GAP…theory…or…fact?

[reba]

Not necessarily directed at the last poster

2.4:. . . Do not make an inflammatory remark just to get a response. Address issues not personalities. Respect where people are in their spiritual walk, and respect all others in general. Respect where others are in their spiritual walk, do not disrupt the flow of discussion or act in a way that affects others negatively including when debating doctrinal issues, in the defense of the Christian faith, and in offering unwelcome spiritual advice.

 

[FreeGrace]

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.

Yes, it was all brought up earlier. Thanks! My intent is to show what Sciptures actually say, and I'm using the Hebrew and will be using the Greek soon. All of which points to a time gap.

What anyone does with this gap is in fact a "theory". ;)

 

[Sinthesis]

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?

Strong's H1961? What translation(s) of the Bible are you using?

 

[Gregg]

The FACT of how "hayah" was translated in ALL the other 4 occurrences of that exact form of the word?? You kidding me?

Besides Gen 1:2 and Isa 48:15, the other three instances of "hayah" you rely upon have nothing to do with the act of Creation. Additionally, you are misinterpreting Isa 48:15, which leaves you with . . . Gen 1:2.

Regarding Gen 1:2 - I, and others here, and two websites I quoted have amply demonstrated why 'hayah' is to be translated as "was" in Gen 1:2, and not as 'became' as you insist.

 

[for_his_glory]

Satan’s fall from heaven is symbolically described in Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:12-18. These two passages are referring to the kings of Babylon and Tyre, but also have a dual reference to the spiritual power behind them, known as Satan.

The angels were created before the earth, Job 38:4-7, and Satan fell before he tempted Adam and Eve, Genesis 3:1-14. Scripture does not say when Satan fell, but we see that it was before tempting Adam and Eve as per Ezekiel 28:12-18. Satan was the guardian set over the garden of Eden before the creation of man. According to Job 1:6, 7 Satan still had access to heaven and the throne of God as he was roaming through the earth moving freely between the two and giving account to God as he spoke to Him. Scripture is silent as giving an exact time when God cast Satan out of heaven and having access to the throne of God, but it was before that of the Assyrian mentioned in Ezekiel 31 that were Pre-Adamic human beings living in or near the garden of God which is/was somewhere close to Lebanon as the river Hiddekel flowed into it.

Genesis 1:28 God told Adam and Eve to replenish the earth, Genesis 9:1 God told Noah to replenish the earth after the flood. By these passages from the Bible we can see that this world is much older than 6000 years and was inhabited by man way before the creation of Adam and Eve as the key word here is replenish. Why would God tell them to replenish the earth if there were not others here before Adam and Eve.

From the time God created the heavens and the earth until that of creating Adam and Eve could have spanned more than 6000 years as we do see Dinosaurs and dragons mention throughout scripture, Job 30: 29; Job 40:15-18, 23; Job 41; Isaiah 27:1; Isaiah 34:13; Isaiah 35:7; Isaiah 51:9; Deu 32:33; Psalms 44:19; Psalms 74:13; Isaiah 43:20; Jer 9:11; Jer 10:22; Jer 49:33; Micah 1:8; Mal 1:3.

My question is who decided man has only been here for 6000 years?

 

[FreeGrace]

I've read your every word in every post in this thread - but can not find a post from 'winc'.

Sorry about that. It was from jasonc, on the first page.

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 . . .

Of course it isn't true because I posted it. It's true because I have stayed with how the word has been translated in ALL of the other 4 uses, which is "became".

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.

Sure. Their eyes were blinded to their own Messiah. But that doesn't prevent them from understanding the Hebrew language better than anyone else.

You have provided nothing but opinion and conjecture, relying upon weak sources and misinterpretation.

Please name such "weak sources" and "misinterpretation". Thanks.

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.

Until someone can offer something more than an opinion, why not?

If my "facts" can be refuted, where is it?

 

[FreeGrace]

Strong's H1961? What translation(s) of the Bible are you using?

Strong's used the KJV.

 

[Gregg]

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.

