He who would do great things should not attempt them all alone的中文意思.这是一个谚语,字面意思与实际意思要一起翻译,
lisaai00021
他处事圆滑,不会得罪任何一方.(八面玲珑)
为您推荐：
其他类似问题
一个好汉三个帮。
扫描下载二维码The Gap Theory interpretation of Genesis
The History of the
Genesis Gap Interpretation
and its Basis in Bible Doctrine
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: Whereby the world
that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 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."
(2 Pet 3:5-7 KJV)
"And the earth was without form, and
darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
this site's index page we stated that 2 Peter 3:5-7 is NOT a reference to Noah's
flood. There are only two (2) places in the entire Bible where the Earth is
flooded by water. One is at the time of Noah's flood (Genesis 7). The other is
at Genesis 1:2 where it speaks about the condition of the Earth at the time just
before God said, "Let there be light."
Now, if 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not a cross-reference to Noah's flood, then it MUST be
a cross-reference to Genesis 1:2 because there is no other Biblical alternative.
And if 2 Peter 3:5-7 is a cross-reference to Genesis 1:2, then the Holy Spirit
is calling your attention to something very significant that millions of
Neo-Creationists are blindly overlooking. Specifically, that a glorious ancient
world that God created in the distant past (Genesis 1:1), had long since been
plunged into deep darkness and overflowed by a raging flood
of great waters on a universal scale at the time of Genesis 1:2. The seven-days
of Genesis that follow chronicle God's methodology of restoring the heavens and
Earth and repopulating the world with living creatures, including modern man who
is made in His image.
There is a time-gap between the first two verses of the
Old Testament. And this is not the only time-gap in the Old T there are
two (2) others. There is the "gap" between the first coming of the Lord Jesus
Christ and His second coming. It is commonly called the "Church Age" or the "Age
of Grace." The other is the 1,000 year Millennial reign of the King of Kings,
the Lord Jesus Christ, here on the Earth between His second coming and the final
great Judgment Day, followed by the creation of the New Heaven and Earth. The
late Clarence Larkin referred to these Old Testament gaps as "Valleys" between
the peaks of prophecy. His illustration below is a schematic of his line of reasoning:
All three of these Scriptural Old Testament "gaps" or
"valleys" have one thing in common: They are impossible to discern without the
witness of the New Testament. These are things that are spiritually discerned
through the knowledge of&the Lord Jesus Christ and all the prophesies about Him
- the source of all true wisdom. (See Revelation 19:10 & Colossians 2:2-3). The Spirit of Prophecy
certainly looks forward into the future, but it also can look backward into the
past and you will be able to see this in the Holy Bible. Keep in mind that what
transpired in the past directly sets the course for what will happen in the
future. This is why it is essential to understand why there is a gap between the
first two verses of the Bible and what happened during that time.
The time-gap in Genesis is obscurely declared but not
detailed in the book of Genesis. It is the very first "mystery" found in the
Holy Bible. Knowing that there is a time-gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis
1:2, and WHY there is a time-gap, will open a more perfect understanding of what
the Creation narrative is actually saying. When you understand this truth, it
cuts a clear path through the confusion of conflicting theories and
interpretations that have occupied the ongoing Creation vs. Science debate. The
essence of that debate will be discussed in a following chapter. For now, it is
very important that we show you the Biblical clues that tell us why 2 Peter
3:5-7 is not a reference to Noah's flood.
Clue #1 - Compare the phrase: "the
heavens and earth, which are now" to the phrase the "heavens
were of old":
What does this mean? Ask yourself this question: When Noah's flood happened did
it change anything in the upper heavens? That is, would a flood on the Earth's surface
have any effect on the sun, moon, or stars high above? The obvious answer is NO.
The heavens of Noah's days were the same heavens as in Adam' same sun,
same moon, same stars, same planet Mars. FACT: Noah's flood had no effect on the
upper heavens. All of Noah's flood's effects were confined to the Earth's
surface and its atmosphere. And although the Bible speaks about the "windows
of heaven" being opened and water coming down
(Genesis 7:11), the context of that reference is the First Heaven, which is the
Earth's atmosphere. That is where the rain comes from. Keep in mind that the
Bible says there are three (3) heavens. (See 2 Corinthians 12:2). This will be
explained in greater detail shortly. Again, note the contrasting comparison
between the phrases the "heavens were of old"
(before the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7) and the "heavens
and earth which are now" (after the waters of
2 Peter 3:5-7). If the effects of Noah's flood were confined to the Earth's
surface and atmosphere, then Noah's flood did not affect or alter anything in
the upper heavens, so logic demands that this verse must be speaking about an
event other than Noah's flood. And Genesis 1:2 is our only other Biblical
alternative.
