Was the Earth RECREATED after an initial creation?
Is there a GAP of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2?
(Part 1 of 4)

Print Page
Introduction

There are two separate creationist viewpoints when it comes to the first two verses in the Bible [1]. In Genesis the creation of the heavens and the earth are described.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." (Genesis 1:1-2)
One perspective states that verse 1 is actually part of the first day of the creation week, and that these events all take place in one twenty four hour period. In this model everything that exists spiritually and some natural phenomena were brought into being in one twenty four hour period. This would include angels, heaven—the abode of God, time, energy, before this day only God existed. The adherents to this model are often called Young Earth Creationists.

The second point of view is that the preexisting earth became wasted and ruined and that God refashions it during the creation week. From verse 3 on what is actually being described is a recreation account in seven 24-hour days or one week, which only involves the earth. The physical realm outside the earth, including time, energy and the spiritual realm, including angels, already exists. Those that hold to this model of creation are often call Old Earth Creationists. See figure 1 [2].




Figure 1: The creation of the heavens and the earth is the topic of the first chapter in Genesis. Were they created only a few thousand years ago or are the heavens and the earth older?
The purpose of writing this paper is to show that there is indeed a gap or a time period between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, and that the Old Earth Creation the second of the two scenarios listed above is correct. By understanding that this gap exists a better understanding of Bible history will develop. Timothy states that the entire Bible is inspired. It can be used to further clarify the creation account.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
However, just because a gap is Biblical, consideration to the following is important:

The duration of the gap will be unspecified in this paper for two reasons; first and foremost the Bible does not mention, except in a general way, the length of the gap and secondly, the scientific dating methods that some creationists have used to date the gap are based on uncertain assumptions. Although the gap is utilized because some creationists believe that the geologic ages must be accounted for by the insertions of hundreds of millions and or billions of years, the justification for the gap in this paper is based on Biblical evidence not some type of supposed harmonization with geological and evolutionary theory. Just because some people believe that a gap must be used to allow theistic evolution to proceed does not mean that all people that believe in the gap are theistic evolutionists. Also because some creationists use the gap as a place to insert the modern geologic record does not mean that all people that believe in the gap believe in the modern geologic record.

There are many versions of the gap scenario. The more freewheeling models consist of a world that preexisted before verse 2, which was inhabited by soulless, manlike creatures. These manlike creatures are the supposed pre-Adamic fossils that are being unearthed today [3]. The world was destroyed by God's judgment and this is what laid down the vast beds of strata. Therefore in this model of the gap the flood of Noah is often regulated to being a local event. Once again believing in a gap does not necessarily mean that you must accept all the baggage that comes with that particular interpretation [4].

Although the gap is Biblical a non-belief in the gap does not makes you a heretic. There are many intelligent, respected researchers that are biblically minded that have done much needed research in the field of creation that do not believe in the gap. They believe that the entirety of the universe, physically and spiritually, was created a few thousand years ago, usually 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. Even though they may not be in agreement with this one point this does not affect their status before God. It is a non-salvation issue. The opposite is also true; the salvation of gappists is not being questioned. To be ultimately saved requires a personal relationship with Jesus Christ (Romans 8:14-17). Many people down through history have fulfilled the requirement for salvation without ever having considered the gap (Hebrew 11:38-40).

God's Revelation

In our search for understanding about what happened to the earth during the gap period the book of Ecclesiastes and Proverbs reveal some very important information.

"As you do not know what is the way of the wind, Or how the bones grow in the womb of her who is with child, So you do not know the works of God who makes everything." (Ecclesiastes 11:5)
"It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, But the glory of kings is to search out a matter." (Proverbs 25:2)

The point is man will never quite understand everything that God has done. God has only revealed so much to man. God has kept some things from human understanding. Often Biblical concepts must be hammered out as the scriptures say "Precept upon precept…line upon line…Here a little, there a little." But just because understanding is not evident or requires digging does not mean that the search should not continue. On the other hand in his word, God has revealed or alluded to things that man cannot discover by himself. Some things are spiritually discerned and God must reveal them. An example of this would be the creation of the Sabbath on the seventh day of the creation week (Genesis 2:1-3). By using only human understanding man could never discern the difference between the Sabbath and any other day of the week, therefore God must reveal this to man. So in a sense a complete understanding of what occurred during the creation week will never be discovered. Man can only understand what God has allowed him to understand.

