The "gap" theory

[Aussie Pete]

The apparent age of the earth compared with the genealogies stated in the Bible create problems in the minds of many, both unbelievers and Christians. I believe that there is an answer. It is known as the "pre-Adamic creation" or gap theory. It presents the view that between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 is a considerable, but unknown time.

The evidence for this view is as follows
1. The word "was" in verse 2 can just as readily be translated "became". Earlier editions of the NIV had this is as an alternative translation.

2. We need to know the difference between "create", "form" and "make". Watchman Nee (Mystery of Creation) puts it like this:

"Genesis and Geology 11 In the first two chapters of Genesis three different words are used for the act of creation: (1) “bara”—calling into being without the aid of pre-existing material. This we have already touched upon; (2) “asah”—which is quite different from “bara,” since the latter denotes the idea of creating without any material whereas “asah” signifies the making, fashioning, or preparing out of existing material. For instance, a carpenter can make a chair, but he cannot create one. The works of the Six Days in Genesis are mainly of the order of “asah”; (3) “yatsar”—which means to shape or mould as a potter does with clay. This word is used in Genesis 2.7 as follows: “And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground.” Interestingly, Isaiah 43.7 illustrates the meaning and connection of all three of these words: “every one that is called by my name, and whom I have created for my glory, whom I have formed, yea, whom I have made.” “Created” signifies a calling into being out of nothing; “formed” denotes a fashioning into appointed form; and “made” means a preparing out of pre-existing materials."

3. Other references confirm that God created the earth as an inhabitable place initially:
Isaiah 45:18 (Darby): "For thus saith Jehovah who created the heavens, God himself who formed the earth and made it, he who established it, -- not as waste did he create it: he formed it to be inhabited: -- I [am] Jehovah, and there is none else."
The same verse, NIV: "For this is what the LORD says-- he who created the heavens, he is God; he who fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited-- he says: "I am the LORD, and there is no other."'

In Genesis 1:1 we read that God created. In Exodus 20:11 we read that God God made the heavens and the earth and the sea. It's not the only reference to God forming the earth we now inhabit.

If this interpretation is correct, then it removes many of the objections that doubters and sceptics have about the Genesis account. Personally, I believe the "gap theory" to be correct. To me, it fits the character of God. Why would He create something formless, empty, a wasteland?

This is not an issue of salvation nor a doctrine meant to divide. It is an explanation that was considered correct by some in the early church and also some early Jewish writings mention it. This was before modern geology began to sow seeds of doubt as to the accuracy of the Genesis account.

This subject matter is covered in "The Mystery of Creation" by Watchman Nee. I highly recommend this to anyone interested in the subject.

 

[d taylor]

.

 

[d taylor]

The apparent age of the earth compared with the genealogies stated in the Bible create problems in the minds of many, both unbelievers and Christians. I believe that there is an answer. It is known as the "pre-Adamic creation" or gap theory. It presents the view that between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 is a considerable, but unknown time.

The evidence for this view is as follows
1. The word "was" in verse 2 can just as readily be translated "became". Earlier editions of the NIV had this is as an alternative translation.

2. We need to know the difference between "create", "form" and "make". Watchman Nee (Mystery of Creation) puts it like this:

"Genesis and Geology 11 In the first two chapters of Genesis three different words are used for the act of creation: (1) “bara”—calling into being without the aid of pre-existing material. This we have already touched upon; (2) “asah”—which is quite different from “bara,” since the latter denotes the idea of creating without any material whereas “asah” signifies the making, fashioning, or preparing out of existing material. For instance, a carpenter can make a chair, but he cannot create one. The works of the Six Days in Genesis are mainly of the order of “asah”; (3) “yatsar”—which means to shape or mould as a potter does with clay. This word is used in Genesis 2.7 as follows: “And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground.” Interestingly, Isaiah 43.7 illustrates the meaning and connection of all three of these words: “every one that is called by my name, and whom I have created for my glory, whom I have formed, yea, whom I have made.” “Created” signifies a calling into being out of nothing; “formed” denotes a fashioning into appointed form; and “made” means a preparing out of pre-existing materials."

