The second pillar of evidence for the Gap Theory, they contend, comes in its apparent congruency with mainstream science. They insist on maintaining their view, at least in part, because they feel it sufficiently reconciles the Scriptures with the secularly-interpreted evidence of deep-time and primitive fossil organisms.
There are good counters to both notions at the foundation of the Gap Theory. First, taking scripture as the authority it claims to be, we must question, if such a relevant event had in fact taken place, why would the Bible be silent on it? Shouldn’t there be some record of such things beyond the scraps suggested by the theorists? Furthermore, God is no liar. That being clear, the first chapter of Genesis notes that, after each creative event, God declared the creation “good.” That leads me to conclude that the creation was, in fact, truly good. For this to be so, evil could not have yet existed, for God, in His holy perfection, could not have declared it good otherwise, thus Lucifer had not yet fallen.
We also find that there is an often overlooked scriptural argument for Lucifer existing in an unfallen state throughout Creation Week. When we read Ezekiel 28:12-16, we find much going on:
“Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. 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. By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.”
While the passage begins as an address to a human king, the language soon shifts, at that point turning its attention to the power behind that king’s throne: Lucifer. The passage speaks of Lucifer’s initial state of nigh-perfection in the Garden of God, otherwise known as the Garden of Eden. Going back to Genesis, we find that the Garden of Eden did not see its creation until Day 6 of Creation Week, just after the advent of Man! Lucifer thus was still in his unfallen state at least until the sixth day of creation! If Lucifer had not fallen throughout the course of the six days of creation, then there could have been no cataclysmic, universal rebellion upon a pre-Adamic world. The end.
Secondly, as the entirety of this work as aspired to demonstrate, there is no need to acquiesce one’s faith in God and the Scriptures in order to accept the evidence found across the world. There is no need to infuse one’s faith with evolution or deep-time or pre-Adamic races simply to fit-in with the society abroad that seeks to destroy those who believe. As with accepting the equally baseless evolution-paradigm, doing so only leads to doubt in the Scriptures as a whole, diminishing the true and timeless authority of the Word of God by poisoning it with falsehoods.
Concerning the Day-Age Model, we find a somewhat different account. Perhaps even more widespread amongst believers than the Gap Theory, the Day-Age Model contends that the days of creation as noted by Genesis were not in fact true days, but rather unknown periods of time perhaps lasting as long as millions of years, during which the sequential acts of creation took place. Many proponents contend that this notion is scriptural, being referenced in 2 Peter 3:8 (“But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years…”), whereby it may be that each of the “days” noted by God in Genesis references periods of time which, to us, are much, much longer in duration. Those who accept this however tend to forget that the remainder of verse effectually nullifies that sentiment, with the entire verse stating “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” Thus, by the end of the phrase, the whole of the argument is rendered moot.
What’s more is that there would be serious biological effects to deal with if such were the case. Consider how plant life was established on the planet on Day Three, yet the sun did not see its advent until Day Four. If each “day” lasted for thousands or millions of years, would not there be some dramatic implications for the plant life of the planet, essentially all of which being entirely dependent upon the sun for photosynthesis? Ultimately, this model is yet another failed attempt at including the notions of secular naturalism within the Scriptures.
All that said, I am absolutely convinced that Genesis says precisely what it means, and that the literal interpretation it, whereby all things were created over the course of six days, is in fact the only proper way to believe it. Exodus 20:11 is further confirmation of this fact. Beyond that, we can be certain that the Earth is in fact young based on further Scripture as well.
– This was an excerpt from “Remnants of Eden: Evolution, Deep-Time, & the Antediluvian World.” Get your copy here today. God bless! –
FOUNDRY4 is a proud member of the International Association for Creation