The Gap Theory view holds that there is a
gap of time between the original creation--In the
beginning God created the heavens and the earth, Genesis 1.1--and a
Divine judgment on the earth--The earth was
[became] without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep,
Genesis 1.2.
It is held that the original creation was destroyed by Divine Judgment on the angels that sinned who presumably populated the earth prior to Adam. It allows for the assumed great age of the earth and the universe and natural phenomena that is held to require great periods of time (like fossils or coal). This destruction could explain the demise of the dinosaurs. The six-day creation is actually a restoration or recreation of the earth and atmosphere. As far as history from the recreation, the renewed creation and mankind are relatively young, comparable to the young earth view of creation.
Genesis 1.1-2: "In the beginning...": I take this as the beginning of the first day of original creation. God created that space called the heavens, and he created that ball of water called the earth. But I believe Genesis Chapter One gives us details of what God did over a six-day period. The first day was not the creation of the earth in all its character to make it fitting for the habitation of mankind. Even a recreation theory requires six days to may the earth habitable for mankind.
"The earth was ('hayah')...": To interpret the Hebrew word "hayah" as "become," I would need explicit biblical evidence of such a preAdamic world undergoing Divine judgment. None of the suggested references for a preAdamic world and judgment are as explicit as the Noahic flood narative. I really doubt Peter had in view the preAdamic world in 2 Peter 3.5-6: For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world [that] then existed perished, being flooded with water. Jesus never refers to a preAdamic judgment, only the Noahic flood, of which we have a clear historical reference in Genesis. It seems to me that what happened in Noah's day and Lot's day are things people willingly forget (2 Peter 3.5), things which are historically recorded and are a precedent of how it shall be at the second coming of Christ and the Day of the Lord.
"...without form and void...": Since the earth on the first day was just a ball of water, it was without form and void, or, as another translation, "waste and empty". I'm not sure about the use of "waste." (The translation of the LXX has "unsightly and unfinished.") If God creating the earth took six days, then in the final stage, it was not created waste and empty. And it surely was inhabited. This was the intended outcome. The same would be true for a six-day recreation view. Why take 6 days to recreate and not do it all in one instant?
Scriptures seemingly supporting a Gap Theory view...
Isaiah 45.18: For thus says the Lord, Who created the heavens, Who is God, Who formed the earth and made it, Who has established it, Who did not create it in vain, Who formed it to be inhabited...
Response: If we take into account the whole six days for the creation of the earth, it was not created a waste, and it was definitely inhabited at the end of the week, which would have been the objective.
Psalm 18.7-15: Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations of the hills also quaked and were shaken, because He was angry. Smoke went up from His nostrils, and devouring fire from His mouth; coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down with darkness under His feet...
Response: This text just seems to portray God's wrath using natural phenomena. If it can be determined that the Noahic Flood is not referenced here because of a lack of historical corroboration, I would think the same would be true for a preAdamic judgment on a preAdamic world.
Jeremiah 4:23-26: I beheld the earth, and indeed [it] [was] without form, and void; and the heavens, they [had] no light. I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled, and all the hills moved back and forth. I beheld, and indeed [there] [was] no man, and all the birds of the heavens had fled. I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land [was] a wilderness, and all its cities were broken down At the presence of the Lord, By His fierce anger.
Response: This text is like Psalm 18.7-15. Yet it is silent as to whether it was the destruction of a world populated by angels. It seems to be just a very ominous vision of Divine wrath. Thus the vision showed the absense of men and the birds having all fled. The absense of men could be like the vision in Isaiah 6.11, 12: "Until the cities are laid waste and without inhabitant, The houses are without a man, the land is utterly desolate. The Lord will remove men far away..." The reference of there being "no man" seems to suggest a judgment on men, not angels (in Jeremiah), for that seems to be the point in Isaiah. "Without form and void" is used in vs 23. I can see how this could support the idea that Genesis 1.2 is the result of judgment. Such a description could apply for both a beginning phase of creation and a judgment. There were no distinctive land features. The LXX doesn't even say "without form and void." My translation reads: "I looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was not." Again, a reference to a lack of distinctive land features.
2 Peter 3:5-7: For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world [that] then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth [which] are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Response: People willingly forget the Noahic flood as Divine wrath on mankind. I doubt that many have heard of a preAdamic flood. It is the Noahic flood that has significance with reference to the Day of the Lord, for the flood came on unprepared souls as will the Day of the Lord. If such was the case with a flood upon a preAdamic world of angels living on the earth, then why not a clear historical account to consider? We know that the angels sinned, but the details needed to support a preAdamic flood on the earth are vague at best.
So what about Dinosaurs? It has made sense to me to see Leviathan and Behemoth, in the book of Job (chapters 40-41), as dinosaur-type-creatures. And if we have fossils of creatures that live today, then either God recreated the same creatures, or the fossil record does not date back to a preadamic period. If the latest Coelacanth fossil is 70 million years old, and yet it lives today, then the fossil is either much more recent, or God recreated the fish (assuming the fossil belongs to the preadamic world), or it's the fish that got away.