3. Other references confirm that God created the earth as an inhabitable place initially:
Isaiah 45:18 (Darby): "For thus saith Jehovah who created the heavens, God himself who formed the earth and made it, he who established it, -- not as waste did he create it: he formed it to be inhabited: -- I [am] Jehovah, and there is none else."
The same verse, NIV: "For this is what the LORD says-- he who created the heavens, he is God; he who fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited-- he says: "I am the LORD, and there is no other."'

In Genesis 1:1 we read that God created. In Exodus 20:11 we read that God God made the heavens and the earth and the sea. It's not the only reference to God forming the earth we now inhabit.

If this interpretation is correct, then it removes many of the objections that doubters and sceptics have about the Genesis account. Personally, I believe the "gap theory" to be correct. To me, it fits the character of God. Why would He create something formless, empty, a wasteland?

This is not an issue of salvation nor a doctrine meant to divide. It is an explanation that was considered correct by some in the early church and also some early Jewish writings mention it. This was before modern geology began to sow seeds of doubt as to the accuracy of the Genesis account.

This subject matter is covered in "The Mystery of Creation" by Watchman Nee. I highly recommend this to anyone interested in the subject.

I believe in a space of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 but i do not believe it was millions etc.. of years. And i do not believe the earth created in Genesis 1:1 was occupied by any thing but angels, no race of adam type of people or dinosaurs etc..

 

[Aussie Pete]

I believe in a space of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 but i do not believe it was millions etc.. of years. And i do not believe the earth created in Genesis 1:1 was occupied by any thing but angels, no race of adam type of people or dinosaurs etc..

I've heard of that view also. I do not agree. I believe that the water that covered the earth was the first flood, Noah's flood being the second. This would explain the fossil records. I do not believe that the earth is anything like as old as most scientists would have us believe. They need an old earth to explain evolution. I do not accept evolution.

 

[d taylor]

I've heard of that view also. I do not agree. I believe that the water that covered the earth was the first flood, Noah's flood being the second. This would explain the fossil records. I do not believe that the earth is anything like as old as most scientists would have us believe. They need an old earth to explain evolution. I do not accept evolution.

The water above the earth is still there.

 

[exitstageright]

I believe in a space of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 but i do not believe it was millions etc.. of years. And i do not believe the earth created in Genesis 1:1 was occupied by any thing but angels, no race of adam type of people or dinosaurs etc..

But, dinosaurs did exist. I have been to various museums and saw the huge bones.I have also been to The La Brea Tar Pits, by Wilshire Blvd, in Los Angeles,California.At the tar pits,one can see for oneself the bones of pre-historic animals that were not mentioned in the Bible. After all,the Bible is not a science book.

 

[d taylor]

But, dinosaurs did exist. I have been to various museums and saw the huge bones.I have also been to The La Brea Tar Pits, by Wilshire Blvd, in Los Angeles,California.At the tar pits,one can see for oneself the bones of pre-historic animals that were not mentioned in the Bible. After all,the Bible is not a science book.

I believe dinosaurs came about in Genesis 6 when the fallen angels corrupted the earth and brought about the half angel half human man. All flesh had corrupted their way.

So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.

 

[TibiasDad]

They need an old earth to explain evolution. I do not accept evolution.

That is a strawman.argument, for many, as myself, believe that the Cosmos is billions of years old, but do not believe in evolution in the sense of Darwinian evolution. (There are certainly "changes" within species, but a fish does not become a bird or monkey a man-- though there is perhaps an argument for some men becoming monkeys! )

Statistical science has shown that there has not been nearly enough time for Darwinian evolution to occur, and even non-theistic, secular scientists have acknowledged this to be to case. An old earth is not merely a substantiation for evolution; it is an undeniable fact that only demonstrates the grandeur of God's creation. The assertion that that YEC proponents make to accuse evolutionists of only wanting an old earth to allow for evolution actually supports the notion that given enough time, evolution could be proven! It cannot!

Doug

 

[Aussie Pete]

That is a strawman.argument, for many, as myself, believe that the Cosmos is billions of years old, but do not believe in evolution in the sense of Darwinian evolution. (There are certainly "changes" within species, but a fish does not become a bird or monkey a man-- though there is perhaps an argument for some men becoming monkeys! )

Statistical science has shown that there has not been nearly enough time for Darwinian evolution to occur, and even non-theistic, secular scientists have acknowledged this to be to case. An old earth is not merely a substantiation for evolution; it is an undeniable fact that only demonstrates the grandeur of God's creation. The assertion that that YEC proponents make to accuse evolutionists of only wanting an old earth to allow for evolution actually supports the notion that given enough time, evolution could be proven! It cannot!

