The Gap theory

[DBowling]

My summary is pretty simple and straightforward... I defer to the Scriptural text in Genesis 1 quoted below.
I have hilighted Genesis 1:2 in blue.
I have hilighted everywhere that God creates or makes life in green.

The question at hand is...
According to Scripture, did God create/make life before or after Genesis 1:2?
I'll let the Scriptural text answer that question

Genesis 1

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

In Christ

[abelcainsbrother]

I'm being technical with the Hebrew you can say asah means making something out of pre-existing materials and that would be acceptable and this is how most explain it and my point still stands even if you think of pre-existing material but it is also right to say that when we see asah it means something that had already been created new before also,it also means to do work on something,to move something also. Some have pointed out that when it says "He made the stars also" some have said God could have moved them back into position.Both are right and acceptable based on the definitions I gave.

OK let's give credit where credit is due... this is a bit closer to the real meaning of 'asah'.
In your statement above you acknowledge that asah could mean
a. making something out of pre-existing materials
b. to do work on something
c. to move something

When you acknowledge these multiple Scriptural meanings of the word asah, that directly contradicts your statement that
"Everytime asah is used it is always something that had already been created before"

In Christ

Not in context of what the text is talking about. Let me give you an example "He MADE the stars also" We could say God worked on pre-existing material,we could say God moved them and because they were not created we know they are not new and they had already been created before. However when it comes to life God made we know God made life to exist out of pre-existing msterials,he worked on something that had already been created before but because this is life he had to make it live so he made life based on former life that had aready been created before this is why "after its kind,according to their kind matters in the text which I tried to explain to you.

ACB,

Where are you getting this from? Do you have a link to someone who says this?

And, I'd also like you to show a Hebrew expert who says that every time asah is used, it is always something that has been created before.

I'd like to see where you got this from, so I can try to understand why the person thinks it's correct.

I'm getting this from researching based on readings or teachings both for and against bara and asah from different perspectives and bible study not only english translations but also hebrew studies on the words bara and asah or created and made. I do have a link to back up the points I have made about when God both created and made life and how when God created life it was new life but when God made life it was not new life but was life made after life that had already been created before.

Here is a link that shows when God made life it is based on the principle of life not now introduced for the first time like when God created life.
http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-25.htm
Here is a highlighted excerpt from the link
Verse 25. - And God made (asah, not beta, the principle of life being not now introduced for the first time, as in ver. 21)

However you should know that Gap Theorists have taught about this for a very long time even if you disagree with it. I mean this is one of the points that have been made by Gap Theorists about bara and asah.All it takes is some research into Gap Theory creationism to see this pointed out. It is very important to them in order to understand Genesis and the bible properly. This is why I've tried to point out Genesis 2:1-4 also. The point is bara and asah are not interchangable eventhough there are bible scholars who teach they are but I disagree based on the research I've done over time looking into it.

[abelcainsbrother]

What is being asserted here by ACB, evidence-wise, is truly as obscure, unprovable and dubious as about anything I've ever seen argued here on G&S. So, I see this, plus the fact that he apparently sees this "former world" stuff so important because he thinks it will make people realize evolution is false / be more likely to believe the Bible is true. But he has spent vast pages of posts without even convincing any of the theologically knowledgeable here of it's potential, much less it's certainty. He's also ignoring a vast host of scholars and Hebrew and Greek scholars and linguists. Now, ACB, when are you going to realize, even if you think GAP Theory to be true, that 1) it is NEVER going to convince theologically knowledgeable Christians, 2) much less unbelievers, and 3) it's certainly not going to change the minds of those who buy into evolution - many whom are already Christians who see various Creation verbiage as merely symbolic or allegorical. So, as others have redundantly and very patiently pointed out, that while your energy and enthusiasm are admirable, there is just NO way that this obscure issue is worth near the effort that has been put into it.

Really, this has carried on to a cartoonish level! I think everyone should sum up their arguments and the thread should be locked. This has become an enormous distraction when there are FAR more important issues to be discussed. I don't think ACB is going to convince anyone, and I also don't think anyone will ever convince ACB that he is wrong. As for future discussions on it, I can't imagine there has been a point not brought up, and REDUNDANTLY so!

First off my belief about how if Gap Theory creationism had been taught by the majority evolution would have been defeated by creationism long ago is just my opinion and does not effect whether or not the Gap Theory interpretation is right or not. It is just my opinion based on observations I've made and based on evidence however it does not necessarily represent the view of Gap Theory creationists as they might even disagree. I do believe it,even if you disagree.Perhaps we will never know though.