It is held that the original creation was destroyed by Divine Judgment on the angels that sinned who presumably populated the earth prior to Adam. It allows for the assumed great age of the earth and the universe and natural phenomena that is held to require great periods of time (like fossils or coal). This destruction could explain the demise of the dinosaurs. The six-day creation is actually a restoration or recreation of the earth and atmosphere. As far as history from the recreation, the renewed creation and mankind are relatively young, comparable to the young earth view of creation.
Genesis 1.1-2: "In the beginning...": I take this as the beginning of the first day of original creation. God created that space called the heavens, and he created that ball of water called the earth. But I believe Genesis Chapter One gives us details of what God did over a six-day period. The first day was not the creation of the earth in all its character to make it fitting for the habitation of mankind. Even a recreation theory requires six days to may the earth habitable for mankind.
"The earth was ('hayah')...": To interpret the Hebrew word "hayah" as "become," I would need explicit biblical evidence of such a preAdamic world undergoing Divine judgment. None of the suggested references for a preAdamic world and judgment are as explicit as the Noahic flood narative. I really doubt Peter had in view the preAdamic world in 2 Peter 3.5-6: For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world [that] then existed perished, being flooded with water. Jesus never refers to a preAdamic judgment, only the Noahic flood, of which we have a clear historical reference in Genesis. It seems to me that what happened in Noah's day and Lot's day are things people willingly forget (2 Peter 3.5), things which are historically recorded and are a precedent of how it shall be at the second coming of Christ and the Day of the Lord.
"...without form and void...": Since the earth on the first day was just a ball of water, it was without form and void, or, as another translation, "waste and empty". I'm not sure about the use of "waste." (The translation of the LXX has "unsightly and unfinished.") If God creating the earth took six days, then in the final stage, it was not created waste and empty. And it surely was inhabited. This was the intended outcome. The same would be true for a six-day recreation view. Why take 6 days to recreate and not do it all in one instant?
Scriptures seemingly supporting a Gap Theory view...
Isaiah 45.18: For thus says the Lord, Who created the heavens, Who is God, Who formed the earth and made it, Who has established it, Who did not create it in vain, Who formed it to be inhabited...
Response: If we take into account the whole six days for the creation of the earth, it was not created a waste, and it was definitely inhabited at the end of the week, which would have been the objective.
Psalm 18.7-15: Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations of the hills also quaked and were shaken, because He was angry. Smoke went up from His nostrils, and devouring fire from His mouth; coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down with darkness under His feet...
Response: This text just seems to portray God's wrath using natural phenomena. If it can be determined that the Noahic Flood is not referenced here because of a lack of historical corroboration, I would think the same would be true for a preAdamic judgment on a preAdamic world.
Jeremiah 4:23-26: I beheld the earth, and indeed [it] [was] without form, and void; and the heavens, they [had] no light. I beheld the mountains, and indeed they trembled, and all the hills moved back and forth. I beheld, and indeed [there] [was] no man, and all the birds of the heavens had fled. I beheld, and indeed the fruitful land [was] a wilderness, and all its cities were broken down At the presence of the Lord, By His fierce anger.
Response: This text is like Psalm 18.7-15. Yet it is silent as to whether it was the destruction of a world populated by angels. It seems to be just a very ominous vision of Divine wrath. Thus the vision showed the absense of men and the birds having all fled. The absense of men could be like the vision in Isaiah 6.11, 12: "Until the cities are laid waste and without inhabitant, The houses are without a man, the land is utterly desolate. The Lord will remove men far away..." The reference of there being "no man" seems to suggest a judgment on men, not angels (in Jeremiah), for that seems to be the point in Isaiah. "Without form and void" is used in vs 23. I can see how this could support the idea that Genesis 1.2 is the result of judgment. Such a description could apply for both a beginning phase of creation and a judgment. There were no distinctive land features. The LXX doesn't even say "without form and void." My translation reads: "I looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was not." Again, a reference to a lack of distinctive land features.
2 Peter 3:5-7: For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world [that] then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth [which] are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Response: People willingly forget the Noahic flood as Divine wrath on mankind. I doubt that many have heard of a preAdamic flood. It is the Noahic flood that has significance with reference to the Day of the Lord, for the flood came on unprepared souls as will the Day of the Lord. If such was the case with a flood upon a preAdamic world of angels living on the earth, then why not a clear historical account to consider? We know that the angels sinned, but the details needed to support a preAdamic flood on the earth are vague at best.
So what about Dinosaurs? It has made sense to me to see Leviathan and Behemoth, in the book of Job (chapters 40-41), as dinosaur-type-creatures. And if we have fossils of creatures that live today, then either God recreated the same creatures, or the fossil record does not date back to a preadamic period. If the latest Coelacanth fossil is 70 million years old, and yet it lives today, then the fossil is either much more recent, or God recreated the fish (assuming the fossil belongs to the preadamic world), or it's the fish that got away.
No comments:
Post a Comment