The Gap Theory

[Faith.Man]

A historical perspective by Ole Madsen on the Gap Theory.

Gap theory page - what is the gap theory?

If you read no other link, read this one by Chuck Missler.

The gap theory page - Chuck Missler - The Gospel in Genesis

Arthur C. Custance on the long held view of the Gap Theory.

Gap theory page - Arthur C Custance

C. I. Schofield on Genesis 1.

The gap theory page - C. I. Scofield - Scofield-Genesis

A. W. Pink on Genesis.

The gap theory page - A W Pink - Gleanings In Genesis: 1. Creation and Restoration

Just a few of the links on this website. Steven E. Dill, D.V.M. has written a new book on the Gap Theory called "In the Beginnings" that I plan to read, but I haven't ordered it yet. I imagine I will do that tonight.

 

[Bushido216]

Why?

 

[mark kennedy]

A historical perspective by Ole Madsen on the Gap Theory.

Gap theory page - what is the gap theory?

If you read no other link, read this one by Chuck Missler.

The gap theory page - Chuck Missler - The Gospel in Genesis

Arthur C. Custance on the long held view of the Gap Theory.

Gap theory page - Arthur C Custance

C. I. Schofield on Genesis 1.

The gap theory page - C. I. Scofield - Scofield-Genesis

A. W. Pink on Genesis.

The gap theory page - A W Pink - Gleanings In Genesis: 1. Creation and Restoration

Just a few of the links on this website. Steven E. Dill, D.V.M. has written a new book on the Gap Theory called "In the Beginnings" that I plan to read, but I haven't ordered it yet. I imagine I will do that tonight.

Looks like some serious exegetical work went into those pages. I'll have to read some more but from what I'm seeing it looks like my cup of tea. Regardless, I'm going to post this to the Creationist Resource pages. I really like this sort of detailed exposition.

Thanks for the links.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[juvenissun]

A historical perspective by Ole Madsen on the Gap Theory.

Gap theory page - what is the gap theory?

If you read no other link, read this one by Chuck Missler.

The gap theory page - Chuck Missler - The Gospel in Genesis

Arthur C. Custance on the long held view of the Gap Theory.

Gap theory page - Arthur C Custance

C. I. Schofield on Genesis 1.

The gap theory page - C. I. Scofield - Scofield-Genesis

A. W. Pink on Genesis.

The gap theory page - A W Pink - Gleanings In Genesis: 1. Creation and Restoration

Just a few of the links on this website. Steven E. Dill, D.V.M. has written a new book on the Gap Theory called "In the Beginnings" that I plan to read, but I haven't ordered it yet. I imagine I will do that tonight.

What does the "without form" mean when the earth is described? Is this a question in the Gap theory?

 

[Faith.Man]

Looks like some serious exegetical work went into those pages. I'll have to read some more but from what I'm seeing it looks like my cup of tea. Regardless, I'm going to post this to the Creationist Resource pages. I really like this sort of detailed exposition.

Thanks for the links.

Grace and peace,
Mark

Your welcome. I have found so little, good information on the Internet regarding the Gap Theory, I was thrilled to stumble upon this site by accident. Of course I'm a Calvinist, so this was in God's plan all along.

 

[Faith.Man]

What does the "without form" mean when the earth is described? Is this a question in the Gap theory?

Genesis 1:2 - The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. [NASB]

Genesis 1:1-2 [from the Bible Knowledge Commentary]

I. The Primeval Events (1:1-11:26)

A. The Creation (1:1-2:3)

The account of Creation is the logical starting point for Genesis, for it explains the beginning of the universe. These verses have received much attention in connection with science; this is to be expected. But the passage is a theological treatise as well, for it lays a foundation for the rest of the Pentateuch.

In writing this work for Israel, Moses wished to portray God as the Founder and Creator of all life. The account shows that the God who created Israel is the God who created the world and all who are in it. Thus the theocracy is founded on the sovereign God of Creation. That nation, her Law, and her customs and beliefs all go back to who God is. Israel would here learn what kind of God was forming them into a nation.

The implications of this are great. First, it means that everything that exists must be under God’s control. The Creation must be in subjection to the Creator. Forces of nature, enemies, creatures and objects that became pagan deities — none of these would pose a threat to the servants of the living God.

Second, the account also reveals the basis of the Law. If indeed God was before all things and made all things, how foolish it would be to have any other gods before Him! There were none. If indeed God made man in His image to represent Him, how foolish it would be to make an image of God! If indeed God set aside one day for rest from His work, should not man who is walking with God follow Him? The commandments find their rationale here.
Third, the account reveals that God is a redeeming God. It records how He brought the cosmos out of chaos, turned darkness into light, made divisions between them, transformed cursing into blessing, and moved from what was evil and darkness to what was holy. This parallels the work of God in Exodus, which records His redeeming Israel by destroying the Egyptian forces of chaos. The prophets and the apostles saw here a paradigm of God’s redemptive activities. Ultimately He who caused light to shine out of darkness made His light shine in the hearts of believers (2 Corinthians 4:6) so that they become new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17).

These verses have traditionally been understood as referring to the actual beginning of matter, a Creation out of nothing and therefore part of day one. But the vocabulary and grammar of this section require a closer look. The motifs and the structure of the Creation account are introduced in the first two verses. That the universe is God’s creative work is perfectly expressed by the statement God created the heavens and the earth. The word bārā’ (“created&#8221 may express creation out of nothing, but it certainly cannot be limited to that (Genesis 2:7). Rather, it stresses that what was formed was new and perfect. The word is used throughout the Bible only with God as its subject.

But Genesis 1:2 describes a chaos: there was waste and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep. The clauses in Genesis 1:2 are apparently circumstantial to Genesis 1:3, telling the world’s condition when God began to renovate it. It was a chaos of wasteness, emptiness, and darkness. Such conditions would not result from God’s creative work (bārā’ rather, in the Bible they are symptomatic of sin and are coordinate with judgment. Moreover, God’s Creation by decree begins in Genesis 1:3, and the elements found in Genesis 1:2 are corrected in Creation, beginning with light to dispel the darkness. The expression formless and empty (ṯōhû wāḇōhu&#770 seems also to provide an outline for Genesis 1:1-31, which describes God’s bringing shape and then fullness to the formless and empty earth.

Some have seen a middle stage of Creation here, that is, an unfinished work of Creation (Genesis 1:2) that was later developed (Genesis 1:3-25) into the present form. But this cannot be sustained by the syntax or the vocabulary.

Others have seen a “gap” between the first two verses, allowing for the fall of Satan and entrance of sin into the world that caused the chaos. It is more likely that Genesis 1:1 refers to a relative beginning rather than the absolute beginning (Merrill F. Unger, Unger’s Commentary on the Old Testament. 2 vols. Chicago: Moody Press, 1981, 1:5). The chapter would then be accounting for the Creation of the universe as man knows it, not the beginning of everything, and Genesis 1:1-2 would provide the introduction to it. The fall of Satan and entrance of sin into God’s original Creation would precede this.

It was by the Spirit that the Lord God sovereignly created everything that exists (Genesis 1:2). In the darkness of the chaos the Spirit of God moved to prepare for the effectual creative word of God.

I have Merrill F. Unger's Commentary on the Old Testament (2 Volumes). What I've quoted above is somewhat derivative from Unger's Commentary. I do not have an electronic version of Unger's Commentary. I highly recommend it.

God Bless.

 

[Faith.Man]

Looks like some serious exegetical work went into those pages. I'll have to read some more but from what I'm seeing it looks like my cup of tea. Regardless, I'm going to post this to the Creationist Resource pages. I really like this sort of detailed exposition.

Thanks for the links.

Grace and peace,
Mark

One other thing, I'd love to get your feedback on the second link, the Gospel in Genesis. It really blew me away, and I'm not one to be taken in by books like the Bible Code and the like.

God Bless.

 

[juvenissun]

But Genesis 1:2 describes a chaos: there was waste and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep. The clauses in Genesis 1:2 are apparently circumstantial to Genesis 1:3, telling the world’s condition when God began to renovate it. It was a chaos of wasteness, emptiness, and darkness. Such conditions would not result from God’s creative work (bārā’); rather, in the Bible they are symptomatic of sin and are coordinate with judgment. Moreover, God’s Creation by decree begins in Genesis 1:3, and the elements found in Genesis 1:2 are corrected in Creation, beginning with light to dispel the darkness. The expression formless and empty (ṯōhû wāḇōhû) seems also to provide an outline for Genesis 1:1-31, which describes God’s bringing shape and then fullness to the formless and empty earth.

This is the paragraph I need: So, it is:

God creates perfect Heaven and Earth > GAP (sin, judgement) > Renovation of original creation in the following Days.

The only reason for the GAP is: God's original creation (the Earth) must be perfect. The "formless and void" describes things far way from perfect.

Did I miss anything?

One question: Today, are we able to see any of the chaotic relics on earth, which was caused by whatever happened during the Gap? Or are those imperfect things all wiped out during the renovation?

 

[Faith.Man]

This is the paragraph I need: So, it is:

God creates perfect Heaven and Earth > GAP (sin, judgement) > Renovation of original creation in the following Days.

I do not see the word "perfect" in Genesis 1:1. It was obviously created perfectly from an elemental standpoint. But beings capable of imperfection (sin) ruined this version of God's creative work. God at some point pronounced judgment on this version of creation. Maybe He decided roaches would get a pass, but everything else was destroyed with a flood. This is not Noah's flood which I believe was local, this was a global flood spoken of in various verses of the Old and New Testaments. This all occurred in the indeterminate past (hence gap). God after an indeterminate time (gap) started creation 2.0.

The only reason for the GAP is: God's original creation (the Earth) must be perfect. The "formless and void" describes things far way from perfect.

No. You've missed the point. This has nothing to do with perfection. Why are you adding that requirement? You're adding something that is not even hinted at in any scripture. The "formless and void" indicates judgment, a particularly harsh judgment. Consider God's judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah. Harsh judgments are not uncommon and always justified.

Did I miss anything?

See above.

One question: Today, are we able to see any of the chaotic relics on earth, which was caused by whatever happened during the Gap? Or are those imperfect things all wiped out during the renovation?

Roaches. Creatures of the various ages according to the fossil record.

 

[RND]

God says in His word that He is creator. He says He created the world in six days. Does not the fact that there is a seven day week not bear witness to God's creation?

 

[juvenissun]

I do not see the word "perfect" in Genesis 1:1. It was obviously created perfectly from an elemental standpoint. But beings capable of imperfection (sin) ruined this version of God's creative work. God at some point pronounced judgment on this version of creation. Maybe He decided roaches would get a pass, but everything else was destroyed with a flood. This is not Noah's flood which I believe was local, this was a global flood spoken of in various verses of the Old and New Testaments. This all occurred in the indeterminate past (hence gap). God after an indeterminate time (gap) started creation 2.0.

The only reason for the GAP is: God's original creation (the Earth) must be perfect. The "formless and void" describes things far way from perfect.

No. You've missed the point. This has nothing to do with perfection. Why are you adding that requirement? You're adding something that is not even hinted at in any scripture. The "formless and void" indicates judgment, a particularly harsh judgment. Consider God's judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah. Harsh judgments are not uncommon and always justified.



See above.



Roaches. Creatures of the various ages according to the fossil record.

OK, I will try again:

1. God created Heavens and earth, perfect or not perfect.
2. The Gap (sin, judgement, death, etc)
3. God started to restore His original creation. It starts with light, etc.

During the Gap:

0. The reason for what happened during the Gap is not clear, but is not a problem.
1. The earth can be described as formless and void during the Gap.
2. Animals died and fossilized
3. Some animal species survived and we can see them today.

So, could I assume the main reason for what happened during the Gap is the Satan?

Also, could I say that the main function to have this Gap theory is to provide a reasonable explanation to the existence of fossils?

 

[RND]

OK, I will try again:

1. God created Heavens and earth, perfect or not perfect.
2. The Gap (sin, judgement, death, etc)
3. God started to restore His original creation. It starts with light, etc.

During the Gap:

0. The reason for what happened during the Gap is not clear, but is not a problem.
1. The earth can be described as formless and void during the Gap.
2. Animals died and fossilized
3. Some animal species survived and we can see them today.

So, could I assume the main reason for what happened during the Gap is the Satan?

Also, could I say that the main function to have this Gap theory is to provide a reasonable explanation to the existence of fossils?

Where does the Bible say sin and death entered the world before Adam's transgression?

Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

Death reigned after Adam's sin.

 

[gluadys]

God says in His word that He is creator. He says He created the world in six days. Does not the fact that there is a seven day week not bear witness to God's creation?

One reason for a seven-day week is that it is the approximate time from one moon phase to another (new moon to first quarter to full moon to third quarter to new moon again).

Also, other than the fixed stars there are seven heavenly bodies visible to the unaided eye: Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. It is from these we get the names of the days of the week--though that is somewhat obscured in English because the equivalent names of the Norse gods are used for some of them.

Compare:

English..............French..............Luminary/Planet

Sunday..............dimanche.........Sun (French name means "lord's day")
Monday..............lundi...............Moon (French "lune")
Tuesday.............mardi..............Mars (Norse "Tiw")
Wednesday........mercredi...........Mercury (Norse "Woden")
Thursday.............jeudi..............Jupiter/Jove (Norse "Thor")
Friday................vendredi..........Venus (Norse "Freya")
Saturday.............samedi...........Saturn

Of course, in paganism, all of these were thought to be gods as well as planets and a day was assigned to each "god".

The equivalences between the original Roman gods and the Norse gods are not exact. Thor is more like Mars, but associated with Jupiter because both used lightning bolts as weapons. Woden, like Jupiter was king of the gods and Tiw was somewhat more like Mercury than Mars. Nevertheless, both systems show the seven days of the week associated with the seven heavenly bodies which were in turn associated with the gods.

I believe later Jewish writing associates them with the angels of the planets.

 

[Bushido216]

God says in His word that He is creator. He says He created the world in six days. Does not the fact that there is a seven day week not bear witness to God's creation?

There's a 7 day week for the same reason that ham is called ham and not slartibartfast... because we arbitrarily decided to arrange ourselves that way. A 7 day week doesn't occur in nature or anything.

 

[juvenissun]

There's a 7 day week for the same reason that ham is called ham and not slartibartfast... because we arbitrarily decided to arrange ourselves that way. A 7 day week doesn't occur in nature or anything.

Somebody must have tried to find out what would go wrong with a 5-day week, or a 6-day week of a 8-day week. I don't know. But I suspect they won't work as well.

Well, to fit the OP, may be the 8-day week will have a chance. Could the Gap be counted as a day?

 

[RND]

There's a 7 day week for the same reason that ham is called ham and not slartibartfast... because we arbitrarily decided to arrange ourselves that way. A 7 day week doesn't occur in nature or anything.

God says He created the week not man. Doesn't seem arbitrary to me.

 

[RND]

One reason for a seven-day week is that it is the approximate time from one moon phase to another (new moon to first quarter to full moon to third quarter to new moon again).

Also, other than the fixed stars there are seven heavenly bodies visible to the unaided eye: Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. It is from these we get the names of the days of the week--though that is somewhat obscured in English because the equivalent names of the Norse gods are used for some of them.

Compare:

English..............French..............Luminary/Planet

Sunday..............dimanche.........Sun (French name means "lord's day")
Monday..............lundi...............Moon (French "lune")
Tuesday.............mardi..............Mars (Norse "Tiw")
Wednesday........mercredi...........Mercury (Norse "Woden")
Thursday.............jeudi..............Jupiter/Jove (Norse "Thor")
Friday................vendredi..........Venus (Norse "Freya")
Saturday.............samedi...........Saturn

Of course, in paganism, all of these were thought to be gods as well as planets and a day was assigned to each "god".

The equivalences between the original Roman gods and the Norse gods are not exact. Thor is more like Mars, but associated with Jupiter because both used lightning bolts as weapons. Woden, like Jupiter was king of the gods and Tiw was somewhat more like Mercury than Mars. Nevertheless, both systems show the seven days of the week associated with the seven heavenly bodies which were in turn associated with the gods.

I believe later Jewish writing associates them with the angels of the planets.

Thanks. We must keep in mind that the Hebrew month was based not on a weekly cycle but a monthly one, based on the phase of the moon, and that every few years a 13th month was added in to compensate for the time discrepancy. Neither did the Hebrews name days. It was merely 5th day to the sabbath, 3rd day to the sabbath, etc. That's why the Hebrews marked days beginning from sunset to sunset as well. It would have been difficult to mark "weeks" considering that one moon phase is completely dark and hard to see.

Lastly, a 5 or 6 day day week would make a better short term fit and sense if you think about it (6 times 5 is 30). These would be closer to the lunar month of about 29.53 days than 28 days by 7 would be.

 

[Bushido216]

God says He created the week not man. Doesn't seem arbitrary to me.

You're missing the point. Whether it was God's decisions or man's or the giant spaghetti monster, there's no reason why 7 days is better than any other number of days.

 

[gluadys]

Somebody must have tried to find out what would go wrong with a 5-day week, or a 6-day week of a 8-day week. I don't know. But I suspect they won't work as well.

Well, to fit the OP, may be the 8-day week will have a chance. Could the Gap be counted as a day?

Nothing in particular goes "wrong" with weeks of different lengths. They are just different ways of keeping track of the time.

Here is an article on cultures which have used different week lengths:
Week - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It doesn't include the recent innovation of the Baha'i calendar which divides the year into 19 months of 19 days (plus intercalary days to complete the solar cycle). Bahá'Ã[bless and do not curse] calendar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



LOL I see our robot censor reacted to part of that last link as if to bad language. However the link still works.

 

[RND]

You're missing the point. Whether it was God's decisions or man's or the giant spaghetti monster, there's no reason why 7 days is better than any other number of days.

If that were true societies around the world would be using various days for the week, Some 5, some 6, some 7.

In that the entire world has accepted a seven day week attests to it being better than any other.