Gap Theory?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#81
I was where you were once, fully denying the gap in Genesis and that the Earth is billions of years old. It's hard to change what you believed for years.
What did you believe and why? What was your evidence?
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,368
3,164
113
#82
What did you believe and why? What was your evidence?
I'd never thought about it until I read a book, "The Mystery of Creation" by Watchman Nee. It blew my mind and answered a whole lot of questions that I'd put aside. I prefer "pre-Adamic creation" as a term, but it seems not as common as gap theory.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,777
113
#83
I prefer "pre-Adamic creation" as a term, but it seems not as common as gap theory.
If there was indeed a "pre-Adamic creation" surely there would have been a great deal of information about it right in the Bible. God would not have left us in the dark about such an important item. The fact that everything only goes back to Adam shows that that is simply FANTASY. Just like evolution.
 

Artios1

Born again to serve
Dec 11, 2020
678
420
63
#84
I think he only theory about Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 is regarding the fall of Lucifer. Other than that, the Bible definitely shows a time span between what we refer to as these verses. ➡ Remember that the originals did not have verses, chapters, or punctuation. And while they are immensely helpful, they are not God breathed …we should always keep that in mind when reading. (As an example: the placement of chapter 2 of Genesis should be after verse 3. That is where chapter 1 should end, and Chapter 2 should begin with verse 4.)

I am not saying the fall of Lucifer did not happen in that time period…. thus causing the earth to become without form and void (tohu va bohu) and scripture seems to point in that direction ….But it is not explicitly connected in the Word, thus making it theory. And any person’s theory (including mine) is based upon conjecture which is…. an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information. ….When dealing with the Word of God, unless it is explicitly stated or connected …we just don’t know.

The following is somewhat of an outline from a teaching I did a while ago on this subject. It addresses the most relevant views against this “time span” between Genesis 1:1 &2 labeled as Critics point, and there is a slight segue way to soul life (but it will tie in).

Definitions:

Create = bara in Hebrew - The word created is to bring something into existence that did not exist before, or to make something out of nothing. Only God can create; man can fabricate, build, construct, design, make, assemble, etc.… but man cannot create. Once God creates something He does not need to create it again, because it now exists…. He just speaks it into being, as He did with the reestablishment of the earth from verse 3 through 14 …..He just spoke it into existence, because it had already been created when He created the heavens and the earth in verse 1……It is not until Genesis 1:21 that God again creates in great whales and every living creature that moveth…He created soul life..

Made = asah in Hebrew – a substance required of which the thing made consists.

Formed = yatsar in Hebrew - fashioned out of something that was already in existence.

Genesis 1:1

In the beginning God created (bara) the heaven and the earth.

Critics point: That the word create (bara) and made (asah) → are used interchangeably throughout the OT and can mean the same thing.

My Response: If the words in the Word do not mean things…..then the Word of God is meaningless to all of us. God has a purpose for what He says and how He says it. The words create and made are used as God intended and are not synonymous nor used interchangeably…………….words have meaning!

It does not state when the heavens and earth were created ….or if they were created at the same time. But we know from the Bible there are three heavens… atmospheric, celestial and where God, Jesus and the angels abide. …. My "theory" is…. that the heaven(s) God created (in the beginning) were the celestial and atmospheric.

Additionally: the Hebrew particle ‘eth before both “the heavens” and “the earth” in verse 1 emphasize the article “the”, which distinguishes them both from the proceeding event spoken of in verse 2.

Genesis 1:2

And the earth (was) became (hayah) without form, and void (tohu va bohu); and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


Critics point: The first was in Gen 1:2 should not be translated became ….because it is rendered “was” in most English version as well as the LXX → and it is semantically unsound in that usage due to the connective word that begins verse 2 (waw) which is a disjunctive term that introduces a circumstantial clause; it is best rendered as: “Now the earth”

My Response: While hayah has been translated was in most English versions including the LXX….. In the original Hebrew ….there was no verb “to be” (which is translated was) However there is a verb “to become”, which is how this should be translated. The second was in this verse was added by translators as there was/is no corresponding word in that place.

