Why the Gap Theory is unacceptable

[oldhermit]

I don't have any problem reconciling them. The first cycle of darkness to light just doesn't appear to be based on the creation of them.

You are fight, it is not based on the creation of them. Would you be willing to entertain another possibility?

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

No. John tells us that that light is Jesus, and he is not a product of creation. He is in fact the Creator. This light is not that which represents the glory of God such as we find in the dedication of the Temple. This is light that did not existed before this time. This is light that is called into existence by the command of God. This is light that is comprised of matter. It is created light that is not produced by celestial sources. It is only human speculation and presumption that would insist that physical light that is comprised of matter cannot exist without some kind of celestial bodies. The fact that these sources were not yet created tells us that in the natural world, material light preceded stars or any other natural source.

Ah...I see. You think differently about let there be light than me. I know from John that this light is Jesus, and it made such utter sense to me that He needed to appear before creation since nothing was created except through Him. So I looked at let there be light more as...let there be light in this dark place or...let the light shine in this present darkness. I looked at it more as a calling FORTH of the uncreated Light (Jesus) rather than as a CREATING of some kind of light that is mysteriously not the light of the sun but nevertheless some other temporal light we know nothing of and can't see.

From John, I see that this is the true Light that existed with God and WAS God and the sun and moon are temporal lights that were created and will one day be done away with.

But I see that you think this is some sort of created light, but other than the sun...

Thank you for talking with me this morning.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

You are fight, it is not based on the creation of them. Would you be willing to entertain another possibility?

I am willing to listen to anything you have to say about what you think this first light is, hermit.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Have to go do some work with my hands hermit. Will be back to hear your thoughts.

 

[oldhermit]

I am willing to listen to anything you have to say about what you think this first light is, hermit.

The reason this appears to be a created substance that did not previously exist is because of the words "Let there be...." This is calling something into existence that did not previously exist. These words become a command pattern for the creation of everything that follows. Everything that was created on the subsequent days was prefaced by the command "Let there be...." One other aspect of light that you may not have noticed in this text is the fact that light and darkness do not naturally separate. It took an act of God for these two things to be separated.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

The reason this appears to be a created substance that did not previously exist is because of the words "Let there be...." This is calling something into existence that did not previously exist. These words become a command pattern for the creation of everything that follows. Everything that was created on the subsequent days was prefaced by the command "Let there be...." One other aspect of light that you may not have noticed in this text is the fact that light and darkness do not naturally separate. It took an act of God for these two things to be separated.

Okay so this still doesn't explain what light He created there. It isn't the light of the sun, so what light is it?

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Okay so this still doesn't explain what light He created there. It isn't the light of the sun, so what light is it?

And speaking of separations, God does not call a few things good. These few things are separations. I don't think He views separations as good, but as necessary for some reason at this point in Genesis...

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

As for light and darkness not separating, I don't quite get what you are saying. There is either darkness or light. A dark room remains dark until a light is turned on. The light overcomes the darkness and then there is no more darkness in the room. The only way darkness can appear again is if I remove the light.

So light and darkness have no part in each other. I wouldn't say they do not naturally separate. I would say when light shrine's, darkness scatters or disappears...

 

[Deade]

No. John tells us that that light is Jesus, and he is not a product of creation. He is in fact the Creator. This light is not that which represents the glory of God such as we find in the dedication of the Temple. This is light that did not existed before this time. This is light that is called into existence by the command of God. This is light that is comprised of matter. It is created light that is not produced by celestial sources. It is only human speculation and presumption that would insist that physical light that is comprised of matter cannot exist without some kind of celestial bodies. The fact that these sources were not yet created tells us that in the natural world, material light preceded stars or any other natural source.

What do you mean by material light?

Would you agree that it is God and not the sun and moon who is responsible for creating, qualifying, and quantifying time?

Einstein space time continuum says that time does not exist without matter. But then there is more matter than we can see: seventy percent of the universe is made of dark matter, whatever that is. All this is too high for us to understand, but God knows about all this. Time does not restrict Him.

 

[oldhermit]

Okay so this still doesn't explain what light He created there. It isn't the light of the sun, so what light is it?

