the Gap theory

[fayth]

do you guys believe in what the researchers are talking about that happened in between gen. 1-2
what is your thoughts on this.

[Carla]

Hi John,

Yes and No.. It is the Holy Spirit who brings people to conviction and repentence... If a heart is open, then great, perhaps they have the ears to hear, if it is a hard heart....then 'no'.. this is where discernment comes in.

[Mary O]

Hi Scribe,
God bless! I've heard of a gap theory between the verses Genesis 1:1-2. But if Fayth is talking about Genesis chaps. 6-8, there should be plenty of evidence. The word isn't quiet about the flood at all. Fayth said Genesis "1-2". In Genesis 1:2 the words tohu-bohu mean "empty and formless; chaos; utter confusion". In Genesis 1:1 God created the heavens and the earth. However, in verse (2) the earth is empty, formless, chaotic, and in utter confusion.

I still think there was a catastrophic event or events. As for the impact on the earth??? Maybe it was a large meteorite or comet. We have the fossil evidence of dinosaurs. It could have been a combination of events too. But it's a big jump to stuff it all betwen two bible verses.

The Creation Institute has a great article about the gap theory. They're not convinced.
http://www.icr.org/article/replenishing-earth/

Replenishing the Earth
by Henry Morris, Ph.D.
Download Replenishing the Earth PDF

Although the "gap theory" is not as popular as it used to be, there is still a significant body of Bible expositors who teach that this theory is the best way to deal with the alleged long ages of Earth history. For example, the Scofield Bible says in its note on Genesis 1:1:

The first creative act refers to the dateless past, and gives scope for all the geologic ages.

Then, its note on Genesis 1:2 says that the statement that the earth's initial aspect was "without form and void," means that ". . . the earth had undergone a cataclysmic change as the result of a divine judgment."

Finally, Scofield's note on Genesis 1:11, dealing with the geologic effects of this supposed pre-Adamic cataclysm, claims that this will solve the problem of the fossils. "Relegate fossils to the primitive creation, and no conflict of science with the Genesis cosmogony remains."

Dr. Scofield was wrong about that, of course, but his explanation was tremendously influential in his day — and still is with many people.

Another very influential writer was Clarence Larkin, whose 1920 book, Dispensational Truth, was widely promoted as "the greatest book in the world" on dispensationalism. With reference to the gap theory, he said in his book that:

The creation of the "Original Earth" was in the dateless past. It was doubtless a most beautiful earth, covered with vegetation and inhabited with fish and fowl and animal life, and probably with human life. How long it continued in this condition we are not told, but an awful catastrophe befell it — it became "FORMLESS AND VOID," and submerged in water and darkness. Gen. 1:2 (Dispensational Truth, p. 22).

Larkin goes on to suggest that the "human" inhabitants of that original creation died in the pre-Adamic cataclysm, with their disembodied spirits probably becoming the demons that plague the present world.

But then he comments on God's command to Adam and Eve to "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth" (Genesis 1:28) as follows:

In the words "replenish the earth" we have unmistakeable evidence that the earth had been peopled before it was thrown into a chaotic condition, and that its inhabitants in some way had been destroyed. (Ibid., p. 34).

Larkin, along with numerous other expositors, thus has taken God's presumed command to "replenish the earth" as proof that there were pre-Adamite beings of some sort in that original world. This idea seemed to allow for adequate time to accommodate the geological ages demanded by evolutionists.

But as it happens, "replenish the earth" was simply a misleading translation, though it was commonly taken as one of the main proof-texts of the gap theory. A better translation would have been simply "fill the earth," leaving no intimation that there had been a previous population of pre-Adamites destroyed in the assumed cataclysm.

Admittedly, "replenish" is a permissible translation of the Hebrew, mâlê. Both "fill" and "refill" are legitimate translations since the translators had a choice to make in translating God's mandate as given to Adam.

As a matter-of-fact, in the King James Old Testament, mâlê was translated "replenish" or "replenished" only seven times. In six of these instances, "replenish" was indeed a more appropriate rendering than "fill." The most obvious is at Genesis 9:1, in which God told Noah to "replenish the earth" after the Flood.

But what about God's previous command to Adam? Why did the translators decide to use "replenish" there when "fill" would seemingly have been more appropriate? Did these good men have some reason to think there just might have been a pre-Adamite population and therefore it would be on the safe side to use the alternate meaning "replenish"?

This question becomes more relevant when we note that they always elsewhere used "fill" or "filled" or "full" or some such variation except when it was obvious that "replenish" was a better choice.

