ways. And people forget that.

     Billy Graham went over there. When he saw that place, he said, "Well..."
he kind of partially hinted that there's other ways to get to Heaven besides
accepting New Testament salvation. Because, since these people didn't have a
New Testament, there must be some other way for them. There's no other way.
Jesus Christ is the way. He was just discouraged when he got over there, and
didn't have enough guts to get into a political battle--which he would have
gotten into if he had told the whole truth. And so he just didn't tell the
whole truth.

     The Lord has all kinds of ways of dealing with people. And, before the
Old Testament was written, He revealed Himself in all kinds of ways. Job's out
there in the wilderness. And Job is out there, and he says, "I have esteemed
the words of His mouth more than my necessary food." And Job had nothing to
even look at. Job said, "I have esteemed the words of His mouth more than my
necessary food." And he didn't have anything yet on paper. Whoever wrote Job
wrote Job before Moses was born. And Moses wrote Genesis.

     So, you have to be careful of those kind of things. If a man is following
his conscience like Cornelius, an angel shows up to him in a dream and tells
ol' Cornelius, "Go send for Simon Peter." The Lord's not bound. Now, He's
bound not to contradict this. I'll grant you that. And He's bound not to
reveal anything contrary to this. And He's bound to use this, and "faith
cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." But, don't you worry. When
a man wants to do right, the Lord will find a way to get the message to him.
Man's trouble is, man doesn't want to do right.

     All right, verse 20: "But while he thought on these things, behold, the
angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of
David,..." Notice, Joseph is called the son of David. My goodness, man, after
eighteen generations--no, twenty-eight generations!--he's the "son of David"!
He's a great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-
great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-
great-great son of David. So, the Bible will call a man a son who's a great-
great-great-great-great-great--28 times--grandson."

     Verse 20: "Thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife."
Called his wife according to Deuteronomy 22:24, whereas they are espoused or
engaged to be married, they're just as good as married. As a matter of fact,
if the fellow breaks the engagement, he has to pay the dowry of virgins, and
the girl's father can get him in all kinds of hot water. The law for that in
America was called "breach of promise." And the law no longer exists. You
can't sue anybody for breach of promise any more. The laws of marriage and
divorce in America are so limber these days, that you can promise someone to
get married to them and not have anything to do about it, and when you get
married, on the next day, if you don't like each other, you can go your
separate ways. Nothing anybody can do about that, either. It's all mixed up.

     Verse 21, a great verse: "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt
call his name JESUS." All right, the word "Jesus" means "Jehovah saves."
Jehovah saves. And the Old Testament spelling is "Joshua." And sometimes
"Jehoshua." And sometimes, like "Joash." And sometimes "Jeosh," "Jeoshua."
Anything that begins with "Ja" or "Je" and has "o-a-s" in it is a form of that
term. And the word means "Jehovah saves."

     So the Lord Jesus Christ is Jehovah coming down to save people. "And she
shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS." "Thou." Joseph
names the baby. "Thou"--Joseph--"shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save
his people from their sins." "His people" in that context is who? It's the
Jews. In that context there it's His people, the Jews--save His people from
their sins--which He does, but of course they reject Him at the time.

     Now turn to Isaiah 49:1, and in Isaiah 49:1 notice the Lord Jesus Christ,
one of the few men in the Bible, who is named before He's born. Cyrus is named
before he's born; Isaac is named before he's born; and Jesus Christ is named
before He's born. Isaiah 49:1. I think John the Baptist is named before he is
born. They're getting ready to name him, and his father says, "No, his name's
gonna be this." He was told what his name would be before he was born.

     Isaiah 49:1: "Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far;
The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he
made mention of my name." That's Jesus Christ talking about Himself in that
passage.

     All right, Matthew chapter 1 verse 21: "And she shall bring forth a son,
and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their
sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of
the Lord by the prophet, saying,..." and he's quoting Isaiah 7:14 "...Behold,
a virgin shall be with child." Now I don't have a blackboard here to work on,
and you need to see this thing on your Greek word here. Your Greek word here
is "parthenos." If you want to spell it out in English, write down "par."
"Parthenos." "A virgin." "Parthenos" shall be with child.

     Now, "parthenos" in Greek literature always means "virgin." It never
means "young woman." It never means "unmarried woman." It never means
"unmarried young woman." It always means "virgin."

     The "Parthenon." The Parthenon is the name of a building in Greece where
the Vestal Virgins carried on the services.

