STUDY OF THE GAP part 6

OMMON

BJECTIONS

What do the anti-gappers say?

In this last section of our study on the Gap, we will try to answer some of the most common
objections to the teaching of a Gap between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2.

Obviously we are not going to be able to make an exhaustive study of each and every objection,
but we will try to touch on the main arguments against the Gap (using the writings Gap opponents
such as Dr. Kent Hovind and Ken Ham).

Since much of this material has already been covered in previous studies, you will likely notice
some repetition in this lesson. It is important, however, to include the same material again in
order to properly and fully answer the opponents' objections.

We will be looking at ten of the most common objections to the teaching of a Gap between Genesis
1.1 and 1.2:

1. Romans 5.12 teaches that sin and death entered our world through Adam, not through Lucifer.
2. Exodus 20.11 says that God created the world and all thing in it during six 24-hour days.
3. Historically the word "replenish" in Genesis 1.28 means "to fill," not "to fill again."
4. Thomas Chalmers invented the Gap Theory in 1814 as a way to harmonize the Genesis account

of creation with the teachings of evolution (and the evolutionist idea of the earth's long life).

5. According to Ezekiel 28.13-15, Satan was created on a specific "day." How could that have

happened before Genesis 1.2 when the first day mentioned in Scripture is in Genesis 1.3-5?

6. According to Isaiah 14.14, Lucifer rebelled when there were clouds and stars. If there weren't

clouds and starts until after the fourth day of creation, how could Lucifer have rebelled in a "Gap"
between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2?

7. According to Ezekiel 28.13-17, Lucifer existed in his unfallen state in the Garden of Eden which

was not created until the sixth day, in Genesis 1.24-31. How could he have fallen between
Genesis 1.1 and 1.2 if he was in the Garden of Eden in his unfallen state in Genesis 1.24-31?

8. The "Gap Theory" undermines the simplicity and authority of Scripture.
9. The existence of a Gap would imply a "three-earth" theory, and yet Revelation 21.1 says that the

"first earth" will exist until it is destroyed by fire at the end of the Millennium.

10. In Genesis 1.31 God says that "every thing" that He had made was "very good." If Satan had

already fallen, God could not have made this statement.

Most if not all of the quotes and objections in this lesson are taken from the booklet entitled The Gap
Theory by Dr. Kent Hovind and Stephen Lawwell, and the Answers in Genesis web site which contains
material by Charles Taylor and Ken Ham.

I. Objection #1

: Romans 5.12 teaches that sin and death entered our world through Adam, not

through Lucifer.

A. Opponents of the Gap state their position with words like the following.

1. "One of the problems with Gap Theory is that it puts death before Adam's sin, violating

Romans 5.12 and 1Corinthians 15.21. "

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so
death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. [Rom 5.12]

For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

[1Cor 15.21]

ESSON

2. "Through Adam's sin, death entered into the world; but through Christ's sacrifice, salvation

is made possible."

For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience

of one shall many be made righteous. [Rom 5:19]

3. "Therein lies the gap theory's greatest error, the placement of sin and death prior to the

existence of Adam. If death existed prior to Adam's sin, then how could it be the result of
sin. Were Adam and Eve standing on thousands of dead plants and animals?"

4. There is so much that could be said about the fallacy of this argument that, in all honesty,

it's hard to know where to begin and how much really needs to be said.

B. What is the specific kind of death that God promised as a result of Adam's sin?

1. Did God promise Adam that he would die physically when he ate of the forbidden fruit?

Was God speaking of "death in general," a death that would include the death of plants and
animals, too?

2. Many people assume that Adam would not have aged physically to the point of "death" if

he would not have sinned. Is that a biblically accurate assumption?

a. In all honesty we cannot come to a conclusive answer to these questions, but we can

make some important observations.

b. God placed two special trees in the Garden of Eden: The tree of the knowledge of good

and even (the forbidden fruit) and the tree of life (notice that it is not forbidden).

And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to

the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and
the tree of knowledge of good and evil. [Gen 2.9]

c. What was the tree of life for? What was the purpose God designed into the tree of life?

Why was it there? What did it do? Scripture is very clear on this issue because God
Himself says that the fruit of the tree of life imparts eternal life to a physical body,
even a fallen and sinful physical body.

And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good
and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life,

and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the
garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the

man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming
sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. [Gen 3.22-24]

d. It seems, then, that Adam's body, though perfect and sinless in its original state, was

not eternal but rather mortal. He would have had to eat of the fruit of the tree of life in
order to receive immortality in his physical body. That was God's concern with Adam
remaining in the Garden of Eden: He did not want fallen man eating of the tree of life
and living (physically) forever in his sinful state.

e. This "mortal aging" of a perfect being (to not call it "death") is also seen in the life of

the Lord Jesus Christ upon this earth. Jesus was born sinless--He did not inherit the
sinful nature of Adam because He did not have an earthly, human father. He was born
perfect and stayed perfect because He never sinned.

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our

infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. [Heb
4.15]

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

f. Yet Jesus aged. He was born a baby, grew through childhood and youth, and later

became an adult. Would He have died physically--would His moral body have aged to
the point of ceasing to function--if He would not have been killed on the cross? It
appears so. He aged from birth until 33 years old when He was crucified. If the cross
had not terminated His life as an adult, He would have continued to age just as He did
before. Yet He was without sin.

g. What "death" is implied, then, by Romans 5.12? All death? Physical death?

Apparently not because Adam aged and needed the tree of life to not die physically.
Jesus, too, aged in His physically, earthly body. Therefore, all "death," is not the result
of Adam's sin. Then what death is spoken of in Romans 5.12?

3. Adam's sin caused the "death" of separation from God--it caused spiritual death.

a. Pay close attention to the "promise" of God with regard to the consequence of Adam's

sin (knowing that God cannot lie and will not "repent" when He has given His word).

And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou
mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt

not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. [Gen
2.16-17]

b. God says very, very clearly that in the very day (during the same period of 24 hours)

that Adam eats of the forbidden fruit, he will "surely die."

c. Yet Adam eats of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and dies

hundreds of years later!

And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he

died. [Gen 5.5]

d. Clearly, then, God was not talking of physical death when He told Adam that the result

of his sinning would be "death in a day." That means that the death spoken of in
Romans 5.12 is not all death (it is not physical death), but rather another kind of death.