It turns out that they translated mâlê by "fill" no less than 33 times, by "filled" at least 73 times, by "full" some 97 times, and even by "fulfill" or "fulfilled" at least 27 times.

So why did they not use "fill" instead of "replenish" in connection with the vitally important dominion mandate recorded in Genesis 1:28? That was the first time mâlê was used in the Bible, and it was surely important to get it right there! Did they actually have some reason to think they should at least allow the possibility of pre-Adamites in this beginning chapter of God's Book?

We cannot really probe into the thinking processes of men who lived almost 400 years ago, but it does seem possible that this could have been a concern. It was well-documented in my book, The Long War Against God, that the concepts of long ages and evolution have been vital components in the Satanic warfare against God since the very beginning.

But the King James period was a time of strong Biblical convictions as well as great scholarship among Christian leaders, and the 54 or so "learned men" whom the King appointed to produce an "authorized" translation of the Bible was surely the most capable and dedicated body of scholars ever to undertake such a task.

As most readers of my own books know, I have continued to use the King James Bible, although I do have many other English versions and refer to them from time to time. In spite of the occasional archaic expressions in the KJV, it is—in my judgment, at least—still the most reliably accurate English translation as a whole, as well as the most beautifully written and spiritually most powerful, of all the hundreds of versions that have been published.

The Bible was originally written in Hebrew and Greek, of course (some in Aramaic), and there had already been a great many translations into other languages, including many into English, well before the King James translation was commissioned. The original "autographs" (by Moses, Paul, etc.) have all disappeared, so now we only have copies of copies to study. Bible scholars have labored diligently to compare and evaluate these various hand-copied manuscripts to arrive as closely as possible to the original text. Although there are still a few unsettled questions, the general accuracy of the King James is quite secure.

Nevertheless, the King James translators, as competent and dedicated as they were, never claimed to be infallible in their translation. They could not help being influenced by their times.

They were all a part of the state church, for example, under the authority of the king. Their commission required them to adhere to the official ecclesiastical terminology of their connections. That is, they were told to use the word "church" instead of the probably more literal translation "congregation" and also simply to transliterate a certain Greek word, using "baptism" instead of its proper translation "washing" or "immersion." Thus, it seems reasonable to explain their use of "replenish" instead of "fill" in Genesis 1:28 by some such background influence. These men were not divinely inspired like Moses and Paul, but they were devoted and sincere Bible-believing Christian scholars, highly competent in what they were doing, earnestly desiring to honor God and His inerrant Word. They produced the version which has stood the test of 400 years of time, and been the Bible used to undergird the greatest missionary advance worldwide since the ministry of the apostles themselves. I still believe it is the best we have in English.

It may not be perfect, but it comes close. The few questionable translations, especially "replenish" in Genesis 1:28, can be noted in any relevant expositions. In any case, that verse should not be used, as it has often been in the past, to justify the gap theory of Earth history.

The main purpose of the gap theory has obviously been to try to accommodate the assumed astronomic and geologic ages of cosmic and Earth history in the Biblical framework of divinely revealed history. The latter clearly speaks of six literal days in which "the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is" (Exodus 20:11).

In any case, the gap theory will not work, either geologically or theologically, and should be abandoned by those still using it. No geologist, Christian, or non-Christian, could accept it. It assumes that the geological ages took place in the alleged gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 and that they were terminated by a great global cataclysm leaving the earth "without form, and void."

But any such cataclysm would completely negate the principle of uniformitarianism on which the geological ages were erected by the geologists in the first place. The gap theory would thus supposedly accommodate the geological ages (along with the evolutionary history of the earth and its inhabitants which are based on them) by destroying the evidence for them!

As far as Biblical theology is concerned, it would place all the fossil remains of the animals of the pre-world, as well as the assumed pre-Adamites, either in the geological ages or the cataclysm which terminated them before sin brought death into the world. But that did not happen until Adam and Eve brought sin and God's "curse" on the world (Romans 5:12, etc.). Even Satan did not sin until after the six days of creation, because at that time, everything was still "very good," including the hosts of heaven (Genesis 1:31; 2:1).

Those who still advocate the gap theory may have good intentions, but the theory is wrong and is a dangerous compromise. It should be abandoned.

The gap theory has a few problems. I think it assumes a lot.

God bless,
Mary O.

[Scribe D'Nucov]

Mary, I agree with Carla and I'm not going to get into a detailed refutation about this. My personal opinion is that all the fossils and the changes in the planet can be answered by understanding what happened at Noah's cataclysm.

