Gap Theory?

[nephilimiyr]

Am I still the only one here that believes in the gap theory in Genesis 1?
Just wondering because it's been awhile since I've posted here.

 

[Bushido216]

Pretty much. You and whomever wrote Omphalos.

 

[nephilimiyr]

I have no idea what or who your talking about but I hope that wasn't intended to be an insult?

God Bless!

 

[Bushido216]

More sarcasm.

 

[nephilimiyr]

More sarcasm.

Yeah, well, whatever, I don't know you and if that's how you conduct yourself with strangers then I have to conclude you meant it as an insult, no matter how you want to sugar coat it. So much for the presence of God in this forum.

God Bless you Bushido, I will say a prayer for you

 

[lucaspa]

I have no idea what or who your talking about but I hope that wasn't intended to be an insult?

Not really. Oomphalos is the title of a book by Rev. Paul Gosse written in 1857.

Bushido is mistaken. Gosse did not believe in Gap Theory, but instead was proposing the Appearance of Age Argument.

However, you do seem to be the only advocate of Gap Theory here. I haven't seen anyone else defend it.

 

[Bushido216]

You're right, I was mistaken.

Though, when you think about it, the end result would be more-or-less the same.

 

[nephilimiyr]

You're right, I was mistaken.

Yeah, sorry, I had no idea who you were talking about

Though, when you think about it, the end result would be more-or-less the same.

You could be right, I don't know. In a way if all Rev. Gosse was proposeing was the age arguement, theistic evolution would also have the same end result, more or less.

 

[Bushido216]

Actually, I am mistaken again. Argh! I hate it when I do this. Appearance of Age and Theistic Evolution would have the same end result. Gap Theory would have the same end result as Young Earth Creation.

 

[lucaspa]

Actually, I am mistaken again. Argh! I hate it when I do this. Appearance of Age and Theistic Evolution would have the same end result. Gap Theory would have the same end result as Young Earth Creation.

The Appearance of Age argument ends up with God being a liar and deceiver -- indistinguishable from Satan. Theistic Evolution has God simply creating by the processes discovered by science. I don't see how the end result is the same at all.

Gap Theory still ends up being anti-evolution, because Gap Theory still has God zapping each species into existence in its present form. Gap Theory does allow an old earth, however.

 

[nephilimiyr]

The Appearance of Age argument ends up with God being a liar and deceiver -- indistinguishable from Satan. Theistic Evolution has God simply creating by the processes discovered by science. I don't see how the end result is the same at all.

Both the gap theory and the theistic evolution theory says that the earth is billions of years old so, in a sense, they are similar on that respect. Sorry Bushido but you were right the first time which makes you mistaken once again.

Hi lucaspa
You and I have debated this once before. I don't feel like doing this again however. Just wanted to know if any gap theorists had joined since I was last here. Looks like the answer to that question is...notta.

Gap Theory still ends up being anti-evolution, because Gap Theory still has God zapping each species into existence in its present form. Gap Theory does allow an old earth, however.

That is correct. The gap theory doesn't actually state any age of the earth but mearly says that the Hebrew text indicates a gap in time between the 1st and 2nd verses in Genesis 1.

Also, like I tried to explain once before, since the Hebrew text doesn't explain how God created, the methods of creation, I would suggest does leave room for a belief in a evolutionary process of some kind. Maybe many gap theorists rule it out but I don't.

 

[lucaspa]

Just wanted to know if any gap theorists had joined since I was last here. Looks like the answer to that question is...notta.

That's the answer. JohnR7 on the other forum had an interesting variation on Gap Theory, but he isn't around anymore.

Also, like I tried to explain once before, since the Hebrew text doesn't explain how God created, the methods of creation, I would suggest does leave room for a belief in a evolutionary process of some kind. Maybe many gap theorists rule it out but I don't.

