what questions does the gap theory not answer?
- Thread starter o-madsen
- Start date
-
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.
I see at least two possibilities
1) He created it not to be habitable then fashioned it to be so.
Or
2) He created it to be habitable, destroyed to be uninhabitable, then refashioned to be habitable.
Either way it was uninhabitable and He formed it to be as we see it today. Other possibilities would just include how many times it was destroyed and reformed.
I see it as quite simple: the preparation of the earth for habitation was not instant, but was instead a process. That still leaves no “gap”.
Ok
Do you believe that the earth is old by let’s say millions of years or young by only 7000?
If young, did God create it to be old with fossils of creatures that didn’t exist in living form during those 7000 years?
Or did was the 6 day process not literally six days?
Ok.
Do you believe that the earth is old by let’s say millions of years or young by only 7000?
If young, did God create it to be old with fossils of creatures that didn’t exist in living form during those 7000 years?
Or did was the 6 day process not literally six days?
Young, as in six literal days a few thousand years ago. God created many kinds of animals that no longer exist because they died out in the worldwide flood, which occurred about 2500 BC.
the gap theory is begins with the angelic fall and the fall of lucifer, job 26.13 I think it is says that the Spirit of God cleared the heavens and the fleeing serpent was pierced, job paints on the same words in genesis 1.2
that means that the earth was not empti and void, it became. HAYAH is better translated BECAME since the was form dont exist in hebrew , it is always in the becoming,
I am in the process of getting my danish articles translated to english om www.creationdays.dk if you are interested
it does actually, this verse says MADE, but genesis 1 says created, there is a difference
also look at genesis 2.4, it says
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,
the generations belong to the beginning, (heaven and earth)
the day belong to the days (earth and heaven)
it is like Moses wants us to notice the wording in a speciel way, why should he write like he did if not to make us aware of something?
after verse 1 in genesis 1 there is a rebhia, a hebrew grammatical sign that tells the reader to stop reading, like Selah in the psalms
heaven and earth is the whole being fit for living for people, isaiah just says that the earth was not created tohu wa bohu, as in the beginning, covered by water, that came later
Genesis 2:4 may be making a distinction or it may be a case of Hebrew reiteration, also common in Proverbs. Note too that “generations” is ‘toledoth’, recounting.
I see the presence of the two verbs in the verse telling us that they are closely related concepts, rather than being quite different as Just_A_Follower is asserting.
Every “Kind” of animal was brought into the ark.
What’s your view on scientific dating such as using carbon 14 or uranium 238?
Agreed. Some went extinct after.
Radiometric dating in general is deeply flawed because it is based on unproveable assumptions and is demonstrably unreliable.
There are known problems with all dating techniques, but there are ways to get around most of them. Dendrochronology is not radiometric and gives a means of checking carbon-14 dating in some cases, back over well 10,000 years at times, before the "young earth" dating. But, there is likewise a huge problem in suggesting that God created the world with the appearance of great age. That problem is that it makes God into a liar. The various dating techniques can be checked by various means and assumptions can be checked and reviewed. However, what method can you use to defend your claim that God created a young world, especially when there are known to be at least three distinct Genesis genealogies in different versions of the Torah. How can you be certain you are looking at the proper one, especially since comparing texts between the New Testament and the three known versions of the Old indicate that the version the Christians followed the Jews in accepting is the one that is least used by Jesus and the New Testament writers.
Some would say that radiometric dating is based on the assumption that the matter being tested has been under the same environmental conditions its entire life. I would agree with that being a flaw. Matter does decay at different rates depending on environmental conditions. But those conditions would have to be extreme to cause a small percentage of decay rate. If the earth is young and humans have inhabited it the entire time, then we could safely say that there have been no extreme environmental conditions during the last 6000 years. If the fossils we find have no carbon 14 left in them, then that already puts them way before the 6000 years.
Where does it say Adam was created with age? Whether he was created in the form of a newborn or a grown man he was still one day old at the end of his first day. How big he was didn’t affect his age.
If God did create the earth aged then that would mean He created dead animals and placed them in the ground, He also created impact craters from meteors, and a fossilized forest under the ice in Antarctica just to name a few. The earth shows many signs of extreme events that would have wiped out mankind that we don’t see in scripture. Supposing the gap theory was true, it would explain all that we see. It also brings science and scripture into agreement so that you don’t have to deny one to believe the other.
Adam was created with age. Perhaps light was as well. When God made the stars, how could their light be seen if the light wasn't aged. How long does it take for the light of stars from other galaxies to be seen? Elements could have also have been aged or simply created as isotopes.
Just because the gap theory satisfies your scientific itches doesn't mean it does so for others, is correct, or comports with scripture.
Gap theory addresses the apparent contradiction between the geological age of the earth and the 6,000 years implied by Genesis. I don't believe the earth is billions of years old. The moon is moving away from the earth and would likely be no longer subject to earth's gravity. Erosion would have washed every coastline and all the surface materials off the earth and into the sea. Of course, a flood like Noah's would address that issue. So for me, option 2 is correct. It is not a salvation issue. I have given some evolutionists food for thought by proposing gap theory to them.
Again, where does scripture say that Adam was created with age?
Believing that He created an already half decayed earth seems more far fetched than Him having created a fresh new earth further back than 6000 years ago. And I’m not trying to satisfy my scientific itches, whatever that means, I just simply don’t deny evidence when I see it. He created science. It is the study of his work and I just happen to be very interested in how He does things. I don’t know, maybe it’s the engineer side of me that likes to learn how things work.