ECT The gap theory?

[revpete]

Between Vs 1&2 there have been those who have proposed that a gap exists and in this supposed gap it is possible to account for ice ages, dinosaurs, the slow build up of layers of different rocks and generally credit the earth with being millions of years old. This "Gap Theory" was first put forward by a man called Thomas Chalmers in the 19th century in an attempt to make The Bible line up with modern thinking. There is also a play on certain Hebrew words. However, I do not propose to discuss that here because these words have been taken out of context and used incorrectly.

Thomas Chalmers:

Thomas Chalmers FRSE (17 March 1780 – 31 May 1847), was a Scottish minister, professor of theology, political economist, and a leader of the Church of Scotland and of the Free Church of Scotland. He has been called "Scotland's greatest nineteenth-century churchman".[1]

He served as Vice-president of the Royal Society of Edinburgh from 1835-42.

 

[genuineoriginal]

There is no need to put a gap in Genesis 1:1-2.
Genesis 7:17-24 can account for the ice ages, the death of dinosaurs, and the layers of different rocks that people mistake as being millions of years old.

 

[Jedidiah]

Exodus 20:11 -- ...in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them....

 

[oatmeal]

Exodus 20:11 -- ...in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them....

made or created or both? and throw in formed as well?

the six days started with Genesis 1:2

Isaiah 45:18

For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.

 

[Jedidiah]

made or created or both? and throw in formed as well?

the six days started with Genesis 1:2

Isaiah 45:18

For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.

Eisegesis. Six days is six days. Ex20:11

 

[Nathon Detroit]

revpete, you had 4 threads with the same topic. Please do not create anymore threads with the same content. I have deleted the other 3 threads.

 

[jamie]

For the Spirit to move over the waters requires a moderate temperature. What was the cause of this moderate temperature?

 

[steko]

The cataclysmic flood is adequate to explain the phenomenon found in earth's record.
There is no need for an artificially imposed Gap/Ruin-reconstruction Theory.

 

[Nick M]

Between Vs 1&2 there have been those who have proposed that a gap exists

Six days means six days.

and in this supposed gap it is possible to account for ice ages,

There was only one and months is hardly an "age".

dinosaurs,

What about them?

the slow build up of layers of different rocks

What slow build up? The flood was rapid and violent giving us sedimentary layers.

Only a moron would think it is a reasonable thought.

 

[Lon]

Eisegesis. Six days is six days. Ex20:11

Understood, but he was talking about the word created (or "made" or "recreated").
The gap theory doesn't dispute a literal 6 days at all. The gap theory is held by those who take Genesis literally, if that helps. I'm not a gap theorist but I've made room for them to sit by me at the lunch table, or I should say I simply sit at that same table, it was already made acceptable before I got there.

CARM believes Gap-theorists cannot be biblically substantiated, however. And Nick:

Only a moron would think it is a reasonable thought.

I do see the problems Matt Slick addresses on CARM (citing 4 biblical passages other than this one you've posted as well).

 

[oatmeal]

Eisegesis. Six days is six days. Ex20:11

Really?

What did God create on the second day?

What did God create on the third day?

 

[jamie]

Really?

What did God create on the second day?

What did God create on the third day?

What did God start with to begin creation? He started with water, not ice.

God divided the waters from the waters by creating a gap between the waters. This gap is defined as heaven.

The waters under the heaven were gathered together so that dry land appeared.

 

[Jedidiah]

Understood, but he was talking about the word created (or "made" or "recreated")...

Exodus 20:11 refers to the Genesis account, plainly. It's infallible interpretation of the Genesis account, just in case any future generations got it in our heads to interpret the Genesis account as anything more complex than "six days."

...The gap theory doesn't dispute a literal 6 days at all...

I don't know that this is true. It certainly doesn't seem that way. So perhaps gap theorists ought to work on their clarity so that simple minded folks like me don't misinterpret them ?