What do you do about the "days" in Genesis 1 if the gap is between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2? That Gap would take you from the Big Bang at 13.4 billion years ago to about 4 billion years ago when earth was a planet with oceans. You've still got just 6 days to cram 4 billion years into. How do you do that? Does Gap Theory then become Day Age Theory?

Neph, just to be absolutely clear, this is not an attempt to argue the validity of Gap Theory. I only want to have you explain what Gap Theory says, not have to justify it.

 

[Bushido216]

The Appearance of Age argument ends up with God being a liar and deceiver -- indistinguishable from Satan. Theistic Evolution has God simply creating by the processes discovered by science. I don't see how the end result is the same at all.

Gap Theory still ends up being anti-evolution, because Gap Theory still has God zapping each species into existence in its present form. Gap Theory does allow an old earth, however.

Nowhere did I say otherwise...?

 

[Godzman]

Intermittent Day Theory is my belief

 

[lucaspa]

Nowhere did I say otherwise...?

Bushido, post #9 "Appearance of Age and Theistic Evolution would have the same end result. Gap Theory would have the same end result as Young Earth Creation."

Appearance of Age and Theistic Evolution have the same result?

 

[nephilimiyr]

That's the answer. JohnR7 on the other forum had an interesting variation on Gap Theory, but he isn't around anymore.

Ah yes, JohnR7, lol, he actually argued with me once that his day age theory was the real gap theory. Yeah, he believed that the "days" written in Genesis 1 were actually 1,000 years apiece, each day being 1,000 years. Interesting? perhaps but it wasn't anything I could agree with.

What do you do about the "days" in Genesis 1 if the gap is between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2? That Gap would take you from the Big Bang at 13.4 billion years ago to about 4 billion years ago when earth was a planet with oceans. You've still got just 6 days to cram 4 billion years into. How do you do that? Does Gap Theory then become Day Age Theory?

Neph, just to be absolutely clear, this is not an attempt to argue the validity of Gap Theory. I only want to have you explain what Gap Theory says, not have to justify it.

And that would be fine by me. I am currently in deep study on other theologies (the divine council, Sumerian texts) right now and don't really have the time.

If you remember our debate, what I had said was that to understand what the gap theory says you must look at the original Hebrew. Verse one makes the general statement that God created the heavens and earth, no hows or whys but just that he did create. Then in the second verse it says that the earth was without form and void. Some biblical scholars believe that the second verse is better translated as saying had become a wreck, chaotic, wasted.

So in effect what we or I see happening is that God created the universe (an unknown date) but at a certain time, also not known, the earth became a big chaotic mess. In the following verses after 1 & 2 we see God recreating the earth. Yes, the story of the recreation was done exactly how the Genesis story says it was done, in 6 literal 24 hour days.

Anology: It's kind of like a painter who is painting a splended outdoor, wildlife scene. At a point while painting this scene the painter sees fault and takes his brush and messes it up a bit. Then he takes his brush and starts to reform the scene.
Now by reading that you mightl say I'm saying that God was at fault so he messed the painting up. No, the scene that he painted is a metaphor in that it represents God actual creation and it's that actual creation that came to be at fault with God, um...the painter, LOL!

Now the Bible doesn't give us a clue how God created his original creation except that it says that he mearly spoke and the heavens came into being. I can attribute this to the big bang. OK but now I have to ask about the life that God created on earth. I don't believe there's anything written in the Bible that mentions how God created life on earth in his original creation. As the painter he could've taken his time at it for all I know, enter evolution, or he could've created this life in an instant or in 6 days like the recreation story. I just don't believe the Bible is clear on this.

I think it's important that you know that I didn't come to my belief of the gap theory by me asking the question of how did God create and whether I could believe in a 6,000 year old eath or to believe in evolution. It wasn't like that at all. I had been studying different theologies on sin and evil. When studying Satan I looked at Genesis 1 and had to ask myself if Satan really become evil in so short amount of time? I was already in the process of studying the Hebrew in these other theologies so the belief in the gap theory became easy for me to understand.

