RV_Wizard

Snake?? You FINALLY said something I can agree with.

God doesn't give details on things that don't happen. You can't answer the question because the ONLY logical answer is that NOTHING could have existed before the beginning of the creation week. If you ever actually READ the Bible you would know that all of these were created AFTER verse 2. Therefore, they did NOT exist prior. Despite the fact that experts say otherwise, as other people and I have quoted, you insist on picking and choosing what you want to believe to validate claims of an ancient earth; despite the fact that they don't. I counted your sources, did the math, and 86% say "without form and void." The most modern translation says the same thing. You follow people like Scofield because you are supported by their disbelief. You're a loud minority voice, but only a few of little faith will listen. You your faith is dependent on what science can verify? News flash! EVERY miracle in the Bible defies science. I suppose Christ didn't rise from the grave either, because science says that can't happen. You need to put away secular textbooks and turn your heart to Jesus. You are teaching things contrary to the word of God. The fate of false prophets and false teachers is not pretty. Another lie. See the quote above. You are using poor interpretations of the language to bow to the claims of scientists. You are using eisegesis. Try reading other posts. The gap flood or satan's flood it the explanation YOUR people use to explain why there was no dry land before verse nine. What happened to the sun? The moon? The stars? How did all the world come to be covered in water? Why was there no light in the universe? This doctrine you are pushing is nothing short of stupid. If someone wasn't begging for a reason to believe in an old earth, you wouldn't convince an eight-year-old. Another lie. I was raised to believe in an old earth. However, I never found ANYTHING in the Bible to support it. The Bible clearly describes a 7-day creation week. The number of completion and perfection is 7. It is used over 700 times in the Bible. Learn something about the Bible before attacking it. Another lie. There was no sin prior to Adam's sin, and thus, no death. The creation was pronounced to be very good. No millions of years of suffering and death, and no sin. God didn't mention that there were volcanoes spewing milkshakes over marshmallow mountains and rivers flowing with chocolate, either. He didn't mention rabbits bringing chocolate eggs T-bone steaks that grew wild in the grass. He didn't mention homes made of graham crackers our trees made of cotton candy. That doesn't mean these things didn't exist, either. Before scientists claimed and old earth, we didn't have people like you trying to fit it between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. Before scientists claimed evolution happened, we didn't have people like others here trying modify day six to show animals evolving from the earth. Before scientists claimed a global flood never happened, we didn't have people like others here trying to claim that there was a local flood up to the mountain peaks in a low-lying area with easy run-off to the sea. You cannot add truth to a lie and make it anything but a lie. Put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. Twist Bible teaching to support a lie and it's still a lie. Ruin/reconstruction is just as contrary to the Scriptures as evolution is. Leading others to doubt the clear teaching of the Bible is just as evil as preaching Islam or Buddhism. You have nothing to support your claim, which is not supported either by science or or Christian doctrine, but twisted interpretations of a language you don't understand. You can't answer simple, logical questions. You false claims do not stand up to the light of reason. I've seen all you have to offer and it is insignificant. Enjoy your heresy.

