Gregg
Member
And how do you explain some of the Jews also argue against the LORD Jesus Christ? Surely relying upon 'the Jews' is not a credible foundation for Biblical doctrine.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
GAP…theory…or…fact?
- Thread starter FreeGrace
- Start date
And how do you explain some of the Jews also argue against the LORD Jesus Christ? Surely relying upon 'the Jews' is not a credible foundation for Biblical doctrine.
Gregg
Member
The following is a quotation from an article entitled What About the Gap & Ruin-Reconstruction Theories?, by Ken Hamon September 6, 2007, and can be found at this web address - https://answersingenesis.org/genesis/gap-theory/what-about-the-gap-and-ruin-reconstruction-theories/
. . .
"Genesis 1:2. Hebrew experts agree that the grammar of Genesis 1:1–3 does not allow for a gap. Notably, the Hebrew word rendered and at the beginning of verse 2 has a very specific meaning in this context. It introduces a parenthetical statement that breaks the sequence of events in verses 1 and 3.
A Hebrew reader would see this word and understand it to say, “Oh, by the way, before I tell you what happened next in verse 3, let me describe what the earth was like initially.”
The word and is a translation of the single Hebrew letter waw (ו). Whenever a sentence begins with the wawattached to a noun (as with “the earth” in verse 2), the statement is a parenthetical comment. It details the state of affairs at that point, not the next step in the flow of events.
Moreover, the Hebrew word hâyâh should not be translated “became” because this is not its primary meaning. A translator is not entitled to “expand the semantic field” unless the context requires a secondary meaning.
For non-Hebrew readers like me, there is another easy way to show that there cannot be a gap. Exodus 20:11plainly says, “In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them.” So God made everything in six days, including things in the heavens.
Moreover, attributing the fossil layers to Lucifer’s Fall creates another problem. The fossil record is filled with signs of disease, thorns, and death. Yet God claimed that the world before Adam’s sin was “very good.”
This brief overview shows that the gap theory is not biblical. It is, in fact, a compromise of the truth of Genesis, which arose when Christian leaders tried to accommodate the millions of years claimed for fossil layers. The gap theory not only compromises the Bible but also fails to satisfy secular geologists, who no more accept a Luciferian Flood than the global Flood of Noah’s day."
. . .
"Genesis 1:2. Hebrew experts agree that the grammar of Genesis 1:1–3 does not allow for a gap. Notably, the Hebrew word rendered and at the beginning of verse 2 has a very specific meaning in this context. It introduces a parenthetical statement that breaks the sequence of events in verses 1 and 3.
A Hebrew reader would see this word and understand it to say, “Oh, by the way, before I tell you what happened next in verse 3, let me describe what the earth was like initially.”
The word and is a translation of the single Hebrew letter waw (ו). Whenever a sentence begins with the wawattached to a noun (as with “the earth” in verse 2), the statement is a parenthetical comment. It details the state of affairs at that point, not the next step in the flow of events.
Moreover, the Hebrew word hâyâh should not be translated “became” because this is not its primary meaning. A translator is not entitled to “expand the semantic field” unless the context requires a secondary meaning.
For non-Hebrew readers like me, there is another easy way to show that there cannot be a gap. Exodus 20:11plainly says, “In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them.” So God made everything in six days, including things in the heavens.
Moreover, attributing the fossil layers to Lucifer’s Fall creates another problem. The fossil record is filled with signs of disease, thorns, and death. Yet God claimed that the world before Adam’s sin was “very good.”
This brief overview shows that the gap theory is not biblical. It is, in fact, a compromise of the truth of Genesis, which arose when Christian leaders tried to accommodate the millions of years claimed for fossil layers. The gap theory not only compromises the Bible but also fails to satisfy secular geologists, who no more accept a Luciferian Flood than the global Flood of Noah’s day."
Gregg
Member
The aim or goal of the 'Gap Theory' is destructive to the word of God and to the Gospel of Christ.
Here is a list siting 7 problems with the 'Gap Theory' from the same article entitled What About the Gap & Ruin-Reconstruction Theories?, by Ken Hamon September 6, 2007, and can be found at this web address - https://answersingenesis.org/genesis/gap-theory/what-about-the-gap-and-ruin-reconstruction-theories/
1. It is inconsistent with God creating everything in six days, as Scripture states.
2. It puts death, disease, and suffering before the Fall, contrary to Scripture.
3. The gap theory is logically inconsistent because it explains away what it is supposed to accommodate—supposed evidence for an old earth.
4. The gap theory does away with the evidence for the historical event of the global Flood.
5. The gap theorist ignores the evidence of a young earth.
6. The gap theory fails to accommodate standard uniformitarian geology with its long ages.
7. Most importantly, the gap theory undermines the gospel at its foundations. [described below:]
Here is a list siting 7 problems with the 'Gap Theory' from the same article entitled What About the Gap & Ruin-Reconstruction Theories?, by Ken Hamon September 6, 2007, and can be found at this web address - https://answersingenesis.org/genesis/gap-theory/what-about-the-gap-and-ruin-reconstruction-theories/
1. It is inconsistent with God creating everything in six days, as Scripture states.
2. It puts death, disease, and suffering before the Fall, contrary to Scripture.
3. The gap theory is logically inconsistent because it explains away what it is supposed to accommodate—supposed evidence for an old earth.
4. The gap theory does away with the evidence for the historical event of the global Flood.
5. The gap theorist ignores the evidence of a young earth.
6. The gap theory fails to accommodate standard uniformitarian geology with its long ages.
7. Most importantly, the gap theory undermines the gospel at its foundations. [described below:]
By accepting an ancient age for the earth (based on the standard uniformitarian interpretation of the geologic column), gap theorists leave the evolutionary system intact (which by their own assumptions they oppose).
Even worse, they must also theorize that Romans 5:12 and Genesis 3:3 refer only to spiritual death. But this contradicts other scriptures, such as 1 Corinthians (15) and Genesis 3:22–23. These passages tell us that Adam’s sin led to physical death, as well as spiritual death. In 1 Corinthians 15 the death of the Last Adam (the Lord Jesus Christ) is compared with the death of the first Adam. Jesus suffered physical death for man’s sin, because Adam, the first man, died physically because of sin.
In cursing man with physical death, God also provided a way to redeem man through the person of His Son Jesus Christ, who suffered the curse of death on the Cross for us. He tasted “death for everyone” according to Hebrews 2:9. He took the penalty that should rightly have been ours at the hands of the Righteous Judge, and bore it in His own body on the Cross. Jesus Christ tasted death for all mankind, and He defeated death when He rose from the grave three days later. Men can be free from eternal death in hell if they believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. They then are received back to God to spend eternity with Him. That is the message of Christianity.
To believe there was death before Adam’s sin destroys the basis of the Christian message. The Bible states that man’s rebellious actions led to death and the corruption of the universe, but the gap theory undermines the reason that man needs a Savior.
.
Even worse, they must also theorize that Romans 5:12 and Genesis 3:3 refer only to spiritual death. But this contradicts other scriptures, such as 1 Corinthians (15) and Genesis 3:22–23. These passages tell us that Adam’s sin led to physical death, as well as spiritual death. In 1 Corinthians 15 the death of the Last Adam (the Lord Jesus Christ) is compared with the death of the first Adam. Jesus suffered physical death for man’s sin, because Adam, the first man, died physically because of sin.
In cursing man with physical death, God also provided a way to redeem man through the person of His Son Jesus Christ, who suffered the curse of death on the Cross for us. He tasted “death for everyone” according to Hebrews 2:9. He took the penalty that should rightly have been ours at the hands of the Righteous Judge, and bore it in His own body on the Cross. Jesus Christ tasted death for all mankind, and He defeated death when He rose from the grave three days later. Men can be free from eternal death in hell if they believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. They then are received back to God to spend eternity with Him. That is the message of Christianity.
To believe there was death before Adam’s sin destroys the basis of the Christian message. The Bible states that man’s rebellious actions led to death and the corruption of the universe, but the gap theory undermines the reason that man needs a Savior.
.
Not according to my search tool. It occurs about 3560 times, to be correct.
I've not relied on any vowel point. I have relied solely on the exact form of the word as found in Gen 1:2. And it occurs exactly 4 more times in the OT, ALL of which were translated "became", or "did not become". Fact.
Please explain what I've given as "theory". I have shown how the word as found in Gen 1:2 is found 4 more times, ALL of which are translated became or did not become. Where's the theory in that fact?
Second, I gave all the verses where "without form and void" in the Hewbrew occurs and how it is translated there. No theory there, either.
While I have stated that there is a time gap between v.1 and 2, I AM providing the evidence for that.
If anything I've provided is wrong, it should be simple to refute it with facts, or evidence.
What I'm seeing so far is push back by those who have accepted the idea from AIG or others that God created the earth just before He created Adam.
And I haven't even gotten into the Greek to support the time gap yet. But it's coming.
First, I'm waiting for any evidence to refute my points. So far, just disagreement, in spite of the evidence.
This appears to be an opinion. What evidence is there to support your claim?
I have provided all 5 verses where "hayah" occurs in the exact same form as in Gen 1:2, and ALL 4 of them are translated "became" or did not become. That is a fact. There is no conjecture in this fact. And I have shown the meaning of "Tohu wabohu" and given all the occurrences of those words. Fact.
No need only for those who aren't interested in what the NT says about it. ;)
No, I'm not saying anything close to that. I wish posters would actually read what has been posted before firing off their own post and opinion.
Did you notice that winc noted that Jews have argued that there is a time gap between v.1 and 2? Why do you suppose they would argue that? Who, better than Hebrew people, to understand the Hebrew language? Please answer.
I explained that in the OP. I am laying out the case. To try to do so in 1 post would be way too long, and this forum frowns on excessively long posts. Plus it would be too much to absord all at once, for those who's preconceived idea is that the earth and Adam were created within a week of each other.
I've already provided the evidence that "hayah" in the form found in v.2 should be translated "became" as it is in EVERY OTHER verse where it occurs. How difficult is that to understand?
And, so far, you haven't even tried to demonstrate how I have. But, I provided the facts. Facts are never incorrect. Just inconvenient for some.
Hello Gregg. If you look close at one of those creation(I believe restoration) days, He did not call it "Good" Gen 1:6-8 NASB
6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. 8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
I believe He did not call this day 'good' because the sea is what covers the abyss. Hence, no more sea in the new earth.
In exodus 20:11 "Made" is Asah. To make something out of something that is already in existence.
asah: accomplish
Original Word: עָשָׂה
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: asah
Phonetic Spelling: (aw-saw')
Short Definition: accomplish
In Genesis 1:1 It is Bara, to make something out of nothing. When God Baras(creates) it is perfect.
bara': choose
Original Word: בָּרָא
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: bara'
Phonetic Spelling: (baw-raw')
Short Definition: choose
I joined late also, so this might of been brought up already.
God Bless Brother.
Good, because I'm not selling.
Well, I've tired of your disagreement. The point is how words are used, not how they "relate" with creation of heaven and earth. That is totally immaterial.
Fact: ALL 4 of the verses where "hayah" is found in the exact same form as in G3wn 1:2 are translated as "became". Why? Beause that is how that particular form of the word is used.
Why do Jews argue for a time gap between v.1 and 2? Think about it.
Apparently you haven't read my posts very carefully. Did you miss the part that the pastor spent 5 years studying Hebrew in seminary? Does that count for nothing? Have you spent more years than that studying Hebrew in seminary?
I'm really getting tired of your claim of "redefining". I have PROVEN that the particular form for "hayah" in Gen 1:2 is translated "became" in ALL 4 of the other verses. I've redefined nothing. I've proven that the form in Gen 1:2 was translated as "became" in ALL the other 4 uses.
You are free to unwatch this thread any time.
Gregg
Member
Yes, but I was referring to the one-hundred-ten times written in the form used in Gen 1:2 . . . היתה.