You are relying upon a faulty translation of those verses. Many translations use "was" (KJV, NIV, EVS, Holman, LXX) or "being" (LITV) in Gen 1:2 . . . and not 'became'.

 

[Sinthesis]

Strong's used the KJV.

Strong's H1961 is in the KJV 75 times. Only twice is it translated as 'become': Deu 27:9 and 2Sa 7:24

 

[gr8grace3]

Strong's used the KJV.

Hey Brother, Gen 19:26 also.

But his wife, from behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

What gets overlooked quite often is the fact that this word is a verb. And It denotes action. "was" can be used, But the Hebrew word denotes that it "was" something else before it "was" formless and void.

 

[gr8grace3]

Another "little" word on this is :

And The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.Gen 1:2

"and" Could be translated "but" depending on the context. The Septuagint has it translated as "but"

But~~used to introduce something contrasting with what has already been mentioned.

 

[Brother Mike]

Please examine ALL the 4 other uses of the exact same form as found in 1:2. They were ALL translated "became".

I don't disagree the word can be translated become something, but in the context of the definition, it already became. We can't base a theory on one Hebrew Word though.

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
(Gen 1:9-10)

However, Earth was not a term to God until verse 10. He separated the water and made dry land, which was then called earth.
eh'-rets (Earth, land, nation) is not a definition of a whole planet, but a partition of land.

The name did not come into being until God made it in verse 10. So, In the begging God made the heavens and the earth, God goes on to tell us how he made those things including the earth, and the heavens.

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
(Gen 2:1)

There is no other supporting scripture that denotes a earth far older than Adam. God said what He did at the start, then tells us how He did it, the whole Begging subject is how the earth started.

I use to believe in a gap theory, but if God called something Earth just after he made it in Verse 10, then it's not possible, and there is no Hebrew
Word there meaning whole planet.

Blessings.

 

[Deborah13]

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.

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.

Genesis 1:2
ב וְהָאָרֶץ, הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ, וְחֹשֶׁךְ, עַל-פְּנֵי תְהוֹם; וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים, מְרַחֶפֶת עַל-פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם.
Genesis 3:20
כ וַיִּקְרָא הָאָדָם שֵׁם אִשְׁתּוֹ, חַוָּה: כִּי הִוא הָיְתָה, אֵם כָּל-חָי.
Exodus 9:24
כד וַיְהִי בָרָד--וְאֵשׁ, מִתְלַקַּחַת בְּתוֹךְ הַבָּרָד: כָּבֵד מְאֹד--אֲשֶׁר לֹא-הָיָה כָמֹהוּ בְּכָל-אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, מֵאָז הָיְתָה לְגוֹי.
www.mechon-mamre.org

As you can see above that word is in the same form in Genesis 3:20 as in the other two verses you have used.

How many times did this form of the word occur in the Hebrew text?
How many times was it translated 'become, became'?

If you didn't search the Hebrew text directly for this word how do you know how many times it is in this form to compare it every time it is used? Maybe you did search the Hebrew text and I am not understanding it that way but you missed Genesis 3:20?

 

[FreeGrace]

You are relying upon a faulty translation of those verses. Many translations use "was" (KJV, NIV, EVS, Holman, LXX) or "being" (LITV) in Gen 1:2 . . . and not 'became'.

No, I am relying on the Hebrew word "hayah", and, specifically, the exact form as translated 4 other times as "became".

That demonstrates the word in that form means "became". In fact, no translation that I know of rendered "hayah" in Gen 1:2 as "became", but that proves nothing. KJV did translate that form of the word as "became" in ALL the other 4 times.

 

[FreeGrace]

Strong's H1961 is in the KJV 75 times. Only twice is it translated as 'become': Deu 27:9 and 2Sa 7:24

What source did that came from? From my PC StudyBible, it occurs 3560 times. PC StudyBible has an interlinear with Strong's numbers. When I click on the #, I get the lexical definition. Then I choose "Englishman's Concordance", which shows every verse where that word occurs. Yep, 3560.

Because the interlinear shows the Hebrew in English letters, for pronunciation, I suppose, I am able to compare and contrast how the basic word "hayah" actually occors in each of those 3560 times. And then I cross reference by looking at the interlinear every where "became/become" occurs.

As a word of existence, like "to be", it's about as common as the word "and".

 

[FreeGrace]

Hey Brother, Gen 19:26 also.

But his wife, from behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

What gets overlooked quite often is the fact that this word is a verb. And It denotes action. "was" can be used, But the Hebrew word denotes that it "was" something else before it "was" formless and void.

Nuts! Missed that one! But the form is not the same as the other 4 verses that are identical to the form in Gen 1:2 and also translated "became". In 19:26, it is spelled "watahiy-", with the middle "a" a superscript.

 

[FreeGrace]

Another "little" word on this is :

And The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.Gen 1:2

"and" Could be translated "but" depending on the context. The Septuagint has it translated as "but"

But~~used to introduce something contrasting with what has already been mentioned.

Great point! I was aware of that. But, according to the YEC, there is no context for v.2, except v.1 and just like Henry Morris and the guy quoted earlier, Bert, I think, context doesn't "demand" it. ;)

 

[FreeGrace]

I don't disagree the word can be translated become something, but in the context of the definition, it already became. We can't base a theory on one Hebrew Word though.

Once again, ALL the other 4 verses that contain the exact same form for "hayah" are translated became/did not become. That is a fact. Not a theory. I haven't based any of this on theory. Straight from Scripture.

 

[FreeGrace]

Genesis 1:2
ב וְהָאָרֶץ, הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ, וְחֹשֶׁךְ, עַל-פְּנֵי תְהוֹם; וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים, מְרַחֶפֶת עַל-פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם.
Genesis 3:20
כ וַיִּקְרָא הָאָדָם שֵׁם אִשְׁתּוֹ, חַוָּה: כִּי הִוא הָיְתָה, אֵם כָּל-חָי.
Exodus 9:24
כד וַיְהִי בָרָד--וְאֵשׁ, מִתְלַקַּחַת בְּתוֹךְ הַבָּרָד: כָּבֵד מְאֹד--אֲשֶׁר לֹא-הָיָה כָמֹהוּ בְּכָל-אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, מֵאָז הָיְתָה לְגוֹי.
www.mechon-mamre.org

As you can see above that word is in the same form in Genesis 3:20 as in the other two verses you have used.

How many times did this form of the word occur in the Hebrew text?
How many times was it translated 'become, became'?

If you didn't search the Hebrew text directly for this word how do you know how many times it is in this form to compare it every time it is used? Maybe you did search the Hebrew text and I am not understanding it that way but you missed Genesis 3:20?

Wow. Another verse I missed. Just gettin' old. But, my interlinear translates it as "was". However, there are 4 other verses that ARE translated "became" or "did not become". That is my point, which shows that the word in that form CAN mean "became", without any stretch or theory.

In my software is the Englishman's Concordance. When a Strong's # is selected, it will show every occurrence of the word. The fact that Englishman's gives 3560 verses, I looked only for when the word was translated as "became/become".

I don't have access to actual Hebrew hieroglyphics because I can't make heads or tails out of them. So I have relied on my Hebrew interlinear which spells the Hebrew words in English, for pronunciation purposes, I suppose. That's what I researched.

No doubt "haayataah" has been translated a number of ways, including Gen 3:20. Of note, my interlinear translated Gen 3:20 "hayah" as "was".

However, my only point about 'hayah" is that in 4 other verses with the exact same form, it was translated as "became", so it's no stretch or theory to treat it that way in Gen 1:2.

However, several have really gotten ahead of themselves on this. I haven't even started in the Greek, which will tie all this together.

 

[gr8grace3]

Nuts! Missed that one! But the form is not the same as the other 4 verses that are identical to the form in Gen 1:2 and also translated "became". In 19:26, it is spelled "watahiy-", with the middle "a" a superscript.

Yep, Just another point and clue, That we can't "demand" that it is "was."