Doug

I was not talking about YEC. I was talking about evolutionists - not Christians. What part of my statement is a logical fallacy?

 

[Aussie Pete]

The water above the earth is still there.

Some is. That's simple, it is by evaporation from the oceans and other water bodies.

 

[Robert8102]

For a person who does not know whether he is a Christian or not, I have long acknowledged the Bible to be the Word of God, literally. I used to believe in evolutionism, until I found out it is scientifically refutable. After changing my mind on biological evolutionism, I still believed in the Big Bang and a billions of years old universe. Then I came to understand that is scientifically refutable, also. I even have put up a website that includes discussion of the scientific refutability of the Big Bang theory. I draw on solid sources for this assertion. My website is www.cosministry.com . Note: the navigation menu may not display in mobile devices.

To see the scientific refutability of evolutionism, you could read "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis," by Australian medical physician and molecular biology research scientist, Dr. Michael Denton. He was an atheist and an evolutionist in principle when he wrote this book, about 1985. He also has a sequel, "Evolution: Still A Theory in Crisis."

For the scientific refutability of the Big Bang theory, you could read, among other things, "The Big Bang Never Happened," by Lerner. (Lerner is the protoge of Alfven, who won the Nobel Price for Physics in 1970. Alfven/Lerner are by no means creationists. They say the Big Bang is a failed paradigm and promote another, also non-creationist, cosmology in its place.) Also, google "ICR light distance problem." The Institute for Creation Research has an excellent article which picks apart the Big Bang theory.

I have learned to not be cowed by some assertions of the mainstream scientific community: that is, old earth and universe, Big Bang and evolutionism. Those who try to reconcile the origins/ages assertions of the mainstream scientific community with the Bible, are apparently cowed by the mainstream scientific community. If you free yourself from awe of mainstream psuedoscience and scientists, you will be free to give scientific creationists' assertions a fair chance.

Some try to reconcile the Bible and so-called "science" by saying things like, when the Bible says "six days," it really means 13 billion years. They say things like "A day with the Lord is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day." Tell me, what does the Bible mean when it says the Promised Land is 11 days journey [by foot] from Egypt? It does not mean it is an 11 million year journey. It means it is an 11 day journey. You can tell when the Bible is being literal and when it is being symbolic, by context. Jesus rose on the third day. Not three billion years later, but on Sunday following the Friday that He was executed on. The Bible is being literal in the Genesis account of creation.

To Christians who are bowled over by the mainstream scientific community, I ask: Did God not have the power to create the whole universe in six calendar days? Or did He just choose NOT to use this power of His? The Bible indicates both that He has/had that much power, and He chose to use that power to create nearly instantaneously. He did not need to take six days. He could have created the cosmos in an instant. He took six days to do it for symbolic reasons of His own. Be bowled over by the power of God, not by the assertions of the mainstream "scientific" community.

One other thing I want to add: when people try to reconcile the Bible with standard theories, they typically make the Bible to be in need of not being literal. They don't play interpretation games with, say, the evolutionists assertion that the earth is five billion years old. But they do play interpretation games with the Bible's straightforward indication that the world is only several thousand years old. They don't say that the evolutionists really mean six days when they say five billion years. They say God really means five billion years when He says six days.

If you want to say "six days = five billion years," then you can say "Jesus = Buddha."

 

[coffee4u]

The apparent age of the earth compared with the genealogies stated in the Bible create problems in the minds of many, both unbelievers and Christians. I believe that there is an answer. It is known as the "pre-Adamic creation" or gap theory. It presents the view that between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 is a considerable, but unknown time.

The evidence for this view is as follows
1. The word "was" in verse 2 can just as readily be translated "became". Earlier editions of the NIV had this is as an alternative translation.

I disagree with you.

The word used is 'was', it was not ' became' which you need to even begin this whole creation before creation model which has no scriptural backup.
"Was" or "Became" in Genesis 1:2?

Christians do need to bend, be in awe of or in any way be fearful of so-called scientific evolution. Real science can be observed and replicated. Evolution is a mans attempt to explain creation without God. It is based on many assumptions.

Like @Robert8102 I also used to be an evolutionist until I became a Christian. Welcome to CF by the way Robert.