Go ahead and state your conclusion from the NT that supports all this conjecture, mis-interpretation, and assumption.
The program is called "PC Study Bible". I am able to search words by Strong's number, in both OT and NT. That's why I know the word "hayah" occurs 3560 times.What search did you use to find all the occurrences of hey-yud-tav-hey in the OT. Was this a program? Please share this information, a link, book, etc.
Thanks
I'm unable to put superscripts in this forum, but here are some of the various forms of "hayah" as found in lexicons that use English spellings to indicate how the Hebrew word would have sounded:
haayataah (Gen 1:2, Gen 47:26, Ex 9:24, 1 Sam 10-:12, Josh 14:14), wahaayaah, Watahiy-, watahiy-, wayihayuw, haayaah, wayahiy, Watihayeynaah, and many more. I've underlined where the superscript goes.
I searched the Strong's number for the word found in Gen 1:2. 3560 times. Then I searched how many times that general word was translated "became/become". Some 63 times. I copied down the exact spelling of each of the 63 occurrences.
What is totally relevant is that ALL of the other 4 are translated as "became/did not become". Why isn't that relevant to you?
Maybe I had the same dream as the writer of Hebrews, then. We'll get there. But you said it wasn't necessary to continue in this discussion, so it seems you'll miss out on the dream that the writer had.
Irrelevant.
Yes. And irrelevant to my points, which have not been refuted, or corrected.
The FACT of how "hayah" was translated in ALL the other 4 occurrences of that exact form of the word?? You kidding me?
So, let's see some of it.
Who ever suggested otherwise? I am presenting evidence for the fact that there is a time gap, using only Scripture.
But you seem to be a "YEC", and such ideas die hard, as I know. Ken Hamm, who I have nothing against, views anyone who believes that the earth is way older than Adam as an evolutionist, which is ridiculous.
Gregg
Member
I've read your every word in every post in this thread - but can not find a post from 'winc'.
What you have posted is not true because of its having being posted. Posting something, and your vast language studies do not make something true. Please . . .
The Hebrew people and the Jews are not necessarily a source to rely on - as the majority of them did not believe in the LORD Jesus Christ. [You have already said that and now I am stated this a second time.] They missed their Messiah, so how can they be a reputable source for you to rely on; especially the Masoretes who developed vowel pointing no earlier than 500 AD.
You have provided nothing but opinion and conjecture, relying upon weak sources and misinterpretation.
Because you call something a fact does not make it a . . . fact. You continue to uphold your statements as a factual basis for that very same statement - circular, yes; factual, no.
This brief overview is an opinion. For example, the claim that "hayah" should not be transated "became" is becasue this is not its primary meaning is irrelevant. I have SHOWN that in ALL other occurrences of the exact same form of the word, it was translated as "became". That is a fact, so "primary meaning" is irrelevant to this discussion.
I'm not talking about primary meanings here. I'm proving that the exact same form of the word is translated as "became" in ALL the other 4 verses. Fact. His opinion included a lot of other errors, but not my concern.
If my facts are in error, please provide evidence of how they are. Which will be kinda hard to do, since ALL 4 other verses where the word form is exactly the same as in Gen 1:2 are translated as "became".
That may be unimportant to some, but that doesn't mean it is unimportant.
Gregg
Member
Apologetics and Theology is not about your dreams.Maybe I had the same dream as the writer of Hebrews, then. We'll get there. But you said it wasn't necessary to continue in this discussion, so it seems you'll miss out on the dream that the writer had.
Are you kidding me??? apples and oranges.
Look, I get it; you're a YEC. Fine. You haven't provided a single fact or evidence yet that refutes what I've provided. Just a lot of opinion and disagreement.
I believe in the GAP fact.
What death are you speaking of? How can you claim that there was death before Adams sin if one believes in the Gap fact?
This is just another opinion. I'm not going to bother commenting on the rest of your post here. If you are interested, just keep following along, although I am going to get into the Greek and NT for additional support and evidence for the time gap.
I'm not defending any "theory", gap or otherwise. I am providing evidence that there is a time gap. Big difference.