The Gap Theory

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Exd 24:12
And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them.

I admire your reasoning in this post, though I don't agree with all of it. I would call your attention to the fact that, on Mt. Sinai, Moses received only the Ten Commandments, not the entire law. God wrote the first tablets, which Moses smashed. God made him write the replacements, probably as punishment for his angry outburst, even though well deserved at first glance. But anger isn't God's way.

I stand by my first response, that Moses would write as he'd been educated to write -- on papyrus. And you're right, good discussion -- for another thread. :laugh:

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Just a note, Our teacher is having us all read a book on one of 5 Creation Theories:

Evolution, Theistic Evolution, Planted by Aliens(lol), Gap Theory, or young earth creation.

His goal is for us to be able to either 1. Explain and present the theory or 2. Refute the theory.

He wants us to end up either with a gap theory position or young earth position.

I dont really know how dogmatic he is about the gap theory.

 

[Inspector Javert]

You think they called a collection of clay tablets "The Book of Law"?

They easily would have....no one used "books"....the word "sepher" is synonymous with either "writings" or "books"

You think "The Book of Law" fit in the Ark?

If you mean the sum total of all it would take to contain the first 5 chapters of the book of Genesis fitting into a 300' Barge......yes, I think there's adequate space for that. Do you maintain otherwise?

You think the article "in" would be used to describe what was recorded as part of that book if it was written "on" -- exteriorally -- a stone tablet?

Yes, the word "write" is related to the word "cut".........
one doesn't simply "write" they "cut" their words.......
that would make sense if your language was originally (as all languages were) originally "written" by "cutting" into a soft clay with a stylus.

No. Moses wrote on papyrus, exactly as he had been taught when being educated in Egypt

I don't doubt Moses was perfectly familiar with the Egyptian method of writing on papyrus with inks.....certainly he could do it.

But Papyri and ink were luxuries which LONG post-date writing itself.......and I maintain that Coptic is far LESS related to the proto-Hebrew of the early O.T. than, say, Chaldee or Ugaritic or similar Semitic languages which are written on clay tablets are.

but in the Hebrew language, not hieroglyphics.

The proto-Hebrew or paleo-hebrew upon which the earliest books of the Bible were written used an alphabet designed for writing upon clay, not papyrus. It Very closely resembled the Phoenician alphabet. Lots of right angles and whatnot....it isn't easy to draw a bird when a coupla' horizontal and vertical straight lines will do the job.

 

[quantumfaith]

Just a note, Our teacher is having us all read a book on one of 5 Creation Theories:

Evolution, Theistic Evolution, Planted by Aliens(lol), Gap Theory, or young earth creation.

His goal is for us to be able to either 1. Explain and present the theory or 2. Refute the theory.

He wants us to end up either with a gap theory position or young earth position.

I dont really know how dogmatic he is about the gap theory.

Is this an online class? An institutional class? Is this class an OT survey?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

If you mean the sum total of all it would take to contain the first 5 chapters of the book of Genesis fitting into a 300' Barge......yes, I think there's adequate space for that. Do you maintain otherwise?

I'm referring to stone tablets being the conveyance of the 613 items of the Law, which were given to Moses just before they entered the Promised Land, and he went to the mountaintop to be taken home to his Maker, and those tablets fitting into the Ark of the Covenant. That would not be possible.

Yes, the word "write" is related to the word "cut".........

I'm sorry, but there is no basis for that statement. The preposition is used to show direction, location, time, or to introduce an object. For example, "I put my wallet ON the table." Another example, "I went TO the store." When the ancient Hebrews wrote the word "in," it referenced not only location, but the nature of that location. They would never have written "in" but rather "on" if the original writings had been "on" a clay tablet. Instead, they wrote "in The Book of Law" to indicate it was found in the scrolls that made up the Book of Law.

I don't doubt Moses was perfectly familiar with the Egyptian method of writing on papyrus with inks.....certainly he could do it.

There is no reason, or evidence, to believe that he returned to the crude Sumerian method of writing on wet clay, or, more ludicrous, to believe he chiseled anything onto hard clay, given he had been educated in the preparation and use of papyrus, the making and application of ink, the proper method of making a stylus, etc.

But Papyri and ink were luxuries which LONG post-date writing itself ...

On the contrary, the preparation and use of papyrus in that part of the world was quite common. The papyrus plant is a reed that grows in marshy areas around the Nile river. In ancient Egypt, the wild plant was used for a variety of uses, and specially cultivated papyrus, grown on plantations, was used to make the writing material.