 

[Bushido216]

Bushido, post #9 "Appearance of Age and Theistic Evolution would have the same end result. Gap Theory would have the same end result as Young Earth Creation."

Appearance of Age and Theistic Evolution have the same result?

Yes, result, not the way in which it got there. Appearance of Age is basically taking all of the evidence of the TEC model and saying "God made it look that way".

 

[lucaspa]

So in effect what we or I see happening is that God created the universe (an unknown date) but at a certain time, also not known, the earth became a big chaotic mess. In the following verses after 1 & 2 we see God recreating the earth. Yes, the story of the recreation was done exactly how the Genesis story says it was done, in 6 literal 24 hour days.

The data we have says that the earth formed from about 5 billion years ago to 4 billion years ago. Now, if you are going for a literal 144 hours at that point, what do you do with the vast geological record, radiometric dating, fossil record, etc. that indicates a far longer time for creation on earth than 144 hours?

I can attribute this to the big bang. OK but now I have to ask about the life that God created on earth. I don't believe there's anything written in the Bible that mentions how God created life on earth in his original creation.

Genesis 1 has God saying "Let the earth bring forth" or "Let the water bring forth". Genesis 2:19 says God formed animals and birds from the dust of the ground. Plants are not discussed. They are just there.

As the painter he could've taken his time at it for all I know, enter evolution, or he could've created this life in an instant or in 6 days like the recreation story. I just don't believe the Bible is clear on this.[/quote
Now I have to ask why you said above "Yes, the story of the recreation was done exactly how the Genesis story says it was done, in 6 literal 24 hour days." There you said the Bible was clear. Now you say it's not. Can you make up your mind, please?

When studying Satan I looked at Genesis 1 and had to ask myself if Satan really become evil in so short amount of time? I was already in the process of studying the Hebrew in these other theologies so the belief in the gap theory became easy for me to understand.

Satan doesn't become evil until after the events in Job, so I can't see how this is relevant to the Gap Theory at all. In Job Satan is God's betting buddy and gofer. No hint that he is evil.

 

[lucaspa]

Yes, result, not the way in which it got there. Appearance of Age is basically taking all of the evidence of the TEC model and saying "God made it look that way".

Ah! You meant "result" as in "how the earth looks now."? Both get to the earth looking like it does now.

Your language was ambiguous. I read it as saying that both theories ended up with the same result in all areas, including their view of God.

 

[Sinai]

If you remember our debate, what I had said was that to understand what the gap theory says you must look at the original Hebrew. Verse one makes the general statement that God created the heavens and earth, no hows or whys but just that he did create. Then in the second verse it says that the earth was without form and void. Some biblical scholars believe that the second verse is better translated as saying had become a wreck, chaotic, wasted.

So in effect what we or I see happening is that God created the universe (an unknown date) but at a certain time, also not known, the earth became a big chaotic mess. In the following verses after 1 & 2 we see God recreating the earth. Yes, the story of the recreation was done exactly how the Genesis story says it was done, in 6 literal 24 hour days....

Now the Bible doesn't give us a clue how God created his original creation except that it says that he mearly spoke and the heavens came into being. I can attribute this to the big bang. OK but now I have to ask about the life that God created on earth. I don't believe there's anything written in the Bible that mentions how God created life on earth in his original creation. As the painter he could've taken his time at it for all I know, enter evolution, or he could've created this life in an instant or in 6 days like the recreation story. I just don't believe the Bible is clear on this.

Assume for the moment that mainstream science is correct regarding the age of the universe (11-20 billion years) and the earth (3-4 billion years). Also assume for the moment that you are the writer of Genesis 1, and God has given you a vision of how He created it all. If you were working with a rather primitive language that had no single word for "universe" but instead used the phrase "the heavens and the earth" to express a concept roughly equivalent to the English concept of universe, how would you express the information God had given you regarding that portion of creation that preceded the formation of our planet?