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so

death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. [Rom 5.12]

e. This death that entered our world by Adam has passed upon all men--all human

beings that are born are born "dead." But they're not dead physically, they are dead
spiritually. They are born separate from God (that's what spiritual death is: Separation
from God, the origin, giver, and sustainer of all life).

And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins. [Eph 2.1]

Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God

through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart.
[Eph 4.18]

f. Everyone is born "dead in sin" because everyone is born separate from God (spiritually

dead). That is why we must be "born again": We need new life; we need the spiritual
life that Adam lost. We need to be reconciled and "reconnected" with our Maker.

Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by
grace ye are saved). [Eph 2.5]

g. This is why Christ, when He was suffering on the cross, cried out that God had

forsaken Him. He was experiencing the consequence and payment for our sin and our
sins: Death! He was experiencing the spiritual death of the separation from God, as
God the Father poured His wrath out upon His Son, our Substitute.

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama
sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

[Mat 27.46]

ESSON

h. Christ said the atonement was finished and complete before He died physically,

showing us that the "wages of sin" is not so much physical death as it is spiritual death
(the separation from God and the eternal divine wrath of the lake of fire).

When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he

bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. [John 19.30]

i. God promised Adam that, as a consequence of his sin, he would surely die in the very

day he disobeyed the commandment of the Lord to not eat of the forbidden fruit. He
ate of it and yet did not die physically for some 900 or more years. Did God lie? Adam
did not die! Did God lie? No! Of course not! Then the death Adam suffered as a
payment for his sin was not physically death, but rather spiritual death (separation from
God). This spiritual death will become eternal death for many in the lake of fire,
because there they will be forever separated from God and will forever experience His
wrath poured out upon them.

For the wages of sin is death... [Rom 6.23]

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And

whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
[Rev 20.14-15]

j. This would beg another question about death in the creation before Adam's sin. If all

death was not the result of Adam's sin, was there or could there have been death before
he fell?

C. Was sin, and therefore death, already present before Adam's sin?

1. There only two things we need to observe in Scripture in order to answer this question, and

neither has to do with the Gap.

2. In the first place, there had to have been death before Adam's sin because he and Eve ate

plants. All men were vegetarians until after the flood of Noah. So, Adam and Eve had to
have eaten of the fruit of the other trees that God gave them in the garden. That fruit "died"
when it was plucked from the tree, chewed, swallowed, and processed by the human body.
So, there was "death" before Adam. The plants that they ate died--the ceased to exist as
plants.

3. In the second place, there was sin in creation before Adam disobeyed the Lord in Genesis

3.6 because Satan (called "the serpent") shows up in his fallen state in Genesis 3.1 and
tempts the woman to sin.

a. So, there certainly was sin in creation before Adam fell, or else there was no serpent

that tempted the woman to sin.

b. Sin brings for death--death is the wage one earns for sinning against God. The serpent

is Lucifer in his fallen and sinful state, so he must have sinned before Genesis 3.1. That
sin brought forth death into God's creation--into the world--and that before the "one
man" sinned in Genesis 3.6.

D. So even without a Gap in Genesis 1.1-2, this objection based on Romans 5.12 simply does

not hold up after analyzing it according to what Scripture says.

1. The opponents say that all sin and all death entered into the world by one man, Adam. But,

that's not what the Bible says.

2. The Bible says that spiritual death (separation from God and ultimately the lake of fire)

entered into the human race because of one man's sin.

3. Sin and death already existed in the world prior to Adam's sin because man ate plants

(causing their death) and Satan had already sinned and become the serpent.

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

4. We know that sin causes death.

For the wages of sin is death... [Rom 6.23]

5. This does not mean that all death is the result of sin. Adam and Eve caused the "death" of

plants before their fall. Could the animals have died in the Garden of Eden? We don't
know. Could Adam and Eve have "died" physically if they hadn't sinned? Possibly. That
seems to be what is implied by the tree of life in the Garden. That seems to also be what we
see in the perfect, sinless body our Lord had when He walked this earth. He aged. If He
would have continued aging, would His body have expired? We don't know, but it seems to
be a very good possibility.

6. What we do know, though, is that the specific death that was brought about by Adam's sin

was spiritual death (and not so much physical death) because Adam did not die physically
the day he sinned.

And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou

mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt
not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. [Gen

2.16-17]

And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he
died. [Gen 5.5]

7. Therefore the death that entered the world by the sin of Adam was the spiritual death of the

human race (of Adam, Eve, and their descendants), not all death in general.

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so
death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. [Rom 5.12]

8. Just as we all die in Adam, those of us who are saved are made alive in Christ.

For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For
as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. [1Cor 15.21-22]

a. That life is, first and foremost, spiritual life because we are born again by the Spirit of

God (the separation--the spiritual death--is done away with in Christ).

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man
be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him,

How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his
mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee,

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born

of the Spirit is spirit. [John 3.3-6]

But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. [1Cor 6.17]

b. God has also promised us new and eternal physical life in that we will be given

glorified bodies in the rapture and resurrection of the Church.

For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the

Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like
unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to

subdue all things unto himself. [Php 3.20-21]

9. Additionally, if the anti-gapper wants to use Romans 5.12 say that all sin entered into this

present world by Adam, he'll have quite a problem explaining why it is then that Eve
sinned first (Gen 3.6). You see, if Romans 5.12 were talking about the first sin entering
into all of God's perfect creation, it's wrong. Eve sinned (and died!) before Adam did.

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was

pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the
fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did

eat. [Gen 3.6]

And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the
transgression. [1Tim 2.14]

ESSON

10. So, it's obvious that Romans 5.12 is not speaking of all sin and death entering into a perfect

creation through Adam.

a. The opponents of the Gap argue that since sin did not enter the world until Adam then

no death or judgment (e.g. what happened in the Gap) could have occurred before
Genesis 3.

b. That is not what Romans 5.12 teaches. It most certainly did--there was sin and

judgment (and therefore "death"; Rom 6.23) before the sin of Adam.

i. The serpent (Satan, Lucifer in his fallen and sinful state) shows up in Genesis 3.1.

