flood

The Gap Theory What it is, and why its wrong

The Gap Theory (or Ruin-reconstruction Theory) has been widely accepted among evangelical Christians, I feel that this shows a lack of faith in Gods word because what believer’s in this theory are doing is trying to align the Bible’s account of creation with the vast time periods that science claims must have existed for the Earth as we know it to have formed. No reader of the Bible would pick this up without it being pointed out because it is so obscure in its context. The gap theory places a large gap of time between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2.

Basically the theory states the following:

Gen. 1:1 "In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth"

Stop text…

Millions of years go by, involving the creation of virtually all the fossilized animals we find today, and due to the fall of satan, God destroyed it all.

Start text…

Gen. 1:2 "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

God is not the author of confusion.
- Now what Christian would get that out of those two verses?
- Why would God give us an entire Bible and fail to give us any details about this period of time?
- Why wouldn’t Jesus have mentioned this gap? He mentioned creation and the flood, so why would He leave out 99.9% of this worlds history?

"Was" or "Became"
The problem that gap believers have is with the interpretation of the word "was" in verse 2. Gap theory believer’s feel that the word should have been translated "became", which would make the verse support their argument. Gen. 1:2 would read: "and the earth became without form and void" leaving the impression that it had changed from its original creation in Verse 1. Without this the theory falls apart.
The supporting argument for the Gap theory is the their belief that the Hebrew verb "hay ta" in Genesis 1:2 should be translated "became" or "had become," thus implying a tremendous transition from perfection to judgment and destruction. The answer to this argument is that while the verb "hay ta" can often be translated "became", the word order and sentence structure in Genesis 1:2 (and in a number of other passages) does not permit this translation. If it had to be translated "became," then we would have to say that Adam and Eve "became" naked (Gen. 2:25), and that the serpent 'became" more subtle than any beast of the field (Gen. 3:1)!
Very illuminating parallels to the construction in Genesis 1:2 are found in Zechariah 3:1-3 ("... he showed me Joshua…. Now Joshua was clothed with Filthy garments…..") and Jonah 3:3 ("So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh…..Now Nineveh was an exceedingly great city…"). Obviously Joshua did not "become" clothed with filthy garments after Zechariah saw him: nor did Nineveh "become" a great city after Jonah entered it. But this is how these verses must be translated if we go by the logic used by those believing in the gap theory.

Thus, all the important English translations or Genesis 1:2 are correct in avoiding the idea of "became" because the verse is simply describing the earth's condition just after it was created.

The Gap theory leaves us with no clear word from God concerning the "original perfect world" (which most advocates of this theory assume to have existed for many millions of years). Thus, we would know nothing of the order of events in its creation, the arrangements of its features, or its history (which, we are told, could have constituted 99.9 percent of earth's history thus far); so instead of having the entire first chapter on this important subject, we have only the first verse! Are Christians to assume that before Genesis 1:2 we must look to scientists and evolutionary geologists to fill in the blanks? What does this do to Exodus 20:11 (cf. 31:17) which states that within the six days (not before the first day), God "made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is" (not just plants, animals, and men)?

Finally, the Gap Theory assumes that Noah's Flood (to which Moses devotes three entire chapters in Genesis) was comparatively insignificant from the standpoint of its geologic and hydrodynamic effects, since all the major fossil-bearing formations were laid down by the supposed Flood of Genesis 1:2 (sometimes referred to as Lucifer's Flood). Obviously the same fossils were not deposited by two universal floods separated by a long time period. Therefore the Gap Theory almost requires that Noah’s Flood be localized in its extent and effect in order to give full emphasis to a supposed pre-Adamic catastrophe. It is futile to argue that the Apostle Peter was referring to a catastrophe back in Genesis 1:2 when he wrote that ". . the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished" (2 Peter 3:6), for he had just referred to Noah's Flood (2 Peter 2:5) and would hardly be referring to a different Flood without explanation, especially since the only Flood the Lord Jesus Christ ever spoke of was in Noah's time (cf. Matt 24:37-39; Luke 17:27).
In summary I would like to state that the Gap Theory is not simply a minor deviation from the traditional interpretation of the Genesis creation account. Great amounts of human interpretation and addition must be added to the word of God for the theory to hold up at all. Why not just take God’s word as it is.

In the beginning God Created….enough said.