As for it being semantically unsound: Failure to recognize the figure of speech polysyndeton (many ands) that God uses in the consecutive 34 verses from 1:1 to 2:3; using “and” 102 times to accentuate the acts of God… must be taken into consideration when dealing with syntax….. A figure of speech is a legitimate departure from the laws of language in order to emphasize and draw attention to what is being said. Of the 219 documented figures of speech God uses 212 different figures in the scriptures.

And the Earth became without form and void…” Is how the text should read. God had created both the heavens and the earth, but it was the earth that became an empty wasteland.

Isaiah states that God created the earth not in vain (tôhûw) a wasteland, but formed it to be inhabited.

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 (tôhûw) He formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.

As I stated earlier ….I can speculate and theorize (based on scripture) as to what took place between Genesis 1:1 & 1:2… the Word does not declare what exactly happened or how much time is between the verses….so I do not know. What I do know is, from Genesis 1:2 to 1:21, God did not create anything again until the 5th day when He created soul life in “great whales and every living creature (chay nephesh) that moveth”…

The word living is the Hebrew word “chay” meaning life or living. And the word translated creature is the Hebrew word “nephesh” meaning soul………….God tells us in Leviticus what/where the soul is.

Lev 17:11a -For the life of the flesh is in the blood

The word life in this verse is the same word for soul (nephesh)

Going back to basic Biology: Oxygen is delivered throughout the body by means of the red blood cells ….actually it is the hemoglobin molecules from the red cells that deliver the oxygen to the individual cells in the body tissue. The bloodstream also picks up CO2 from the body and returns it to the lunges to be exhaled…

Therefore Genesis 2:7 where God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul…. Makes perfect sense as a figure of speech ➡ Anthropopatheia (or Condescension) the ascribing of human attributes, etc., to God.

What happens when we die? The heart, which pumps the blood, which delivers the oxygen to the brain …… stops….. soul life ceases in that particular person… but is carried on through prodigy. But if there is no offspring, the soul is gone when that person dies; there is nothing immortal about the soul.

Blood is what mobilizes (gives life) to humans and animals and this soul life was created by God in Genesis 1:21.

Because God did not create it until the 5th day tells us that it did not exist before. Whereas, light, earth, water, grass, fruit trees …etc. everything that God spoke into existence following Genesis 1:3 had already existed in the first heavens and earth, and did not need to be created again.
Continued ↓
 

Artios1

Born again to serve
Dec 11, 2020
678
420
63
#85
Rom 5:12........cont'd


Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Critics point: There was no death in the world until sin was in the world, which was a result of Adam's disobedience.

Therefore, the assertion of the gap enthusiasts that all the dinos and cave peeps that fit into that Paleolithic period between Gen 1:1 & 1:2 would have died…. thus contradicting Rom 5:12.


My Response: I agree that there was no death in this world until sin….. But 2 Peter 3:5-7 (&13) is clear that we are in the second world…..the first world (which does not refer to Noah’s flood)…. perished.

*2Peter 3:5-7

5) For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

6) Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

7) But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word, are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the Day of Judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

13) Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Proceeding on the premise of the time span between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 and on the premise of there being Paleolithic man and creatures that fall into that time span, we can unequivocally draw the conclusion that whatever it was that mobilized or gave life to the man and creatures was not the same type of blood that gives us life….. If it was,…… the creation of what we know as soul life in Genesis 1:21 would not have been necessary; God would have just spoken it into existence…..

What was it that gave them life ….I do not know….it could have been Jell-O …Cheese Whiz or something that resembles blood…but it was not the soul life (nephesh chay) that gives us life today ………………….probably not Jell-O or Cheese Whiz.

I use the term (Paleolithic man) quite loosely...I do not adhere to evolution or the common scientific explanation of the age of the earth, which the educated world has been held hostage to with lies and distorted science for so very long.

There are scientists today who promote a much younger earth…. stating the flawed, inconsistent, and forged results of radiometric and carbon dating. But their voices have been suppressed in effort to support a godless evolution and the big bang theory.

I don’t know the time between the first earth and the current one we live in and honestly, to me…. it doesn’t matter.......

