Originally Posted by stephanos

I don't think you need a gap to account for the fall of Helel and the angels that followed him. For one thing, are we certain that the heaven that God resides in are included in the 6 day creation?
[B]....


My point is is that one doesn't have to reason around the Scriptures to fit in parts of the Bible we are uncertain of, and certainly not to fit in secular sciences and its theories on the origin of things.
just mytwocents(tm).

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Again, the Bible-Believer's view of the Gap (for those who accept it) has absolutely nothing to do with accepting evolution, or attempting to allow for it. Anyone who is familiar with Ruckman, Larkin, et. al. know this. So why bring it up as though we ARE supporting evolution?

As I said before, I do not break fellowship over the Gap discussion. I simply don't appreciate the derogatory tone from some people over it. And I really don't like the insinuation that the Gap - as taught by a Bible Believer - somehow has something to do with accomodating evolution.

In regards to your first line, we won't always understand everything in the Bible, but I know that the Lord never asks us to believe something that is unreasonable. So in a sense, you are correct; yet in another sense you are not. Everything the Lord does has order and sense to it. I have never yet heard anyone who is Anti-Gap give a reasonable, logical explanation for when and how Satan fell. The Gap answers this in a reasonable fashion, without violating any scripture.

In Christ,

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by Steve Schwenke

Again, the Bible-Believer's view of the Gap (for those who accept it) has absolutely nothing to do with accepting evolution, or attempting to allow for it. Anyone who is familiar with Ruckman, Larkin, et. al. know this. So why bring it up as though we ARE supporting evolution?

As I said before, I do not break fellowship over the Gap discussion. I simply don't appreciate the derogatory tone from some people over it. And I really don't like the insinuation that the Gap - as taught by a Bible Believer - somehow has something to do with accomodating evolution.

In regards to your first line, we won't always understand everything in the Bible, but I know that the Lord never asks us to believe something that is unreasonable. So in a sense, you are correct; yet in another sense you are not. Everything the Lord does has order and sense to it. I have never yet heard anyone who is Anti-Gap give a reasonable, logical explanation for when and how Satan fell. The Gap answers this in a reasonable fashion, without violating any scripture.

In Christ,

When God hasn't given us an explicit word on something, please don't reason around the Scriptures in order to make it seem He has. Also, please don't make it appear that we who don't believe the gap theory are unreasonable and unlogical. We simply believe that when God said "In the beginning" means in the beginning of creation by the virtue of the word "created," and that God did all His creating (in regards to the creation we find ourselves in) in 6 days, not 6+x where x is loosely translated as "how ever much time it takes to fit in all these other things we are uncertain about".

Please understand that I do understand why people believe the gap theory. However, I also understand the history of how the gap theory came into being, and for that reason I cannot support it. Also, I do believe that it is solely because of 'accomodation' (of both secular and non-secular theories) that people support the gap theory. This is another reason I do not agree with it. Like you said, this isn't a break fellowship issue, but I do want to be clear that I do not support the gap theory as being the one that states there is a gap of an undefined amount of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. I do believe that God is eternal, and as such He was around before Gen 1:1. I don't know if there is much Scripture to help us to understand the workings of God before He began the creation we all find ourselves in. But I do believe that He was active before Genesis 1:1.

So that's where I stand.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

[atlas]

Steve,

I have never yet heard anyone who is Anti-Gap give a reasonable, logical explanation for when and how Satan fell.

I have never heard a reasonable, logical explanation of how or why Satan's fall has anything whatsoever to do with creation. Would you care to give us one?



Atlas

The question of the gap in Genesis has always been an intriguing one to me.

Atlas, I think brings up the strongest puzzle to the doctrine - the comparison of Gen 1:1 with Matt 19:4 and Mark 10:6.

I have yet to hear a good answer to that.

Given that perplexity, the gap theory still stands very strong in Scripture. The simple fact of the matter is that there are MANY gaps in Scripture.

A couple of examples would be --

This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
Gen. 5:1-3


Only Seth is mentioned as Adam's son. No mention of Cain and Abel whatsoever. God chooses not to mention them. A GAP exists in Genesis 5 that is filled in by looking at OTHER Scripture.

Now all kinds of explanations could be given as to why Cain and Abel are not mentioned in Genesis 5, but whatever the reason may be, there is no getting around the ABSENCE or GAP that exists of Adam's first two sons in that passage.

