Come on in, the water's fine!
About time I weighed in and let another voice be heard.
At first I was a non-gapper, then I heard this other theory, and since apparently so many professed Bible-believers taught it, I figured it was worth thorough investigation, since I could have been wrong. Especially since Ruckman teaches it, I figured I'd better get to the bottom of the matter.
I am endebted to Kent Hovind for letting me borrow from his knowledge; I have every seminar, class, debate, rebuttal and book the brother ever did, and have gone over his material profusely.
Now I MUST state that in no way do I follow that man's teachings, but as a good little Berean, I searched out almost all the interesting topics Kent ever brought up, (which were many), including this gap theory.
One of my good Bible-believing friends and I have been involved in a discussion about this gap theory, and at first I knew only Hovind's succint, detailed, thorough and plausible explanation (which some here misrepresent). But when this friend started trying to explain the other side, using a few of the main arguments often repeated for the gap, I decided to investigate deeper.
I've read this entire thread carefully, and throughtfully, as well as the other threads that touch on it. I've read both Ruckman's and Hovind's sides, as well as others. I've sought the Lord's guidance on it, and have asked various brothers I come across.
The outcome of my personal research has led me back to a firm, scriptural and logical conclusion that there is NO gap in Genesis.
I've given sincere thought to everything the pro-gappers have presented, and watched as the non-gappers have perfectly refuted each and every meaty point, not to mention the scripture wresting, the accomodation of long-age pseudo-science, the bad logic, the weak scriptural arguments, the appparent requirement to make the theory work.
The non-gap conclusion doesn't have to bend anything, agrees perfectly with scripture, and the "without form and void" I have seen easily refuted in many ways.
Also, YEC agrees perfectly with all true science.
I noticed nobody got much into the extreme fallacy of the pseudo-science that claims to prove the earth is older than ~6000 yrs. That's a whole other topic, that is resolutely, soundly and comprehensively explained in Hovind and other's work, as well as backed up by hard impirical evidence.
Now, many of the comments made in this thread I felt compelled to respond to but didn't, and Winman has been doing a great job in responding to most of them.
I'm afraid that once someone gets stuck in a heresy, and have commited much of their effort to trying to back it up, the harder it gets for that person to see the truth. Like a pastor who's spent years fighting againsts the KJB and its proponents, will have a far far harder time admitting he was wrong, even if he does see the light.
I for one, spent over a year honestly unsure on this gap theory, seeking information from both sides, but have come to the logical conclusion.
The non-gap explanation makes perfect sense for everything;
the geological evidence of a ~6000 year old planet / universe (plus all related topics);
the fall of Satan occuring after man was living sinless in the Garden of Eden;
each and every scriptural reference to the creation, the flood, the fall of man, and the futurs of creation, man and angels.
There is only ONE argument that I have ever heard a gapper present that I can't reconcile, and I ask you non-gappers out there if you have an answer:
God's System of Sevens, by Ruckman.
He presents seven stages of the earth / world, in that God's various plans of perfection are always done in sevens.
Now, possibly this one doesn't have to confirm to the system of sevens, for there are many other exceptions to that pattern. Or perhaps Ruckman has them out of order somehow.
Now, I don't find that this presented pattern alone can prove a gap/recreation, but could only support it. since that pattern doesn't have to be true, as it is only conjecture based on observed patterns, without a direct scripture indicating that the world will pass through seven states of being.
Anyways, there are many more things on this topic I'd like to talk about, mostly in favor of non-gap, but that is one sincere puzzle I'd like to have solved.
Notable Quotable:
Did you know that we live in a single spoken sentence? Uni-verse
|