 

[Running2win]

I disagree with you about this. A plain sense reading of Genesis and the 7 day week of evenings and mornings prove God was speaking of 6 literal days. If you take the record of how long people lived and then died you get about 6000 years. 1000 years is as one day with God gives us 6000 until the "rest" of the 7th day-Sabbath. We will be there around 2030. Take note.

The problem with a gap is God cursed creation when Adam and Eve sinned. Death came from Adams sin. The creation is still under the curse. So therefore, the fossils were laid down after the flood that destroyed the earth. It's a matter of believing God + nothing, or mans so called "wisdom" + adding God. Don't go down that road.

Christians comes up with some weird ideas in order to be make peace with the wicked- evolutionists.

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

18For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. 24For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees? 25But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for it.

 

[d taylor]

Some is. That's simple, it is by evaporation from the oceans and other water bodies.

That is not what Psalms 148 states
Praise Him, you heavens of heavens, And you waters above the heavens!

Those are the same waters that is separated by the raqia created by God in Genesis 1:6

 

[Running2win]

That is not what Psalms 148 states
Praise Him, you heavens of heavens, And you waters above the heavens!

Those are the same waters that is separated by the raqia created by God in Genesis 1:6

Just read verse 5-"For He commanded and they were created". So the context is the creation event. Genesis says what happened to the majority of waters above. (7:11-12, 8:2)

The heavens and earth will never cease to exist. He will "change" them one day after the day of the Lord, but they are forever.

If we don't believe the creation event and global flood we are lumped in with mockers, according to the Bible. It's believe in God or man. Evolution mocks God.

3Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, 4and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.” 5For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, 6through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. 7But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

 

[TibiasDad]

I was not talking about YEC. I was talking about evolutionists - not Christians. What part of my statement is a logical fallacy?

It is also the reason that YEC decries the evolutionists "need" for an ancient Cosmos, but that is not a true reality. In other words, even a 14 billion year old cosmos doesn't provide enough time for the evolution of all that we have today! So it is an invalid premise to say that an ancient universe can logically and mathematically produce our current reality of life!

Doug

 

[d taylor]

Just read verse 5-"For He commanded and they were created". So the context is the creation event. Genesis says what happened to the majority of waters above. (7:11-12, 8:2)

The heavens and earth will never cease to exist. He will "change" them one day after the day of the Lord, but they are forever.

If we don't believe the creation event and global flood we are lumped in with mockers, according to the Bible. It's believe in God or man. Evolution mocks God.

3Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, 4and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.” 5For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, 6through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. 7But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

There was no global flood, there was a flood that covered the entire earth but it was not global.

And Psalms is speaking about the waters that are above the raqia and are still there. More than likely there is enough water up there to flood the earth many times, not just that one time.

Because God promised not to do that again (flood the earth), if there was no water up there. Why would God have to promise not to flood His creation again.

 

[Victor in Christ]

I used to get bogged down with theories like this for over a decade. What did they do for me? The answer is they drove me away from true wisdom and i went back into the world care free and reckless. They're only theories in human intelligence which Solomon also sought for, he like so many other people, myself included, became none the wiser to the true wisdom of the scripture until they finally gave all that worldy wisdom up.

The true wisdom is believing deep within your heart in faith that Christ is your only Saviour. To possess that wisdom you must humble yourself before your creator, loose your pride, put every worldly thing aside and put all your faith in Christ and ask him to come into your heart and you will obediently follow and Christ will bless you abundantly (not in material/worldy things).

don't even try to seek earthly/worldly wisdom after you become born again/saved/converted, etc. Its meaningless and will eventually destroy you.

Ecclesiastes 7:16

 

[exitstageright]

I believe dinosaurs came about in Genesis 6 when the fallen angels corrupted the earth and brought about the half angel half human man. All flesh had corrupted their way.

So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.

Okay,that is fair enough.

 

[Aussie Pete]

It is also the reason that YEC decries the evolutionists "need" for an ancient Cosmos, but that is not a true reality. In other words, even a 14 billion year old cosmos doesn't provide enough time for the evolution of all that we have today! So it is an invalid premise to say that an ancient universe can logically and mathematically produce our current reality of life!

Doug

I don't know how you concluded that I believe evolution is possible. Evolutionists reject your argument, obviously. I've given up trying to convince evolutionists that they are wrong.