Common Objections to the Gap

There are several major areas that supposedly show that there is no gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. The major ones used by those that do not believe in a gap are listed below.

The gap theory is a new interpretation: Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847) and Cyrus I. Scofield (1843-1921) developer of the Scofield Reference Bible popularized this idea. It has only been popular for the last 190 years. It was introduced after geologic evidence indicated that the earth was very old.

The Bible does not support a gap: A gap can only be placed in the first two verses of Genesis by violating the linguistics and the intent of the scriptures.

There was no sin before Adam: There was no death prior to sin, and Adam brought sin. All fossils—dead things—are post Adamic.

The creation was pronounced good: If the earth were built on the dead remains of a past world how could God proclaim, "it was good."

Angels were created on the first day: Angels have no prehistory before the creation week, therefore angels and humans are chronological contemporaries.
The above listing is not inclusive of all the objections that the young earth creationist have leveled against the gappists, but they are the most common and often used. All of these major objections and a few minor objections are going to be examined in detail to see if they really can be used to counter a belief in the gap.

Is the Gap Model Recent?


Figure 2: Is the gap theory of recent origin? Was it formulated to counter modern geologic theory and its need for the earth to be older than a few thousand years?

The Young Earth Creationists believe that the gap model is a recent invention. See figure 2 [5]. According to them it originally was proposed to help counter the rising influence of modern uniformitarianism based geology that was coming to the forefront during the 1800s and 1900s. In essence it was proposed not for Biblical reason but it was proposed as a compromise. Consider the following quote from a Young Earth Creationist source [6]:

" The modern gap theory was proposed in 1814 by Thomas Chalmers, a leading Scottish theologian. Some geologists of his day had argued that the earth was much older than Genesis implies. Chalmers, therefore, proposed the gap theory to harmonize Genesis with the demands of those geologists. There is no clear record of anyone prior to 1814 interpreting Genesis 1:1-2 in this way. "

Is it true that the gap theory is of recent origin?—the answer is a resounding—NO! The gap model has a long and distinguished history and has been supported by many ancient Hebrew and Biblical scholars. Consider the following quotes from Arthur C. Custance's writings [7]. These quotes are from his book Without Form and Void, chapter one entitled: A Long-held View. Notice how these dates are much older than the mid 1814 date.

" Jewish commentators made the discovery, but their early literature (the Midrash for example) reveals that they had some intimation of an early pre-Adamic catastrophe affecting the whole earth. Similarly, clear evidence appears in the oldest extant Version of the Hebrew Scriptures (the Targum of Onkelos) and some intimation may be seen in the "punctuation marks" of the Massoretic text of Genesis Chapter One. Early Jewish writers subsequently built up some abstruse arguments about God's dealings with Israel on the basis of this belief and it would seem that Paul in his Epistle to the Corinthians is at one point making indirect reference to this traditional background (see II Cor. 4:6). A few of the early Church Fathers accepted this interpretation and based some of their doctrines upon it. It is true that both they and their Jewish antecedents used arguments which to us seem at times to have no force whatever, but this is not the issue. The truth is, as we shall see, that the idea of a once ordered world having been brought to ruin as a consequence of divine judgment just prior to the creation of Adam, was apparently quite widespread. It was not debated: it was merely held by some and not by others. Those who held it referred to it and built up arguments upon it without apparently feeling the need to apologize for believing as they did, nor for explaining the grounds for their faith. (p. 2)

Hugo St. Victor (1097-1141) was a Flemish scholar and a member of the Augustinian Monastery of St. Victor and later Prior of the monastery in Paris. He wrote: "Perhaps enough has already been debated about these matters thus far, if we add only this, 'how long did the world remain in this disorder before the regular re-ordering (dis-positio) of it was taken in hand? For the fact that the first substance of all things arose at the very beginning of time – or rather, with time itself - is settled by the statement that, 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth'. But how long it continued in this state of confusion. Scripture does not clearly show." (p. 12)

Two centuries later, Thomas Aquinas (1226 -1274) reiterated this view when he wrote: "but it seems better to maintain (the view) that the creation was prior to any of the days (literally, before any day)." (p. 12-13)