So answer the question. What was it before? There was no light, no sun, no moon and no stars. There was no external source of heat. The earth was covered with water and dry land had not appeared yet. How did fish and animals populate the earth when they hadn't been created yet? How did fossils get into the ground when there was no dry land? You pre-suppose another existence yet there is no scenario in which anything could have lived. There were no trees, so no oxygen to breath. If this mythical pre-existence did somehow exist, the tectonic shifts that brought dry land to the surface would have destroyed the very fossil record you're making this up to explain. The fact is, ruin/reconstruction theory is nothing more than a modern day heresy. The interpretations you cite and claim are "original Hebrew" are all recent; many out of the 1970's. Then you have no answer why a much more modern version with access to all the information translates Genesis 1:2 as "without form and void." You pick and choose the translations you like and declare that all the others are wrong. Galatians 1:8-9 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! 2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. Does a belief in the gap theory mean no one understood the biblical account of creation until secular geologists figured it out for us? Why does the Bible spend three chapters teaching about the Genesis Flood and none about the gap flood? Did God’s judgment during the gap also destroy the sun, moon and stars? If not, then why did God have to create them again on day 4 of the “re-creation”? Proponents of the gap theory, as well as many other supporters of long ages, claim they do not believe in evolution. However, long ages (billions of years) is the very foundation for evolution. The Bible is not dependent on billions of years. It allows for everything in a span of about 6,000 years. In addition, nowhere in the Bible is there any account of billions of years. Romans 5:12 teaches that “…through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin…). However, the gap theory allows for death, disease and struggle before sin. Since the fossil record is claimed to be the result of what happened during the gap this would include all the animal fossils and Neanderthals which have been confirmed to be fully human. This means the gap theory includes animal and human death before sin. Does this mean Romans 5:12 is wrong? If the Bible is incorrect concerning how and when sin and death entered the world, why should anyone believe what it says about how sin and death can be remedied through the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Is God’s Word complete or should we allow for the discovery of new scientific knowledge (“new revealed knowledge”) to be inserted into Scripture? source

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. What was it like, one second after creation? There was no light, and thus no heat. There were no stars in the sky. The earth was alone in space. It was "without form and void." That could mean that it began as a gaseous state, then cooled and formed into liquid, and then dry land arose. It could just mean that it was barren of life. This was, of course a temporary condition, because then God created light. Light shone on the earth. With light comes heat. The proposed gap comes between verse one and verse two, so there was only darkness when the make believe gap took place. The planet was covered with water. Some say it was because of "Lucifer's Flood;" as if Lucifer had the authority and ability to destroy God's creation. Gap proponents have never been able to explain how life could have come about, flourished and been destroyed in total darkness with no heat from any source but geothermal. Picture life on Neptune, only more extreme because Neptune still gets some light and heat from the sun. How, then, did anything exist?