...The gap theory is held by those who take Genesis literally, if that helps...

So long as "literally" means "six days," that sounds fine.

...I'm not a gap theorist but I've made room for them to sit by me at the lunch table, or I should say I simply sit at that same table, it was already made acceptable before I got there.

CARM believes Gap-theorists cannot be biblically substantiated, however....

I don't know what CARM is. :idunno: Exodus 20:11 says "six days" which simply confirms the simplest reading of Genesis.

 

[Jedidiah]

Really?...

Uh-huh.

 

[HisServant]

The audience that Genesis was written for had no words for billions of years and would have not understood the intricacies of creation. So God inspired it to be written in such a way that it could be understood by its intended audience. It was perfectly written for whom it was intended for.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I believe replenish means replenish, not plenish.

 

[Jedidiah]

If it wasn't six days, then the commandment to keep the Sabbath was a sham. Ex20:11

 

[Lon]

Exodus 20:11 refers to the Genesis account, plainly. It's infallible interpretation of the Genesis account, just in case any future generations got it in our heads to interpret the Genesis account as anything more complex than "six days."
I don't know that this is true. It certainly doesn't seem that way. So perhaps gap theorists ought to work on their clarity so that simple minded folks like me don't misinterpret them ?
So long as "literally" means "six days," that sounds fine.
I don't know what CARM is. :idunno: Exodus 20:11 says "six days" which simply confirms the simplest reading of Genesis.

CARM just has a short treatise on the gap theory is all. It is probably short enough that I could have posted it, but I went with just a link.

Here is most of it:

The gap theory postulates that between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2 there was an entirely different creation which, some claim, was wiped out by a "Satan's Flood," and after which the earth was re-formed and the six days of Genesis creation commenced. The gap is said to have involved great eons of time. This gap theory was formed in response to the uniformitarian idea of long ages first applied by geologists in the nineteenth century. The gap theory is contradicted by the Bible itself on a number of counts.

1. Genesis 1:2 gives us a list of three qualities: the earth was formless and empty; darkness covered it; and the Holy Spirit was hovering, or vibrating (same word in the Hebrew) over the waters. No Hebrew historical narrative starts with a list of qualities. The explanation ALWAYS follows the general statement of where the history starts or is headed. Thus, Genesis 1:2 would be rightly seen as an explanation of the earliest moments following the creation of the time/space/mass continuum in Genesis 1:1.
2. 2 Pet. 3:5 states clearly that the earth was formed out of water and by water. No reference is made to land preceding that, which is what the gap theory proposes.
3. Ezekiel 28:12-17 is generally considered a "double" passage, containing a parenthetic pertaining to Satan as well as an address to the king of Tyre. In it, the being referred to was in Eden as a blameless guardian cherub. If you cross reference this passage to the passage that is clearly regarding Satan in Isaiah 14:12-15, you will see a parallel structure which really cannot be denied. There are a series of "I will's" in Isaiah, answered by the corresponding actions of the Lord in return in Ezekiel. This being the case, Satan, or Lucifer as he was originally, could not have been in rebellion before Eden was formed and therefore there was no "Satan's Flood' which could have destroyed a world he had corrupted in some sort of gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
4. In the Fourth Commandment, Exodus 20:11, it is clearly stated that the heavens, the earth, the seas, and all that is in them were created in six days.

So the gap theory does not hold where the rest of the Bible is concerned. Geologically and archaeologically this would not be valid, either, for the world destroyed in the "Satan's Flood" would NOT be the fossilized world the gap theorists often postulate. The fossil strata we know would have been utterly destroyed by NOAH's flood had they been from an earlier time. -Matt Slick, CARM

 

[Nick M]

I believe replenish means replenish, not plenish.

I am going to have to pull a godrulz card on this one. Except it means what is says, unlike his claims.

1 a : to fill with persons or animals : stock

b archaic : to supply fully : perfect​

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I am going to have to pull a godrulz card on this one.

:jawdrop: