standingfirminChrist
New Member
Isaiah 45:18 was not speaking of a gap at all. It was referring to the creation of the earth as accounted for in Genesis 1
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
GAP: Theory or Fact
- Thread starter Accountable
- Start date
standingfirminChrist said:Isaiah 45:18 was not speaking of a gap at all. It was referring to the creation of the earth as accounted for in Genesis 1
Amen to that, my brother! Then the rest of the Gen.1 give an explanation of the Lord making it sutable for habitation, for both man and other living creatures.
1. God's every move in creation was one of intentional purpose and design.
2. Man no doubt was God's crowning act of creation, for he was the only one created in the image of God and given dominion over what God created.
3. So God created a home for man. To let man know how special he's to his Maker, God put his fingers on creation (Ps.8).
a. I propose that the language of Gen. 1:2 lends itself to that. "The earth was formless and empty" and not "became ruined and desolate" as the gap theorists would have us to believe.
b. "Became ruined and desolate" is not necessary, suggesting a cataclysmic judgment that came up on the earth.
c. Rather, "tohu waw bohu," "formless and empty" suggests that God was about to make it suitable for man, who would be its primary occupant.
4. This is reminiscient of God forming man from the dust of the ground (Gen 2:7). Why didn't a perfect God just speak man in to existence out of thin air? Why did He go through the trouble of using the earth and then breathing into his nostril?
2. Man no doubt was God's crowning act of creation, for he was the only one created in the image of God and given dominion over what God created.
3. So God created a home for man. To let man know how special he's to his Maker, God put his fingers on creation (Ps.8).
a. I propose that the language of Gen. 1:2 lends itself to that. "The earth was formless and empty" and not "became ruined and desolate" as the gap theorists would have us to believe.
b. "Became ruined and desolate" is not necessary, suggesting a cataclysmic judgment that came up on the earth.
c. Rather, "tohu waw bohu," "formless and empty" suggests that God was about to make it suitable for man, who would be its primary occupant.
4. This is reminiscient of God forming man from the dust of the ground (Gen 2:7). Why didn't a perfect God just speak man in to existence out of thin air? Why did He go through the trouble of using the earth and then breathing into his nostril?
There is evidence that strongly suggests and with great merit can be interpreted as a cosmic cataclysmic judgment (not just on earth) which would be quite consistent with the Angelic conflict/rebellion in eternity past.TCGreek said:b. "Became ruined and desolate" is not necessary, suggesting a cataclysmic judgment that came up on the earth.
Last edited by a moderator:
Accountable
New Member
If it deals with the week of creation, which cities did God create in Genisis 1? What Kingdoms shaked? Was the Earth made a wilderness during the Creation of Genesis 1? I thought all that God made in this week was good.standingfirminChrist said:Isaiah 45:18 was not speaking of a gap at all. It was referring to the creation of the earth as accounted for in Genesis 1
Just a thought. I didn't see any of this in Genesis 1's history of creation. That is unless you place it at the time the earth was without form and void. Or, is it still future?
Accountable
New Member
I may be misunderstanding your quote here but I see room for this happening between 1&2b in your statement.TCGreek said:Amen to that, my brother! Then the rest of the Gen.1 give an explanation of the Lord making it sutable for habitation, for both man and other living creatures.
Please correct if I have misunderstood.
Bob Alkire
New Member
So much of the creation problem comes from trying to let science and or humanism judge the Bible. This problem worked it's way right into the church.
Charles Hoge and B. B. Warfield during the 1800's were taken in to the reinterpreted Genesis 1 of the old earth, millions to billions of years old. How many times over the years has Christians and ones in leadership or pastors altered their interpretation of the Bible to accommodate science?
We don't question how long a day is in the Bible in other places but we do or some do in Gen, 1, why?
In my view, if Darwin hadn't pushed his point of view, good men wouldn't have been taken by the gap or taught it. All Darwin did was take the legs out from under Christians if one buys what he had to say, then is the rest of the Bible true or not. The so called church rolled over and played dead.
Charles Hoge and B. B. Warfield during the 1800's were taken in to the reinterpreted Genesis 1 of the old earth, millions to billions of years old. How many times over the years has Christians and ones in leadership or pastors altered their interpretation of the Bible to accommodate science?
We don't question how long a day is in the Bible in other places but we do or some do in Gen, 1, why?
In my view, if Darwin hadn't pushed his point of view, good men wouldn't have been taken by the gap or taught it. All Darwin did was take the legs out from under Christians if one buys what he had to say, then is the rest of the Bible true or not. The so called church rolled over and played dead.
Are you aware that there are teachers of what is commonly called the GAP doctrine that teach it having absolutely NOTHING to do with Darwinism or its influence but relate it to two issues:Bob Alkire said:So much of the creation problem comes from trying to let science and or humanism judge the Bible. This problem worked it's way right into the church.
Charles Hoge and B. B. Warfield during the 1800's were taken in to the reinterpreted Genesis 1 of the old earth, millions to billions of years old. How many times over the years has Christians and ones in leadership or pastors altered their interpretation of the Bible to accommodate science?
We don't question how long a day is in the Bible in other places but we do or some do in Gen, 1, why?
In my view, if Darwin hadn't pushed his point of view, good men wouldn't have been taken by the gap or taught it. All Darwin did was take the legs out from under Christians if one buys what he had to say, then is the rest of the Bible true or not. The so called church rolled over and played dead.
The Hebrew Grammar
The Angelic Conflict
I disagree that it would not exist. One can hold to the GAP doctrine and easily believe in the 7 days of creation.
Accountable said:I may be misunderstanding your quote here but I see room for this happening between 1&2b in your statement.
Please correct if I have misunderstood.
Well, it is up to you to demonstrate your position.
Mr.M said:There is evidence that strongly suggests and with great merit can be interpreted as a cosmic cataclysmic judgment (not just on earth) which would be quite consistent with the Angelic conflict/rebellion in eternity past.
1. I do not doubt for one sec that cases can be made for other views. That has been the way of life for quite sometime.
2. At the end of discussions like these, we all have to interact with the same biblical data.
Accountable
New Member
The Gap fact was taught long before Darwin ever saw his first monkey.Bob Alkire said:So much of the creation problem comes from trying to let science and or humanism judge the Bible. This problem worked it's way right into the church.
Charles Hoge and B. B. Warfield during the 1800's were taken in to the reinterpreted Genesis 1 of the old earth, millions to billions of years old. How many times over the years has Christians and ones in leadership or pastors altered their interpretation of the Bible to accommodate science?
We don't question how long a day is in the Bible in other places but we do or some do in Gen, 1, why?
In my view, if Darwin hadn't pushed his point of view, good men wouldn't have been taken by the gap or taught it. All Darwin did was take the legs out from under Christians if one buys what he had to say, then is the rest of the Bible true or not. The so called church rolled over and played dead.
Any suggestions as to the connection between what appears to be planetary cataclysmic histories throughout the perceivable universe and most clearly within our solar system and anything hinted at or can be deduced from Scripture?TCGreek said:1. I do not doubt for one sec that cases can be made for other views. That has been the way of life for quite sometime.
2. At the end of discussions like these, we all have to interact with the same biblical data.
Bob Alkire
New Member
Mr.M said:Are you aware that there are teachers of what is commonly called the GAP doctrine that teach it having absolutely NOTHING to do with Darwinism or its influence but relate it to two issues:
The Hebrew Grammar
The Angelic Conflict
I disagree that it would not exist. One can hold to the GAP doctrine and easily believe in the 7 days of creation.
I know that and I know that well. I was a Gap man until about 1967, it is what I was taught in college and seminary. John Whitcomb at Grace believed it at one time as did Charles Ryrie but today they don't and neither do I.
