Jump to content
Online Baptist Community
  • Newest Sermon Entry

    • By 1Timothy115 in Devotionals
         11
      Psalms 119:1-8                                         Sep. 5 - Oct. 2, 2019
      1 ALEPH. Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD.
      2 Blessed are they that keep his testimonies, and that seek him with the whole heart.
      3 They also do no iniquity: they walk in his ways.
      4 Thou hast commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently.
      5 O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes!
      6 Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments.
      7 I will praise thee with uprightness of heart, when I shall have learned thy righteous judgments.
      8 I will keep thy statutes: O forsake me not utterly.
      The following verse stood out to me...
      5 O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes!
      At first glance it seemed to me this person’s soul is poured out with intense desire to have God’s direction in keeping His Word.
      I made a small wood fire in our backyard for my granddaughter, Julia, since she would be staying overnight with us. My wife and Julia stayed outside at the fire for about half an hour. Then, I found myself alone to watch the fire die out on a particularly lovely evening. So I took my verse from above and began to repeat it for memorization. As I repeated the verse, I tried to contemplate the words and apply them to what I was seeing around me. 
      The moon and stars were out now peering through the scattered clouds above.
      [Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. Genesis 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, Genesis 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.]
      Thought 1         
      The moon has stayed his course since the day God created him, also the stars, obeying the statutes directed by God from the first day they were created. Can you imagine God’s direction to the Moon and stars, “moon you will have a path through the sky above the earth, stars you will occupy the firmament above the moon and be clearly visible in the cloudless night sky.”
      Then, the trees, grass, even the air we breathe obey the statues God gave them from the beginning. None of these creations have souls, none have hearts, none have intelligence, but they all observe God’s statutes, His instructions for their limited time on earth.
      Thought 2
      What if we were like the moon, stars, trees, grass, or the other creations which have no soul? We would be directed to keep God’s statutes without choosing to keep them. This is not the image of God, there would be no dominion over other creatures, or over the earth. We would not be capable of experiencing the joy and peace of learning the love of God
      Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
      Philippians 4:7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.
      Thought 3 (October 2, 2019)
      Is the psalmist pleading God to force God’s statutes to become the man’s ways? No, he is speaking of his own failure in keeping God’s statutes and his desire to keep them, very much like Paul in Romans 7:14-25.
      God doesn’t work through force to turn men from their ways that they would desire His statutes or desire God Himself. Men must reject (repent) put aside his own ways and voluntarily seek God and His statutes.

The Gap theory GARBAGE

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

In the world of make believe evolutionary science, each year the earth ages 21 million years to satisfy the fickle minds of the evolutionists.

Anyone can fossilize an object in a 5 gallon bucket within a matter of months.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

It's interesting, over the last month, I think, I have read three articles on items found encased in amber. A fact about amber-no one has any idea how long it take for sap to become amber, yet they are always assumed to be millions of years old.  So we have first, lizards found in amber, http://www.livescience.com/53948-lizards-trapped-in-ancient-amber.html ; then a bird's wing, http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/bird-wings-dating-back-age-dinosaurs-found-frozen-amber-180959599/?no-ist , then a spider, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/07/new-spider-species-cretaceous-burmese-amber-extreme-projection-horned-fangs/ .

If you read the articles, you'll find some interesting 'facts': like, ALL of them are dated at 99 million years. Not 100 million, but 99, each one. None of the articles give any indication as to how they came to this conclusion-how does one date amber? And since no one knows how long it takes to become amber, are they really particularly old at all? While much is said about, say the bird feathers and the bird they BELIEVE they came from, they don't know-it's all weasel words, "Might have", and "It is believed" or 'It is thought". But they don't know. And there is nothing about these critters that says they are anything different than a bird, or spider or lizard around today. So they could be ten years old, 50, 100. But always "99 mmmmmiiiiiiillion years old".  Also, they are referred to as fossils or mummified, neither of which is possible in something encased in amber-'preserved' would be the proper term, but these science journals and websites seem to have a hard time even with the basic terminology.

Evolutionary science is so severely flawed it is scary. Scary that anyone accepts it. I am temped to find a tree with some good sap, put a bug in it, and keep it to see how long it takes to become amber, maybe sell it and get into the science magazines. I am already trying to see if I can fossilize a goat-had a goats die about ten years ago-right after it did, I dug a nice deep hole, filled it with water, put in the goat and covered him with mud, then dirt. We have a lot of minerals in our soil, so in a few years I may dig him up and see if we have manages to fossils anything on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 hours ago, swathdiver said:

In the world of make believe evolutionary science, each year the earth ages 21 million years to satisfy the fickle minds of the evolutionists.