This text shows us that physical light existed without benefit of the sun. Consider this. When God separated light from darkness, this was the beginning of the evening and morning phenomenon for the earth. The only way this could seem to happen would be the separation of darkness and light into two separate hemispheres in relation to the earth. In order for there to be an evening and morning would mean that the rotation of the earth began at this point. The rotation of the earth is cause by a huge ball of liquid iron spinning at the earth's core. This would also demonstrate that a determined relation of physic has now been put is place and the earth begins to rotate on a 24 hour cycle. Thus, the evening and the morning become the first day.

Rather than the sun being the source of light as most assume, it is quite possible that on the forth day, God coalesced the light that was created on day one into the sun and the rest of the stars. This would explain why all of empty space is in darkness and the only physical light that exists is in these pockets of light.

[SUB][SUP]
[/SUP][/SUB]

 

[MarcR]

This interpretation goes with the Gap Theory, so it would appear that you have accepted it. But there are other ways to interpret tohu wa bohu -- without form and void. Many translations say formless and empty which is fair enough.

"Void" (empty) of course simply means DEVOID OF plant, animal, and human life, and that corresponds to the globe initially surrounded by an envelope of water. So "without form" is the phrase that is debated. It could simply mean a formless mass of mineral molecules, or a mass of dust and gas. That is how astronomers see the formation of planets today.

I cited the most respected Hebrew English Lexicon available. on what authority do you challenge it. The lexicon was NOT specifically anticipating this conversation.

 

[oldhermit]

And speaking of separations, God does not call a few things good. These few things are separations. I don't think He views separations as good, but as necessary for some reason at this point in Genesis...

For what ever reason, the fact remains that it took and act of God to separate light from darkness.

 

[oldhermit]

As for light and darkness not separating, I don't quite get what you are saying. There is either darkness or light. A dark room remains dark until a light is turned on. The light overcomes the darkness and then there is no more darkness in the room. The only way darkness can appear again is if I remove the light.

So light and darkness have no part in each other. I wouldn't say they do not naturally separate. I would say when light shrine's, darkness scatters or disappears...

Still, the text tells us that before God separated light from darkness, they existed together. I cannot even begin to imagine what this would look like because this is something beyond human experience.

 

[Magenta]

Okay so this still doesn't explain what light He created there. It isn't the light of the sun, so what light is it?

I would say it is the Light of His Being. Also, Jesus is the Light of men

 

[oldhermit]

What do you mean by material light?



Einstein space time continuum says that time does not exist without matter. But then there is more matter than we can see: seventy percent of the universe is made of dark matter, whatever that is. All this is too high for us to understand, but God knows about all this. Time does not restrict Him.

Natural light is simply light that is comprised of matter and energy.

 

[John146]

For what ever reason, the fact remains that it took and act of God to separate light from darkness.

Where did the darkness come from?

We should take note that God is light and there is no darkness in Him according to the next verse. Also see 1 Timothy 6:16 and Psalms 104:1-2. Since in the beginning there was only God according to John 1:1, we can safely say there was no darkness at all.

1 John 1:5 “This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.”

Since there is no darkness in God, why would He create the earth in darkness? The darkness had to come from a result of sin.

We also see in the Bible that darkness is never a good thing. See Luke 22:53, Acts 26:18, 2 Corinthians 4:4, Ephesians 6:12, Colossians 1:13-14, 1 Thessalonians 5:5 and 1 Peter 2:9.

In Revelation 22:1-5, we see that God will make a new heaven and earth and there will be no darkness at all. In fact, there will be no need for light because God himself will be the light. When God created the earth in Genesis 1:1 it was exactly like the creation in Revelation 22:1-5, full of light and no darkness.

 

[MarcR]

I agree with you they did.. but I would suggest they wanted to see something there. They were looking for a way to be able explain what science claimed they where uncovering...Darwinism.

It's not that it is just unpopular, is believed to be wrong! there is a difference.

In my humble opinion the 6 day ages theory has far superior arguments compared to the Gap theory. I don't agree with that either I hold the traditional view.. I believe the theological correct view..Yep linguistics are important but so is theology! As you have admitted you have not looked at the theology. Here is what you have said:



I am quite shocked really that you come to your view without frankly, looking at the theology of creation. Maybe that's where the gap theory went wrong in the first place?

There are many excellent commentaries available with a theological focus. Mine is the only one I'm aware of with a purely linguistic focus. I am showing what words mean in context including idiomatic shadings. There are many other resources for people to sort out their theology. It is noteworthy, IMO, that one's theology ought not to depart very far from what the words mean; otherwise one's theology might turn out to be wrong.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

I would say it is the Light of His Being. Also, Jesus is the Light of men

I don't think it should be ruled out as a possibility that the first light was HIS light, a spiritual light. (rather than the electromagnetic radiation given off by a sun or something else in the natural realm).