He sinned before Adam and was judged by God. That is why he is "the serpent" in
Genesis 3.1 and not "Lucifer, the son of the morning, the covering cherub."

ii. The woman, later called Eve, sinned before Adam, too, and caused death to enter

into the world (she died spiritually!).

iii. Romans 5.12 speaks of spiritual death (separation from God as a "payment" for

sin) entering into the human race. It does not speak of all death entering into a
perfect, sinless creation through Adam.

11. Therefore Romans 5.12 does not prove that there was no Gap. There most certainly could

have been sin and judgment (death) beforehand--and there was! The serpent (Satan) had to
have fallen before Genesis 3, and that fall (his sin of rebellion) caused God's judgment
upon him and those who sinned with him (the sons of God). All sin and death did not enter
into a perfect sinless creation through Adam. Sin and death already existed prior to Adam's
fall.

II. Objection #2

: Exodus 20.11 says that God created the world and all thing in it during six 24-

hour days.

A. In Exodus 20.11 and 31.17 the Bible says that God made all things in six days.

For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is,

and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and
hallowed it. [Exod 20.11]

It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the

Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was
refreshed. [Exod 31.17]

B. It's interesting to note that Dr. Kent Hovind in his booklet The Gap Theory changes the

Word of God and states that Exodus 20.11 and Exodus 30.17 say that God "created" all
things in six days.

1. On page 14 of the booklet, Dr. Hovind states: "Since everything was created in six days

(Ex. 20:11) and Lucifer was created (Ez. 28.13, 15), the gap theory's second assumption,
the idea that Satan fell prior to the six days of creation, is already invalidated."

2. These two verses in Exodus most certainly do not teach that God "created" all things in six

days. They say He "made" all things in six days, and "make" in the Bible is not always the
same as "create."

3. This is something we have seen before, in Observations #3 and #4 in the second chapter of

this study, so what follows is a brief review of that material. If you want to to see all the
details of the difference between "create" and "make" in Scripture, please refer back to
chapter 2.

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

C. There is a fundamental difference in the Bible between the usage of the word "create"

and that of "make."

And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had

rested from all his work which God created and made. [Gen 2.3]

1. Creation and the ability to create is one of the divine attributes that forever and infinitely

separates God from man.

a. God is the only Being capable of true "creation"--of making something from nothing.

b. Genesis 1.1 suffices to show us that God can create something (matter, space, energy)

from nothing. This attribute belongs to God alone--He alone is Creator.

c. Whenever we see the word "create" (creates, created, etc.) in Scripture, it means only

one thing: Create from nothing; make something from nothing; form something from
nothing.

d. Creation is the act of bringing something into existence where there was nothing

before.

2. The word "make" (makes, made, etc.), however, does not have such a specific definition in

the Bible. There are basically two ways in which the word "make" is used in Scripture.

a. First, "make" can refer to an act of creation--it can imply the same thing as

"create" (that something was made from nothing). When we compare John 1.1-3 with
Genesis 1.1, we see that "make" is used in the same way as "create."

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was

God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him;
and without him was not any thing made that was made. [John 1.1-3]

b. However, "make" can also mean to the act of forming something out of another that

was already in existence.

i. We see this usage through the whole of Scripture. Adam and Eve, for example,

"made" themselves aprons from fig leaves. They didn't create something from
nothing; they formed something (aprons) from another that already existed (fig
leaves).

And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were

naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
[Gen 3.7]

3. The student of Scripture will find a consistent use of the word "create"--it means to make

something from nothing. The word "make" or "made," however will always need to be
defined based on its context. Sometimes it means to "create" (to make something out of
nothing) and other times it means to form a thing from another.

D. Observe that Exodus 20.11 and Exodus 31.17 say that God "made," not that He

"created."

1. This could refer to the original creation, that He "made" everything from nothing in six

literal days.

2. But, according to the usage of "made" in Scripture, it could also mean that He formed

something from another that was already there.

3. In other words, this objection based on Exodus 20.11 and 31.17 is not proof for or against

the Gap of Genesis 1.1 and 1.2.

ESSON

4. We must look elsewhere for conclusive explanations, and that is exactly what we have

done in this study. It's obvious that God "created" everything in Genesis 1.1, and that the
original creation was "habitable."

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, he formed it
to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else. [Isa 45.18]

5. Later, after Lucifer's rebellion in the Gap and the subsequent divine judgment and ruin of

creation, God "made" everything again--He renovated creation (He formed it again from
the heaven and the earth that were there from before). And, according to Exodus 20.11 and
31.17, He took six days to do so--to "make" everything in our present world.

III. Objection #3

: Historically the word "replenish" in Genesis 1.28 means "to fill," not "to fill

again."

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and

replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea,
and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the

earth. [Gen 1.28]

A. Here are some of the arguments that the opponents of the Gap propose (and pay

attention to the ridiculous lengths to which they will go in order to try to make their case).

1. "Much of the validity drawn from this verse [Gen 1.28] centers on the usage of the word

replenish. Gap theorists believe that this is God's command for Adam and Eve to refill, or
repopulate, the earth, assuming the previous inhabitants of the earth were destroyed in the
Genesis 1.2 catastrophe."

2. "The problem that gap theorists encounter stems from their misunderstanding of the word

replenish."

a. Now, before we continue with this quote (because it goes on at some length), we need

to remind ourselves to pay attention to details, and to not only to what is said but also
how it is said.

b. Dr. Hovind, the author of the comments we are reading, goes through all kinds of

machinations and definitions using dictionaries, historical figures, and even the
Hebrew language (as if he spoke Hebrew). This fact is very enlightening when the
simplicity of the biblical answer to the problem is analyzed (which we will do after
finishing our reading of Dr. Hovind's lesson on the etymology of the word replenish).

c. He continues saying: "English dictionaries did not appear until the 18

century. The

closest thing to a dictionary from that time, Robert Cawdrey's Alphabetical Table
(1604), defined the word replenish as 'fill.' The Oxford English Dictionary also reveals
that the predominant usage of the word replenish in 1611 was 'to make full, fill, stock
with.' To further bolster the evidence that replenish means 'to fill' we only have to look
to the underlying Hebrew word from which replenish was translated--male (maw-
LAY). Male, listed in the Biblical concordance as Strong's 04390, simply means 'to fill,
be full.' This should leave no doubt that the word replenish, bolstered by the underlying
Hebrew word male, means 'to fill," not 'fill again'."

d. There is more. He goes on to cite various dictionaries from 1828, 1891 and 1892 in an

attempt to show that the meaning, usage, and understanding of the word replenish has
changed since its introduction into the English Bible of 1611. After it's all said and
done, Dr. Hovind asks this question: "Why can the words 'let' (Romans 1:13) and
'gay' (James 2:3) change meanings in 400 years but the word 'replenish' cannot?"