While 14% of translations, all of them recent, might support gap claims, 86% INCLUDING the most recent translation agree with the original translation. The fact is, nearly all words have multiple meaning depending on the context used. Until the the old earth crowd began to convince people the earth was old, the church accepted the Scriptures as written. After all, there were no verses in the original text. "Without form and void" is merely the original condition, as the oceans originally were barren of life, and the earth originally had no life. Verses were added to make the text easier to read. Like all doctrines that came after gospels, gap theory is a false believe based on a perversion of the Bible. Islam also bases many of its lies on the truth of the Abrahamic traditions. Mormonism, Jehovah's Witness, and other false religions are also Bible based. That does not make them holy. Other problems with modern age ruin/reconstruction theory: It is inconsistent with God creating everything in six days, as Scripture states, and as God Himself said in Exodus 20:11. It puts death, disease, and suffering before the Fall, contrary to Scripture. Romans 5:12 says, “Therefore, just as through one man [Adam] sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned.” From this we understand that there could not have been human sin or death before Adam. Genesis 1:29–30 teaches us that animals and man were originally created to eat plants, which is consistent with God’s description of His creation as “very good.” But how could a fossil record, which gives evidence of disease, violence, death, and decay (fossils have been found of animals apparently fighting and certainly eating each other), be described as “very good”? For this to be true, the death of billions of animals (and many humans) as seen in the fossil record must have occurred after Adam’s sin. The gap theory is logically inconsistent because it explains away what it is supposed to accommodate—supposed evidence for an old earth. While the gap theorist may think Lucifer’s flood solves the problem of life before God’s creation recorded in Genesis 1:2 and following, it actually removes the reason for the theory in the first place. If all, or most, of the sediments and fossils were produced quickly in one massive worldwide Lucifer’s flood, then the main evidence that the earth is extremely old no longer exists, because the age of the earth is based on the assumed slow formation of earth’s sediments. The gap theory does away with the evidence for the historical event of the global Flood. If the fossil record was formed by Lucifer’s flood, then what did the global Flood of Noah’s day do? The gap theory fails to accommodate standard uniformitarian geology with its long ages. The gap theory undermines the gospel at its foundations. By accepting an ancient age for the earth (based on the standard uniformitarian interpretation of the geologic column), gap theorists leave the evolutionary system intact (which by their own assumptions they oppose). Even worse, they must also theorize that Romans 5:12 and Genesis 3:3 refer only to spiritual death. But this contradicts other scriptures, such as 1 Corinthians 15 and Genesis 3:22–23. These passages tell us that Adam’s sin led to physical death, as well as spiritual death. In 1 Corinthians 15 the death of the Last Adam (the Lord Jesus Christ) is compared with the death of the first Adam. Jesus suffered physical death for man’s sin, because Adam, the first man, died physically because of sin. In cursing man with physical death, God also provided a way to redeem man through the person of His Son Jesus Christ, who suffered the curse of death on the Cross for us. To believe there was death before Adam’s sin destroys the basis of the Christian message. According to Exodus 20:11, God “made” (asah) the heavens and the earth and everything in them in six days. If God made everything in six days, then there is clearly no room for a gap. To avoid this clear scriptural testimony against any gap, gap theorists have alleged that asah does not mean “to create,” but “to form” or even “re-form.” They claim that Exodus 20:11 refers not to six days of creation but to six days of re-forming a ruined world. The fact is that the words bara and asah are often used interchangeably in the Old Testament; indeed, in some places they are used in synonymous parallelism (e.g., Genesis 1:26–27, 2:4; Exodus 34:10; Isaiah 41:20, 43:7). Applying this conclusion to Exodus 20:11, 31:17, and Nehemiah 9:6, we see that Scripture teaches that God created the universe (everything) in six days, as outlined in Genesis 1. Theologians call the form of use of tohu and/or bohu in Isaiah 34:11 and Jeremiah 4:23 a “verbal allusion.” These passages on judgment allude to the formless and empty earth at the beginning of creation to suggest the extent of God’s judgment to come. God’s judgment will be so complete that the result will be like the earth before it was formed and filled—formless and empty. This does not imply that the state of the creation in Genesis 1:2 was arrived at by some sort of judgment or destruction as imagined by gappists. source

Islam is Satanic religion. There is only one way to Heaven, through Jesus Christ. Muslims have no chance of getting to Heaven unless they turn from the Satanic cult there are in. it is a religion of hatred and murder. Its "prophet" was a terrible person who was known to rape young girls and boys. How strange it must be to pray five times per day and still go to Hell.

Try me. Say something true for once. As you ignore the actual experts who point out that Jeremiah was quoting Genesis for effect; that the land would be so completely destroyed it would be as before God began to fill the earth. Of course, no amount of proof will be good enough for you. No you don't. You like approval by the old earth proponents. That's why even though the most recent translation says "formless and void," you cling to discredited translations because they allow you to spew your heresy. Clueless DOES exist in your mind. You have the understanding of a stone. Another lie. I gave you a list. Point. Set. Match. Uh... no. Science is the study of the physical world. Please show us how science explains things like the sun standing still in the sky or the dead coming back to life. Show us the scientific explanation for the sudden formation of all living animals in a day. Another lie. You said nothing was formless. I'll give you 31 reasons. Genesis 1:1-1: 31. If you had a clue what it said, you would have never made that statement. The shorter list would be of ones you understand. They make these things they call books, and they are permanent records of things people publish. Gap theory was first popularized by Thomas Chalmers in 1814. Hey, you DO know the definition of at least one word. The Bible says there was a six day creation. You claim otherwise. Publish date 1997. It's new age heresy. Did you bother to read the publication date? The Biblical cannon closed after the writing of the Revelation. Any newer doctrine is heresy.