Another interesting gap is found in Isaiah 61 -

The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;
Isaiah 61:1,2

In Luke 4, Jesus quotes Isaiah 61:1,2, but only quotes the FIRST HALF of verse 2. Then Jesus sits down and proclaims that this scripture has been fulfilled.

The second half of verse 2 is not fulfilled until Jesus comes back.

So in Isaiah 61:1,2 we have the First Coming and Second Coming of Jesus Christ with a GAP of 2,000 years (the dispensation of grace) represented by a comma.


All kinds of gaps such as these can be found in Scripture.

It is entirely plausible that such a gap might exist between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2

[atlas]

Herami,


I know their are gaps in the Bible. That being said I do not believe there is a gap between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:2. My reason for this is listed below.

Gen. 1:1

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Matt. 19:4

And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,


Mark 10:6

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

Ex. 20:11

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

All of these verses say it is six days, or that man and woman were made in or at the beginning. The Bible gives the creation of man a few days ( 24 hour days ) from the start most would agree a few days out could still be called at or in the beginning. This is not unreasonable to make this statement if their is a six day creation without a gap. It is very unreasonable if their is a gap of thousands, millions or billions of years.

I do not see how gappers over come all of these Bible verses. I'm not trying to be mean by saying any of this, I'm just trying to make a very valid Biblical point. How can it be a few days if it had a gap of thousands, millions or billions of years. Also notice it always says the evening and morning were day. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th day. This is 24 hour days, no doubt about this any whatsoever. This can not be a thousand year day as some claim

Six 24 hour day creation, no gap. This is the only way any of these Bible verses posted above makes common sense. God wrote the Bible to make common sense for a common man. I think some folks sometimes get a little deep and over look something very common. I have found that in the Bible most of the time the simple answer is the correct answer. I think the case for this can also be made for creation.




Atlas

Hi Atlas!

Your point is a very valid one!
I have been looking for an answer to that one point for years and have yet to find one I am satisfied with.

However, I still see some very strong Biblical evidence on the PRO side of the gap argument also.

Right now, my stance on the gap is "it's a strong possibility."

I don't see it as a fact, and I don't see it as completely implausible.

I will be glad to lay down some of the stronger Biblical evidences on the side of the existence of a gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2, if you are interested.

[atlas]

Herami,


I have read most if not all of the pro gap side. Others may not have read the pro gap side of the issue. So I think you need to post it my friend. It will be good for other folks to see both sides of the gap issue. I know the case is made very well for the 6-24 hour day creation. I also know that many good folks are gappers. I just happen not to be one of them. I think you have to over look all of the Bible verses I have posted a gapper.

If you will can you also tell me how Lucifer's fall has anything whatsoever to do with creation? That would be nice. Most tend to dodge this question for some reason.


Atlas

Originally Posted by atlas

Steve,





I have never heard a reasonable, logical explanation of how or why Satan's fall has anything whatsoever to do with creation. Would you care to give us one?



Atlas

Ok then, when did he fall? How does verse 2 fit into the creation? So God's original creation (v. 2) was void? Where did those waters come from? Verse 3 gives us the first day, but verse 2 is not part of verse 3, so far as I can tell.

[chette777]

Steve,

Check out the Thread

Why isn't the Second day of Creation said to be good?

[atlas]

Steve,

As always I ask the question.

I have never heard a reasonable, logical explanation of how or why Satan's fall has anything whatsoever to do with creation.

You come back with questions about the fall, as everyone else dose.

Ok then, when did he fall?

Can you show me one place in creation where the name of Satan is even mentioned? Satan had absolutely nothing to do with creation whatsoever.

Can you also tell me what this verse is saying?

Gen. 20:11

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is,...

I can tell you what it is saying. Their was a 6 day creation. The heaven and earth and everything that is in them was made in those 6 days.

Was Satan ever in the heaven or the earth? If so he was made in one of those six days. As was everything else that has ever been in heaven or the earth.

How do you deal with this simple plain verse that deals with a 6 day of creation and what was created? This is the real question here. Did not God give the 10 commandments to Moses with his spoken Word, IE: The very mouth of God? The verse I am quoting came from the very mouth of God himself.

Gen. 20:11

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is,...

Atlas