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

B. Firstly, no one is saying that the meaning of the word replenish may have changed

meaning in the common usage of the English language from 1611 to the present.

1. That's not the point because we're not talking about usage in common language. We are

investigating the usage of the word in Scripture.

2. How does the Bible define the word replenish. That's what we do with "let" in Romans

1.13 and "gay" in James 2.3. We don't impose our understanding of the words onto
Scripture, rather we compare Scripture with Scripture and allow the Bible to define the
words for us.

3. Common usage in the present day is not our final authority for word definition, nor is a

dictionary (any dictionary from any time period). The Scripture is always the final
authority.

C. Genesis 9.1 solves this entire problem very easily.

1. The word replenish in Genesis 1.28 appears in the commission that God gave to Adam.

That same commission is repeated in Genesis 9.1, for Noah, and the same word replenish is
used.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea,

and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the
earth. [Gen 1.28]

And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and

multiply, and replenish the earth. [Gen 9.1]

2. You see, it's just that simple .You don't need to run to this dictionary, that dictionary, and

the Hebrew. All you have to do is compare Scripture with Scripture and it's easy!

3. God told Noah to be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. Was he "filling" the

earth or was he "filling again" the earth? Obviously he was filling the earth again.

4. God told Adam to be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. It's obvious from

Genesis 9.1 that the King James translators understood replenish to be a "re-filling" and
not just a "filling."

5. If we let context and usage determine definition, we have to take into account Genesis 9.1

when we try to understand Genesis 1.28. There's no other way around it. It's the same
commission given in the same wording, and it says "replenish." God intended Adam to do
exactly what He intended Noah to do. It is clearly a re-filling.

6. This topic was discussed in some detail in reason #10 of chapter 3 in this study (which see

for more details).

D. The opponents of the Gap are wrong.

1. They say that, historically, the word "replenish," as used and understood in Genesis 1.28,

meant "to fill," not "to fill again."

2. But, that is simply not true because in the early 1600s the King James translators used it in

Genesis 9.1 to mean "to fill again."

IV. Objection #4

: Thomas Chalmers invented the Gap Theory in 1814 as a way to harmonize the

Genesis account of creation with the teachings of evolution (and the evolutionist idea of the
earth's long life).

A. The Gap critics seem to think that a Scottish theologian named Thomas Chalmers invented the

teaching of a gap of time between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2.

1. Dr. Kent Hovind says, "Thomas Chalmers... is credited with being the first proponent of

the gap theory. His proposal of the theory was first recorded in 1814."

ESSON

2. He goes on to explain that Chalmers came up with idea of the Gap as a way to harmonize

the teachings of evolution (specifically the speculations of scientists about the long ages of
the earth's development and fossil record) with the creation account of the Bible. He says
that the Gap was "invented in 1814 in response to the teaching that the earth was old--
[which is] not [the] historical position of the Christian church."

3. Charles Taylor and Ken Ham of the Answers in Genesis organization say this about the

Gap: "The people who made up the gap theory were people who desperately wanted the
Bible to match up to science and that is their way of making it happen."

4. It has been stated emphatically and repeated throughout this study that the Gap (as

presented here by this author) is in no way an attempt to harmonize evolution and the Bible
--long ages of the earth and the Bible. This is simply a straw-man argument made from
ignorance.

B. Thomas Chalmers did not invent the teaching of the Gap.

1. Listen to the words of Alan Shelby in response to the above statements: "I do not believe

anyone can substantiate the statement that those people (Scofield, Haldeman, Grant,
Chafer, Pember, Unger, and others) were in any way 'desperate to make the Bible match up
with science.' That is simply slander. I don't believe anyone has shown a citation from any
writing or any of their preaching where they said that. And to read that motive onto
someone who takes the gap interpretation is simply wrong. I don't know any of them that
believed in a local flood either (although there may have been , as there are today even
among 'creationists'), and I would say I am pretty familiar with their writings."

2. In addition to their slander, the critics of Gap are incredibly ignorant of the history of the

teaching. To say that Thomas Chalmers invented the "Gap theory" in 1814 is simply
ridiculous. I had been taught centuries before he was even born.

a. To quote Alan Shelby again: "Seeing the gap between verse 1 and 2 [of Genesis 1] was

normative dispensationalism for decades."

b. We have already seen in this study that the Gap is mentioned in Job 38.4-11, a writing

that predates the first coming of Jesus Christ (it predates even the writing of the first
five books of the Bible!).

c. The Apostle Peter spoke of the Gap in 2Peter 3.3-7 (please refer back to the second

point of chapter 5 in this work: "The Original Creation: Perished Under Water").

d. The Apostle Paul uses the Gap to teach on the doctrine of original sin and salvation by

the intervening work of God in 2Corinthians 4.6 (please see "Reason #7: The New
Testament and the Testimony of the Christian" in chapter 3).

e. Mani (Manes, Manichaeus), a third century Persian philosopher who converted to

Christianity (AD 215-277), also taught what would amount to a "Gap" in the which
Lucifer rebelled, fell, and began the evil and wicked being called Satan.

i. Historians are not at all "kind" with their depiction of Mani and his teachings, and

in many cases they are fully justified. He was a bit aberrant in much of his
doctrinal beliefs, but this is not our point in question.

ii. The question is this: Did Thomas Chalmers invent the "Gap theory" in 1814 in

response to the evolutionary science of his day? The answer is clearly, "No"
because one can find the same teaching in the third century. Mani taught it.

[a] He taught that before Adam was created, Satan and his demons mounted and

assault upon God's kingdom--they wanted to take over God's throne and reign
over creation. Their rebellion resulted in the introduction of darkness (Gen 1.2)
into God's perfect, light-filled creation (Gen 1.1).

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

[b] From this rebellious incursion resulted the present world with its darkness (the

result of the original sin of Satan and his demons; Gen 1.2) and light (the result
of God entering into His creation now tainted by sin (Gen 1.3-5).