     Now, I say that because the quotation is from Isaiah. Verse 22: "was
spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying." Now, when you get to Isaiah 7:14,
it says, "Behold, a virgin shall conceive." That word for "virgin" is in
Hebrew. If you want down the Hebrew in English, the word is "almah." "Almah."
"Almah." "Almah."

     Now, in some of the new bibles, when they got to Isaiah 7, they wrote
down, "Behold, a young woman shall conceive." And the alibi was that "almah"
could be "young woman." Well, if "almah" could have been "young woman," it
wasn't. Why? Because when Matthew quoted it, he said "parthenos." When Matthew
quoted Isaiah, Matthew said what Isaiah said was, "virgin." Now the word
"almah" can mean "virgin" or "young woman." There's a case where your King
James English would tell the Hebrew translator how to translate. Nothing like
an English Bible to straighten out the Hebrew manuscripts. The Hebrew came
through there and said, "Now what is this 'almah'? Is it 'virgin' or not?" All
he had to do was turn to Matthew--in a King James--and he'd know how to
translate it.

     Now, "almah" means "virgin." So, when you graduate from some college,
they call that your "alma mater." And "mater" is "mayter," "mooter." And your
"mooter," "mayter," "mater" is your mother.

     So every college graduate in America has a virgin mother. Whew! How's
that?

     You talk about influence of the Catholic church, man! Have you ever been
told, "I'm going back to my old alma mater"? They're saying, "I'm going back
to my old virgin mother!" That's all that stuff is.

     All right, Matthew chapter 1 verse 23: "Behold, a virgin." If there's any
question about what it meant, the Bible tells you what it meant. "A virgin
shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his
name"--second name--"Emmanuel." Then He has two names before He is born. One
is given to Him, and one is prophesied. "His name shall be called Emmanuel,
which means, God with us." The "el" is the abbreviation for "elohim."
"Elohim." "Emmanuel" means "with us is God." "God with us." So He has two
names.

     Now, if you want something interesting some time, you go through a
concordance and figure out all His names. I've got a list of them somewhere.
There has never a lived a man on this earth who has had so many names as the
Lord Jesus Christ. And He's called Emmanuel; He's called the Son of David;
He's called the King of Israel; He's called the King of the Jews; He's called
the King of kings; He's called the Almighty; He's called the Lord; He's called
the Lord God; He's called God; He's called the Lord of hosts; He's called the
Bread of life; He's called the Water of life; He's called the Shepherd; He's
called the Door; He's called the I AM; He's called the Alpha, the Omega, the
Rose of Sharon, the Lily of the valley, the Seed of David, all that stuff, the
Bread of life--just on and on and on and on.

     "Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God." God! "God with us." Jesus
Christ is Jehovah God manifest in the flesh. So every bible that changes 1
Timothy 3:16 is a satanic bible; I don't care who published it. These jerks!
They think they can live like the devil on the basis of their reputations!
They're crazy enough to think, "If I don't drink and don't smoke and don't
dance and don't spit and live in a dormitory with a hall monitor and have got
a barbed wire fence outside, and don't put my money in a modernistic
collection plate, I am equipped to pervert the word of God!"

     Well, that stuff is just flesh! That's just as much flesh as if you go
out there and roll around in a hog wallow.

     I was going through Atlanta one time and saw an advertisement there, me
and a preacher were driving around and it said, "Nude women wrestling in the
mud tonight!" What a thing, man! In America, in America, watching a bunch of
nude women wrestling in the mud. What a thing, man! I mean, I mean, that's so
gross, man, I don't see how anybody can get anything out of that, man! A bunch
of nude woman--think of two nude women wrestling in mud, man! What a thing,
man!

     I went by that, and I thought to myself, "A sow that was washed has
returned to her wallowing in the mire." It's all I could think of, you know. A
gross thing!

     Well, now, you say, "What is that?" That's flesh! See? Well, now, that
business of thinking that "I am so equipped that I can alter the word of God"--
that's flesh! I mean, you don't have to be in a hog wallowing contest in a
beer joint to indulge in the flesh. That desire in itself is fleshy. The flesh
in a scholar might not appreciate nude women wallowing in the mud, but I'll
guarantee you the flesh in the scholar enjoys putting itself up as the final
authority and having people say, "My, isn't he brilliant!" See? It's the same
stuff.