Clue #2 - Notice also in the passage that the earth
is said to be "standing out" of the water
and "in" the water. In our English language,
these descriptive terms suggest that these particular waters were not
confined to the s they overflowed the entire planetary
system. The Bible says that part of the planet was "standing
out" from these waters. That is to say, the sphere of the planet was
partially "overflowed" and the location of
the bulk of the waters was external to the Earth itself. The Bible says the
planet was "in the water" of this
particular flood (think of a round fishing floater bobbing in a lake). In
other words, part of the Earth is protruding from the waters and not simply
just covered by waters on the surface. The literal English wording of this
passage does not describe a flood event confined to the Earth's surface.
This passage describes a deluge that raged across the solar system, and
beyond. Our solar system and outer space are the Second Heaven of the
Bible's three heavens.
Try to draw this mental picture: Think of a dark and
ruined solar system with water strewn throughout it like one big messy galactic
spill. That is what Genesis 1:2 is speaking about. And imagine the planet Earth
drifting awash in this roaring and rolling, formless mess and orbiting around a
dead star. Where would such
waters have come from? Well, it is an established scientific observation that
(See also:&
Certainly there
must have been lots and lots of stars in the heavens that were "of old" and, if
something had caused the entire cosmos to have gone dark and all the stars died,
then there would be excessive water everywhere throughout space. If that was
indeed the case, then all those extinguished stars would need to be reignited to
be seen in our present heavens. Although many "Gap Theory" advocates believe
that the sun, moon and stars we not affected, and were only being obscured by
deep cloud cover until the fourth of the seven days, that interpretation does
not hold up under closer scrutiny of the Scriptures. Why it does not will become
clear as we examine the Genesis narrative by "precept upon precept" and "line
upon line" (Isaiah 28:10).
Let's review:
"And the earth was without form, and
darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters."
&(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
At Genesis 1:2 the heaven and the Earth are in
darkness and great waters are upon the deep. If we interpret the deep to
include everything in the physical universe, which included everything below God's heavenly
realm far above (see John 8:23), then the situation becomes clear. Before
any reconstruction of the heavens and Earth could begin, God had to do
something with all that water scattered across space. That is why the Bible
says that God "divided the waters" (Genesis
1:6-7). It was the first order of business after the Lord God turned on the
work lights (Genesis 1:3) and began to clear up the mess. And this verse
does not say that this division was between the waters on the Earth's
surface and the clouds up in the sky, or describe the construction of some
imagined "water canopy" above the Earth that later was the water source for
Noah's flood. That is NOT what the Bible says:
"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."
(Genesis 1:7 KJV)
The Bible is saying that God established a three-heaven
structure between the Earth and the heavenly abode of the Ancient of Days. The
firmament is the abode of the sun, moon and stars, and the galaxies. In other
words, it is speaking of the entire physical universe. And the Bible says that
God placed waters above that firmament. In doing so He placed a "Sea"
between the footstool of His heavenly throne and the less than pure physical
universe down below. Prayerfully consider the schematic diagram above because
this is what the division was all about. Also make note that in Genesis 1:8 the
Lord God says nothing about this being good.&Although God says, "it
was good" concerning days 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 He does not say that about the
work of the second day. Ever wondered about that? The reason is very simple.
Although this division was not good, it was necessary to protect the creation
from the flaming glory of God's Holiness. Nothing impure can stand in His
presence, and even the presence of a regenerated heavens and earth was not
completely pure before God (see Job 25:5). There is a whole sermon that could be
preached about the significance of this division, but I digress. These things
will be discussed in detail later in this study.