[c] All of this can be found quite easily in many of the readily available sources of

Church History (for example, the work of Philip Schaff).

f. So, regardless if one considers Mani to be a heretic or not, the fact of the matter is that

he taught the Gap in the mid-third century. It was not invented by Thomas Chalmers in
1814 as a response to the evolutionary ages of the earth as taught by secular scientists
of his day. It's been taught since the days of Job, during the days of the Apostles (Peter
and Paul), and throughout the history of the church (from earliest centuries up until the
days when the doctrine was refined and developed by men like C.I. Scofield and
Clarence Larkin).

V. Objection #5

: According to Ezekiel 28.13-15, Satan was created on a specific "day." How

could that have happened before Genesis 1.2 when the first day mentioned in Scripture is in
Genesis 1.3-5?

Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy
covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper,

the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy
tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast
upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of

the stones of fire. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast
created, till iniquity was found in thee. [Ezek 28.13-15]

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that

it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the
light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning

were the first day. [Gen 1.3-5]

A. Here is what Dr. Hovind says about the "day" in which Lucifer was created.

"If Satan was created on a 'day' and the first day, according to the gap theory, only
included Genesis 1.3-5, how could Satan have existed between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2 prior
to the first day?"

B. The "first day" of Genesis 1.3-5 could have been the "first day" in the renovation process,

and not the "first day" in all of cosmic history.

1. This objection was dealt with in chapter of 4 of this study.
2. It is more than obvious to even the most casual reader of Job 38.4-7 that the sons of God

(including Lucifer) existed before God created the earth. They watched the whole process
(from the measuring and laying of the foundation until the glorious and praise-inspiring
finish). Therefore, they had to exist in Genesis 1.1, because that it where God created the
earth. That means they existed before the "first day" of Genesis 1.3-5.

3. Lucifer, just as all the other sons of God, was created on a "day" (a specific point in time),

and that "day" was before the "first day" mentioned in Genesis 1.3-5. To teach differently
is to contradict Scripture (Job 38.4-7).

4. This kind of reasoning used by Dr. Hovind in the above quote is ridiculous (if not to say

childish).

a. The numbering of the days in Genesis 1 and 2 is to show progression--they are

consecutive days. It is like saying, "the first day of the renovation," and then "the
second day."

ESSON

b. We do the same thing today when we speak of the "first day" of school for our

children. What? Did school not exist before the first day my son attended
kindergarten? Of course it existed! But, we refer to the "first day" as the "first day" in
the context of a school year.

c. The use of "first, second, third, etc." in Genesis 1 and 2 does not limit time (i.e. that

there were no days before Genesis 1.3-5), but rather is used to show chronological
succession and the division of time as God renovated His creation.

VI. Objection #6

: According to Isaiah 14.14, Lucifer rebelled when there were clouds and stars.

If there weren't clouds and stars until after the fourth day of creation, how could Lucifer
have rebelled in a "Gap" between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2?

A. We cite Dr. Kent Hovind again in order to present the argument of the Gap critics.

1. "Since the clouds could not have formed prior to God's creation of water on day one, Satan

fell after day one."

2. He goes on to say that, "Isaiah 14.13 also reveals to us that Satan's fall must have occurred

after the creation of the stars, which occurred on day four. Certainly, these verses imply
Satan could not have fallen before creation."

B. The clouds and the stars of Isaiah 14.12-14 are not the clouds and the stars of this present

world.

1. In the first place, there were no clouds around the earth until after the flood of Noah.

a. We studied this point in detail in chapter 4 as we analyzed the phrase, "I will ascend

above the heights of the clouds..." of Isaiah 14.14.

b. We know that there we no clouds around the earth because of what Scripture clearly

says in two places.

i. First, it never rained upon the earth until the flood of Noah. God made a mist come

up from the ground, and that mist is what watered the face of the earth (not rain).

And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the

field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the
earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist

from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. [Gen 2.5-6]

ii. In second place, the first rainbow that ever appeared was after the flood of Noah.

Rainbows are formed when light refracts in the water in the atmosphere (mist,
clouds, precipitation, etc.). There were no rainbows before Genesis 9 because there
were no clouds before Genesis 9--it never rained on the earth until the flood of
Noah.

And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me

and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual
generations: I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a

covenant between me and the earth.[Gen 9.12-13]

iii. So, if Dr. Hovind insists on placing the rebellion of Lucifer after God made clouds

on this earth, he must place that event after Genesis 9. There were no clouds
around the earth until after the flood of Noah. That, though, is obviously a
complete contradiction of Scripture because Lucifer appears in his fallen state in
Genesis 3.1--he appears as Satan, the serpent. So, he had to have fallen before
Genesis 3.1 and before God formed clouds in the earth's atmosphere. The clouds,
then, of Isaiah 14 do not refer to the clouds of water in our atmosphere, but rather
to the clouds of heaven--the clouds that surround the throne of God.

Clouds and darkness are round about him: righteousness and judgment are

the habitation of his throne. [Ps 97.2]

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

iv. Please see chapter 4 for a more complete explanation of these "clouds."

2. The mention of "stars" in Isaiah 14.13 is very similar to that of the clouds in Isaiah 14.14.

It refers to the "stars" in God's presence, and not the stars in outer space.

a. Stars in the Bible can be angels, not just "suns in distant galaxies."

The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the

seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven
churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.

[Rev 1.20]

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
[Job 38.7]

And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the

earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered,
for to devour her child as soon as it was born. [Rev 12.4]

b. Therefore, Lucifer's intention very well could have been to exalt his throne above the

"stars" (angels) of heaven. He wanted to rule over everything, including the angels.

c. Again, this was covered more thoroughly in chapter 4, in our analysis of Lucifer's

rebellion as given in Isaiah 14.12-14.

d. The "stars" of Isaiah 14.13 do not necessarily have to be the stars of Genesis 1.16 (the

heavenly bodies--suns--that God created on the fourth day. The could very well be
angels.

VII. Objection #7

: According to Ezekiel 28.13-17, Lucifer existed in his unfallen state in the

Garden of Eden which was not created until the sixth day, in Genesis 1.24-31. How could he
have fallen between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2 if he was in the Garden of Eden in his unfallen state
in Genesis 1.24-31?

Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy

covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper,
the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy

tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
[Ezek 28.13]

And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the

man whom he had formed. [Gen 2.8]

And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it
and to keep it. [Gen 2.15]

A. The critics of the Gap place Lucifer in the Garden of Eden that God created on day six.

1. Dr Kent Hovind, referring to Ezekiel 28.13-17, says that, "God revealed that Lucifer, in an

unfallen state, existed in the Garden of Eden, which was not created until day six."

2. The Gap critics, therefore, equate "Eden the garden of God" (Ezek 28.13) with the "Garden

of Eden" (Gen 2.8, 15).

B. Even though the garden of Ezekiel 28.13 and that of Genesis 2 could be the same, they

don't necessarily have to be.

1. In Genesis 2.8-15 (especially the first and last verses of that passage) God calls the garden

in which He placed Adam "the garden of Eden." It was a garden in a region that the Lord
called "Eden." It is, though, never called the "garden of God."

2. The Bible never says that God placed Adam in the "garden of God," but rather in the

"garden of Eden." Lucifer was Eden the Garden of God, but Adam was in the Garden of
Eden.

ESSON

3. It could very well be that "Eden" refers to a specific area on the earth (for example, the

Middle East), and that as a region on this planet it existed in Genesis 1.1, in the original
creation.

a. Ezekiel 28.13 says that the "garden of God" was located in this area called Eden.

b. When God "renovated" the earth during the "six days of creation," He could have then

place a new garden in Eden, the "garden of Eden."

c. It could also be, though, that the "garden of God" is the same "garden of Eden," and

that God made it anew for Adam and Eve.

4. Because of the words used to refer to both of these gardens in the area called Eden ("the

garden of God" and "the garden of Eden"), I tend to believe that they are different.

a. The garden of God existed in Eden (the part of our planet we call the Middle East) in

Genesis 1.1 and was later destroyed in the universal flood that stopped Lucifer's
rebellion.

b. The garden of Eden was again made in the same area of the planet--Eden, the Middle

East--and that is where God placed Adam and Eve.

c. Please refer to chapter 4 and the detailed analysis of Ezequiel 28.13 for more study on

Lucifer being in Eden the Garden of God.

5. Regardless of the final definition of these gardens that God made in a place called Eden,

the fact remains that there could have been two. The texts do not demand only one Garden
of Eden. There certainly could have been one during the perfect world of Lucifer before his
rebellion (before Genesis 1.2) and then another made for Adam in his perfect state (made
on the sixth day; Gen 1.24-31 cf. 2.8-15).

VIII. Objection #8

: The "Gap Theory" undermines the simplicity and authority of Scripture.

A. Here are the words of Dr. Hovind as he explains why he think the Gap, if it existed,

should be plain to see for everyone with even the most casual of readings.

1. "God did not write his Word in a tricky language. To compromise the simplicity of

authority of the Scripture is to accommodate the world's current philosophy. If the gap
theory were true, the average person must not be capable of reading the Bible and
understanding it without some guru or priest telling them what it really means."

2. Is that statement biblically correct and accurate? No, it is not.

B. Some things in the Bible are hidden and some things are simply difficult to understand.

1. This was discussed in chapter 1 but because Scripture is so clear on the issue, it won't take

us long to review what we've already seen.

2. Sometimes God conceals things from people.

It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a
matter. [Prov 25.2]

a. There are some things in Scripture that God has hidden from people (mostly from the

proud, arrogant people that think their intelligence or academic achievements earns
them brownie points with God).

b. God expects us to search these things out; He expects us to study the Scripture.

3. Some things in the Bible are just plain hard to understand.

And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved
brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some
things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest,

as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. [2Pet 3.15-16]

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

a. I'm sorry, but the "average reader" of Scripture is going to come across a lot in his

Bible that he won't understand without a little effort on his part to study it out.

b. And if we are not careful, diligent, and humble as we deal with these things that are

hard to be understood, we'll likely end up wresting them (twisting them) out of context.

4. That's why God has established men to teach other men the Bible.

And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same

commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also. [2Tim 2.2]

a. Not everything in Scripture is just sitting there on the surface waiting for the average

reader to skim over it and understand it by himself.

b. That's not how God designed this thing. He placed men in the structure in order to pass

on knowledge from one generation to the next.

5. Remember, God "hid" a "gap" of 2,000 years in at least two other places of Scripture, and

He did not reveal those gaps to man until the first century after Christ (Eph 3.1-7 cf. Gal
1.11-12).

a. (Dan 9.24-27, esp. vv26-27) There is a large gap of time between verses 26 and 27 of

Daniel's prophecy of the 70 weeks.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for
himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and

the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the
war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst

of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the
overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the

consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. [Dan
9.26-27]

i. (v24-26) The first 69 weeks (weeks of years) leave us at the crucifixion of the

Messiah.

ii. (v27) The last week (Daniels famous 70th week) is the Tribulation Period that has

yet to take place.

iii. Therefore, between verse 26 (the crucifixion and the resurrection) and verse 27

(the Tribulation Period) there is a gap of about 2,000 years.

iv. However, to read this passage by itself (as an "average reader"), you would never

think there was a gap between those two verses. As a matter of fact, verse 27
begins with the conjunction "and" showing continuance of context! Yet we know
that there is a gap there; it's called The Church Age.

b. We see the same gap represented by a comma in Isaiah 61.1-3.

1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to
preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,

to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are
bound;

2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our

God; to comfort all that mourn;

3 To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes,
the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that

they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he
might be glorified. [Isa 61.1-3]

i. In Luke 4, Jesus Christ cites this passage at the beginning of His public ministry

and applies it to Himself, but He stops at the comma in verse two of Isaiah 61.

ESSON

And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when
he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit

of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to
the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to

the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that
are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. [Luke 4.17-19]

ii. In Isaiah 61.1-2a we see the first coming of the Messiah. In Isaiah 61.2b-3 we see

the His second coming. The comma in verse two represents a gap of 2,000 years!

c. No one knew of those "gaps" until God revealed them to Paul. They are "gaps" that

span a length of time of about 2,000 years. So, even though God did not write His
Word in "tricky language," He most certainly has hidden things from men, and when
He reveals them there is no guarantee that they will be easy to understand. We need to
study the Scripture and labor hard at understanding its content!

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be

ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. [2Tim 2.15]

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word
with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those

things were so. [Act 17.11]

d. Let's not be so naive,lazy, and Laodicean to think that everything should be "easy" and

"perfectly laid out for all to see." God expects us to work at our study of His Book, and
that work must be diligent, systematic, and methodical And it's a work that requires a
lifetime of effort.