God states: "in the beginning" and that's good enough for me.
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,835
4,321
113
mywebsite.us
#86
The simple truth of the matter is vividly illustrated by/in the 'grammar of the language'. The first word 'And' in the next several phrases tells the tale. (And, especially, the first word of verse 2.)

There is no disconnect between the description that follows the first statement and 'In the beginning'.

In terms of the passage of time, it is fluid - there is no "jump" in time - from the first verse onward, it is all contained within the context of 'In the beginning'.

It takes a lot of imagination to insert a "time jump" after verse 1 - because, it simply does not indicate any such thing. In fact, the indication is fluid and continuous.

Therefore, there can be no gap.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#87
I'd never thought about it until I read a book, "The Mystery of Creation" by Watchman Nee. It blew my mind and answered a whole lot of questions that I'd put aside. I prefer "pre-Adamic creation" as a term, but it seems not as common as gap theory.
That’s the way I was until I read Scofield’s notes on the Gap theory, I was still in high school
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#88
The argument about was vs became was already answered. One definition of the word is to exist, ie the world existed without form and void. Of course like many hebrews or Greek terms it does not sound right in the English so the translators put the word was instead. because it makes more sense

considering that fact the translators knew became was a possible definition, yet did not use its is proof positive the gap, or Pra-Adamic theory was not known at the time of interpretation of the English text, hence it is a new idea. It does not prove it wrong. It is just another of many things which have come up which suggests the Gap theory may be wrong.

but remember fold, the Gap theory is just that, a theory. Just like the hydroplate theory is just that a theory. whatever we believe, we really have no proof.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,368
3,164
113
#89
If there was indeed a "pre-Adamic creation" surely there would have been a great deal of information about it right in the Bible. God would not have left us in the dark about such an important item. The fact that everything only goes back to Adam shows that that is simply FANTASY. Just like evolution.
A great deal is not included in the Bible. Like most of the first 30 year's of Jesus' life. Only the bare bones of Adam and Eve's misadventure in Eden is mentioned. Hardly anything is known of the apostles apart from Paul, Peter, James and John. Of those, most emphasis is on Paul. What happened to Matthew, Judas, Nathanial and the others? Arguing from silence is simply wrong. I suggest that you read "The Mystery of God's Creation" by Watchman Nee. You might just change your mind. Sweeping statements such as yours are indicative either of ignorance or pride - or both. Gap theory/pre-Adamic creation may be wrong. Or it may be right. Some of the finest Christian scholars agree. Others equally gifted do not.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,368
3,164
113
#90
The argument about was vs became was already answered. One definition of the word is to exist, ie the world existed without form and void. Of course like many hebrews or Greek terms it does not sound right in the English so the translators put the word was instead. because it makes more sense

considering that fact the translators knew became was a possible definition, yet did not use its is proof positive the gap, or Pra-Adamic theory was not known at the time of interpretation of the English text, hence it is a new idea. It does not prove it wrong. It is just another of many things which have come up which suggests the Gap theory may be wrong.

but remember fold, the Gap theory is just that, a theory. Just like the hydroplate theory is just that a theory. whatever we believe, we really have no proof.
"Was" only makes sense if you have a preconceived notion about the creation. That God would make something formless and empty makes no sense to me. Early study versions of the NIV study bible (which I used extensively for some time) had "became" as a possible alternate translation.

Pre-Adamic creation theory has been around almost as long as the Church itself. A quote from a Gap theory web site:

"Long before the modern study of geology, early church writers had examined the biblical text and considered the idea that between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2 there stretched an indeterminate period when the created world fell into chaos. Such a scenario often connects with the idea that the angelic realm was originally entrusted with power over the earth, which power concluded with a betrayal of that trust when a number of the angels followed Satan in rebellion against God. Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60 - c. 130 AD) wrote, "To some of them [angels] He gave dominion over the arrangement of the world, and He commissioned them to exercise their dominion as well... but it happened that their arrangement came to nothing."

Personally I believe that Lucifer was the light of the pre-Adamic creation. When he rebelled, the creation at that time lost its light and therefore God had to create the sun, moon and stars. Satan wanted his former glory back, hence his assault on Eve and Adam.

