Talk:Gap creationism

message: I reorganized the external links to bundle the "pro" gap theory together and the "other views" together. Also added a couple links and included William Buckland's name up with Thomas Chalmers, since Buckland wrote a treatise on gap theory in 1820. In a sense, that makes him as much a "founder" as Chalmers.
--shift6 17:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One should not confuse translation with what Genesis says.  What it says is in Hebrew.  Translations vary in accuracy.  Genesis contains no translations.  One can say the KJV translates inaccurately.  Suggesting other translations is a common & legitimate part of exegesis of the Hebrew passage.  What the above post illustrates is that gappers can vary widely on associated issues, none of which is necessarily germane to the theory.  (EnochBethany (talk) 17:02, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Old section

message: Gap creationism, also called Restitution creationism or Ruin-Reconstruction, is a term used to describe a particular set of Christian beliefs about the creation of the Universe and the origin of man.  The concept of the Gap Theory is widely thought to have been promulgated by William Buckland and Thomas Chalmers in the early 1800s, though some adherents maintain that it can be traced back to biblical times. Certainly it became quite popular when it was promoted by the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909.
===Rationale===
Gap creationists believe that science has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the Earth is in fact far older than can be accounted for by merely adding up the ages of Biblical patriarchs, as given in the Book of Genesis. By using this approach, Young Earth creationists derive the age of the Earth to be approximately 6,000 – 10,000 years.
However, in order to maintain that the Genesis account is inerrant in matters of scientific fact, which includes accepting that the Earth is extremely ancient, Old Earth creationists suppose that certain facts about both the human past and the age of the Earth have been omitted from the Biblical account rather than mythologized by it. The "Gap creationism" explanation of this position is to state that sometime before the Fall of Man, there must have been a "gap" in the Biblical account that lasted perhaps tens of thousands or even millions or billions of years.
A revised theory proposes that time in its current measurable form didn't exist prior to the Fall of Adam and Eve.  God and all spiritual beings exist outside of time, therefore time is irrelevant.  In this environment, the matter of whether the universe was created in one second or over several billions of years is immaterial; also, the principles of physics were optimal - for example, the speed of light was infinite.  Some adherents to this revision also believe that the universe was created considerably smaller and subsequently grew after an immense conflict between Satan and Michael (archangel), which resulted in the signs of a universal cataclysm, which the non-theistic scientific community interprets as evidence for a Big Bang.  The Earth may have pre-existed this event or may have arisen from it, but in both cases was left empty and desolated, and was selected for recreation.  In this revised theory, mankind is created by God to take the role of spiritual partnership that was formerly occupied by Lucifer, and intended to re-establish God's intended order throughout the regenerated universe as part of an ongoing creative process.  Only in such a capacity, can the general state of decay beyond the earth, and throughout the cosmos, be attributed to the Fall of Adam and Eve.
However, not all adherents of the Gap Theory accept that the scientific geological record refers to the gap between initial creation and regeneration, preferring instead to rely on the Biblical flood as a sufficient explanation for the mass extinction of many groups and classifications of creatures, including the
:I don't know why the above has been cut off.  At any rate, one needs to be careful in generalizing about gappers.  What gappers think about the inerrancy of physical science, would vary a lot from gapper to gapper.  You just cannot generalize that way.  You may say, "Some who hold the gap theory . . . ."  The article should concentrate on the essence of the theory.  Subtheories should be identified as such.  Gappers simply believe that there is a gap of time between creation & the tohu-bohu state of Gen 1:2.  Ideas about what happened in the gap are likely to vary.  And it is possible to leave what happened in the gap unrevealed. The rationale & motive of each gapper is variable.  (EnochBethany (talk) 16:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreferenced article

message: Gap creationists believe that science has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the Earth is in fact far older than can be accounted for by merely adding up the ages of Biblical patriarchs, as given in the Book of Genesis. By using this approach, Young Earth creationists derive the age of the Earth to be approximately 6,000 – 10,000 years.
However, in order to maintain that the Genesis account is inerrant in matters of scientific fact, which includes accepting that the Earth is extremely ancient, Old Earth creationists suppose that certain facts about both the human past and the age of the Earth have been omitted from the Biblical account rather than mythologized by it. The "Gap creationism" explanation of this position is to state that sometime before the Fall of Man, there must have been a "gap" in the Biblical account that lasted perhaps tens of thousands or even millions or billions of years.
A revised theory proposes that time in its current measurable form didn't exist prior to the Fall of Adam and Eve.  God and all spiritual beings exist outside of time, therefore time is irrelevant.  In this environment, the matter of whether the universe was created in one second or over several billions of years is immaterial; also, the principles of physics were optimal - for example, the speed of light was infinite.  Some adherents to this revision also believe that the universe was created considerably smaller and subsequently grew after an immense conflict between Satan and Michael (archangel), which resulted in the signs of a universal cataclysm, which the non-theistic scientific community interprets as evidence for a Big Bang.  The Earth may have pre-existed this event or may have arisen from it, but in both cases was left empty and desolated, and was selected for recreation.  In this revised theory, mankind is created by God to take the role of spiritual partnership that was formerly occupied by Lucifer, and intended to re-establish God's intended order throughout the regenerated universe as part of an ongoing creative process.  Only in such a capacity, can the general state of decay beyond the earth, and throughout the cosmos, be attributed to the Fall of Adam and Eve.
However, not all adherents of the Gap Theory accept that the scientific geological record refers to the gap between initial creation and regeneration, preferring instead to rely on the Biblical flood as a sufficient explanation for the mass extinction of many groups and classifications of creatures, including the
:I don't know why the above has been cut off.  At any rate, one needs to be careful in generalizing about gappers.  What gappers think about the inerrancy of physical science, would vary a lot from gapper to gapper.  You just cannot generalize that way.  You may say, "Some who hold the gap theory . . . ."  The article should concentrate on the essence of the theory.  Subtheories should be identified as such.  Gappers simply believe that there is a gap of time between creation & the tohu-bohu state of Gen 1:2.  Ideas about what happened in the gap are likely to vary.  And it is possible to leave what happened in the gap unrevealed. The rationale & motive of each gapper is variable.  (EnochBethany (talk) 16:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Rationale