The inside of the triangular stalk was cut or peeled into long strips. These strips were then laid out in two layers, one horizontal and one vertical, and pressed and dried to form a papyrus sheet. The inside of the triangular stalk was cut or peeled into long strips. These strips were then laid out in two layers, one horizontal and one vertical, and pressed and dried to form a papyrus sheet. many of these sheets were then joined end-to-end to form a roll. No glue was required; instead, the natural gum of the plant held the sheets together. A roll was usually about one foot in height and could be up to 100 feet in length. It didn't take that long.

 

[Benjamin]

Just a note, Our teacher is having us all read a book on one of 5 Creation Theories:

Evolution, Theistic Evolution, Planted by Aliens(lol), Gap Theory, or young earth creation.

His goal is for us to be able to either 1. Explain and present the theory or 2. Refute the theory.

He wants us to end up either with a gap theory position or young earth position.

I dont really know how dogmatic he is about the gap theory.

I think it would be the most interesting for the assignment to attempt to hypothetically support the Gap Theory. If one considers earth ages (days) and the rebellion of Satan (Eze 28) there are a lot pieces that could fit into such a theory. For instance, how does one explain the angels who existed “before” the foundations of the earth who were shouting for joy, Job 38:7. Years ago I was looking into this and found a lot support but its been so long I’ve forgotten 90% of my where my thoughts were going and my notes are long lost through computer crashes.

Sorry, if I had the time I’d try to refresh and back up some of my thoughts I probably would, but I don’t have the time. IN the end of my studies on the subject I guess I would say I was undecided and there were more important issues to me, but I expect I could have lot of fun messing with the YECs here who would be chomping at the bit to burn me at the stake for the arguments I could come up with in support of the GT. :laugh:

 

[Inspector Javert]

O.K....Obviously, we are going beyond the scope of topic here, and this possibly merits it's own thread. But, I'll answer some of this:

I'm referring to stone tablets being the conveyance of the 613 items of the Law, which were given to Moses just before they entered the Promised Land, and he went to the mountaintop to be taken home to his Maker, and those tablets fitting into the Ark of the Covenant

.
I have no problem with the 613 items of the law being written on Papyrii....
It's the book of Genesis which is the lynch-pin of the "Gap-Theory" argument.....Moses didn't "WRITE" Genesis either on Papyrii or tablets....he colllated and edited it....It actually implies that in the text every time it says.."These are the generations of"
etc.... That's a clue for us to figure it out...The book of Genesis reads that no less than 9 times...it's not there in order to meaninglessly repeat itself...it's telling us something.....
Namely, that that is the end of a particular account and that the particular tablet which comes AFTER it....starts with the same phraseology (that's to keep it in order) Like this in your KJV:
Gen 6:9
These are the generations of Noah
So, Noah will yack for a chapter or two...and then he passes it off to his sons and signs off 4 chapters later:
Gen 10:1
Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah,
..........an account ensues...and it ends with this.....
Gen 11:10
These are the generations of Shem:
Shem will yack for less than a chapter, and then he will sign off at the end of a tablet and introduce the next one thusly:
Gen 11:27
Now these are the generations of Terah
Terah/ Abraham will yack for about ten chapters and then Ishmael will take up the job here:
Gen 25:12
Now these are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham's son,

That would not be possible

It's actually quite possible. I don't think you understand those languages at all. They don't use useless spaces as we do.....they don't "punctuate" for the end of a "sentence" or complete thought as we do....they do none of this. Any given tablet usually maximized at about 17" by 17" square.........
If you know those languages......
You can put a LOT of information on one of those tablets.....
A LOT.
Clay may seem rudimentary and stupid to you.....but.........clay lasts WAY longer than papyrus.........a LOT LONGER. How many extant Papyrii written by Moses do you think there are? The Original writers of Genesis were neither stupid nor crude nor idiots........they knew that clay would last a long time and they developed their writing systems to maximize space vs. accuracy.
That's why words like "of" don't exist, and they don't even have an idefinite particle like "an" (as we English speakers do)......it wastes space. The average clay tablet at no more than 17" by 17" can contain LOADS of information....LOADS...(way more than you can convey in English). They weren't stupid.

I'm sorry, but there is no basis for that statement. The preposition is used to show direction, location, time, or to introduce an object. For example, "I put my wallet ON the table." Another example, "I went TO the store." When the ancient Hebrews wrote the word "in," it referenced not only location, but the nature of that location. They would never have written "in" but rather "on" if the original writings had been "on" a clay tablet. Instead, they wrote "in The Book of Law" to indicate it was found in the scrolls that made up the Book of Law.