     All right, 24: "Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of
the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till..."
implying he did later "...and knew her not till she had brought forth her
firstborn son." Her firstborn! Implying what? Others.

     So you have the only Bible on the market that has the word "firstborn" in
it. The rest of them all took it out.

     Isn't it a strange business? A strange business. All these "good, godly,
dedicated" men. "Well, Billy Graham told me it was a great bible. Well, So-and-
So graduated from Tennessee Temple with a master's degree, and they said it
was reliable." Isn't it a strange thing? You know, you got to be hardheaded,
you got have a brow like brass to beat your way through to the truth these
days, you know that?

     One time a fellow said he wanted to get the truth, and a philosopher took
him down to the river, and took him out there and held him underwater and
said, "I'll show you how to get it," and held him underwater. And the guy
liked to drowned! And about the time he was, you know, scratching at the guy's
wrist to blood, trying to get him to let go of his head to get him out of the
water because he was turning purple, the philosopher let him up.

     And the guy said, "You fool! You crazy fool! What are you trying to do?
Kill me?"

     And the philosopher said, "No." He said, "I'm trying to teach you a
lesson." "When," he said, "you want truth as bad as you wanted air just then,
you'll find it."

     A lot of truth in that, brother!

     Now, you know what Americans think? They think truth is just hanging on a
fruit tree about to drop off into your mouth if you wink at it. Well, I got
news for you--it ain't! It ain't! The truth is hard to come by these days.
It's hard to come by. If you're going to find the way to truth, you're going
to have to batter your way through some friends and relatives. Now, some of
you know that. Some of those boys are going to get out of the service, and
about the time they get out of the service, they're going to say, "You got a
G.I. bill down there?"

     And we're gonna say, "No." 

     And they're gonna "suddenly get a strange leading of the Spirit" to go
someplace else!

     And, now, listen, I sympathize with you, see, and I understand the
problem, and all this and that. But it's just tragic today. The thing has
gotten to where, if you're gonna get the plain truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, you're gonna have to go someplace where you're gonna
get this, and all of this, and nothing but this. Because this is the truth.
And the first thing you're going to find out, is that it's going to be awful
hard to find a place like that, where it's all just laid out for you. You may
have to sweat a little blood and tears before you get through.

     All right, 25: "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn
son: and he called his name JESUS." Now you should know--and it will come upon
a quiz--that verse 25 has been messed with in every bible on the market. The
word "firstborn" has been eliminated from all the new bibles, because they are
protecting the perpetual virginity of Mary. Of course, they're all "good,
godly, dedicated" fellows. It's a strange business.

     I wonder how come they don't think I'm godly? I don't drink. I don't
dance. I don't smoke. I don't shoot craps, you know. I don't even have a
television set. Some of them have television sets. Isn't it strange? I mean,
I'm true to my wife; I don't step out on her. I pay my bills when they're due.
I don't support any modernists. I don't even support people who fool with
ASVs. I wonder how come I'm not godly? What do I have to do to qualify to be
godly? I guess you gotta be crooked to be godly! You say, "You got to
witness." I witness; pass out tracts; pray; you know, give above my tithe, win
people to the Lord. I wonder how come, what do you got to do to get into the
clique, huh?

     All right, Matthew 2. Matthew 2. Don't worry; I ain't gonna try to get in
it. I get my suspicions about it, I'll tell you. I was a man 27 years before I
was a preacher. And I'm real dumb about a lot of things, but I can smell a con
man 500 miles upwind, brother. I mean, if you're a nice person--and some of
you are, and thank God you are--but if you're a nice person, and you're
wondering why I'm kinda hard to get to know, it's because I'm suspicious of
nice people! Heh! If you really want to know. I mean, some of you are genuine.
I know that, and thank God you are. But when a fellow comes to be and says, "I
sure am glad to meet you, Brother Ruckman. It's such a blessing to be here." I
just immediately kind of, you know, kind of, "look out, here comes the
shieve," you know! And, of course, it's partly my fault, it's partly my fault
for being defensive. But, I guess if you're raised in a military family and
came up where I came, you know, and just out in the street, you are looking
for a shot in the back or a rock to drop on your head or something, you know.
When I eat in a cafeteria, I eat with my back to the wall. I don't like to sit
with a door behind me or a window. You go in my office there, and you'll find
that the chair in that desk is in the corner. Brother McGaughey's is more out
in the open, and out in the room someplace. That shows you something about the
character and personality. Uh, I never had anybody jump me since I've been
saved, you know. But I've been expecting it any minute. And, if I get, if
somebody jumps me when I'm out on one of these trips, they're liable to get a
surprise, because I'm ready to jump back at a moment's notice. And it'll
probably never happen; I hope it doesn't. I mean, I don't want to get in a
fistfight, you know, and kick somebody's teeth out--I don't want to get in
that kind of thing. But it's just the way you're raised. Sometime my wife put
her hand upon my shoulder, and I'll go like that, you know. And she'll say,
"What's that?" Nothing, just reflex, you know.