History of the &Gap
Theory& Interpretation
The Ruin-Reconstruction or Gap Theory interpretation of
the Genesis narrative is this: The seven days of Genesis were indeed seven
literal 24 hour days, but they are not a description of the original creation of
all things (Genesis 1:1). Rather, they are a Divine special regeneration of the
cosmos made from what already was here before the present world of Man. In other
words, there are two (2) creation events in Genesis. The first is described in a
one-sentence statement at Genesis 1:1 and occurred billions of years ago. The
second occurred relatively recently and was accomplished in 7 days, and very
detailed, beginning at Genesis 1:3. This is why the Bible at Genesis 2:4 says:
"These are the generations
[plural] of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that
the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,"
(Genesis 2:4 KJV)
Ruin-Reconstruction interpretation of Genesis was the bread and butter Creation
doctrine of the Protestant Fundamentalist movement in the early part of the 20th
century. The interpretation has mainly been credited to the Scottish theologian,
Thomas Chalmers, who began to preach it back in the early 19th century. However,
there were theologians who also held this view long before Chalmers' days.
Contrary to Young Earth Creationist allegations, Chalmers did not invent the
Genesis Gap
interpretation as a compromise of the Word of God to accommodate science and the theory
of evolution. That gap has always been in the Scriptures since the day Moses
penned the book of Genesis. However, only in post-New Testament times and only
after man's knowledge about Earth's natural history increased greatly, has the
Spirit opened people's eyes to its existence. And only by rightly-dividing and
gaining true knowledge through the Lord Jesus Christ can the reader start to
comprehend the doctrinal significance.
Keep in mind that from the days of the Apostles up
through the Dark Ages, and until just a few centuries ago, a 6,000 year age for
the heavens and Earth was accepted dogma in the institutions of both the Church
and Academia. Up until then, the real age of the Earth was not a burning issue.
However, after the Bible was published for the masses, and as the scientific
evidence for an old Earth grew, so did the breech between the establishment
Church and establishment science.
Thomas Chalmers, to his credit, refused to accept
that the Scriptures had been broken by the growing body of geological
observations of his time. He did not lose his faith in the accuracy of the Holy
Bible, nor did he go into denial of the forensic geologic facts. As a Protestant
theologian honest enough to realize the truth of those emerging observations,
while remaining steadfast, faithful and committed to defending the Scriptures,
Chalmers (and others) were inspired to observe the time "Gap" between Genesis
1:1 and 1:2 in the Creation narrative. And he did so many years before Darwin
had published his On the Origin of Species. In other words, an Old Age
for the Earth had already became an accepted fact long before Darwin and his
theory came on the scene. Therefore, the Young Earth Creationist argument that acceptance of an Old
Earth is a compromise to Evolutionary Theory is simply not true and has no
foundation in historical fact or truth.
What we have in the case of Thomas Chalmers and the post
Reformation times is an example of Progressive Revelation from the Holy
Scriptures. That is, when the proper time came, the Word of God had once again
proved itself timely and relevant to the level of scientific and Spiritual
understanding of the day. That Bible is still just as timely and relevant today,
and can still provide true and faithful answers to scientific discoveries that
appear to challenge the fundamentals of the Christian Faith. The problem today
is that people have, for the most part, abandoned faith in the infallibility of
the Holy Scriptures.
As the world moved into the Industrial Revolution, and
since about the middle of the 20th Century, there have been copious publications
of new English Bible translations, each claiming to be an improvement on the one
before it and each claiming to be better than the common King James Bible. This
is the Bible that Chalmers and the main body of English speaking Protestant Fundamentalism used
over the years to bring so many people to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus
Christ. Although an in-depth study of this phenomenon is beyond the immediate
scope of this study, it is important to point out that this departure from the
old Authorized text has had a profound effect on the spirituality of the
Fundamental Church. Since that time the Ruin-Reconstruction (Gap Theory)
interpretation of Genesis has also been systematically relegated to the
"Fundamental Doghouse" and displaced on the center stage of Creationism by the
Neo-Creationists - the Young Earth Advocates.
Objectively looking at the Fundamental Church in
historical retrospect, it is observed that as the juggernaut of Evolutionary
Theory became a growing mainstay in academia across the latter half of the 20th
Century, the Fundamental Church has increasingly retreated into a shell of
denial and self-preservation. Having thrown aside their best source of
Scriptural Authority and defense (the King James Bible), and with declining
numbers who were scientifically educated and intellectually honest enough to
deal with the geological arguments, the Fundamental Church has consequently lost
the ability to effectively address the overwhelming body of evidence for an Old
Earth from a true Biblical perspective. And, as a consequence, has also lost the
ability to effectively minister the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to the
educated masses of today when it comes to the accuracy of the book of Genesis.