Can you imagine going back in time and telling early tent dwellers about modern technology, how the solar system functions and what it's really like on the moon? How would they react? There are things in the Bible that we now understand that were a complete mystery to people at the time. Biblical Statement Science Then Science Now Earth is a sphere (Is. 40:22). Earth’s a flat disk. Earth is a sphere Number of stars exceeds a billion (Jer. 33:22). Number of stars totals 1,100 Number of stars exceeds a billion Every star is different (1 Cor 15:41). All stars are the same. Every star is different. Light is in motion (Job 38:19-20). Light is fixed in place. Light is in motion. Air has weight (Job 28:25). Air is weightless. Air has weight. Winds blow in cyclones (Eccl. 1:6). Winds blow straight. Winds blow in cyclones. Blood is a source of life and healing (Lev. 17:11). Sick people must bled. Blood is a source of life and healing.

What if you woke up in the morning with a horn growing out of your forehead and wings? What if the Bible IS true and the scoffers and unbelievers are cast into a lake of fire for eternity? What if you died today and had to stand in front of God to give an accounting for everything you've said or done?

Count 40 centuries from Adam to Christ, and add 17. Adam knew the truth. He was there. When Moses wrote the Torah, the Jews knew his words were true because, like all ancient cultures, the stories were handed down through the generations. Moses was an educated man, and doubtless became aware of Jewish history through his people long before writing anything. That's why the Torah was so readily accepted; the people were already familiar with the contents. First, "unsightly" is your word, second, it's taken from Genesis 1:2 and nothing but trees and grass lived on the earth before Genesis 1:20. Grass wasn't even there until verse 9. Once again, you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding. That's another lie. I already did and you STILL demonstrate your inability to comprehend the meaning. Things that are formless do not have their own form. Their shape is either in flux or determined by the surrounding environment, not the thing itself. I will give you examples but that won't stop your uneducated commentary. Ready? Air, propane, methane, petroleum vapor, natural gas, water, milk, Kool Aide, soft drinks, saline solutions, beer, wine, Gloop and Gleep the formless, fearless wonders, bird droppings, liberal brains, Casper the ghost, liquefied Jello, clouds, Radon, argon, Calgon, soy sauce, pickle juice, blood, steam, poorly cooked oatmeal, chicken broth and the Blob. Case closed. You lose.

That's a lie. That's another lie. You only like a slim minority of modern texts which use definitions twistable enough for you to make your claims. As it was shown to you, 86% of all translations INCLUDING the most recent one agree with the original Hebrew words, without for and void. Who made YOU the authority of what the words really mean, why should ANYONE believe your claims over the actual experts who transcribed the texts? New flash: the creation was a supernatural event. Science cannot study the supernatural. Solid objects, yes, but liquids and gases conform to their surroundings and thus have no form of their own. To reject words you can't comprehend is a classic display of ignorance. Starting in the late 18th century, Satan came up with what he called ruin/reconstruction or gap theory. He certainly ensnared a number of people in that heresy. Interestingly, you never answered why it is that virtually nobody in the church questioned the age of the earth until geologists began to claim long ages. The correct term is "heresy." It makes it new age doctrine. Do I have to explain to you how years are used to record the passage of time? Which explains why the latest and most accurate transcription says "without form and void," right? Your claim would only make sense if there was a consensus with new age interpretations, but most concur with the original. As you well demonstrate. Everyone's wrong but you, because your pastor told you new age bunk and you swallowed the lie whole. No. teaching things contrary to the Bible is heresy. You can have any opinion you want, but when you post it as fact it's called false teaching. You clearly didn't understand his evidences, and the proofs why the words could not ever mean what you claim. They come from a Satanic heresy compiled in the late 18th century. There are volumes written against it.