IX. Objection #9

: The existence of a Gap would imply a "three-earth" theory, and yet Revelation

21.1 says that the "first earth" will exist until it is destroyed by fire at the end of the
Millennium.

A. The critics of the Gap accuse those of us who teach the Gap of also teaching a "three-

earth" theory.

1. Dr. Hovind says, "This lack of understanding has led many theologians to teach the 'three-

earth' theory, which is based upon the gap theory. The three-earth theory simply states that
the earth prior to Genesis 1.2 was the first earth, the current earth is the second earth, and
the earth God has yet to create, as described in Isaiah 65:17 and II Peter 3:13, is the third
earth. Revelation 21.1 refutes this belief in stating that the current earth is the first earth,
not the second."

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth
were passed away; and there was no more sea. [Rev 21.1]

2. He is absolutely correct in stating that the current earth is indeed the first earth--the first

physical earth. But it is most certainly not the first "stage "of the earth. Many teachers of
the Gap refer to the "first" earth as the earth in its "first stage." It later when through a
change (the universal flood after the fall of Lucifer) and became the "second earth" in the
sense of the earth in its second "stage."

3. However, it is wrong to say that all Gap "theorists" teach a "three-earth" theory. I don't. I

teach a "seven-earth" theory--a theory (it's a fact, actually) that this present earth will go
through seven distinct stages, and the eighth will be the new earth of eternity future.

B. The Gap and a "seven-earth" theory: The seven stages of the Earth

1. Stage 1: The Original Earth

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. [Gen 1.1]

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, he formed it to
be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else. [Isa 45.18]

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

a. The first stage of the earth was Genesis 1.1: The perfect creation of God.

b. This was the earth upon which Lucifer walked in his original state at the fifth and

covering cherub.

2. Stage 2: The Chaotic Earth

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. [Gen 1.2]

a. This is the earth under God's divine judgment (frankly, it's under water, too).

b. Lucifer rebelled with a third of the angels of heaven, and God judged them (and

stopped their rebellion) with a flood of waters that filled the universe.

3. Stage 3: The Edenic Earth

a. After the "seven days of creation" (which were really seven days of renovation,

because created the heaven and the earth in Genesis 1.1), the earth entered into its third
stage of its existence.

b. Once again we see perfection in God's creation as He placed Adam and Eve (perfect

and innocent) into the newly made Garden of Eden.

c. If we used Peter's definition of "world" (the combination of "heavens and earth"; 2Pet

3.5-7), we could say that during this stage there was a perfect earth in a world of sin.
God had made a perfect place for perfect man to be--it was a place and a person
without sin. Yet there was sin in the world because of Satan's fall in the Gap.

d. This stage, however, did not last long because Satan tempted Eve to sin, and Adam

willingly followed her in disobedience to God's command.

4. Stage 4: The Antediluvian Earth

a. This deals with the period of the earth's life between Adam's fall and the flood of

Noah. It could be called the "earth above the water" because God watered the face of
the earth with a mist that came up from the underneath the ground (Gen 2.5-6). It didn't
rain on the earth until the flood of Noah.

b. This stage ended, of course, after 120 years of Noah preaching righteousness. God

gave the anti-antediluvian people 120 years to repent and then He wiped them out--all
except for Noah and his family--with the flood.

And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is
flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. [Gen 6.3]

And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of

righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly. [2Pet 2.5]

5. Stage 5: The Present Earth

a. If the earth before the flood was "above the water," then our present earth (the present

stage of the earth) could be called the earth "under the water" because now the mist
from underground has ceased and God waters the face of the earth from above with
rain.

b. Our earth is still corrupt just as it was during the Antediluvian stage. Because Adam

sinned against God eating of a plant (the fruit of a tree), his sin caused the cursing of
the creation--of that tree, of the earth from whence it grew, and therefore of every
other living thing that gets its life sustenance from things that grow from the earth.

And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife,

and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat
of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the

days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt
eat the herb of the field. [Gen 3.17-18]

ESSON

For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of
him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall

be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the
children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and

travaileth in pain together until now. [Rom 8.20-22]

c. This stage will end when Christ returns the second time and lifts the curse that God

placed on the earth in Genesis 3.17-18.

6. Stage 6: The Millennial Earth

a. The Millennium begins with the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ to this earth.

He returns with all the armies of heaven following Him.

And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him

was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war...
And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed

in fine linen, white and clean. [Rev 19.11-14]

b. We, the sons of God (the Christians, those who have been born again), will be

"manifest" to the world at that time.

Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall

be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall
see him as he is. [1Jn 3.2]

c. At that time--at the time of our "appearing" or "manifestation" in the second coming

--God will lift the curse from off the earth.

For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the
sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by

reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself
also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty

of the children of God. [Rom 8.19-21]

d. The ground will become more productive that we can imagine, producing up to four

harvests a year.

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that the plowman shall overtake the

reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall
drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt. [Amos 9.13]

e. The animals (part of creation that was cursed because of Adam) will also be changed.

The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the
kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child

shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie
down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the sucking child

shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the
cockatrice' den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the

earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea. [Isa
11.6-9]

The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the

bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in
all my holy mountain, saith the Lord. [Isa 65.25]

f. Because men will not be eating food grown in a cursed earth, they will again enjoy

long lives. If someone dies at 100 years old, it will be as if a child had died.

There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not
filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being

an hundred years old shall be accursed. [Isa 65.20]

7. Stage 7: The Destroyed Earth

a. During the Millennium Satan will be a prisoner in the bottomless pit.

And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless
pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent,

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him
into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should

deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after
that he must be loosed a little season.[Rev 20.1-3]

b. But after those thousand years are up, he will be release for a short time. During that

time he'll mount one more rebellion to try to take the throne from God.

And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the

earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is
as the sand of the sea. [Rev 20.7-8)

c. The Lord will stop his rebellion just as He did in the Gap, but this time it won't be with

water. It will be with fire.

And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the
saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven,

and devoured them. [Rev 20.9]

d. That same fire will destroy the earth (no place will be found for it because it will cease

to exist).