And even more specific was the most learned of all medieval commentators on Genesis, Pererius (1535 - 1610) who wrote: "Even though before the first day, the heavens and the elements were made subsequent to the substance (ie., basic essence of creative activity) nevertheless they were not perfected and completely furnished until the period of the six days: for then was given to them (their) furnishing, (their) fulfillment (filling up), and (their) completion. However, just how long that darkened state of the world lasted, ie., whether it lasted more than one day or less than one day, this is not clear to me, nor (I hold) is it clear to any other mortal man unless to one to whom it has been divinely made so." (p. 14)

However, among those who approached the problem from this angle was the famous Dr. E. B. Pusey of Oxford University whose work on Daniel provided him with an opportunity to give a summary statement of his own views on the matter. First of all, he deals strictly with the questions of grammar and syntax…. (p. 24)

While it has become a custom to challenge the Hebrew scholarship of anyone who supports the "Gap Theory", and while it has thus be come possible to get away with such pontifical statements as "no Hebrew scholar supports this view" (!), there never has been any question as to the scholarship of Pusey who nevertheless did support it. (p. 26-27)

It is well to remember that a substantial number of other Hebrew scholars have adopted this view on the linguistic evidences Martin Anstey, Alfred Edersheim (to whom Hebrew was almost a native language), H. Browne, G. V. Garland, N. Snaith (who seems to me to favor "became" for "was"), T. Jollie Smith, A. I. McCaul, R. Jameison, and many others*. (*See appendix 1 of Without Form and Void for excerpts from these sources) (p. 28)"

As an in-depth example of a Hebraic and Biblical scholar, who supported the idea of a recreation scenario for the first two verses in the Bible, consider the life of William Whiston [8].
Whiston born in England (1667-1752) sought to harmonize religion and science. He was ordained in 1698 and served as a chaplain to the Anglican Bishop. He published A New Theory of the Earth [9] in 1696. See figure 3 [10]. In this work he claimed that the Noachian deluge had been caused by the passing of the earth through the watery tail of a comet. Afterwards he was an assistant to Sir Isaac Newton and succeeded him as professor of mathematics at Cambridge in 1703. He was a friend of Edmund Halley, the discoverer of the cyclic nature of comets.

At a later date he wrote Astronomical Principles of Religion. Although he wrote many religious works he is best known for translating the works of Josephus into English.




Figure 3: A diagram from William Whiston's book, A New Theory of the Earth showing the trajectory of the earth and the flood-causing comet. Whiston wrote extensively about the gap.

Young Earth Creationist often claim that the gap theory was introduced in the mid 1800's to counter the rising threat of modern geologic thought and vast periods of time. All of the following quotes [11] are from Whiston's A New Theory of the Earth published in 1696. This was more than 90 years earlier than James Hutton's Theory of the Earth, which was published in 1785. James Hutton is often called the father of modern geology. In reality, the gap model is very old and it preceded the need for geologic time.

The creation of the earth out of a confused chaos:

"That the notions they have entertained of the Nature, Stile, and Extent of the Creation of the World in six days, are false, precarious, and no less contrary to the Holy Scriptures themselves, that to sound Reason and true Philosophy. The proposition therefore which shall be the subject of this Dissertation, and includes the whole point before us, shall be this: The Mosaick Creation is not a Nice and Philosophical account of the Origin of All Things; but an Historical and True Representation of the formation of our single Earth out of a Confused Chaos, and of the successive and visible change thereof each day, till it became the habitation of Mankind. " (p. 3)
The astronomical heaven was created first sometime in the past, then God refashions a confused chaotic earth through His holy spirit:

" …And the Earth was without Form and Void, and Darkness was upon the Face of the Deep, and the Spirit of God moved on the Face of the Waters. Where 'tis clear, that as soon as the Holy Writer descends to the Description of the Chaos, and the commencing of the Six Days Creation, he mentions not a word of any Production out of Nothing (before supposed and asserted to have been past and done, In the Beginning) he omits, and thereby evidently excludes that heaven, or those Superior Systems of the World already spoken of, from any place therein, and by the whole coherence plainly confines the Narration following to the Earth alone with its dependencies.
" Moses does not say, as the common Expositors do, "That just at the commencing of the Six Days Work, the Earth, and all the rest of the World was originally produced; But that, When God had (formerly) created all the World, which is usually distinguished into the Heaven and the Earth, the latter of these, (the consideration whereof was alone pertinent to the present design) at the time preceding the Six Day Work, was in a Wild, Irregular, and Dark condition: or such a perfect Chaos, as nothing but the power of God, and his Spirit's moving on, and influencing the same, could ever have reduced into a habitable World." " (p. 5-6)