This falling away has precipitated the rise to power
within Fundamental Christianity of today's Neo-Creationist power brokers. These
are the militant Young Earth "Creation Scientists" like Kent Hovind, Ken Ham and
others who have beguiled the Lord's flock through emotional appeals to archaic
traditionalism, presented in the new and improved wrapper of "Creation Science."
The faithful are exhorted to put logic and reason aside and stand firm in the
proscribed Party Line of Young Earth Creationism, all in the name of Jesus and
'Defending the Faith' against the "Evil Evolutionists" and the "Scientific
Conspirators."
While the motivations and intentions of these men are, without
doubt, completely honorable and worthy in their own minds, they have embraced a
fanaticism and collective group-think that has degenerated into a less than
intellectually honest religious and political juggernaut in its own right. Full
of pride and arrogance, and stopping their ears to any justification for an Old
Age of the Earth (even Biblical), they proudly claim to be defenders of the
Bible. But when confronted with rightly-divided Scripture on this matter, they
will not hesitate for a moment to criticize the old King James Version Bible or any
variant of Greek and Hebrew Scriptures that contradicts their
dogmatic paradigm of reasoning. This is unfortunate, but true.
Consequently, most "Christians" of today, regardless of
denominational persuasion, can only agree on what the first verse of the Genesis
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the
(Genesis 1:1 KJV)
And even then they quibble about whether the word heaven
in the first verse should be singular or plural (BTW, it's singular in the King
James Bible). And beyond that first verse all agreement quickly disintegrates
and the battle for hearts, minds, and souls (and money) begins. (see 1 Timothy
But criticism of the accuracy of the King James
Version of the Bible is not restricted to the Young Earth Creationists.
Even some traditional Gap Theorists claim that the second verse of Genesis was
also badly translated in the KJV and would argue it should have been translated
"And the earth
had become without form, and
darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters.
(Genesis 1:2)
This is unnecessary and unwise in either case, as doing
so can lead to a slippery slope. Consider the admontion the Lord gives in Revelations 22:19.
Neither is it wise to dismiss the literal wording of
Genesis in attempts to reconcile it to Evolutionary Theory. The school of
Creationists known as Theistic Evolutionists generally hold that the Earth is
very old and that life evolved as it was "Intelligently Designed" to do by the
Creator. Their position on the interpretation of the seven days of Genesis is
that each "day" represents an indeterminate period of geologic time that closely
matches the progression of the Earth's theoretical evolutionary development over
the millennia. But a literal interpretation of the Holy Bible's wording does not
support this interpretation.
The key crux of correctly interpreting the Genesis
narrative requires the reconciliation of these apparent contradictions:
1). How can the Earth be only 6,000 years old (according to the Bible
chronology) when the forensic evidence of Geology and the fossil record reveals
that the Earth is very ancient?
2). How could DEATH have only started with the fall of
man about 6,000 years ago (according to the Bible) when evidence for death is
found throughout the geologic ages?
3). How can Man have been on the Earth for only about
6,000 years (according to the Bible), when there is evidence of man-like
creatures inhabiting the Earth for hundreds of thousands of years?
Any interpretation of the Genesis narrative, that cannot
answer all these three key questions, is wanting.
Rightly-Dividing
the Word of God
Let's begin by a thoughtful, logical and critical
examination of the most hotly debated passage in the book of Genesis:
"And the earth was without form, and
darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
Most people gloss over this verse almost like it is not
even there. Ask a random sampling of people on the street the question, "What
was the first thing that God created?" and over 90% of the time the answer will
be, "Light!"
"And God said, Let there be light: and there was
light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from
the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.
And the evening and the morning were the first day."
(Genesis 1:3-5 KJV)
And those 90% who answered "Light" are dead wrong,
according to the Bible itself. Here is why. Let's apply some English grammar,
common sense and basic science to the issue. Look at verse Genesis 1:2 and read
"And the earth was
without form, and darkness was upon the face of
the deep. And
the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
&On the very first of the Genesis days, before God says, "let
there be light," several things already exist. Specifically, 1.) the
earth, 2.)
darkness ,
3.) the deep, and 4.)