Anybody who has dealt with militant atheists knows no matter how much evidence you lay out they will deny it while having none atheism is true.But I still believe in evidence and for those who do really seek the truth evidence will matter to those people and even when it comes to a more believable theory than the theory of evolution. I know and understand very well how hard it is to change somebodies mind,to me this is just debating and discussing the different views and interpretations.

I have not ignored bible scholars that reject the Gap Theory.I have tried to look into it from different perspectives to see who is right and I have not ignored bible scholars that reject the Gap Theory or rival creation ministries.

I think I'm the only one sometimes that is willing to change my mind about the Gap Theory if it could be shown to be wrong but I don't see how it has been. Even if nobody changes their mind I don't see how they have shown truthfully,honestly and biblically why it is wrong,they just are just choosing to hang on to their creation theory for whatever reason and it is OK with me if they do. It will all get settled when we get to heaven about who was right and not just about creationism.

[DBowling]

Here is a link that shows when God made life it is based on the principle of life not now introduced for the first time like when God created life.
http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-25.htm
Here is a highlighted excerpt from the link
Verse 25. - And God made (asah, not beta, the principle of life being not now introduced for the first time, as in ver. 21)

I hope you realize that this quote that you are referencing from the Pulpit Commentary directly contradicts the Gap Theory premise that animal life existed prior to Genesis 1:2.

In your quote above the Pulpit Commentary is saying that 'bara' is used in Genesis 1:21 to indicate that in Genesis 1:21 God created life (presumably animal life) "for the first time".
This directly contradicts the Gap Theory claim that God created animal life "for the first time" sometime prior to Genesis 1:2.

BTW... I noticed you referenced biblehub.com.
Have I ever mentioned that I love that site!!!

In Christ

[RickD]

Verse 25. - And God made (asah, not beta, the principle of life being not now introduced for the first time, as in ver. 21)

Doh!

[Audie]

Here is a link that shows when God made life it is based on the principle of life not now introduced for the first time like when God created life.
http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-25.htm
Here is a highlighted excerpt from the link
Verse 25. - And God made (asah, not beta, the principle of life being not now introduced for the first time, as in ver. 21)

I hope you realize that this quote that you are referencing from the Pulpit Commentary directly contradicts the Gap Theory premise that animal life existed prior to Genesis 1:2.

In your quote above the Pulpit Commentary is saying that 'bara' is used in Genesis 1:21 to indicate that in Genesis 1:21 God created life (presumably animal life) "for the first time".
This directly contradicts the Gap Theory claim that God created animal life "for the first time" sometime prior to Genesis 1:2.

BTW... I noticed you referenced biblehub.com.
Have I ever mentioned that I love that site!!!

In Christ

Then too is that the so called "gap theory" does not meet the minimal qualifications to be a scientific theory. Which, I guess, leaves "gap". I'd agree with that.

[abelcainsbrother]

Here is a link that shows when God made life it is based on the principle of life not now introduced for the first time like when God created life.
http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-25.htm
Here is a highlighted excerpt from the link
Verse 25. - And God made (asah, not beta, the principle of life being not now introduced for the first time, as in ver. 21)

I hope you realize that this quote that you are referencing from the Pulpit Commentary directly contradicts the Gap Theory premise that animal life existed prior to Genesis 1:2.

In your quote above the Pulpit Commentary is saying that 'bara' is used in Genesis 1:21 to indicate that in Genesis 1:21 God created life (presumably animal life) "for the first time".
This directly contradicts the Gap Theory claim that God created animal life "for the first time" sometime prior to Genesis 1:2.

BTW... I noticed you referenced biblehub.com.
Have I ever mentioned that I love that site!!!

In Christ

You like biblehub? I might change your mind. Here is something that I think was overlooked. Now this is going by the NASB translation on biblehub but we still have influence from Gap Theorists that proves there were many hebrew/greek bible scholars that held to the Gap Theory interpretation and their influence is still around today.It is the footnotes of the NASB version bible. Now I already know that certian rival creation ministries teach their followers to ignore the footnotes in their bible and stick to just the bible translation and what it says.And I think I know why.

