Gap Theory Refuted

[Hambone]

This is where the rubber meets the road with Baptists. Do you, or do you not take the Word of God literally? Is the Word of God infallable?

So, what did God create first?

NO. NOT LIGHT.

There were four things that existed when God said,"Let there be light." 1-The Earth, 2-water, 3-the "deep", and 4-darkness.

These four things already exist on the first day, so light was not the first thing God created. The first thing God created was the "heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). Genesis 1:2 describes the CONDITION of the Earth at a point in time AFTER the "heaven and earth" were first created.

[Hambone]

I just believe what God said ' date='he says in the Bible that he created the earth in 6 days and rested on the 7th .[/quote']

The Gap Theory does not refute this.

[tired]

How do you know the creation of the earth and the light wasn't the first day?

[Hambone]

God created the earth as a blank slate, so to speak, then like an artist he began adding to it what He wanted there.

There is abundant evidence that man and dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time. There are several footprints of humans and dinosaurs having walked in the same place at approximately the same time.

Look at some of the drawings of ancient civilizations, such as those in South America (and others) which clearly show humans and various species of dinosaurs together, with the humans sometimes hunting them.

Isaiah 45:18 tells us that the Lord God did NOT originally create the Earth in such a desolate condition. The word "vain" in Isaiah 45:18 and the term "without form" in Genesis 1:2 are from the same Hebrew word (tohuw). These verses by themselves, when rightly-divided in either language, destroy the core premise of Young Earth Creationism. Genesis 1:2 compared with Isaiah 45:18 rules out God initially making the Earth as a formless mud ball, then turning on the work lights and starting the decorating process.

As the verse clearly says, the Earth is already there. Although it is "without form and void" on the surface of the planet and covered in waters, it is most certainly already the formed planet Earth. It even has a name...it's called THE EARTH. The presence of water, in either liquid form or ice (or both), tells us that this planet already has some form of an atmosphere. Since nowhere else in the Genesis narrative does the Spirit tell about God establishing the Earth's geologic structure, we can safely assume that the planet's crust, mantle, and core structure are already fully differentiated. There is already nuclear decay in the mantle producing the heat that drives the Earth's tectonic and volcanic processes. And the dynamo at the Earth's core was already generating the magnetic field which protects the Earth's surface from lethal radiation from outer space. Oh yes, and outer space is already there too because the Earth is in space rotating on its axis on a 24 hour clock (the evening and the morning).

[tired]

<< Exodus 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.

The bible says that there was no death before man sinned. So how did anything die before adam? Or Satan was cast out?

[heartstrings]

<< Exodus 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.

The bible says that there was no death before man sinned. So how did anything die before adam? Or Satan was cast out?

This is very interesting to me, could you please show me the chapter and verse?

Here's one....it says death passed upon 'men'
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Doesn't the Bible say that the antedellian world...was another world?
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

So could a "pre- adamic" world have been a "world that then was" also...which "perished" as the antedelluvian world did?

The curse
Is there any other mention of the "curse" besides the "curse on the ground". Because God told Adam, "cursed be the ground".

I'm just asking questions, OK?

[Hambone]

Keep in mind that from the days of the Apostles up through the Dark Ages, and until just a few centuries ago, a 6,000 year age for the heavens and Earth was accepted dogma in the institutions of both the Church and Academia. Up until then, the real age of the Earth was not a burning issue. However, after the Bible was published for the masses and afterwards, as the scientific case evidence for an old Earth grew, so did the breech between the establishment Church and establishment science.

Thomas Chalmers, to his credit, refused to accept that the Scriptures had been broken by the growing body of geological truth of his time. He did not lose his faith in the accuracy of the Holy Bible, nor did he go into denial of the forensic geologic facts. As a Protestant theologian honest enough to realize the truth of those emerging observations, while remaining steadfast, faithful and committed to defending the Scriptures, Chalmers (and others) were inspired to observe the time "Gap" between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 in the Creation narrative. And he did so many years before Darwin had published his Theory of Evolution. In other words, an Old Age for the Earth had already became an accepted fact long before the Theory of Evolution came on the scene. Therefore, the argument that acceptance of an Old Earth is a compromise to Evolutionary Theory, is simply not true and has no foundation in historical fact.

What we have in the case of Thomas Chalmers and the post Reformation times is an example of Progressive Revelation from the Holy Scriptures. That is, when the proper time came, the Word of God had once again proved itself timely and relevant to the level of scientific and Spiritual understanding of the day. That Bible is still just as timely and relevant today, and can still provide true and faithful answers to scientific discoveries that appear to challenge the fundamentals of the Christian Faith. The problem today is that people have, for the most part, abandoned faith in the infallibility of the Holy Scriptures.