The reverend Billy Graham was one of the greatest and most influential evangelist in my lifetime. I still listen to his sermons from time to time. He actually wrote a book about Angels and talked extensively about them. He knew the Bible cold and led millions to the Lord. Yet, there were things that he said I absolutely disagree with. There were issues he refused to take up, possibly because of the controversy. He wanted to appeal to the masses, so on issues like evolution or the atrocities upon children the Catholic church covered up, he was silent. So, like Graham, Ham has the right to be wrong. In this instance he is assuredly wrong. In the beginning applies to our beginning. Heaven was always God's home, and the angels are His servants. Are they eternal? If it suits God, then yes. If not, then they are finite. We know that Satan is an eternal being and he was an angel. Because humans are fallible, you have to test the things they say against the absolute truth of the Scriptures. We can be wrong. That's why we should post quotes from the Bible in full context, to avoid the risk of teaching falsely.

Who in the heck claims angels were made when the earth was? God is infinite, and His angels serve Him. Angles could just as easily have been here 10 billion years as ten thousand. God was infinite before He created the world, and He is infinite after. I don't think the darkness was Satan, I believe it was the uncreated universe. I believe light was a physical light; either the sun or something like it. In the book of Job, Satan still has access to God and Heaven, even after tempting Eve, and after rebelling against God. It's like God was keeping him in check but allowing him enough free reign to absolutely earn the eternal damnation awaiting Him. So Satan is on the outs with God, but the final confrontation with Michael and the angels comes during the tribulation. For now Satan is a nemesis, but He will soon be put away forever. That is my opinion based on what I have read. Only the Scriptures themselves are without fail.

I have the Bible. That's good enough for me. I also have all the articles and commentaries from those who have studies the false claims of gap theory proponents, including your improper translation of the Hebrew language. And you only posted the definitions you like. We know. Only your new age distortions of the language meets your approval. And you don't think it strange that after 57 centuries, scientists start claiming an old earth and suddenly there is a new translation to support the claim? 1 Timothy 6: 3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself. Only to those who lack understanding. No, in all but a handful of new age Bibles the words are "Without form and void." You claim you're right, but most experts say you're wrong. Your false doctrine was invented in the late 18th century to try and find agreement with the old earth crowd. That is an indisputable fact. Of course that's a lie. The NAS, your go-to version, was published in 1971. Which is why very few here believe you. Again, that's a lie. Nobody interpreted it that way before the late 18th century. Let's pick one of your newer Bibles, the NRSN, published in 2021. "The earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters." Picking and choosing the minority of translations you like is as dishonest as other posters taking fragments of a verse out of context and pretending they mean something totally different. Nope. That's heresy. You've proved you have no comprehension what "without form" means. That's it. All the rest of us understand it. The article was written by a Hebrew expert, not I. Hence the source. That's all you've done. Repeatedly. And repeatedly. Nope. You've repeated the same bunk you've said over and over, while I've posted multiple experts proving everything you have posted is wrong. In fact, I even posted Genesis 1:2 from a modern Bible I would never read just to prove to you that even today, nearly all translations disagree with the things you are claiming. Someone sold you a big fat lie, and that has become the great love of your life.