From a scientific standpoint, two of the four things
mentioned are physical matter. The Earth is already in the form of a planet and
there are waters upon its surface. Whether the water is in a solid or liquid
phase, its presence implies there is also an atmosphere on the planet. Since
matter requires time and space (the deep) to exist, then the fundamental
constants of physics (E=MC2) are established, which means the darkness only
indicates an absence of light. Since these things appear to be so, we can also
surmise that the Earth's lithology is already fully differentiated into the
divisions of a crust, mantle and core structure. And, as confirmed by the
phrase, "And the evening and the morning were the
first day." The planet is a gravity well in space rotating on its axis at
the rate of about 24 hours a day. All of that is in place BEFORE God says, "let
there be light."
In response to this line of reasoning, Young Earth
Creationists will then argue that God created the Earth "without form and void,"
(and we must assume also the waters and the space called the deep, and the
concept of time) at the very beginning of the first day. But the Holy Spirit has
a counter-argument to that objection:
For thus saith the LORD that
God himself that formed t 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.
(Isaiah 45:18 KJV)
"And the earth was
without form, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And
the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
Isaiah 45:18 tells us that the Lord God did NOT
originally create the Earth in such a desolate condition. The word "vain"
in Isaiah 45:18 and the term "without form" in
Genesis 1:2 are from the very same Hebrew word (tohuw).
These verses by themselves, when rightly-divided in either language, destroy the
core premise of Young Earth Creationism. Genesis 1:2 compared with Isaiah 45:18
rules out God initially making the Earth as a formless mud ball about 6,000
years ago, then turning on the work lights and starting the decorating process.
It just did not happen that way.
As the verse clearly says, the Earth was already there.
Although it is "without form and void" on the
surface of the planet and covered in waters, it is most certainly already the
formed planet Earth. It even has a name...it's called THE EARTH. Since nowhere
else in the Genesis narrative does the Spirit tell us about God establishing the
Earth's geologic structure, we can safely assume that the planet's geology is
already fully established, as well. Further, there is already nuclear decay in
the mantle producing the heat that drives the Earth's tectonic and volcanic
processes. And the dynamo at the Earth's core is already generating the magnetic
field which protects the Earth's surface from lethal radiation.
And after seeing that all these things are already
present, can we realistically be expected to accept the Young Earth
Creationist's argument? Are we to believe that God went "poof" and made the
planet Earth and its complex geology, the vast expanse of outer space, time, and
lots of water, all at the very beginning of the very first day without a single
sentence outlining this complex work? Especially since God only says on day one, "let
there be light" and then calls it a day? That seems somewhat out of character
in light of the fact that God then spends another five full working days
afterward on just the surface features with the Bible fully documenting the work
in great detail. Did Moses sleep through that part of the lecture? I don't think
The only common sense, logical, and truly Biblical
conclusion that these things collectively tell us is that the seven days of
Genesis were a reconstruction from the ruins of what was already there. It was a
new "generation" of all things. The Word makes a statement of fact on the
Earth's ruined condition and then proceeds to tell us how God regenerated all
things. That is the simplicity and truth of the narrative. Man has been guilty
of reading his own understanding into the meaning of Genesis, instead of just
taking God at His literal Word.
The Earth's geological history (which, by the way, God
also preserved in stone), tells us that this planet is very old. Therefore, the
Holy Bible MUST explan the validity of those observations and provide a Biblical
reason why these things are so. And the Genesis Gap Doctrine of
Ruin-Reconstruction does exactly that. The Bible gives no specific time when God
first created the heaven and the Earth (Genesis 1:1), but it does give the time
when the Earth is found in this desolate condition and it does give the time for the start of the
seven, literal, 24 hour days. That time was, indeed, geologically very recently.
In this respect only is the Young Earth Creationist correct. Exactly how long
that time gap represents nobody can say for sure, but it most certainly could
accommodate as much as 4.5 billion years.&
At this juncture the diehard Young Earth Creationist,
still refusing to consider the Scriptural facts just presented, brushes reason
aside and pontificates that the doctrine of this gap is nothing more than a
compromise of the Scriptures to accommodate the long periods of time required by
the Evolutionary model. This is their answer to anything, Biblical or
Scientific, that allows for an old age for the Earth. Is this a valid argument?