Anyone can fossilize an object in a 5 gallon bucket within a matter of months.  

I'm always looking for little science projects to do with my grandson; can you tell me how to do that?

1 hour ago, Ukulelemike said:

It's interesting, over the last month, I think, I have read three articles on items found encased in amber. A fact about amber-no one has any idea how long it take for sap to become amber, yet they are always assumed to be millions of years old.  So we have first, lizards found in amber, http://www.livescience.com/53948-lizards-trapped-in-ancient-amber.html ; then a bird's wing, http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/bird-wings-dating-back-age-dinosaurs-found-frozen-amber-180959599/?no-ist , then a spider, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/07/new-spider-species-cretaceous-burmese-amber-extreme-projection-horned-fangs/ .

If you read the articles, you'll find some interesting 'facts': like, ALL of them are dated at 99 million years. Not 100 million, but 99, each one. None of the articles give any indication as to how they came to this conclusion-how does one date amber? And since no one knows how long it takes to become amber, are they really particularly old at all? While much is said about, say the bird feathers and the bird they BELIEVE they came from, they don't know-it's all weasel words, "Might have", and "It is believed" or 'It is thought". But they don't know. And there is nothing about these critters that says they are anything different than a bird, or spider or lizard around today. So they could be ten years old, 50, 100. But always "99 mmmmmiiiiiiillion years old".  Also, they are referred to as fossils or mummified, neither of which is possible in something encased in amber-'preserved' would be the proper term, but these science journals and websites seem to have a hard time even with the basic terminology.

Evolutionary science is so severely flawed it is scary. Scary that anyone accepts it. I am temped to find a tree with some good sap, put a bug in it, and keep it to see how long it takes to become amber, maybe sell it and get into the science magazines. I am already trying to see if I can fossilize a goat-had a goats die about ten years ago-right after it did, I dug a nice deep hole, filled it with water, put in the goat and covered him with mud, then dirt. We have a lot of minerals in our soil, so in a few years I may dig him up and see if we have manages to fossils anything on him.

Poor goat :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
5 hours ago, heartstrings said:

I'm always looking for little science projects to do with my grandson; can you tell me how to do that?

Poor goat :(

You know, in your business, as well as me, that it happens sometimes, just an unfortunate side-effect of keeping livestock.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
8 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

You know, in your business, as well as me, that it happens sometimes, just an unfortunate side-effect of keeping livestock.

 

Yeah, I was just goofing off.  Carry on, bury them deep. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Not going to say much on this topic.  Scofield and Larkin (both baptists) taught the gap as well.  
Here is the thing.  OK, so somebody teaches the Gap.  I guess I am not seeing it as a "problem" if you are for or against it.  I don't see how it affects the doctrine on anything else.  I don't see how it affects the OT Law, or how it affects the NT church.  It is one of those things that is debatable (to some at least!).  If you don't agree with it, fine.  To me, it is something worth discussing and debating, but it is certainly not something worth dividing over.  It has little to no effect on our core doctrines.

That's all I will say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
1 hour ago, Steve Schwenke said:

Not going to say much on this topic.  Scofield and Larkin (both baptists) taught the gap as well.  
Here is the thing.  OK, so somebody teaches the Gap.  I guess I am not seeing it as a "problem" if you are for or against it.  I don't see how it affects the doctrine on anything else.  I don't see how it affects the OT Law, or how it affects the NT church.  It is one of those things that is debatable (to some at least!).  If you don't agree with it, fine.  To me, it is something worth discussing and debating, but it is certainly not something worth dividing over.  It has little to no effect on our core doctrines.

That's all I will say.

I don't know that I can agree with you here-I think it DOES effect a lot of doctrine. For instance, how could God look at His entire creation, all He had created and made, and declare it all very good, if part of that creation had already fallen into sin, rebellion and destruction? Remember, part of the gap theory is that Day 1 is before the gap, the rest is after it, so all that God has made before and during that gap period HAD to be included in the context of ALL that God had created and made. So then God is saying that Satan, now Lucifer, is good, the fallen angels, good, all the death underneath the renewed earth, all good. I cannot buy that.

