<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d14792577\x26blogName\x3dPLAIN+PATH+PURITAN\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://electofgod.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://electofgod.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d3757314713231228019', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

8.07.2017

The so-called Gap Theory

Why is establishment Christianity so against what they've labelled the 'gap theory'?

Because it shines light on the Devil. They want people to be ignorant of the Devil, as much as possible, so that the Devil can control more easily. They want this unconsciously.

Once they've labelled something they then confidently mock it to no end, attempting to get God's people to concede fear of the world.

Well, I'm an elect of God, so mock away, Churchians.

I'm going to quote a description of the so-called Gap Theory using A. W. Pink from his little book on Satan titled Satan and His Gospel. Then I'm going to give the counter-arguments.

This is from the chapter titled 'Satan's Position Since His Fall' from the book:

"The thoughtful reader of Genesis 1 will doubtless be puzzled by the contents of the first two verses. He will naturally ask, Why should an earth created by God be “without form, and void”? or, as the Hebrew suggests “an empty waste, or ruin.” Surely a perfect Creator would not create an imperfect earth. Nor did He. Isa. 45:18—which contains the same Hebrew words to be found in Gen. 1:2—expressly declares, “For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God Himself that formed the earth and made it; He hath established it, He created it not in vain,” or, if the Hebrew here be rendered as in Gen. 1:2: “He created it not without form and void,” i.e. a ruin. How then harmonize this statement with Gen. 1:2? The answer is, Gen. 1:2 ought to have been translated “And the earth became without form, and void,” or, “an empty waste or ruin.” But how, and when did it become such? Probably, long after the point in mind referred to in Gen. 1:1. Between verses 1 and 2 of Genesis one there is room for a long interval of time, during which some terrible calamity occurred, resulting in the earth, originally created by God, becoming a ruin. But what calamity could have been commensurate with such a disaster? We reply, the only answer which appears to be adequate is, the fall of Satan."

Pink, Arthur W.. Satan and His Gospel (Arthur Pink Collection) (Kindle Locations 321-329). Prisbrary Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Pink goes on to write about Satan having been put in Eden as Prince and then having fallen due to pride, etc. (Read the whole chapter, it's free on the internet.) He then gives this motivation of Satan: "Moreover, the above conclusion makes it easier for us to understand why Satan should seek to seduce our first parents and cause them to disobey their Maker— being filled with envy and hatred at seeing a man placed over the realm which once he had governed."

Pink goes into it much more than these two quotes, but I'll leave it at that.

What are the counter-arguments? The Bible tells us something will sound good until you hear the counter-arguments. I know there are counter-arguments (I've gone over them before, which has made me whiplash back and forth on this subject over the years.)

First of all, get the Theory of Evolution, or any defense of it, out of your mind. That is the first accusation from establishment Christianity, that anybody who holds to the so-called Gap Theory is looking for a defense of the Theory of Evolution, or is more generally looking for a way to sync modern science paradigms with the Bible. Whatever those current paradigms are. You can consider the Theory of Evolution to be garbage 'science' and still hold to the so-called Gap Theory; and, as well, you can be not concerned at all to hold the word of God up to the ever-shifting standards of modern science beliefs.

So, now the counter-arguments: "It's wacky, and stuff!!" OK, that is one common counter-argument you'll encounter on various internet forums and blogs.

Here's another: "Before I give counter-arguments to your 'gap' theory I should tell you that I'm very much NOT going to let on that I don't really even believe in the supernatural, let alone some dude named 'Satan.'" Then they list counter-arguments.

By the way, you don't have to believe in death happening on earth prior to Adam's fall. We don't know what the creation was like when Satan was the Prince of the Garden. It may have just been angelic beings, for which death meant they fell and were condemned ultimately to the lake of fire.

Another point, one that doesn't really exist in the academic world of theology. Some say if there was this original creation and then ruin then why isn't the Bible more explicit about it? That is because there are elements of the Bible that are not intended to be in the forefront (such as knowledge of the angelic creation in general) because they would obviously capture the imagination of human beings solely (pretty much) and take attention away from the basics of the faith. The fall of Satan is presented in the Bible here and there, in Ezekiel, in Isaiah, but not explicitly, and you get the usual establishment dullards denying the obvious in those passages (including Calvin, unfortunately, but his concern was the basics of the faith, so it's probably understandable in his case).

This article gives a good impression of how it's really not so easy to give counter-arguments to the so-call Gap Theory. The writer of the article is unusually honest for this subject.

By the way, I am young earth. I think you can be Young Earth Creation and hold to the Gap Theory, because the earth we speak of was created again in the seven days. I think fossils are due to the flood, which was worldwide. I believe in the supernatural, which includes supernatural creation. I have no problems with anything regarding starlight or whatever. I believe in mature creation and the practical implications of creating the entire universe in seven days.

I believe Satan defiled human bloodlines which explains the different races (sub-species) of humans on this planet. I believe all human beings were created white, ruddy complected, or able to blush, and any non-white people group today is the result of defiled bloodlines. White people also aren't as pure as some might think. I think if we ever saw an original son or daughter of Adam we would be very shocked at how impure we all are now. Still, I do believe the original Adamic race still exists, and it is the white race, and it is the target still of Satan and his spiritual children because they know that it is within the white race that the memory and traditions of our Creator and his word exist on this planet, thus they want to exterminate white people from the face of the planet. What you see going on in the world today is towards that goal, in a way never seen before probably.

Not everybody is interested in knowing as much about Satan and his history and his role in God's plan of redemption as some Christians are. The Bible accommodates both.

God had to establish the adversary. He did this by first creating earth and giving it to the angelic being known as Satan. Once Satan fell due to his pride the adversarial element in God's plan of redemption was established (which is also His plan of peopling His creation with beings who love Him by more than a fiat love).

Read the entire chapter in Pink's Satan and His Gospel. Again, here it is.

____________
Addendum: I found some typical counter-arguments after writing the above:

Here are some of the major problems that I have with the Gap Theory of Creation:

1) There is no prima facie reason to posit a gap of any measurable time between the first two verses of Genesis.

2) Gap theory originated in the 19th century as a reaction to the rise of the evolutionary theory of the origin of life to account for an old earth which the Bible does not otherwise suggest. It was popularized by the Scofield Bible, not the best source of exegesis, In my humble opinion.

3) It purports to account for the fall of Lucifer, and death entering creation, before the fall of man in Genesis 3 in direct contradiction to the teaching of Romans 5.

4) It forces one to conclude that the creation account in Genesis 1 is actually a re-creation account. Under this theory, we don't have any Biblical data about the actual creation.

One by one... 1) He can prima facie all he wants, but there certainly are many reasons to posit such a gap. Pink does it in the aforementioned chapter of his book which I have linked above, so I won't repeat it.

2) Who cares? This is what I mentioned above, how the first accusation from establishment churchian types is you are trying to defend the Theory of Evolution or some other modern scientific paradigm or data. And considering there is nothing new under the sun regarding biblical exegesis I'm sure one could find the gap theory by some other name somewhere in theologians prior to the 19th century. If not, it's hardly an argument against though.

3) Did Lucifer 'die'? He puts in the phrase "and death entering the creation" when that doesn't have to be the case at all. We don't know what life was like on the first earth creation. As I mentioned above, it could have been solely angelic life. They didn't die, I mean the ones that fell. They fell and became condemned.

4) Why do we need any biblical data about the "actual creation" beyond the first verse of Genesis? That's just demanding something from God that perhaps God didn't see fit for us to have.

Weak, weak, weak...

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home