But read the footnotes of Genesis 1:2 and you'll see it points you to Jeremiah 4:23 where Gap Theorists point to in order to show how the earth became without form and void in Genesis 1:2. But also if you check out Genesis 2:2-4 and read the footnotes you'll see it refers you to verses that Gap Theorists would point you to and it points out the work God did in the 6 days starts with Genesis 1:3-31 the very same thing Gap Theorists believe and point out that YEC's and others reject,we believe the first day started in verse 3 not verse 1 like YEC's but it also points out "These are the generations" was removed from the text. They are Gap Theory friendly footnotes and it proves there were many hebrew/greek bible scholars that held to the Gap Theory and their influence is still around. I only pointed out these few examples but I bet there are more examples.

[abelcainsbrother]

Here is a link that shows when God made life it is based on the principle of life not now introduced for the first time like when God created life.
http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-25.htm
Here is a highlighted excerpt from the link
Verse 25. - And God made (asah, not beta, the principle of life being not now introduced for the first time, as in ver. 21)

I hope you realize that this quote that you are referencing from the Pulpit Commentary directly contradicts the Gap Theory premise that animal life existed prior to Genesis 1:2.

In your quote above the Pulpit Commentary is saying that 'bara' is used in Genesis 1:21 to indicate that in Genesis 1:21 God created life (presumably animal life) "for the first time".
This directly contradicts the Gap Theory claim that God created animal life "for the first time" sometime prior to Genesis 1:2.

BTW... I noticed you referenced biblehub.com.
Have I ever mentioned that I love that site!!!

In Christ

Then too is that the so called "gap theory" does not meet the minimal qualifications to be a scientific theory. Which, I guess, leaves "gap". I'd agree with that.

Hi Audie,we missed you being around,glad you are back. I personally don't want to turn this thread into a evolution vs Gap Theory thread. I do have a thread on here already for that. I believe regardless if you want to use the scientific definition of a theory once all of the evidence is laid out the Gap Theory will be more believable based on evidence so that hiding behind a scientific definition won't work. Anyway,glad you are back.

[DBowling]

You like biblehub? I might change your mind.

I don't think so

But read the footnotes of Genesis 1:2 and you'll see it points you to Jeremiah 4:23 where Gap Theorists point to in order to show how the earth became without form and void in Genesis 1:2.

A couple of questions for you?

1. What is your understanding of the historical context surrounding Jeremiah 4:23?
2. Do you believe that Scripture is claiming that the state of the earth in Jeremiah 4:23 was identical to the state of the earth in Genesis 1:2?

In Christ

[abelcainsbrother]

You like biblehub? I might change your mind.

I don't think so

But read the footnotes of Genesis 1:2 and you'll see it points you to Jeremiah 4:23 where Gap Theorists point to in order to show how the earth became without form and void in Genesis 1:2.

A couple of questions for you?

1. What is your understanding of the historical context surrounding Jeremiah 4:23?
2. Do you believe that Scripture is claiming that the sate of the earth in Jeremiah 4:23 was identical to the state of the earth in Genesis 1:2?

In Christ

Being a Gap Theorist I do. I believe God is making a point to his people basically saying if I destroyed the earth and made it without form and void and then restored it I will do this for my people that I've made a blood covenant with the seed of Abraham. It goes all the way back to the covenant God made with Abraham. It also lines up with bible prophecy also how the jews would rebel against God,go whoring after other god's yet be restored back in the last days wich I believe is being fulfilled now,once all of the gentiles can be reached that can be reached God will then turn back to his jewish people and keep the covenant he made with Abraham and 144,000 jews from the 12 tribes of Israel will come through the tribulation saved believing in Jesus Christ. God is provoking the jews to jeolousy with a heathen people but will restore the jewish people. But also it is a picture of the salvation we experience once we are saved. We come to God in a empty and waste state and are restored back to our perfect state through Jesus. There are many parallels in scripture.

I also know there are those that make this a future prophecy and I have looke into it and I see no way it fits into end-time bible prophecy because men are still here and alive whe Jesus returns after the tribulation as bad as the tribulation is there is never a time when there is no man in the future. As a matter of fact this would break the covenant God made with Noah how God will never again destroy all flesh and life off of the earth again which is why we have a rainbow to remember that covenant. There is never a time in the future when there is no man on the earth. The earth is repopulated during the thousand year reign of Jesus and lions lay down with lambs,etc so there is all kinds of life that survives the tribulation period and is here when Jesus returns.