The sun, moon, and stars were created sometime before the six-day recreation week and not on the fourth day of the week:

" Now, in order to the giving what satisfaction I can in this Point; let it be considered, That the Light being not said to be created by Moses, its Original were without difficulty to be accounted for, if the other Point, the making of the Heavenly Bodies were once settled, which therefore is the sole remaining difficulty in the case before us. And that would be no harder, if the Translation of the Word of Moses were but amended, and the Verse hereto relating, read thus, And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the Heaven, to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for season, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the firmament of the Heaven to give light upon the Earth, and it was so. And God having (before) made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; and having (before) made the stars also, God set them in the firmament of the Heavens to give light upon the Earth, &c. or which is all one, And God had (before) made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he had (before) made the stars also, and God set them in the firmament, &c.
" In which rendering, 'tis only changing the perfectum for the plusquam perfectum, and ever thing is clear and easy, and the Objection vanishes of its own accord; the Creation of the heavenly Bodies being hereby assigned to a former time, and the Work of the fourth day no other than the placing them in our Firmament, according as the account hereafter to be given does require. "

The heavenly bodies were not created but appeared to an earth bound observer on the fourth day:

" …the Heavenly Bodies…described…with relation to our Earth, and as Members and Appurtenances of our Atmosphere…'Twas entirely with regard to our Light and Darkness, our Day and Night, that all was done, as far as can be collected from the words of Moses. Thus, as soon as the Heavenly Bodies are made, though they be universally useful, they are placed in the Firmament of Heaven, (a Phrase used in our History for our Air only) to divide our day from night, to be to us for signs and seasons, for day and year; to be for lights in the firmament of heaven to give light upon the earth; to rule over our day and night, to divide our light from darkness. And as to the order of the Introduction, 'tis not that of their proper Greatness or Dignity, but that of their respective Appearances and Uses here below…Agreeably whereto when our Air is clogged with gross Vapors, so as to hide or disfigure their faces to us, The Sun is said to be turned into darkness, the Moon into blood… " (p. 18)
The heavenly bodies were created prior to the recreation week. They were visible on the fourth day because the opaque atmosphere cleared and allowed their light to reach the surface of the earth:

" Now 'tis easy to tell what is meant by their Creation in the case before us, when it has appeared that their Production out of nothing was precedence to the six day Work, and that they are wholly considered as belonging to our Earth, and placed in our Air; viz. their primary being so placed; their first becoming visible to Men on Earth, or in other words, their original appearing to be there…The Sun, Moon, and Stars, are then said first to Be, or to be made, when afterwards the Air was rendered so very clear and transparent, that those Luminaries became conspicuous, and their Bodies distinctly visible, as in a clear Day or Night they now appear to us. " (p. 23)
Comments on how the scriptures should be interpreted literally and not by preconceived notions. The literal interpretation of the scriptures indicates a gap:

" And in like manner, 'tis but just to believe, that so much of the Mosaick Creation, as related directly to the Earth and its appurtenances, and so came at once with the comprehension of the History, and of the capacities of the Readers, ought literally to be Interpreted; though some thing extraneous to the Formation of the Earth, and beyond the notice of the people, to be taken in a deferent acceptation…And 'tis evident that the Holy Book ought not to be tormented or eluded, as to their obvious sense, on every occasion, under pretence that some particular Texts are to be construed another way. That SACRED RULE ought for ever RELIGIOUSLY to be observed, That we never forsake the plain, obvious, easie and natural sense, unless where the nature of the thing it self, parallel palaces, or evident reason, afford a solid and sufficient ground for so doing. " (p. 26)
Only the earth as affirmed and spoken by ancient sources and Moses was chaotic [12]. The disordered state of the earth did not extend beyond the earth.