Your final comment "The gap theory has a few problems. I think it assumes a lot." is a massive understatement, considering the entire theory is based on over-interpreting two words (tohu bohu). There is nowhere else in literature that we attempt to make every possible definition fit and then extrapolate a 200 page thesis out of two words. It is, in my opinion, an avoidance tactic - designed to appease those who can't accept a young earth scenario and the Biblical account of Noah's cataclysm.

[Jordan S. Flach]

Check out
http://www.reasons.org/

[Jonathan McLatchie]

Hugh Ross of Reasons2Believe Ministries is a progressive creationist, not a gap theorist.

[Jordan S. Flach]

Exactly.

[Scribe D'Nucov]

Not directly related to the Gap Theory, but an interesting note for those who have an interest in Biblical Origins:

I recently saw the video of the Bethlehem Star, by layman research and Law Professor Rick Larson. It was truly phenomenal. (Pun intended).

Rick has taken time to study the nine data points of the phenomena of the star, as detailed in the Gospels and then aligned that with what has recently been discovered about the timing of Herod's court and the Magi's trip to Bethlehem. He combines that with the science of Astronomy using new software that adopts Keplers laws of planetary motion. What he discovers is truly incredible.

It is, as far as I understand, the first time since the 1st century, that we can know what the astronomical events during the life of Christ actually are/were. In short, the major events of the life of Jesus of Nazareth all coincide with major signs in the heavens. I never understood before that what Peter quotes about the Prophet Joel's signs of the coming of the Messiah, as Peter said in Acts 2, were all fulfilled in the times of the life of Jesus.

This video is a MUST see for every one. Whether a believer or a doubter, it will amaze you what Rick has found. To go to his website: www.bethlehemstar.net

See the video and be awakened. God, the creator, has laid out the Gospel in the stars and the signs all coincide with the major events of Jesus life.

[Gayla]

I think it is very important to discuss these issues, and especially in a group of Christians. The world spends its time, learning ways they can bash the faith and the church, (if you don't think so spend some time online, on a non- Christian forum, funadvice.com for example - this is a site that is set up by an atheist, and all his advisors that work with the thousands of people from all over who come there, are constantly being fed a diet of unbelief, and these people are highly educated ) Christians need to be just as educated... while maintaining their biblical roots.

We need the answers.... to the things they throw out. If we can not keep up with them, and excell over them... I think this would be wrong...since we serve the Living God.

Go to that site and stick around awhile, read the previous posts...and you will soon see what is going on.

I miniistered there for two years, until it got too hot for them, and they banned me.

See how they flog anyone with any faith.... with the intention of intimidation....

The advisors, are at least 9-10 online all the time... and any mention of faith... brings them all in to flog the individual that is brave enough to speak up.

We must be equipped to deal with this.

We cannot hide our heads in the sand.

We need answers... otherwise, they are going to take the day, with their unbelief and propaganda.

Daniel had the answers in his day, and we need the answers in ours, otherwise, we come off as ignorant and unlearned, just another charge against Christians.

I hope anyone reading this can see and understand where I am coming from... and not take offense to what I have said.

Please... go to this forum and stick around awhile, and invite your friends...

Christians are def. in the minority there...

And btw... the title of the group that I am speaking of is Spirituality & Religion.

However, they intend to dominate it, not allowing Christians to speak out, in sincerity and truth.

A generation of young vulnerable people are listening to their lies, and believing it to be truth, since they have developed a stronghold.

I have committed this issue to prayer, and hope you will too, as the site currently has 186,000 members from all over the world... Talk about a mission field....

and Christians and truth are sooooooooooo needed... by the innocent ones that stumble into this den of unbelievers.

[veronica boyd]

AMEN GAYLA! AMEN AGAIN

[David Velasquez]

So many great topics -

I have only been in this community for a couple of days and so many good topics have been discussed already that I am hoping to enjoy and start some future ones, but for now bear with me as I throw in my two cents on some old ones. :)

The description of God creating heaven and earth is understood to be 1) recent, i.e., thousands not millions of years ago; 2) ex nihilo, i.e. out of nothing; 3) special, i.e. in 6 consecutive 24 hour periods called "days" and further distinguished as such by this phrase, "the evening and the morning." Notes taken from the McArthur study bible of Genesis 1:1-2

This topic of course is one that has been looked at in many different ways and since is a secondary issue and not an essential, is also one we can have fun exchanging ideas/opinions with. Actually all topics should be discuss in love and joy.