message: There needs to be a section that briefly summarizes some of the more significant or popular criticisms or responses to Gap Theory. No more than a paragraph or two needs to appear, but there should be something to help readers frame the debate. 108.246.205.134 (talk) 16:14, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms or responses to Gap Theory 

message: The article states:  "it agrees concerning the six literal 24-hour days of creation, . . . ."  Actually, the gap theory postulates a gap between Gen 1:1 & Gen 2:2.  In considering that theory, it obfuscates the theory by adding on other optional theories, concerning which there is disagreement among gappers.  A six day literal 24-hour days of creation  is another matter.  It is best to confine the theory to the gap & not add in other optional ideas, like pre-Adamic creation & literal days.
:More baggage on the theory is stated:  "Gap creationists believe that science has proven beyond reasonable doubt . . . ." The amount of confidence in physical science varies from theorist to theorist.  Some observe that science changes its theories given time (Pluto was a planet!).  Some may think that science has proved something, others may think science has a good explanation, others may not be concerned about what science says at all.  You just cannot generalize about gappers that way.  And the sentence has no documentation.  I revised it to say, "Some gap creationists may believe that science has proven beyond reasonable doubt . . . ."
:: Additional baggage:  "Angels already existed in a state of grace when God laid the foundations of the Earth."  This idea is not essential to the theory.  To say that angels existed in a state of grace is nonsense.  Angels who never sinned don't need grace; sinful men need grace.  Does the source say that, or is this "existed in a state of grace" an importation of RCC theology?  I mean that only time I have ever heard that concept is in RCC theology.  The whole statement confounds one subset of the theory with the theory.  If the statement is kept, it should be changed to "When God laid the foundations of the Earth, no angel had sinned."  
:::Additional baggage:  "Satan had fallen from grace "in the beginning"."  Is Origen the only one who says this, first citation?  If Origen was not a gapper, this is an improper citation.  satan had not "fallen from grace."  Grace is the unmerited favor sinners receive from the Lord; since before satan fell he was not a sinner, the term "grace" is inappropriate for him.  However, if Origen was a gapper & said it, then the statement is justified.  But was Origen a gapper?  (EnochBethany (talk) 16:51, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baggage on the Theory 

message: There seems to be a misunderstanding about the difference between chapters and verses. Biblical "books" are broken into "chapters," and chapters are broken into "verses." I previously corrected the inaccurate statement in the lead sentence, "two distinct creations in the first and the second verses of Genesis," but the correction was reverted. 
The two creation narratives are in the first two chapters, not verses. Here is the text of the first two verses, in their entirety:
:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, 2 the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.
The remainder of Chapter 1 goes through the familiar six-day creation story. Chapter 2 begins with God resting on the seventh day, then describes the creation of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, with a slightly different sequence for the creation of humans and animals, and men and women. These differences are described in Genesis creation narrative.
Thus: the first two verses contain a tiny portion of one creation narrative. The first two chapters contain two complete creation narratives. I am changing verses to chapters in the lead accordingly. I hope anyone who feels moved to revert the change will first explain their reasoning here. Kirkpete (talk) 15:22, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is not about 'two creation accounts'. The Gap Theory is about what happened between 1.1 and 1.2. Note Genesis 1:2 under 'Biblical support'.Smarkflea (talk) 16:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Furthermore, what you are calling the "first creation narrative" is actually a broad genealogy overview of sorts, of the "lineage" of the heavens and the Earth. It is the same Hebrew word 8435. toledoth (Strong's Concordance) used in other parts of the Old Testament where it says "These are the generations of Adam, of Noah, of Isaac, etc. That ends at Gen. 2:4, where that is plainly stated. The narrative picks up with specific events that happened on the various days, and afterward, in the same creation narrative. LovelyLillith (talk) 00:25, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Verses" versus "Chapters" 

message: I reverted the changes made by  primarily because they were not verifiable – no source had been cited. However, the changes included some non-neutral wording, such as the following:
*"The Gap Theory recognizes an evident time gap between the first and the second verses of Genesis..."
This wording seeks to use Wikipedia's voice to establish the fact of a time gap, when such a gap is a very debatable matter of religious interpretation. Binksternet (talk) 15:49, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-neutral changes 

message: Heres a hint the genesis isnt the beggining, the beggining is on the secrets of the book of enoch,at chapter 24, and that tells the story of genesis 1:1 more detailed but even that is just but a fragment, like on the book of adam and eve whitch reveales some of the fragments.
 