R. B. Thieme pulls up the Angelic conflict to give background on the Gap, and he did do a good job at it. If I may say Thieme did a better job at it than anyone I've come across. I too, have taught the Gap, but I don't buy it today.
And on the Hebrew Grammar part, I don't buy into that side, but I'm not the Hebrew teacher.
But I still believe what I said.
Mr.M said:Any suggestions as to the connection between what appears to be planetary cataclysmic histories throughout the perceivable universe and most clearly within our solar system and anything hinted at or can be deduced from Scripture?
Let me know, for you are the one leading that charge.
I was referring to Barnhouse, The Invisible War.Bob Alkire said:I know that and I know that well. I was a Gap man until about 1967, it is what I was taught in college and seminary. John Whitcomb at Grace believed it at one time as did Charles Ryrie but today they don't and neither do I.
R. B. Thieme pulls up the Angelic conflict to give background on the Gap, and he did do a good job at it. If I may say Thieme did a better job at it than anyone I've come across. I too, have taught the Gap, but I don't buy it today.
And on the Hebrew Grammar part, I don't buy into that side, but I'm not the Hebrew teacher.
But I still believe what I said.
Last edited by a moderator:
standingfirminChrist
New Member
Mr.M said:There is evidence that strongly suggests and with great merit can be interpreted as a cosmic cataclysmic judgment (not just on earth) which would be quite consistent with the Angelic conflict/rebellion in eternity past.
Not Biblical evidence.
Apparently you didn't read my post though you quoted it. Here try it again:standingfirminChrist said:Not Biblical evidence.
There is evidence that strongly suggests and with great merit can be interpreted as a cosmic cataclysmic judgment (not just on earth) which would be quite consistent with the Angelic conflict/rebellion in eternity past.
The cataclysmic evidence I am referring to is what we view astronomically on moons and planets that have strong patterns of some cataclysm, i.e. giant craters formed from enormous objects slamming into these stellar bodies in mass numbers. That is called a cataclysmic event.
That combined with the record of the Angelic Conflict and the fall of Satan which involved God's judgment upon him and one third of the Angels gives weight to the doctrinal teaching.
I am not sure what YOU mean by biblical evidence but the Bible does refer to the testimony of God via nature. Now, nature testifies to God which is apart from the Bible so here is a case of the testimony of God outside of the Bible, that being nature. As well, the rainbow testifies to God's promise, again a source of physical evidence of an act of God. So you see, properly understood in light of the clear teachings or glimpses provided in the Bible, physical evidence and correlations to the acts of God in history are legitimate.
The Bible says he created the sun and there is the sun as evidence. God judged the rebelling Satan and one third of the angels and we see evidence of a universal judgment which is exactly why earth needed to be restored.
And so, the Angelic Conflict...i.e. the rebellion of Satan and one third of the Angels is recorded in Scripture. There was a judgment. For those that accept the Hebrew distinctions in Genesis regarding the GAP doctrine, this is quite compatible and quite biblical as well as observable to some degree regarding some form of divine judgment resulting in a universal cataclysm.
You simply disagree.
standingfirminChrist
New Member
There is no Biblical evidence whatsoever of a Gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.
Sure nature declares the handiwork of God... but it does not declare a gap.
Sure nature declares the handiwork of God... but it does not declare a gap.
What in the world does the Gap theory have to do with evolution? Evolution simply means to "Change". Darwin taught that species change from one to the other. God says each was created after their own kind. Darwin's theory is wrong and God is right, period. However, everything evolves (changes). Each one of us "evolved" from a fertile egg into the person you are today. The United States evolved from 13 colonies to 50 states. The Gap theory simply contains the history prior to Gen. 1:2, no evolution, simply creation and destruction.
Mr.M said:I was referring to Barnhouse, The Invisible War.
Barnhouse... Now that is a good man!!! ... Good last name too!