And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone,

where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night
for ever and ever. And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from

whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place
for them. [Rev 20.10-11]

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the

heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with
fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned

up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons
ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting

unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be
dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? [2Pet 3.10-12]

e. Just as God judged the original (perfect) earth with a flood of waters when Satan lead a

rebellion, the second "perfect" earth (the earth of the Millennium) will be judged and
destroyed by fire when Satan leads his last rebellion at the end of the Jesus' thousand-
year reign on the earth.

f. This "stage" of the earth isn't long--it could be just an instant. But it results in the

destruction of the "first" earth that, up to end of the Millennium, has passed through
six distinct stages. The final and seventh stage is its destruction.

8. Stage 8: The New Earth

a. The eight "stage" of the earth is actually a new beginning (eight in the Bible is the

number of new beginnings) because it is an entirely new earth.

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth
were passed away; and there was no more sea. [Rev 21.1]

b. This "eighth" earth will be just like the "first" earth because it marks the return to a

perfect earth in a perfect universe. Sin will have been dealt with and God's plan will
continue without any further corruption. It will be perfect and it will be eternal.

ESSON

9. Stages 1-8: The Earth's Stages

a. We could illustrate the earth's eight stages with a chart showing the distinct

relationship between "types" and "antitypes".

The

Original

Earth

The

Chaotic

Earth

The

Edenic

Earth

The

Antediluvian

Earth

The

Present

Earth

The

Millennial

Earth

The

Destroyed

Earth

The

New

Earth

Gen 1.1

The perfect

earth

Gen 1.2

The earth under

judgment

Gen 1.3-3.24

The perfect

earth in a

sinful

"world"

Gen 4-8

The corrupt earth

"above" the

water (no rain)

Gen 9-Rev 19

The corrupt

earth "under"

the water (rain)

Rev 20.1-10

The perfect

earth in a

sinful

"world"

Rev 20.11-15

The earth under

judgment

Rev 20-21

The perfect

earth

Type

Antitype

The corrupt earth

The perfect earth in a sinful "world"

The earth under judgment

The perfect earth

b. There may be some teachers of the Gap that promote a "three-earth" theory, but it

seems like the Bible would teach a "seven-earth" theory, with the eighth being the
same as the first: A perfect, sinless earth to carry out God's plan of the ages.

X. Objection #10

: In Genesis 1.31 God says that "every thing" that He had made was "very

good."

A. The Gap opponents say that if Satan had already fallen, God could not have made this

statement.

Everything would not have been good in Genesis 1.31 if Lucifer had already fallen (he
would be the "bad" in the creation).

B. The word "good" in Genesis 1.31 is not a reference to the whole of creation--to

everything that went before--but rather only to everything that was made on the sixth
day.

1. This point was made in chapter 5 as we dealt with the six days of "re-creation" (the

renovation of creation).

2. We must take Genesis 1.31 in the context of the verses that surround it. Genesis 1.24-31 is

the account of what God made and created on the sixth day.

3. In verse 25 He says that the making of the beasts of the earth was good, and then in verse

31 He refers to everything that was made on the sixth day; it was all good. If it were
otherwise, the comment of all being "good" would be outside of the context of "the sixth
day." As it stands, however, the comment of "good" must be understood within the
confines of the sixth day.

ESSON

OMMON

BJECTIONS

CONCLUSIÓN:
I would like to conclude this chapter (and the whole study, really) with a question posed by Dr. Kent
Hovind in his booklet entitled The Gap Theory.

Does it really matter if the gap theory is taught or not?

Well, yes it does. In the first place, if it's in Scripture then we should study it out and learn it. God placed
in there for a purpose; He wants us to know it. The knowledge of the Gap will affect how we understand
the God, the plan of God, and our place and purpose in that plan. If it's in Scripture, then God wants us to
study it and know it. So, in this sense, yes it does matter.

In second place, it matters because without a Gap 2Corinthians 4.6 teaches that we were not born in sin--
that there is no "original sin" passed on from Adam to us.

For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our

hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus
Christ. [2Cor 4.6]

All of the details of this aspect of the implications of the Gap can be found in "Reason #7" in
chapter 3 of this work.

In the same way that God commanded the light to shine out of darkness in Genesis 1.3-4, He
shined in our hearts to gives us the light of the knowledge of God for salvation.

If the original creation of Genesis 1.1 did not fall into darkness because of sin (Lucifer's
rebellion), then Adam didn't fall into sin either. If there is no Gap, then the earth was first formed
in a state of disorder, ruin, and darkness, after the which God made a series of "adjustments" in
order to finish up the process of creation, making it perfect.

Yet, 2Corinthians 4.6 shows us that there must be a Gap between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2, a Gap that
contains Satan's original sin.

Exactly as God made the first creation, that's how He saved us. Our salvation experience parallels
the creation history in Genesis 1. That's what Paul is saying in 2Corinthians 4.6. Therefore, if
there is no Gap, then there was no "original sin"--there was no "original fall"--that caused all
the ruin in creation.

If there was no Gap, then there was no "ruin" in the first place, just a process of "making
things better."

If there was no Gap, then we don't need God's intervention to save us because we didn't fall
into ruin, chaos, disorder, and darkness with Adam. We only need to "evolve" a little more
each day and eventually we'll arrive at our perfect state.

That's what you get if you don't have a Gap between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2!

There must be a gap of time between Genesis 1.1 and 1.2, a gap during the which Lucifer fell,
because if not, then 2Corinthians 4.6 teaches that we are saved by just "getting better" not by a
direct intervention of God to give us light and make us new again.

So, yes, it does really matter if we teach a Gap or not. It matters a lot--it matters an eternity--
because it has bearing on the doctrine of salvation taught by the Apostle Paul.

ESSON

Let us be diligent students of the Word of God, searching the Scriptures daily and "digging in the Word
of God" as a man would dig for hidden treasure. Let us not treat it lightly or approach our studies with
preconceived ideas. Let us simply let Scripture define itself and reveal to us the perfect plan, purpose, and
will of God.

My son, if thou wilt receive my words,

and hide my commandments with thee;

So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom,

and apply thine heart to understanding;

Yea, if thou criest after knowledge,

and liftest up thy voice for understanding;

If thou seekest her as silver,

and searchest for her as for hid treasures;

Then shalt thou understand the fear of the Lord,

and find the knowledge of God. [Prov 2.1-5]