You really should stop posting things that are known to be false. It is an indisputable fact that ruin/reconstruction theory has no basis in the Hebrew language. Rather, new and different interpretations were made so as to accommodate the unbiblical claim of long ages. That's why certain people are so hostile to the KJV and to the 86% of interpretations that confirm the six day creation. Timothy warned us of false doctrines that would come to deceive many. Islam is a false doctrine. Evolution is a false doctrine. Much of Catholicism is based on false doctrine, Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormonism are false doctrines and ruin/reconstruction is a false doctrine. That's why it didn't exist for the first 57 centuries. If it had any bearing in truth, wouldn't someone have noticed it before then? Again, with no sun, moon, light, heat or surrounding universe, the earth was a floating mass covered in water and maybe ice (but no land). How, then, was it inhabited? How, then, was it destroyed? Light came AFTER verse two; verse three, to be exact. There is no intelligent reason to fall for the false doctrine of ruin/reconstruction, so those who do are without excuse. It's just an excuse not to believe in the Bible as written, and to play up to the old earth advocates who don't believe a word of it either. Some issues with Gap heresy: 1. Although the gap theory originated out of a desire to accommodate the millions of years of supposed geological time, only the most naïve would think it succeeds. Uniformitarian geologists reject the idea of any global Flood, whether the biblical Noah’s Flood, or the imagined ‘Lucifer’s Flood’ of the gap theory. The fossils supposedly formed over hundreds of millions of years, not rapidly as in a catastrophic flood (ruin). Students from Christian homes went to secular universities and found that the ‘gap theory’ made no sense with secular geology anyway, so they saw it for what it is—an ill-informed attempt to make the Bible fit secular science. And since their Christian leaders had effectively made ‘science’ authoritative over Scripture in this matter, many of these students took the next logical step: since ‘science’ says that dead men don’t rise, virgins don’t conceive, adultery and homosexual behaviour are natural, then … (False doctrine leading people to Hell... who'da thunk it?) 2. It postulates the fall of Satan and wholesale death and suffering in a world that God declared ‘very good’ in Genesis 1:31 and thus undermines the doctrine of redemption and the need for Jesus' death and resurrection. 3. It contradicts the Sabbath command of Exodus 20:8–11, which is based on the creation of the ‘heavens, earth, sea and everything in them’ in six ordinary days. 4. It is grammatically impossible to translate the verb היה) hayah) as ‘became’ when it is combined with a vav disjunctive—in the rest of the Old Testament, vav + a noun + היה) qal perfect, 3rd person) is always translated, ‘was’ or ‘came’, but never ‘became’. Moreover the qal form of היה does not normally mean ‘became’, especially in the beginning of a text, where it usually gives the setting. 5. Also, the correct Hebrew idiom for ‘become’ is to attach the verb ‘to be’ היה) hayah), e.g. ‘was’, to the preposition ‘to’ (Hebrew ל le). The verb ‘to be’ does NOT mean ‘become’ without this preposition. Since Genesis 1:2 lacks the preposition, it cannot mean ‘became’. 6. The Hebrew phrase tohu va bohu (ובהו תהו ,(translated ‘without form and void’ in Genesis 1:2, is claimed by gap theorists to indicate a judgmental destruction rather than something in the process of being built. But tohu occurs several times in the Bible in which it is used in a morally neutral state, describing something unfinished, and not yet organized, but not necessarily evil. Hebrew scholars and the church have for centuries taken the view that Genesis 1:2 is not a scene of judgment or an evil state created by the fall of angels, but a description of the earth in its undeveloped state. The plain and simple meaning of what Moses says is that on the first day there was a mass covered by water, with no dry land involving features such as hills (tohu = ‘unformed’), and no inhabitants yet (bohu = ‘unfilled’). The following verses simply describe the forming and filling. 7. Some have attempted to use Jeremiah 4:23 to teach the gap theory, because it uses the same phrase, tohu va bohu, to describe the results of a judgment. Gap theorists like Arthur Custance used this to assert that ‘without form and void’ must mean ‘laid waste by a judgment’—so that use of these words in Genesis 1:2 must mean that the earth suffered a judgment. But this is fallacious— there is nothing in the Hebrew words tohu va bohu themselves to suggest that. The only reason they refer to being ‘laid waste’ is due to the context in which the phrase is found in Jeremiah 4. The words simply mean ‘unformed and unfilled’. This state can be due either to nothing else having been created, or some created things having been removed. The context of Jeremiah 4 is a prophecy of the Babylonians attacking Jerusalem, not creation. In fact, Jeremiah 4:23 is known as a literary allusion to Genesis 1:2—the judgment would be so severe that it would leave the final state as empty as the earth before God formed and filled it. source The bottom line is, ruin/reconstruction theory or gap theory is false doctrine originating from the father of lies to deceive those who don't have a solid foundation in the word of God. There is no truth in it. It's modern nonsense and contrary to the sound teaching of God's word.