No, and here is why:
The Earth is "without form and
void" at Genesis 1:2 and in darkness. There is no indication of anything
being alive on the surface of the Earth at this time, and that time is roughly
about 6,000 years ago. Now, common sense and logic tells you that, if nothing
was alive on the Earth's surface at that point of time, then there could be
nothing from which this world's surface life forms could have evolved. The
literal wording of Genesis 1:2 rules out the possibility that anything (or
anyone) living today has "evolved" from anything that existed on the surface of
the Earth before the seven days. Every living thing today was made/created
during the seven days of Genesis. This is why the specific phrasing of "after
his kind" or "after their kind" is used
by the Spirit in describing the Lord's regenerative work. The implication is
that what creatures are alive on the Earth today were modeled after the same pattern
of living things (kinds) that were alive on the
Earth in the world before this present one. There was a clean break in the
genetic lines of descent. And, since there is not an unbroken genetic line of
ancestry, there is no "Evolution" from the previous world into this one.
Again, remember the fact that when Thomas Chalmers began to preach about the Gap
in Genesis (in the early 19th Century) it was well before Charles Darwin even
published. So Chalmers' motivation NEVER was to accommodate the Theory of
Evolution because it had not even been proposed or published at that time.&(Gee, I
wonder why YECs don't bring up that fact.)
But that answer has not fully addressed the question. If
the Genesis Gap Doctrine is not a compromise to evolutionary theory, as our
misguided Young Earth Creationist friends fraudulently claim, then what is the Biblical
purpose in allowing for an old age for the Earth and an old world order before
the seven days of Genesis? The truth is that it points the way to uncovering
what happened in the Earth's ancient spiritual history. It is a history that
begins some time after "the
beginning" (Genesis 1:1) and reveals the origins and
background information concerning Mankind's mortal spiritual adversary, Satan. He has been around
for a long, long time and the Earth's geological and fossil record of
catastrophes and mass extinctions are the lasting legacy of his original fall in
the distant past. And this knowledge leads directly to the core of understanding
who we are, why we were placed here afterwards, and why we need salvation
through the Lord Jesus Christ. It is a sobering body of Biblical information
that the "god of this world" (see: 2
Corinthians 4:4) fights hard to suppress.
Have you never wondered why there is darkness present at
Genesis 1:2 when the Scriptures say that God is light and in Him there is no
darkness (1 John 1:5)? Where did Satan come from and when did he turn against
God? He was in the Garden of Eden, already an enemy of God, before Adam and Eve
transgressed. So why is there no mention of Satan's creation or fall
anywhere in the seven days of the Genesis narrative? When were the Angels created? If man was made
"a little lower than the angels" (see Psalms
8:5) then who are they and when were they made? What are the "devils"
in the Gospels and where did they come from? These are the mysteries that the
Gap interpretation of Genesis unlocks through prayerfully considered verses
found throughout the Bible and the observation of many clues in the geologic
record. This is all covered in greater throughout this study.
The reader should keep firmly in mind that the
state-of-the-art of scientific knowledge is constantly changing and completely
disregards any input from the Holy Bible. To assume that the scientific theories
of today are the end of all true knowledge is foolishness. Conversely, to shun
and deny sound scientific evidence under the banner of "Defending the Faith"
against the "Evil Evolutionists" is equally unwise and foolish and a discredit
to the Faith that claims to be the fountain of all truth.
As Christians dedicated to finding and defending the
truth, we should make every effort to understand what the literal Biblical text
is actually saying, by its own Scripturally-defined terms, before attempting to
harmonize it with our current scientific understanding or traditional belief
God is the Divine Author of both the Scriptures and
the Earth's Geologic record. Both are from His hand. Both witness to
historical and spiritual Truth. He established the principles of physics by
which we can search out the answers to things preserved within the Earth's
geology. His Scriptures provide us with a definitive source of Authority and
a faithful guide to verify the validity of those answers. Therefore, it is
our firm belief that there cannot possibly be any real contradiction in
facts between Geology and Genesis. Any such contradictions only arise within
the flawed paradigms of our understanding, be they scientific or scriptural.
Let's be honest, Creationism will never find fair and
equal standing and acceptance with the non-believing world's accepted paradigm
of origins. The truth of the Bible must be accepted by faith as the Word of God.