It also completely skews the idea of the clearly literal six-day creation, if in the middle of it, there were millions of years of days. Throughout the Bible, God declares that He created the earth and heavens in 6 days-that means all the heavens He created on day 1 as well, that the Gap folks say was just obscured and revealed on day 4.

Not to mention that it includes death before Adam, despite the fact the Bible says clearly that man brought sin, and death by sin-the clear reference is toward Adam's sin, not Lucifer's sin. Lucifer convinced man to sin, but death didn't come until Adam had sinned. So all that death during the gap could not have occurred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Mike, I am not going to debate you on the gap.  The point I was trying to make was this.  All of your objections have been noted.  But do the people who are teaching the gap teaching the things you are objecting to?  If they are not teaching the things you are objecting to, then the doctrine has NOT been affected.
I do not know any IFB's who believe the Gap to teach anything about evolution, or deny the 6 literal days of creation as listed in Genesis 1.  They simply move it as a re-creation.  the time element before the Gap is completely irrelevant to the pro-gappers.  
In short, your objections are based on things that are NOT being taught by the pro-gappers - at least not by the IFB version of it.  
They still believe in the distinction between Israel, the church, the OT, the NT, the sufficiency of the Cross, the Blood of Christ, Heaven, Hell, New Heaven, New Earth, etc. etc. etc.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Holding fast to the errors of the Gap Theory piles on other errors as well.  Such is the way of most protestant churches these days.  in a great many cases, when they hold to the Gap, they then get the Lord's Supper and Baptism wrong, they then believe in the universal, invisible church, divorced pastors and the list of heresies goes on and on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Do you know any pastor who has every single doctrine and preference 100% correct?
I don't.  

NOBODY has EVERYTHING correct.  We are all still sinners, and we are all prone to error.  
Oliver Greene taught the gap. 
John R. Rice endorsed the NASB.  
John R. Rice's reference Bible was not a pure KJV.  
This is not to disparage either of those men, because they both did great good in their ministries!  But they were wrong on THOSE points.
So let's call a person out on their errors, and be edified by them where they are right.  
There are many people who teach the gap who have tremendous insight into Scripture on many points, and we can all be edified by them.  Why toss them out over the gap?  To me that is total nonsense.  

Now if it is the case as Mike made, then sure.  Or if they get off into "weirdology" fine.  But if the core of their teaching and preaching is in the main sound, good, and edifying, then I believe it is a bit reactionary to toss ALL pro-gappers out.  

So I think there is a distinction to be made between essential doctrine, and non-essential doctrine.  That is, doctrine that we cannot budge on at all, then other doctrines where we can respect each other where we don't agree.  

IMO, since the Gap does not affect major doctrine, I would classify it as non-essential.  

Do as you please!  I see no reason to divide over the issue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 hour ago, Steve Schwenke said:

Do you know any pastor who has every single doctrine and preference 100% correct?
I don't.  

NOBODY has EVERYTHING correct.  We are all still sinners, and we are all prone to error.  
Oliver Greene taught the gap. 
John R. Rice endorsed the NASB.  
John R. Rice's reference Bible was not a pure KJV.  
This is not to disparage either of those men, because they both did great good in their ministries!  But they were wrong on THOSE points.
So let's call a person out on their errors, and be edified by them where they are right.  
There are many people who teach the gap who have tremendous insight into Scripture on many points, and we can all be edified by them.  Why toss them out over the gap?  To me that is total nonsense.  

Now if it is the case as Mike made, then sure.  Or if they get off into "weirdology" fine.  But if the core of their teaching and preaching is in the main sound, good, and edifying, then I believe it is a bit reactionary to toss ALL pro-gappers out.  

So I think there is a distinction to be made between essential doctrine, and non-essential doctrine.  That is, doctrine that we cannot budge on at all, then other doctrines where we can respect each other where we don't agree.  

IMO, since the Gap does not affect major doctrine, I would classify it as non-essential.  

Do as you please!  I see no reason to divide over the issue.

 

If someone through a particular point of view denies the accuracy of the literal reading of the Word of God, are they not opening up the possibility for other parts of the bible to be questioned?

