Monday, October 09, 2017

A GREAT LIE

THE GREAT LIE................
When you start buying into the theory of evolution, you open the door to say, “You don’t have to trust the Bible completely.”
This is a lie straight from the gates of hell because salvation is based on the Blood of Jesus Christ NOT rejecting Scientuifc discovery.    Evolution and old Earth evidence has NOTHING to do with God Crteating man in His Image AND the reality is that Science  proves beyond a shadow of doubt that the Creation revealed n Genesis is ABSOLUTE Trtuth......it is interpretation of processes that have caused the division and the TRUTH is ALL of the Bible is ABSOLUTE thruth. I suspect Fundamental young Earth believers fear Science because they fear God for the wrong reasons. The DANGER is that humanity has bought into pseudoscience which has allowed the evil new world order to supress real TRUTH and enslave mankind in total ignorance!
I suggest all readers check out Reasons.org

An article on old vs new.....you decide

Have you ever heard of the “Old Earth” theory
and the “Young Earth” theory?
The founder of Prophecy in the News, Dr. J.R. Church, was always a believer in what the Bible teaches about a 6-day creation and the “Young Earth” theory. He taught this without compromise and without apology.
When you start buying into the theory of evolution, you open the door to say, “You don’t have to trust the Bible completely.”
Evolution and the theory that the earth was formed in “millions of years” is the greatest myth ever forced on the minds of men.
The main reason for believing in the young earth is that the earth is young! The Bible tells us so, and the weight of the scientific evidence points to a young earth. John Morris, son of the famous Dr. Henry Morris, president of the Institute for Creation Research, states that “While the Bible may not specify a precise date for creation, it does indicate that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Similarly, while the geologic and physical evidence cannot give a precise age, all the evidence is compatible with the young-earth doctrine, with far greater evidence supporting a young earth than an old earth. There is much evidence incompatible with the old-earth idea.”
He goes on to say, “Furthermore, many biblical doctrines are based on the recency of creation and the corollary doctrine, the global flood. One cannot hold the old-earth position and believe that the flood was global, for if the flood was global, then the entire earth’s surface was altered. The flood would leave in its wake the rock and fossil record, which now is misinterpreted by geologists as evidence for an old earth. All Christians who knowledgeably advocate an “old earth” believe that the flood was only local. (A few still hold the bizarre notion that the flood was tranquil and did little geologic work. Imagine – a tranquil, worldwide flood!) The doctrinal absurdities which result from a local flood and old earth are well documented in creationist literature. The most serious fallacy involves the death of the vast majority of earth’s inhabitants before man appeared, and before he sinned and incurred the wages of sin. Astronomer Hugh Ross even proposes human-like animals who buried their dead, practiced religious ceremonies, painted pictures on cave walls, etc., but did not yet possess an eternal spirit. Death before sin implies that death is natural, not the penalty for sin. But if so, what good did the death of Jesus Christ accomplish? And what was the world like before the Fall? Old-earth advocates believe it was no different from our world – with death, disease, bloodshed, carnivorous activity, fossils. Belief in the old earth, with the implied concepts of death before sin, the world before Adam not really “very good,” an inconsequential Fall and Curse, a local flood, etc., destroys the foundation of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Some Christians do believe in both Christianity and the old earth, but this is inconsistent with their professed belief in the Bible.”
I have been reviewing a book for our Prophecy in the News bookstore titled, “Is The Big Bang Biblical? by John Morris. In his book he talks about the so-called “Gap Theory” in a chaptered titled, “Does Scripture Allow a Gap?”. He says the “Gap Theory” was proposed early in the 1800s, but which became popular around the turn of the century, and has very few scholarly advocates these days. However, many Christians do still hold to it, mostly by tradition, having never examined it closely. There have always been many scientific and theological problems with the idea of a long gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, but perhaps the “death” of the gap theory came with the 1978 publication of Dr. Weston W. Fields’s fine book, Unformed and Unfilled. In it, Fields specified the many biblical problems inherent in the concept and, with only a few exceptions, Bible scholars have now abandoned it. Some of the main arguments are briefly summarized below.
Gap advocates hold that only the surface of the earth was “created” during the six-day series of events detailed in Genesis 1:2 through 2:25. This creation followed a global holocaust brought on by the fall of Satan, which destroyed a supposed pre-Adamic world. But the all-summary statements of Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:11, and elsewhere, argue otherwise; “the heavens and the earth…all the host of them…all that is in them…all His work which God created and made,” seem better to refer to all of creation, not just the earth’s surface.
Some have claimed that in Exodus 20:11 the verb “to make” is used instead of “to create,” and, that, therefore, the summation is referring only to the earth’s surface, leaving the rock strata and the earth’s interior untouched. But in reality, while there is an important distinction between the words in Genesis 1, both are used in Genesis 2:2-3 and Nehemiah 9:6 to refer to all of creation; and are even used in synonymous parallelism in Genesis 2:4, Exodus 34:10, Isaiah 41:20, and Isaiah 43:7.
Another often-repeated claim is that Genesis 1:2 should read, “the earth became without form and void,” as supposed to the traditional understanding that when God first created the earth in verse 3, it “was without form (i.e., not yet inhabited).” The verb’s normal meaning, however, is simply “was,” and while it may be translated “become,” the context does not warrant it, and all accepted versions of the Bible was “was.”
Each verse in Genesis 1, except verse1, begins with the conjunction “and,” thereby connecting each verse sequentially to those before and after. There is no hint of the passing of millions or billions of years of time between verses 1 and 2.
Gap advocates frequently turn to other portions of Scripture for support, particularly those which use the word “without form” and “void” (Jer. 4:23, Isa. 24:1, and 45:18 are most important). In each case, the prophet refers to a wasted state due to the judgment of sin, thereby implying that Genesis 1:2 likewise implies a condition brought about by judgment. But in each case, the context regards the land of Israel, not the original earth. There is no justification for postulating long ages present in a supposed gap in Genesis.”
John Morris summarizes the chapter by saying… “The gap theory, as with all efforts to harmonize Genesis with the geologic ages, faces insurmountable problems on several fronts. How much better to take God at His Word and simply believe what He says.”