The world has placed its "faith" in the Theory of Evolution and carnal
reasoning. The supernatural intervention or acts of an invisible Divine
Sovereign can neither be proved nor disproved by the scientific method.
Regrettably, a large segment of Fundamental Christianity has placed its faith in
an interpretation of Genesis which denies not only the historical facts
contained within the Earth itself but, in some cases, the concise wording of the
Holy Bible as well. A rightly-divided exegesis of the Genesis account, however,
reveals the full truth when the geologic evidence is examined in the light of a
truly literal Scriptural context.
Without the original Hebrew and Greek Bible manuscripts
(the originals no longer exist - only variants of copies), one must either put
his trust in the opinions of modern scholars or in a reliable Bible translation
he or she can trust as a final authority in all matters. Without apology, we have taken
a stand for the King James Authorized Version of the Bible as that
Scriptural Authority in the English language. This translation (and it is a
translation) once command wide respect within the Fundamental Church. It still
does in some faithful congregations.
Can the King James Bible translation be Trusted?
This is a hot-button question that raises even more
heated controversy than the Creationism vs. Evolution debate. It is a question
that has caused many church-splits and brings out the nastier side of Christian
behavior and attitudes (all in the name of the Lord, you understand). And, these
days, those that trust the Authority of the translation are callously branded
and maligned as being "King James Only" believers by the majority of the flock of
the church of the Laodiceans. (See: Revelations 3:14) Since this a subject
that would require volumes to completely document, we will confine our
discussion to where it deals with the Genesis Gap Doctrine.
The Authorized King James Bible was first
published in 1611 and the "Standard Text" we use today was revised in the year
In the course of their work, the translators of
the 1611 text were led to leave two subtle textual indicators within
their final Old English translation of the book of Genesis to call the reader's
attention to the doctrine of the time gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. Keep in
mind that this translation work was done over 400 years ago, long before Darwin
or the founding of the modern geological sciences. These indicators are not
found in more recent English translations because contemporary scholars say
they were "mistranslations" of the Hebrew words. But were they really?
The first of these two &mistranslations& involves these two verses:
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the
(Genesis 1:1 KJV)
Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all
the host of them."
(Genesis 2:1 KJV)
The word "heaven"
(singular) in Genesis 1:1 and the word "heavens"
(plural) at Genesis 2:1 are both from the same Hebrew word (shamayim).
Modern scholars insist that the word "heaven"
in Genesis 1:1 should als thus all new English versions say
"heavens" in Genesis 1:1. Technically, that is
not quite correct. The tense in the Hebrew is the dual. It is easily confused
with the plural, inasmuch as Hebrew words take on an "im" ending when
made plural. Ha'shamayim looks like a plural word.&However, the ayim
ending is a special case called the dual. It always describes exactly two
(unlike the strict plural), but the two are considered as one. We have a similar
expression in English.&For example, when we speak of a "pair of pants" or a
"pair of glasses," we never think of these items as more than one despite the
"s" ending on the nouns (normally a plural indicator). The AV1611 translators
obviously knew this. As you study the materials on this site you will begin to
understand their choices for certain English renderings.&
In respect to Gap Theory doctrine, the implication
is that there was a structural difference in the "heavens"
of the old world (when the heaven and Earth were originally created) as
compared to the three-heavens structure God established for the new world
after the seven-days regeneration. That is discussed in greater detail later
and will give you insight into the ambiguous phrase "no
more sea" found at Revelation 21:1 after the Final Judgment. You will
learn that it cross-references back to the dividing of the waters spoken of
in Genesis 1:7 on the second creative day.
The second "mistranslation" concerns these two verses:
"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be
fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the
earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the
fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."
(Genesis 1:28 KJV)
"And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto
them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and
the earth."
(Genesis 9:1 KJV)&
The fur really flies over the KJV Bible translators'
choice of English words in these two verses, but especially so in Genesis 1:28
of the creation narrative. Modern scholars (and most Young Earth Creationists)
insist that the Hebrew word (male) should be translated as "fill,"
which certainly is&one meaning of the Hebrew word, and it is rendered as "fill"
instead of "replenish" in most newer translations. But in the case of Genesis
9:1 where Noah and his family are instructed to RE-populate an earth that has
been wiped out by the flood, the word "replenish"
as translated in the old KJV Bible renders a more accurate English meaning than
does the word "fill." Because the KJV translators used the word "replenish"
in both Genesis 9:1 and Genesis 1:28, on the surface this seems to indicate that
the translators were pointing to a similarity in circumstances between Adam and
Noah in their respective Divine commissions. If the word "replenish"
stands in Genesis 1:28, then both Adam and Noah are told to repopulate a
desolate Earth after a major destructive event, specifically, a flood:
"And the earth was without form, and
darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)&&
Since the flood of Noah's time was a judgment upon the
world of that time, then a flood before Adam's creation would imply a previous
judgment upon an old world order before the seven days of the creation
narrative.