" I prove that the History before us, extends not beyond the Earth and it Appendages, because that confused Mass or rude heap of Heterogeneous matter, which we call the Chaos whence all the several parts, were derived extended no farther. I will here I suppose be allowed me that the ancient Chaos, so famous among the ancient Philosophers, and so evidently referred to by Moses, was the entire and single source or promptuary of the six days productions…that the Chaos was so far from comprehending the entire matter of the Universe, nay or of the Solar System, that it reached not so far as the Moon, nor indeed any farther than that Terraqueous Globe we now Inhabit. " (p. 32)
" The Chaos mentioned by Moses is by him expressly called The Earth, in contradistinction on to The Heavens, or the other Systems of the Universe; and all its parts taken notice of in the Sacred History, appear, by the following Series of the Scripture, to belong to our Earth and no other. The words of Moses are, In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth; and the earth was without form and void, and darkness was on the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Where I think 'tis plain, as has already observed, that when the Author comes to the Chaos of Foundation of the six day work, he excludes the Heavens from any share therein, and call the Chaos it self An Earth, without from and void, with Darkness upon the of the Abyss; and this ought to grant, these being the very words from which 'tis concluded that the Heathen Chaos was no other than what Moses derived the World from. " (p. 33-34)

" The Mosaick and ancient Chaos could not include the Sun or fixed Stars… " (p. 35)

" The Mosaick Creation is confined to our Earth, with its Appurtenances, because otherwise the time of the Creation of each Body was so extremely disproportionate to the Work itself, as is perfectly irreconcilable to the Divine Wisdom of it Creator, and the account of the Works themselves as they are set down by Moses. " (p. 41)

Many ancient writers understood that the first two verses in Genesis actually are separated by some amount of time. The amount of time is not important; the duration of the gap will be discussed later. What is important is to understand that verse one and two do not belong in the creation week. The earth was created in verse one, later after the passing of some amount of time it was found in a chaotic state in verse two and was recreated as a fit habitation for humanity. As affirmed by all these quotes the gap theory existed from a very early time historically. It was simply refined by Chalmers and others. In reality the gap has always existed and was simply used by those theologians that wanted to try to marry scripture and science.

Part 1: Introduction, Objections to Gap theory
Part 2: Do Hebrew Scholars Support a Gap?
Part 3: Was There Sin Before Adam?
Part 4: Biblical Evidence for a Catastrophe between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2

Works Cited and Research Notes

[1]. Unless otherwise noted all scriptural notations are from: The Bible. The New King James Version. Thomas Nelson Publishers. Nashville, TN. 1994.

[2]. Genesis. Artwork by Joe Tucciarone. Used with permission. 2403 West Friday Circle Cocoa, Florida 32926. http://members.aol.com/INTERSTELL/joe.html

[3]. There is much scientific evidence that states that the all humans are genetically related. In other words, science and the scriptures both agree that all men, generally speaking and this includes Homo erectus, Neanderthal man, and Cro-Magnon man, have descended from one source-Adam and Eve. Other supposed hominid apelike ancestors are simply misinterpreted fossils, in reality extinct apes. To believe in a gap does not mean you believe in pre-Adamic soulless/spiritless proto-humans.

[4]. This is similar to understanding that Jesus Christ did not have long hair. Just because you reject the longhaired contemporary Jesus does not mean you reject the Jesus of the Bible. In a similar vein if you reject the seven-day creation account and accept the biblical seven-day recreation account—the gap, this does not mean you must accept all the attendant baggage and various theories that come with the gap. Some of this baggage has been added by the Young Earth Creationists and some has been added by the Old Earth Creationists.

[5]. The Grand Canyon. Photo Courtesy of the United States Park Service (USPS). photo by B. W. Hamilton.

[6]. Brown W. In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood. 7th ed. Center for Scientific Creation. Phoenix AZ. p. 274. 2001.

[7]. Custance, Arthur C. Without Form and Void a Study of the Meaning of Genesis 1:2. Doorway Pub. 1989. or online at http://custance.org

[8]. Encyclopedia Britannica 15th ed. William Whiston. Micropaedia. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. Chicago IL. 1985.

[9]. Whiston, William. A New Theory of the Earth. Arno Press. New York. 1978 (originally published in1696).

[10]. Whiston, William. 1696. Figure 7, p. 101.

[11] Whiston, William. 1696. Section: of the Mosaick Creation.

[12]. Whiston believed that the earth had an original chaotic state as mentioned in Genesis 1:2. He further contends that the earth being similar to a comet or the atmosphere of a comet caused this chaotic state.

Written by: Arnold Mendez
Visit Arnold's site dedicated to Creation and related topics.