The word "baptise" is an anglicised version of the Greek word used to describe sunken ships. I know of no translator brave enough to change the word to "immerse" which would be a better translation. We can't go offending Catholics, Lutherans and others who think sprinkling babies is baptism. I understand their theological arguments. I don't agree with them. I don't let that hinder my fellowship. That has not always been reciprocated. Neither will I let the chronology of Creation discussion hinder my fellowship with people who disagree. Again, that is not always reciprocated.
 

Rondonmon

Senior Member
May 13, 2016
1,304
183
63
#91
The simple truth of the matter is vividly illustrated by/in the 'grammar of the language'. The first word 'And' in the next several phrases tells the tale. (And, especially, the first word of verse 2.)

There is no disconnect between the description that follows the first statement and 'In the beginning'.

In terms of the passage of time, it is fluid - there is no "jump" in time - from the first verse onward, it is all contained within the context of 'In the beginning'.

It takes a lot of imagination to insert a "time jump" after verse 1 - because, it simply does not indicate any such thing. In fact, the indication is fluid and continuous.

Therefore, there can be no gap.
You are right, you guys have a huge imagination if you think God created the Universe in 6 days, it's not even a serious argument. God wrote YOWM, not Day, that is your testament to what God wrote. There is NO GAP because God wrote a YOWM not a day. It's you and others who try to MANDATE that it means a day, not God. God uses YOWM is I proved in another post in varied ways via TIME. You all dodged that post because you can't argue against the facts I bring, God uses YOWM as a division of TIME in general, thus INSERT whatever is applicable, it's evident how God uses YOWM iN many ways, yet you still insist its a day. You are all wrong on this by a mile, not inches, the Universe was not created in 6 days, we are still in God's rest, did that last one day also?

You and others theorize the GAP, if God meant (And he did) Billions of years via his YOWM then the GAP is all in your mind, God said what He said, not what you and others think He said.

God who lives in ALL TIME, and thus was living in the end Product of His creation as He created His Creation because God covers all of Eternity, supposedly changed the Laws of Nature that He created, so He could DECEIVE US on how old the Universe is. BUT....that is a falsehood. The Universe is indeed 13.7 billion years old, just like the Laws of Nature God created proves it is. God did not have to speed things up because God lives in ALL TIME at once. Thus the speed of light proves how old the Universe is. We have mapped the Universe out with Microwaves, we know exactly how it looked in the BEGINNING !! There were 400 million years of Darkness.

wmap_0.jpg

Gen. 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void;(VOID means there was no earth yet, it was a SPOKEN CREATION yet to come into existence) and darkness was upon the face of the deep (SEE Above, 400 million years of DARKNESS as MAPPED OUT by Microwaves prove God's Holy Word to be CORRECT). And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

The EVENING was first because te Darkness was first in our Universe.

I truly do not trust anyone via any scripture who can't solve this puzzle, that's not really a hard puzzle tbh. in these modern times. I say this because if one can't use common logic to get to what should be easily understandable answers, how can he discern the hard things of God? No wonder so many people can't even understand the timing of the Rapture. As a preacher of over 35 years, it boggl4e my mind at the number of people we push away because they see stuff like this and say, God has to be a fairy tale, FIRST they told me about Santa, then Jesus, and hat the universe is 6000 years old, The other two, makes them doubt Jesus is real. Satan uses every trick in the book against us. We shouldn't give him ammo.

I can out debate anyone of you on this and prove you wrong, because I studied it, and wrote a blog on all this because God convicted me of NO KNOWING, and thus not being able to tell those the truth, because God and Science will always come to the same conclusions of course because REAL SCIENCE is only a journey from the unknown to the known. And God knows all things.

God is going to ask each one of you in Heaven, why did you not take the team to learn the facts, where you could better reach the masses. We will be judged as a Church before all others, not condemned, but judged nevertheless.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#92
"Was" only makes sense if you have a preconceived notion about the creation. That God would make something formless and empty makes no sense to me. Early study versions of the NIV study bible (which I used extensively for some time) had "became" as a possible alternate translation.