His plan for the new creation may be tipping us off..... Rev 22:5 "There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever."



For those in bondage to KJVO

Rev 22:5 (KJV)
[FONT=&quot]And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.[/FONT]

 

[Shc]

Despite the article by Lee Irons /www.oneplace.com/ministries/bible-answer-man/read/articles/the-gap-theory-of-genesis-12-16836.html which you extensively quote without giving credit. Irons fails to mention that Merrill F. Unger (Unger's Bible Dictionary) and the McClintock and Strong Bible Encyclopedia also propose a gap between verse 1 and verse 2 of Genesis 1.
did not come to my belief in a gap between verse 1 and verse 2 and/or between verse 2 and verse 3 from any of these sources. Before commenting on any chapter in my commentary, I parse the chapter in the original Language. When I did so with Genesis 1 the Gap suggested itself for reasons mentioned below.




I believe that the 6 days of creation in Genesis 1 are literal 24 hour days. I believe that this creation narrative speaks of re-creation after a cataclysmic upheaval.

Gen 1:2
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.
KJV


without form, and void תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ a desolation and a waste.

note that the waters are already present.

Gen 1:6-9
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

firmament לָרָקִיעַ means expanse or horizon

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

made This is not בָּרָ֣א created this is יֲּ֣עֲשׂ called forth, made manifest, allowed to be seen.

The waters under the horizon are now divided (separated or distinguished) from the waters above the horizon [as fog or clouds].


Nothing in the Hebrew precludes this from being a previously created Sun now made visible. Also nothing in the Hebrew precludes the light in verses 3 and 4 from having come from a previously created Sun.


8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
KJV

Nte that the land is already present (as were the waters) and appears when the waters recede adding more order to the chaos.


Gen 1:11-12
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

whose seed is in itself The way this verse is written requires that itself must refer to the earth. This means that the seed of all the plants is already present in the earth and is likely a vestige of a previous creation.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
KJV

Gen 1:21
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
KJV

Here the word created is used for the first time since verse 1.

These facts do not require belief in a gap between verse 1 and verse 2; and/or between verse 2 and verse 3; but they certainly do not preclude it. If anything IMO they suggest it.



The best support for the 'Gap Theory' is the Hebrew text, from whence I derived my version of it. While I was aware of the 'Gap Theory' proposed by both Unger's Bible Dictionary and the McClintock and Strong Bible Encyclopedia I arrived at the Gap theory in my commentary independently and to the best of my knowledge it is original. Before Nehemiah's post, I was unaware of Chalmers' or Scofield's involvement with it.


One of many articles in defense of the Gap Theory can be found here: The Gap Theory interpretation of Genesis

As i read (One of many articles in defense of the Gap Theory can be found here: The Gap Theory interpretation of Genesis ) gap theory but only the first picture made sense. The "creative ages" picture part. I am not sure about the entire theory as probably I didn't understand it.
The re-creation part made sense because scripture shows from Revelation 21:1 "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea."

So one day when Jesus returns we can expect a re-forming of earth again.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

This text shows us that physical light existed without benefit of the sun. Consider this. When God separated light from darkness, this was the beginning of the evening and morning phenomenon for the earth. The only way this could seem to happen would be the separation of darkness and light into two separate hemispheres in relation to the earth. In order for there to be an evening and morning would mean that the rotation of the earth began at this point. The rotation of the earth is cause by a huge ball of liquid iron spinning at the earth's core. This would also demonstrate that a determined relation of physic has now been put is place and the earth begins to rotate on a 24 hour cycle. Thus, the evening and the morning become the first day.

Rather than the sun being the source of light as most assume, it is quite possible that on the forth day, God coalesced the light that was created on day one into the sun and the rest of the stars. This would explain why all of empty space is in darkness and the only physical light that exists is in these pockets of light.

[SUB][/SUB]

But it seems to me that your thoughts on it are based on even more conjecture than mine...

I at least have John informing me about a light that came into the world through whom/which everything we see was created. And he even worded it as, or similar to, how the beginning of genesis is worded. This gave me a clue that he was in fact referring back to genesis when He spoke of Jesus, the Word, the light that came into the world.