[Philip]

ACB, you contend there was a former world before this one, that was destroyed. And yet, you read this into the text with the merest wisp of evidence for it. As, IF true, this would be a huge and significant thing - this supposed other world. So, we're to believe God references it, unbelievably subtly, ever so cryptically, and then He reveals absolutely nothing at all about that world, who inhabited it, why it was destroyed - NOTHING. And this merest of wisps of detail inspires you to campaign for a GAP, one you assert would explain the geological evidences, would destroy belief in evolution. My observation is that truly IMPORTANT theological points, in Scripture, are made pretty clear. And the ones that we all argue over - especially due to their lack of clarifying certainties - are almost to a one, essentially irrelevant - a fun if distracting debate.

None of this makes any sense - not just the lack of evidence for it - but that you believe there is some great importance to this issue. You have spent countless words without convincing even one of those here who take and study Scripture very seriously. That should give you a HUGE hint of how worthless promoting this will be to change the minds of UNBELIEVERS - whether over evolution or just God's existence. Because if logical, Scripturally savvy, long-time Christians are so skeptical - especially after so much of your effort and time - as they have overwhelmingly rejected this belief, along with the overwhelming consensus of contemporary CHRISTIAN scholars - I mean, where's the worth in spending so much time on it?

[DBowling]

You like biblehub? I might change your mind.

I don't think so

But read the footnotes of Genesis 1:2 and you'll see it points you to Jeremiah 4:23 where Gap Theorists point to in order to show how the earth became without form and void in Genesis 1:2.

A couple of questions for you?

1. What is your understanding of the historical context surrounding Jeremiah 4:23?
2. Do you believe that Scripture is claiming that the sate of the earth in Jeremiah 4:23 was identical to the state of the earth in Genesis 1:2?

In Christ

Being a Gap Theorist I do.

Ok... now let's look at the context for Jeremiah 4:23
You can get a good feel for the Scriptural context of Jeremiah 4:23 by reading Jeremiah 4:5-31.

Same two questions about Jeremiah 4:5-31
1. What is your understanding of the historical context of Jeremiah 4:5-31?
2. Do you believe that the state of the earth described in Jeremiah 4:5-31 was identical to the state of the earth in Genesis 1:2?

In Christ

[abelcainsbrother]

ACB, you contend there was a former world before this one, that was destroyed. And yet, you read this into the text with the merest wisp of evidence for it. As, IF true, this would be a huge and significant thing - this supposed other world. So, we're to believe God references it, unbelievably subtly, ever so cryptically, and then He reveals absolutely nothing at all about that world, who inhabited it, why it was destroyed - NOTHING. And this merest of wisps of detail inspires you to campaign for a GAP, one you assert would explain the geological evidences, would destroy belief in evolution. My observation is that truly IMPORTANT theological points, in Scripture, are made pretty clear. And the ones that we all argue over - especially due to their lack of clarifying certainties - are almost to a one, essentially irrelevant - a fun if distracting debate.

None of this makes any sense - not just the lack of evidence for it - but that you believe there is some great importance to this issue. You have spent countless words without convincing even one of those here who take and study Scripture very seriously. That should give you a HUGE hint of how worthless promoting this will be to change the minds of UNBELIEVERS - whether over evolution or just God's existence. Because if logical, Scripturally savvy, long-time Christians are so skeptical - especially after so much of your effort and time - as they have overwhelmingly rejected this belief, along with the overwhelming consensus of contemporary CHRISTIAN scholars - I mean, where's the worth in spending so much time on it?

This is just another kind of discussion and debate.Why is it such a problem? Those who disagree can ignore it. I have simply tried to show why I beieve this is right. It bothers you for some reason for this to be discussed and I don't understand why. It is just not when I discuss the Gap Theory interpretation either. When we discuss bible prophecy there are those who think it is not importnt,can't be undestood,etc and yet there are plenty of Christians that look into it and teach it and discuss it.

Differences of opinion should'nt be a reason to not discuss things. Are you saying that on here we should'nt discuss controversial things because its a destraction? Are you concerned about people changing their mind about the Gap Theory interpretation and you don't want that to happen so we should'nt discuss it? Are you afraid it might run people off from here?

To me I'm just discussing things that interest me according to what else there is to discuss on here.I realize we are not all interested in the same things when it comes to a discussion. If others are so right about their creation theory then they should have no problem showing or explaining why they think it is right,but as far as I've seen they have'nt instead te just don't want it discussed or think its not important.