and also here's another fragmet 
how the dinosaurs were created and placed at eden(before men) to worship, and how after the fall of Lucifer wnitch was earlier known as luciel, and his followers, they go to eden to possesesd them via the portal or gate on the earth,and mutch more enterance some i am not aware of at this time, and how God throw the dinosaur from eden because the dinosaured sin at eden, and how after a few while the earth became so full of the dinosaur that the Lord must destroy all of them,and flood the whole earth, and froze it,thus creating the ice age ,and then AFTER the ice melt,then the HOLY SPIRIT came and floated above the water whitch was gen1:2.
 
and there are mutch more secrets about not only the beggining,but also the end times secrets, and the only way we can know about it if we have a deep relationship with the Lord, and walk with him, and if we dont it would be very very hard or even impossible to understand about the book that i have shared and some hints that i have shared, and even this is just a hint for if we were to say all the secrets maybe this whole page will not be able to contain it,so that's some hint to the confused ones and again if you want to know more ask The Holy Spirit without ceasing, and see those books and ask The Holy Spirit to help you to connect these things, and if this helped you glorify the Lord, for the Lord your GOD has given this knowlage to you.
 
Friend of Jesus Christ (talk) 08:08, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not usable in Wikipedia since neither you nor the divine friend you got it from are considered reliable sources. Maybe you could try Conservapedia instead. --Hob Gadling (talk) 09:59, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

text: According to reliable sources dinosaurs and men never coexisted (except for some of their avian descendents) and the holy texts we have are the result of long term living tradition, compilation and selection, that also include several semi-consolidated origin myths...  —PaleoNeonate – 03:12, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hint of what happened in between the gap 

message: The History section currently makes reference to lots of ancient and medieval sources, seemingly attempting to prove that the gap theory has been around for a long time and wasn't just invented in the 19th century. Much of this content is inaccurate or misleading. The only non-primary source cited is Arthur Custance, who is an advocate of gap creationism and therefore not a reliable source for our purposes. His book should be treated as a fringe source, only useful for claims about itself – so we could write, for example, "Custance finds support for his theory in the writings of Thomas Aquinas", but not "the writings of Thomas Aquinas provide support for gap creationism".
So I'm going to remove the first five paragraphs of the History section as insufficiently sourced. To more fully explain my reasoning, I've copied this content into the collapsed section below, where I'll comment on each part individually.
There's no citation for the claim that the War in Heaven is thought to have taken place between verses 1 and 2, and this means that the Papias quote is irrelevant. Danielou's restatement of Andreas's restatement of the same Papias quote is also irrelevant.
The cited source is available here, and I don't see anything in it that supports this statement. If we go beyond the given page range to p. 49, Origen there discusses the difference between the spiritual heaven of verse 1 and the corporeal firmament of verse 6, but that's nothing to do with gap creationism.
This is correct, but neither Origen nor Jerome connect this with the idea (or even mention the idea) that there is a gap between verses 1 and 2.
Even Custance (whose book is available online here) admits that Hugh of Saint Victor is "not saying, specifically" that anything happened between verses 1 and 2; and in fact Hugh goes on to say, in his very next sentence, that "between this which was made and that no delay at all intervened" (source).
This quote isn't from Summa Theologica; Custance actually cites Aquinas's commentary on the second book of Lombard's Sentences (Distinct. xiii, Article 3). I don't have access to that source, so I don't know the context. If it's relevant, we need a non-polemic source that says so.
Again, if this is relevant, it needs a better source, and the quotes need putting in context. Thrown in like this, these quotes give the impression that the authors are arguing for full-blown gap creationism, whereas Custance only uses them to support the milder claim that a certain interval elapsed between the creation of the substance and the forming of it.
The first quote (apparently a somewhat free translation) comes from Genesis Rabbah 3:7. This passage, commenting on verse 5, says that other worlds existed, but doesn't say they existed between verses 1 and 2. The Zohar quote (or something like it) can be found here (Ctrl+F "generations of Formlessness"). This has been taken way out of context; the Zohar only restates the Genesis Rabbah claim in order to refute it: "It is said that the Holy One, blessed be He, created worlds and destroyed them ... But there certainly must be a secret here ... It cannot be that the Holy One, blessed be He, destroyed the makings of His own hands."
— Dan from A.P. (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @DanFromAnotherPlace I don't feel like the Papias quotation is merely an attempt to prove the antiquity of the Gap Theory. Papias does imply that Satan, originally ruling over the world, laid it in waste. That is a central claim in the Gap Creationism theory. But I wouldn't say that Papias shows there is a gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2, but he might imply it. 2600:1014:B069:4D62:8A37:F007:56A6:2501 (talk) 14:41, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section