I think you are making this up to be honest. Hebrew Preposistions take on a DEARTH of responsibility that our English ones don't even the preposition "MIN" which means "from" (loosely) can be taken three different ways..

I think you are speaking from no knowledge of the language itself or how it works but rather from assumption.

You are putting WAY TOO much stock in the nature of Hebrew Prepositions. They aren't very particular at all.

There is no reason, or evidence, to believe that he returned to the crude Sumerian method of writing on wet clay

He didn't "return" to it......it was ALREADY THERE.
And it isn't "CRUDE"....it has it's benefits...It lasts longer......and the Hebrew people didn't speak COPTIC.......they spoke Hebrew.
He was writing to them........not Egyptians.
You show me how many copies of your brilliant "non-crude" papyri you have......and I will (literally) show you 60,000 Ugaritic Ninevite and Sumerian tablets which exist to this day.......They are all in the British Museum of Natural History....
Clay lasts, Papyrus doesn't. That's why said museum has WAY more info about Ninevah from original writings than they do about Egypt.

But, the Egyptians weren't stupid either....they also wrote their history in clay . But it's largely in pottery shards etc and not scrolls. They didn't ditch the practice, they just kept the long term info encased in clay and not paper.

or, more ludicrous, to believe he chiseled anything onto hard clay

He did nothing in "HARD CLAY"......he did it in "soft" clay....
soft clay is easy to mark in..........it hardens though.....and lasts forever.
You are simply being insulting and rude. This does not become you at all.

given he had been educated in the preparation and use of papyrus, the making and application of ink,

Yes, Moses knew how to do it. So what?

the proper method of making a stylus, etc.

The "proper method" of making a "stylus" was to write a clay tablet......not to pen something in ink upon a papyri scroll.

On the contrary, the preparation and use of papyrus in that part of the world was quite common. The papyrus plant is a reed that grows in marshy areas around the Nile river. In ancient Egypt, the wild plant was used for a variety of uses, and specially cultivated papyrus, grown on plantations, was used to make the writing material.

"ON THE CONTRARY" WHAT?????

I KNOW everything you said in this diatribe. Did I deny this????

I know about that reed, and where it grows...I'm telling you two things:
1.) It didn't grow in the wilderness of Zin where Moses spent 40 years with the Israelites.......duh :sleep:

2.) Moses didn't "WRITE" the book of Genesis to begin with AT ALL!........
If he had you would have a point in impressing us with what you learned from spending 45 mins. paying attention to the History Channel. Such as this pablum:

The inside of the triangular stalk was cut or peeled into long strips. These strips were then laid out in two layers, one horizontal and one vertical, and pressed and dried to form a papyrus sheet. The inside of the triangular stalk was cut or peeled into long strips. These strips were then laid out in two layers, one horizontal and one vertical, and pressed and dried to form a papyrus sheet. many of these sheets were then joined end-to-end to form a roll. No glue was required; instead, the natural gum of the plant held the sheets together. A roll was usually about one foot in height and could be up to 100 feet in length. It didn't take that long.

Yeah....I know......
I also dedicated my life to spending 60 mins. watching one "Modern Marvels" on the History Channel......

But Moses didn't "WRITE" Genesis..............
He "Wrote" the 613 codices of the "Law" you insist on.

If you are hard-core about maintaining the truth of a Genesis account passed down in grass....you have nothing to stand on.

Genesis, God codified in CLAY.............Moses could write the rest of the Pentateuch 2,000 years later on Papyri originally without a problem. I don't have a problem with that.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Is this an online class? An institutional class? Is this class an OT survey?

Methods of Bible study at a Bible College.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

And please lets focus on the OP.

Enough of this clay tablets argument.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

And please lets focus on the OP.

Enough of this clay tablets argument.

I agree.

IJ, PM me if you want to continue this, or we should start another thread. No, I'm not making it up. I've studied Hebrew, though not to the extent I've studied Greek, but the "dearth" of reference you infer isn't factual relative to the ancient Hebrew language. Thanks, and God bless.

 

[Inspector Javert]

I agree.

IJ, PM me if you want to continue this, or we should start another thread. No, I'm not making it up. I've studied Hebrew, though not to the extent I've studied Greek, but the "dearth" of reference you infer isn't factual relative to the ancient Hebrew language. Thanks, and God bless.

You're right about at minimum one thing............

the "Gap Theory" is a load of garbage.

It's (what did you say)
The only doctrine found only in "white"??? or something"

:laugh:Yes...