Is there not a danger in that should be considered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 hours ago, Steve Schwenke said:

Mike, I am not going to debate you on the gap.  The point I was trying to make was this.  All of your objections have been noted.  But do the people who are teaching the gap teaching the things you are objecting to?  If they are not teaching the things you are objecting to, then the doctrine has NOT been affected.
I do not know any IFB's who believe the Gap to teach anything about evolution, or deny the 6 literal days of creation as listed in Genesis 1.  They simply move it as a re-creation.  the time element before the Gap is completely irrelevant to the pro-gappers.  
In short, your objections are based on things that are NOT being taught by the pro-gappers - at least not by the IFB version of it.  
They still believe in the distinction between Israel, the church, the OT, the NT, the sufficiency of the Cross, the Blood of Christ, Heaven, Hell, New Heaven, New Earth, etc. etc. etc.

 

Mind you, Steve, I am not seeking to be hostile toward you-I understand what you're saying, I'm just saying that to hold to a gap, unless they are doing it seriously ignorantly, they MUST deny the very words of God.

. Ex 20:11-"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it"

Ex 31:17- "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed"

By these two verses it is clear that everything, including the heaven (before the gap, including all there was within them, both heaven, AND the earth) in six days. This cannot allow for anything else but those six days since days one and two have to be split by millions of years. The very foundation of time and how it is kept is based on six literal days. It also strives against the very concept of the origins of sin and death. Those are extremely serious things and they cannot be ignored by anyone who holds to a gap. That's all I'm saying-I believe it is very dangerous.

   
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Mike and Dave
i understand your objections.  However, those who hold to the gap - at least in the IFB world - do not deny a literal 6-day re-creation as listed in Genesis 3.  This comes down to a matter of interpretation.  They believe every word literally.   To say otherwise is disingenuous.  What you are saying is that if they don't agree with you, then they are not Biblical literalists.  This is not true.  If it were true, then we would be able to find major doctrinal problems across the board in their teachings.  If they were not Biblical literalists, then they not only take liberties in Genesis 1, they would also take liberties throughout the Bible.  They don't. 

There is no slippery slope here, so far as I can see.

Blessings!
 

In Christ,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
21 hours ago, swathdiver said:

divorced pastors

Hey, I believe ALL pastors should be divorced  -----------  divorced from self-will, divorced from popular opinion, and the list goes on and on and on....

 

Like I tell my kids sometimes -- I won't say that I couldn't help posting it, I could have but choose not to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Interesting.

I don't believe Lucifer was ever the name of the Devil. But the 'story' of Lucifer can only be proven through the so-called gap theory.

That is false teaching. And without it I know of no way someone can teach the Lucifer 'story', which happens to lift the Devil much higher than he should ever have been lifted, without believing in a gap.

Edited by Genevanpreacher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
5 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Interesting.

I don't believe Lucifer was ever the name of the Devil. But the 'story' of Lucifer can only be proven through the so-called gap theory.

That is false teaching. And without it I know of no way someone can teach the Lucifer 'story', which happens to lift the Devil much higher than he should ever have been lifted, without believing in a gap.

No Gap here GP:

 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! 

 Lu 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.

If we take God at his word it doesn't take any stretch of the imagination to see that Lucifer and Satan are one and the same. Nor does it require any Gap theory to clearly understand the plain teaching of Scripture.

The only difference we see is that his name was changed from Lucifer when his abode was heaven, to Satan when he was cast down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Actually Lucifer was the name of Venus back then. No connection to Satan at all.

Reading the context of those verses really brings about much more than the tradition commonly taught in Baptist circles. The power that someone got in making up 'prophecies' about the devil...Wow!

Don't know why preachers teach it as fact, that the devil was a 'good guy' before he was a bad angel, is way beyond me.

The Lord Jesus said he was a liar from the very beginning. How does that affect the story?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By HappyChristian
      I found this article very interesting. Since I help with Creation Club here, I receive emails from various creation groups. This one is headquartered in England. CMI - Creation Ministries International - has some interesting articles on creation, but this one kind of veers from that.  It is a sad read, chilling, really. But it is interesting...evolution causes folk to believe they are nothing special. And so why not kill or commit suicide or do drugs or on and on...This young man was such a one as to buy into that thought.  I'm quoting the whole article so that if someone can't open the link they can still read it.  (Credit goes to CMI)
       
       
      http://creation.com/will-cornick-murders-teacher
       
      The Boy Who's Proud to be a Killer 
      Will Cornick murders teacher in front of classmates in Leeds, England
      by Warren Nunn
       
      Incredibly instinctual and human....
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 13 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...