I think you are telling me since the majority of bible scholrs reject the Gap Theory today and have bandoned it we should believe them and accept some other interpretation or theory they accomodate,yet I have given evidence to show that the majority of bible scholars once accepted the Gap Theory,it was the majority interpretation up until about the 1970's and yet these bible scholars are not taken seriously eventhough their influence is still around in the footnotes of our bibles. I am not going to accept any creation theory based on what the majority thinks but to the best of my ability according to God's word.

The majority of both Christians and non-believers have been wrong before.This is also why I was sceptical about evolution when I started researching it and those who accept evolution appeal to the majority of scientists who accept it. So based on majority we should just shut up and accept evolution,well I say not so fast,lets look at the evidence.

Think back when Galileo discovered what he did and yet the majority would not even look through his telescope and just believed their majority interpretation and yet they were eventuallyy shown to be wrong and their interpretation was wrong,not the bible. The bible never said the sun goes around the earth and yet it was the majority belief and interpretation at the time and was wrong.So what the majority believes can be wrong.I'm always sceptical when the majority says this is right. It does not mean they are totally wrong either,alot of times it is alittle bit of truth with a bunch of assumptions to go along with it.

[Audie]

Here is a link that shows when God made life it is based on the principle of life not now introduced for the first time like when God created life.
http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-25.htm
Here is a highlighted excerpt from the link
Verse 25. - And God made (asah, not beta, the principle of life being not now introduced for the first time, as in ver. 21)

I hope you realize that this quote that you are referencing from the Pulpit Commentary directly contradicts the Gap Theory premise that animal life existed prior to Genesis 1:2.

In your quote above the Pulpit Commentary is saying that 'bara' is used in Genesis 1:21 to indicate that in Genesis 1:21 God created life (presumably animal life) "for the first time".
This directly contradicts the Gap Theory claim that God created animal life "for the first time" sometime prior to Genesis 1:2.

BTW... I noticed you referenced biblehub.com.
Have I ever mentioned that I love that site!!!

In Christ

Then too is that the so called "gap theory" does not meet the minimal qualifications to be a scientific theory. Which, I guess, leaves "gap". I'd agree with that.

Hi Audie,we missed you being around,glad you are back. I personally don't want to turn this thread into a evolution vs Gap Theory thread. I do have a thread on here already for that. I believe regardless if you want to use the scientific definition of a theory once all of the evidence is laid out the Gap Theory will be more believable based on evidence so that hiding behind a scientific definition won't work. Anyway,glad you are back.

Thanks abe. I was just pointing out news of the obvious, I dont care to debate it with you.

(oh, I never "hide")

[abelcainsbrother]

Here is a link that shows when God made life it is based on the principle of life not now introduced for the first time like when God created life.
http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-25.htm
Here is a highlighted excerpt from the link
Verse 25. - And God made (asah, not beta, the principle of life being not now introduced for the first time, as in ver. 21)

I hope you realize that this quote that you are referencing from the Pulpit Commentary directly contradicts the Gap Theory premise that animal life existed prior to Genesis 1:2.

In your quote above the Pulpit Commentary is saying that 'bara' is used in Genesis 1:21 to indicate that in Genesis 1:21 God created life (presumably animal life) "for the first time".
This directly contradicts the Gap Theory claim that God created animal life "for the first time" sometime prior to Genesis 1:2.

BTW... I noticed you referenced biblehub.com.
Have I ever mentioned that I love that site!!!

In Christ

Then too is that the so called "gap theory" does not meet the minimal qualifications to be a scientific theory. Which, I guess, leaves "gap". I'd agree with that.

Hi Audie,we missed you being around,glad you are back. I personally don't want to turn this thread into a evolution vs Gap Theory thread. I do have a thread on here already for that. I believe regardless if you want to use the scientific definition of a theory once all of the evidence is laid out the Gap Theory will be more believable based on evidence so that hiding behind a scientific definition won't work. Anyway,glad you are back.

Thanks abe. I was just pointing out news of the obvious, I dont care to debate it with you.

(oh, I never "hide")

OK that is fine.If you ever change your mind?I have a thread for it. You can go get all of the evidence you can find too.You should know that much of the evidence now used for evolution was once evidence for Gap Theory creationism before Charles Darwin came along and hijacked it away from Christians.Alot of Christians seem not to care either.