I agree with you about 95% of the time. So, I hate disagreeing with you on this one thing. But, it's for anutter day. As far as the O.P....

You're right.
The Bible teaches nothing whatsoever akin to a "Gap Theory". ONLY really OOOLLLDD people even believe it anymore. There's practically no one under the age of 60 who even dreams of it anymore.

That doctrine will literally "DIE" along with the senile old coots who teach it. They have few to no converts in any Bible-believers under the age of 110. It will cease to even be acknowledged within 50years....thank God!!! :jesus::godisgood:

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

It's (what did you say)
The only doctrine found only in "white"??? or something"

"It is the only 'doctrine' that I know of that is based solely, completely and inexplicably on white space."

:laugh:Yes...

:laugh: Glad you appreciated it.

I agree with you about 95% of the time. So, I hate disagreeing with you on this one thing. But, it's for anutter day.

Amen, brother. :thumbsup: Carry on!

 

[Benjamin]

You're right about at minimum one thing............

the "Gap Theory" is a load of garbage.

It's (what did you say)
The only doctrine found only in "white"??? or something"

:laugh:Yes...

I agree with you about 95% of the time. So, I hate disagreeing with you on this one thing. But, it's for anutter day. As far as the O.P....

You're right.
The Bible teaches nothing whatsoever akin to a "Gap Theory". ONLY really OOOLLLDD people even believe it anymore. There's practically no one under the age of 60 who even dreams of it anymore.

That doctrine will literally "DIE" along with the senile old coots who teach it. They have few to no converts in any Bible-believers under the age of 110. It will cease to even be acknowledged within 50years....thank God!!! :jesus::godisgood:

Is all this rhetoric supposed to mean something? LOL

 

[quantumfaith]

Another poster earlier suggested that you run from such a class. I suggest just the opposite. I think you should read scholarly (theist) authors on a wide range of ideas on this idea and other ideas.

IMO, a professor should not suggest to you where he expects you to land on the issue, rather he should encourage you to study and be informed on a multitude of different positions.

I might suggest the popular level book:

Origins Christian perspective on Creation, Evolution and Intelligent Design

Debra and Loren Haarsma (Reformed in Theology)

 

[Inspector Javert]

No, I'm not making it up.

Just wanted to say, that I used the wrong verbiage here....It sounds like I am suggesting you weren't being intellectually honest. I didn't mean it that way. I meant something more like you were perhaps "assuming too much", not "making it up".
I didn't mean that the way it probably looked.
Sorry about that B.T.W.

God Bless :wavey:

 

[prophet]

Gen 2:1
Chapter 2
1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2:4
4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, [in the day]that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

Gen 1:1-5
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light:and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good:and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And [God called the light Day], and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were [the first day].

Nope, no sign of a gap here.
The first day, was the first day.
The first day was the beginning.
He created both heavens and earth, on the first day.
He called it "day"
Day
Not "Age".
Not Millenium.
Day.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Mr. Kurecki

Studying both sides of an issue is an excellent way to learn about it. If one doesn't understand the background and information upon which the other 'side' relies, one will never understand what one believes.

Typically, one only reads the information which agrees with one's position - a rather good way to remain totally ignorant of half the issue. However, looking at the other side is scary; perhaps those things one thought aren't true. Then what?

Then what indeed? What can displace God from His position? Nor can one learn anything that will cause God to cease loving. The God we serve does not encourage ignorance.

 

[quantumfaith]

Studying both sides of an issue is an excellent way to learn about it. If one doesn't understand the background and information upon which the other 'side' relies, one will never understand what one believes.

Typically, one only reads the information which agrees with one's position - a rather good way to remain totally ignorant of half the issue. However, looking at the other side is scary; perhaps those things one thought aren't true. Then what?

Then what indeed? What can displace God from His position? Nor can one learn anything that will cause God to cease loving. The God we serve does not encourage ignorance.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Yeshua1]

There is absolutely nothing in the narrative that would even suggest a gap.

So where would you fit int he dall of satan, and rebellion in heaven, as he fell before Adam and Eve fell!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

So where would you fit int he dall of satan, and rebellion in heaven, as he fell before Adam and Eve fell!

You sure about that, Yesh? I don't think it's any accident he showed up shortly after the Creation was complete, and Adam and Eve were beginning to acquaint themselves with their home. In fact, I'd say it is quite likely he took the form of the serpent and slithered into the garden less than 15 minutes after he lost the battle for heaven! That's his nature. Lose a battle, start another one.