As the world moved into the Industrial Revolution, and since about the middle of the 20th Century, there have been copious publications of new English Bible translations, each claiming to be an improvement on the one before it and each claiming to be better than the common King James Bible; the Bible that Chalmers and the main body of Protestant Fundamentalism used over the years to bring so many people to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. Although an in-depth study of this phenomenon is beyond the immediate scope of this study, it is important to point out that this departure from the old Authorized text has had a profound effect on the spirituality of the Fundamental Church. Since that time the Ruin-Reconstruction (Gap Theory) interpretation of Genesis has also been systematically relegated to the "Fundamental Doghouse" and displaced on the center stage of Creationism by the Neo-Creationists - the Young Earth Advocates.

Objectively looking at the Fundamental Church in historical retrospect, it is observed that as the juggernaut of Evolutionary Theory became a growing mainstay in academia across the latter half of the 20th Century, the Fundamental Church has increasingly retreated into a shell of denial and self preservation. Having thrown aside their best source of Scriptural Authority and defense (the King James Bible), and with declining numbers who were scientifically educated and intellectually honest enough to deal with the geological arguments, the Fundamental Church has consequently lost the ability to effectively address the overwhelming body of evidence for an Old Earth from a true Biblical perspective. And, as a consequence, has also lost the ability to effectively minister the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to the educated masses when it comes to the accuracy of the book of Genesis.

This falling away has precipitated the rise to power within Fundamental Christianity of today's Neo-Creationist power brokers. These are the militant Young Earth "Creation Scientists" like Hovind, Brown, Ham, Gish et al, who have beguiled the flock through emotional appeals to archaic traditionalism, presented in the new and improved wrapper of "Creation Science." The faithful are exhorted to put logic and reason aside and stand firm in the proscribed Party Line of Young Earth Creationism, all in the name of Jesus and 'Defending the Faith' against the "Evil Evolutionists" and the "Scientific Conspirators."

While their motivations and intentions are, without doubt, completely honorable and worthy in their own minds, they have embraced a fanaticism and collective group-think that has degenerated into a less than intellectually honest religious and political juggernaut in its own right. Full of pride and arrogance, and stopping their ears to any justification for and Old Age of the Earth (even Biblical), they proudly claim to be defenders of the Bible. But when confronted with rightly-divided Scripture on this matter, they will not hesitate for a moment to criticize the old King James Bible, or any variant of Scriptures for that matter, that contradicts their dogmatic paradigm of reasoning. This is unfortunate, but true.

Consequently, most "Christians" of today, regardless of denominational persuasion, can only agree on what the first verse of the Genesis states:

[Hambone]

Like mankind, the Bible says that the Earth and the heavens also have "generations" in their histories:

"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,"
(Genesis 2:4 KJV)

"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;"
(Genesis 5:1 KJV)

"These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
(Genesis 6:9 KJV)

[Hambone]

In all three of the verses above the word "generations" is defined as a line of descent, a family history from one generation to the next. The Hebrew word for generations is plural in all cases. If God only made the heavens and Earth once, as Young Earth Creationists would have you believe, then the term "generations" should have been in the singular, which it is NOT in either Hebrew or the KJV English translation.

[Revelation3:20]

"Exodus 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."

[heartstrings]

In all three of the verses above the word "generations" is defined as a line of descent' date=' a family history from one generation to the next. The Hebrew word for generations is plural in all cases. [u']If God only made the heavens and Earth once, as Young Earth Creationists would have you believe, then the term "generations" should have been in the singular, which it is NOT in either Hebrew or the KJV English translation.

Actually the reason "generations" is plural, is because whatever is being spoken of , "generated" many things.

For example. when Genesis 5:1 says "these are the generations of Adam", it is basicly saying "these are the progeny of Adam", then it goes on to list all the people who came out of Adam......Seth, Enos Jared, etc. etc.

Another example, In Genesis 6 where it says "these are the generations of Noah", Noah was a just man. perfect in his generations, he walked with God, etc then it lists who Noah generated: Shem, Ham and Japheth.

[Wilchbla]

I just saw this in an Answers From Genesis newsletter:

Q: Did Jesus allow for a gap?

A: If you carefully study the words of Jesus, He made it plain that there can?t be a gap of billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

In Mark 10:6, Jesus said, ?But from the beginning of creation God made them male and female.? In these very words, Jesus clearly teaches that Adam and Eve were created in ?the beginning of the creation??not after billions of years had passed. Also, the expression ?beginning of the creation? rules out any ?re-creation? or ?second start? as taught by many gap theorists.

There is much more here:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creatio ... theory.asp

Hi John, I actually do believe there is a gap between verse 1 and 2 yet I don't hold to evolution. In fact, I don't see why everyone insists that you must hold to evolution in you believe there is a gap there. It is simply an attempt to place the time of Satan's rebellion and fall. The only other time for Lucifer's fall would be when Adam and Eve sinned in the garden which some do teach. Nothing was evolved. God created the heaven and earth along with Lucifer and the sons of God. Lucifer probably had some authority or rulership in a pre-Adamic Garden of Eden (Ezekiel 28), got lifted up in pride (Isaiah 14) then rebelled with some of the angels. God destroyed everything with water than recreated it again this time with Adam (the son of God) with authority over the earth. So the earth MAY be millions of years old but the plant and animal life and mankind is only 6000 plus years old.

Bill