Pre-Adamic creation theory has been around almost as long as the Church itself. A quote from a Gap theory web site:

"Long before the modern study of geology, early church writers had examined the biblical text and considered the idea that between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2 there stretched an indeterminate period when the created world fell into chaos. Such a scenario often connects with the idea that the angelic realm was originally entrusted with power over the earth, which power concluded with a betrayal of that trust when a number of the angels followed Satan in rebellion against God. Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60 - c. 130 AD) wrote, "To some of them [angels] He gave dominion over the arrangement of the world, and He commissioned them to exercise their dominion as well... but it happened that their arrangement came to nothing."

Personally I believe that Lucifer was the light of the pre-Adamic creation. When he rebelled, the creation at that time lost its light and therefore God had to create the sun, moon and stars. Satan wanted his former glory back, hence his assault on Eve and Adam.

The word "baptise" is an anglicised version of the Greek word used to describe sunken ships. I know of no translator brave enough to change the word to "immerse" which would be a better translation. We can't go offending Catholics, Lutherans and others who think sprinkling babies is baptism. I understand their theological arguments. I don't agree with them. I don't let that hinder my fellowship. That has not always been reciprocated. Neither will I let the chronology of Creation discussion hinder my fellowship with people who disagree. Again, that is not always reciprocated.
Again this has been answered.

a maker first creates a ball of clay, then he takes time to form it into his or her design so it can be usefull

in the same token, this is what God did in its origional state the earth was without form and void, and then God spent 6 days forming it so it can be used, hence God created the heavens and the earth,
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#93
You are right, you guys have a huge imagination if you think God created the Universe in 6 days, it's not even a serious argument. God wrote YOWM, not Day, that is your testament to what God wrote. There is NO GAP because God wrote a YOWM not a day. It's you and others who try to MANDATE that it means a day, not God. God uses YOWM is I proved in another post in varied ways via TIME. You all dodged that post because you can't argue against the facts I bring, God uses YOWM as a division of TIME in general, thus INSERT whatever is applicable, it's evident how God uses YOWM iN many ways, yet you still insist its a day. You are all wrong on this by a mile, not inches, the Universe was not created in 6 days, we are still in God's rest, did that last one day also?

You and others theorize the GAP, if God meant (And he did) Billions of years via his YOWM then the GAP is all in your mind, God said what He said, not what you and others think He said.

God who lives in ALL TIME, and thus was living in the end Product of His creation as He created His Creation because God covers all of Eternity, supposedly changed the Laws of Nature that He created, so He could DECEIVE US on how old the Universe is. BUT....that is a falsehood. The Universe is indeed 13.7 billion years old, just like the Laws of Nature God created proves it is. God did not have to speed things up because God lives in ALL TIME at once. Thus the speed of light proves how old the Universe is. We have mapped the Universe out with Microwaves, we know exactly how it looked in the BEGINNING !! There were 400 million years of Darkness.

View attachment 228268

Gen. 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void;(VOID means there was no earth yet, it was a SPOKEN CREATION yet to come into existence) and darkness was upon the face of the deep (SEE Above, 400 million years of DARKNESS as MAPPED OUT by Microwaves prove God's Holy Word to be CORRECT). And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

The EVENING was first because te Darkness was first in our Universe.

I truly do not trust anyone via any scripture who can't solve this puzzle, that's not really a hard puzzle tbh. in these modern times. I say this because if one can't use common logic to get to what should be easily understandable answers, how can he discern the hard things of God? No wonder so many people can't even understand the timing of the Rapture. As a preacher of over 35 years, it boggl4e my mind at the number of people we push away because they see stuff like this and say, God has to be a fairy tale, FIRST they told me about Santa, then Jesus, and hat the universe is 6000 years old, The other two, makes them doubt Jesus is real. Satan uses every trick in the book against us. We shouldn't give him ammo.

I can out debate anyone of you on this and prove you wrong, because I studied it, and wrote a blog on all this because God convicted me of NO KNOWING, and thus not being able to tell those the truth, because God and Science will always come to the same conclusions of course because REAL SCIENCE is only a journey from the unknown to the known. And God knows all things.