To insist that the word "fill" is the best rendering
implies that the King James Bible translators did not understand the true
meaning of the Hebrew word and "mistranslated" male in both those
verses. But did they really? Just five verses before rendering male as
"replenish" in Genesis 1:28, the same
translators rendered male as "fill" in
Genesis 1:22:
"And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and
multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth."
(Genesis 1:22 KJV)
This fact shows that those translators most certainly
knew the subtle differences in meanings of the Hebrew word male and were well
aware of the interpretive implications of using the English word "replenish"
in Genesis 1:28 and 9:1 in the King James translation.
Now, if these were the only places in the Scriptures
that gave support to the Genesis Gap interpretation that would be very skimpy
evidence indeed upon which to base sound doctrine. But, as we have already
pointed out, there are other literal wording considerations within the Holy
Bible that raise valid interpretative issues. For example, there is the issue of
the Biblical word "generations":
Like mankind, the Bible says that the Earth and the
heavens also have "generations" in their
histories:
"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,"
(Genesis 2:4 KJV)
"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In
the day that God created man, in the likeness of G"
(Genesis 5:1 KJV)
"These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just
man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
(Genesis 6:9 KJV)
In all three of the verses above, the word "generations"
is defined as a line of descent, a family history from one generation to the
next. The Hebrew word for generations is plural in all cases. If God only made
the heavens and Earth once, as Young Earth Creationists would have you believe,
then the term "generations" should have been in the singular, which it is NOT in
either Hebrew or the KJV English translation.
The Holy Scriptures are clearly saying that the seven
day's work was a new generation of the heavens and the Earth when God made the
world of Man following the desolation found at the time of Genesis 1:2.
Something similar will be done in the future. The Bible says there will be yet
another generation of the heavens and Earth at the second coming of the Lord
Jesus Christ:
"And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you,
That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall
sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging
the twelve tribes of Israel."
(Matthew 19:28 KJV)
"Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look
for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness."
(2 Peter 3:13 KJV)
"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth:
and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind."
(Isaiah 65:17 KJV)
The geologic and fossil records are the surviving
evidence that God preserved for us to testify to the truth that the Earth is
very old and was inhabited for a long period before the seven days of Genesis
chapter one. Those records, written in stone, also provide evidence of a long
reign of Death upon the old Earth and the end of the old world order by a
universal destructive event.
Clearly, if we believe the literal wording of the Bible,
there was indeed a universal creative event during the seven days of Genesis,
about 6,000 literal years ago. But the literal wording of the Bible and the
Earth's geology reveals that there is more to the story - it was not the
original creation of all things. Understanding the time gap in Genesis opens a
vast knowledge gap. You just can't rely on your own understanding or the
traditions of man to obtain this knowledge. You have to TRUST THE BOOK.
"For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither
[are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For [as] the heavens are higher than
the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your
thoughts."
(Isaiah 55:8-9 KJV)
Previously on this page we stressed that in order to
understand what the literal Biblical text is actually saying, it must be
interpreted by its own Scripturally-defined terms. On the page that immediately
follows we will discuss two very important Scripturally-defined terms, and the
differences in conceptual meanings they convey. It is essential that students of
God's Word comprehend these terms and differences in order to discern truth from
traditional assumptions. These words are "Earth" and "World" and they are not
Next Page:
& Index Page:
Disclaimer: External Links
from this website are for instructional or promotional purposes and do not
constitute an endorsement by the The Bible, Genesis & Geology Ministry.
&All original text (C) 1997 - 2017 .
Materials from this site may
be freely copied for personal use or church Bible studies.
They may not be reproduced for commercial use without
the express written permission of this Ministry.
Are you saved? Are you Sure?
Click the image below for the Gospel Truth in your
native language!