     Brother Davis, he'll know something about these kinds of things. I mean,
uh, for years and years, I was teaching those fellows how to bayonet, and I'd
take the scabbard off it, and make 'em rush with the bare bayonet, you know,
and say, "Stick me!" "Stick me, you blankety-blank, you couldn't stick the
broadside of a barn, you blank..." you know, cuss at them, get them mad, make
them come at you.

     And, you know, some of them would get smart. They wouldn't come at you
swiftly, they'd chance, you know, and work on you a while. You had to commit
yourself somewhere. You'd back off for awhile, but you couldn't back off
forever. I mean, I've got 200 men watching me. I mean, when you committed
yourself, you had to commit yourself quick. I mean, quick like Jack the
rabbit, boy,  you had to move! And the reflexes had to be so that...

     I remember one time, I tangled with a Malay G.I. over in the Philippines
one time. He was about six feet, as black as the ace of spades. And he was out
there, and he said, "That's not the way they do it in combat, Lieutenant!"

     And I gave him the rifle, and I said, "OK, son, show us how they do it."

     So he got up there, and he came at that thing, and he came in there, and
he knew what he was doing. I mean, he turned the bayonet over on the side, you
see. That's what the Marines do. They do it so if you pry the bayonet you cut
your hand, and you go between the reds better that way, and it doesn't stick.
And so he came in that, you know, came around with that thing. And I backed
off maybe, oh, eight or nine seconds, and then I had to commit myself. And I
committed myself, and stepped in, and he slashed, and I got by the slash and
got the barrel of the gun instead of the bayonet. The new one's are not too
long. And when I did, his reflexes worked, see, and he just let go of the gun.
He's not going to take a chance of breaking the fingers on over his shoulder;
he was going to let go and slug me. And my reflexes were, can I duck the slug,
and got under it and tripped him. And his reflexes were, can he through me
while I tripped him. My reflexes were...

     And when you get one of those things--ka blew blew ka blew blew blew ka
blew!--like that, man, you don't know what in the world's going on, man! I
mean, those things just have to be, they're faster than sight, man, you can't
follow them. And I finally, after about, oh, you know, as many moves as it
takes to make in ten minutes were done in about three seconds. And I kicked
him in the face and got loose from him and got his rifle, and he dropped, and
raised that thing over my head. And I was going to beat his brains with that
thing. And over my head I had the butt end like that at his face. And I was
going to knock his teeth out. I mean, in those few quick movements, there were
several movements there that weren't exactly with the best intentions, let's
put it that way!

     And about that time that fellow raised his hand and he said, "That's
enough, Lieutenant. That's enough, Lieutenant." It stopped, you see.

     I got called in before the C.O. and just got chewed out and reamed and
called everything but white. "What are you doing, rolling around there in the
ground, you know, with an enlisted man, blam, blam, blam, blam--"

     And I told that colonel, I said, "Why, I couldn't--you can't lose face
out in front of that bunch. Two hundred Filipinos out there watching you? What
you talking about? Boy, you lose your shirt out there, you'll never command
them again. Orientals--they don't take that kind of stuff."

     Well, then you take--I never got anywhere with him. Lost my promotion
that year. But I lost it before, so it was nothing.

     And you take that kind of business right there. When you get that stuff,
I guess that stuff gets ingrained in you after awhile to where, after awhile,
you just, people just make you jumpy. Now, I know none of you are going to
climb me and stick me with a bayonet, see, and stab me in the back. But it
sticks with you. So I'm suspicious.

     Now, how'd that get in that text? Oh, yeah. I was going to say this. I'm
never going to join the Scholar's Union because I'm suspicious of them. I
think they'll jump you on the back and stab you, is what I think. If I think
they won't do that, I think they'll do it to the Bible.

(c) 1997 Peter S. Ruckman