God is going to ask each one of you in Heaven, why did you not take the team to learn the facts, where you could better reach the masses. We will be judged as a Church before all others, not condemned, but judged nevertheless.
This is all great but it does not prove anything

if God created the stars as lights for the evening and as signs etc etc. and It says he did it in one day, he would have done it so that it performed its function in that day, he did not nend million of light years to wait on it pit could perform its function, he is God, he can make it appear on earth that day,
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,131
3,689
113
#94
Again this has been answered.

a maker first creates a ball of clay, then he takes time to form it into his or her design so it can be usefull

in the same token, this is what God did in its origional state the earth was without form and void, and then God spent 6 days forming it so it can be used, hence God created the heavens and the earth,
Sounds good, but that’s not in scripture. In scripture, God does not create things “without form, and void”. An example would be Adam. God created Adam in the image of God, perfectly. God creates things instantly and perfectly, so there had to be something that happened between verses 1 and 2.
 

JohnRH

Junior Member
Mar 5, 2018
676
324
63
#95
Sounds good, but that’s not in scripture. In scripture, God does not create things “without form, and void”. An example would be Adam. God created Adam in the image of God, perfectly. God creates things instantly and perfectly, so there had to be something that happened between verses 1 and 2.
Adam started out as dust of the ground; formless & void. Even after he was formed he was still void; so God breathed into his nostrils and filled that void. The process God chose to use was perfect from start to finish. Don't demand it to be "instant"; He's not on our timeclock.
 

ewq1938

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2018
5,020
1,268
113
#98
Again this has been answered.

a maker first creates a ball of clay, then he takes time to form it into his or her design so it can be usefull
It's incorrect to compare how a man makes something vs. how God makes something. God creates and forms faster and more precisely. The creating and forming happens simultaneously.

Isa 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.

The Earth was created, made, established, created not in vain, and formed.

Gen 1:2 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.

"without form" is the Hebrew word "tôhû"

H8414
תֹּהוּ
tôhû
to'-hoo
From an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.
Total KJV occurrences: 20


Isa 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.

"he created it not in vain"

"in vain" is the Hebrew word "tôhû".

Isaiah says God did not create the Earth in "tôhû" or not "without form". Yet, non-gappers argue that God did create the world in vain/"tôhû" which goes against what God gave to Isaiah. Non-gappers misunderstand Gen 1:2 and argue against Isaiah 45:18.

If we combine what the two verses are saying we will have this:

In the beginning, God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain (tôhû), he formed it to be inhabited but it became void and vain (tôhû) so God created what was needed for the earth to be inhabited.
 

ewq1938

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2018
5,020
1,268
113
#99
Yep, I never claimed otherwise

I didn't say you did. I was merely adding something that wasn't mentioned. However, I don't think the gap theory is actually a theory. See my last post which proves the world was not created void or "tohu".
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
It's incorrect to compare how a man makes something vs. how God makes something. God creates and forms faster and more precisely. The creating and forming happens simultaneously.

Isa 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.

The Earth was created, made, established, created not in vain, and formed.

Gen 1:2 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.

"without form" is the Hebrew word "tôhû"

H8414
תֹּהוּ
tôhû
to'-hoo
From an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.
Total KJV occurrences: 20


Isa 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.

"he created it not in vain"

"in vain" is the Hebrew word "tôhû".

Isaiah says God did not create the Earth in "tôhû" or not "without form". Yet, non-gappers argue that God did create the world in vain/"tôhû" which goes against what God gave to Isaiah. Non-gappers misunderstand Gen 1:2 and argue against Isaiah 45:18.

If we combine what the two verse are saying we will have this:

In the beginning, God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain (tôhû), he formed it to be inhabited but it became void and vain (tôhû) so God created what was needed for the earth to be inhabited.
Again, this is all fine and dandy but does not prove your point

he created the world in 6 days and rested on the seventh, look at the universe. And he created it as you posted many times to be inhabited, meaning God did not need to wait billions of years for the light of stars to show up on earth or for land to mature or plants to mature or for their to be enough plant life to provide Oxygen for animal and human life or animal life to provide enough carbon dioxide so plants can live, he did it all in 6 days,

to do all this is 6 days I would say is quite amazing