[kevinvw]

This verse is the biggest advocate for the gap theory and I think in light of certain other passages it doesn't support any gap at all.

Mat 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
Mat 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Mat 24:38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
Mat 24:39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

In this passage Jesus is talking about the second coming and he compares it to the days of Noah when the people didn't hearken to the warning of the coming judgment.

2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2Pe 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
2Pe 3:8 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.
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
2Pe 3:10 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.

I think the biggest reason why people see this verse as supporting some flood that happened between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 is because they read it without the context. Notice the similarity between the warning of Jesus Christ and this passage.

The scoffers are saying that the Lord isn't coming back and that nothing different has happened since the beginning just like the people didn't believe Noah that there was going it was going to start raining. It says they are willingly ignorant of the flood that wiped out the people in the days of Noah. They refuse to believe that God killed those men with a flood and they refuse to believe that God came to earth as a man, died, rose from the grave, ascended into heaven, and is going to come back to kill them. Peter warns us to not be willingly ignorant like these men because the Lord is not slack concerning His promise even though it seems like He's taking a long time. He will come back and kill scoffers just like He killed the scoffers in the days of Noah.

Both Jesus and Peter are talking about the second coming, and they both liken it to something. Jesus likened it to the days of Noah. Some people think Peter is talking about some mysterious time period between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. I think it's evident that he's repeating the same warning that Jesus gave, and not telling us about some period of time so mysterious that it hides between two verses.

You say, why does Peter talk about an old world and the world that is now. Well look at 2 Peter 2:5.

2Pe 2:5 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;

Unless Noah lived between Gen 1:1 and 1:2, the old world was the world from the beginning of time to the flood of Noah, which would make the world that is now the world from after the flood to the second coming of Jesus Christ. After which, the Lord makes the new heavens and the earth.

[geologist]

Originally Posted by kevinvw

This verse is the biggest advocate for the gap theory and I think in light of certain other passages it doesn't support any gap at all.

Unless Noah lived between Gen 1:1 and 1:2, the old world was the world from the beginning of time to the flood of Noah, which would make the world that is now the world from after the flood to the second coming of Jesus Christ. After which, the Lord makes the new heavens and the earth.

I think I have already addressed these points on my website on this page:

http://www.kjvbible.org/gap_theory.html

I'm glad to see, however, that this subject has shook you up enough to get you started denouncing it. Good for you.

[chette777]

this is an explanation from Ole Madsen. I quote him because I couldn't make it any clearer on these verses.

"Compare the phrase "the heavens and earth, which are now" to the phrase the "heavens were of old":

When Noah's flood happened did it change anything in the upper heavens (above Earth's atmosphere)? Were there changes made to the sun, moon, or stars? The answer is NO. The heavens that were already ordained and up in the sky during Adam's day are the very same heavens that were there for Noah and his sons after the flood. And those same heavens are still there today.

FACT: The flood had no effect on the heavens. All flood effects were confined to the Earth's surface and atmosphere.

Again, note the contrasting comparison between the phrases the "heavens were of old" (before the waters) and the "heavens and earth which are now" (after the waters). If Noah's flood did not alter the heavens, why does the passage clearly speak of former heavens "of old" and different heavens afterwards. This can not be an accurate reference to Noah's flood, but it could be a reference to a reconstruction of all things; a reconstruction that happened during the seven days. "

Mind you I do not agree with all of Ole's view but this interpretation is pretty accurate. I just don't call the 6 day creation a reconstruction as I believe it was a new form and creation not wholly something left over.

[kevinvw]

Maybe you guys are taking critical of a view of the words old, now and new.

Deu 19:14 Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in the land that the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it.

Deu 32:7 Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations: ask thy father, and he will shew thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee.

I mean, look at this. These people didn't live in a previous heaven and earth. I think Peter is just saying that back in the day, God flooded the earth, and now he's waiting to come back and burn everything fire, and he's gonna kill the scoffers just like he did back then, but this time we get to dwell in a new creation where there is only righteousness.

[kevinvw]

Psa 74:2 Remember thy congregation, which thou hast purchased of old; the rod of thine inheritance, which thou hast redeemed; this mount Zion, wherein thou hast dwelt.

Psa 74:12 For God is my King of old, working salvation in the midst of the earth.

Psa 102:25 Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands.

Psa 119:152 Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.

Jer 28:8 The prophets that have been before me and before thee of old prophesied both against many countries, and against great kingdoms, of war, and of evil, and of pestilence.

Jer 31:3 The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.

Lam 3:6 He hath set me in dark places, as they that be dead of old.

Mic 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

I think these verses clearly demonstrate what the phrase "of old" means, and it always used to describe something from a long time ago or something that is aged like an old shoe or old person, not a former creation or existence.

[MC1171611]

kevinw,

The problem with your long list of verses is that none of them are in reference to the earth except for Psalm 102:25, which when compared with Job 38 is shown to be the Creation in Genesis 1:1.

I'm afraid nothing you've provided even lends credence to your views, let alone disproves the Gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

[chette777]

Originally Posted by kevinvw

These people Peter

God uses men and the circumstances of men to reveal many things in his word. I have gone over certain verse every year and each time I learn something different from it. there is a shallow meaning and there are deeper meanings to some verses in God's word.

that is what Paul describes when he says, Eph 3:18 May be able to comprehend with all saints what [is] the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; not all the saints know everything. But the ability to comprehend what I have just explained above all understand.

I refuse to allow myself to get polarized into only one view as God may change my whole comprehension on that area. I remain open to him. Now when it comes to The sound doctrines of God's grace in Salvation. they are firm and God does not changes my mind on those. but other things he does.

[kevinvw]

Originally Posted by MC1171611

kevinw,

The problem with your long list of verses is that none of them are in reference to the earth except for Psalm 102:25, which when compared with Job 38 is shown to be the Creation in Genesis 1:1.

I'm afraid nothing you've provided even lends credence to your views, let alone disproves the Gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

I think the issue flew completely over your head. I gave those verses because they clearly explain the phrase of old. It does not mean that there was an earth that existed before this current one. It means in times past, old in age, back in the day, from ancient times, or a long, long time ago if you will.

2 Peter 3:5 ...that by the word of God the heavens were of old...

This phrase does not ever mean a former existence. It is dealing with the heavens and the earth from ancient times, not former heavens and earth. I would say a good example of something that is dealing with former and latter things is the old and new testaments. The old testament is called old not because it's old in age but it is the former and now we have the new testament which superseded the old testament and took its spot. When the new heavens and earth are made then we can rightfully call the heavens and earth that we live in now the old ones because they will be the former, but that isn't what is being talked about when the phrase of old is used. Good thing we won't even remember this wretched and terrible world that we live in anyway, according to Isa 65:17. It also explains the former and latter situation you're trying to push the phrase of old into, but you can't because it would only mean former if it was just old and not of old.

Isa 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

[chette777]

Kevin,

The term "the old" does give the meaning of a former existence also as found in

Eph 4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
Col 3:9, 10 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

It would seem your boat has a leak in it and it is an old leak

[kevinvw]

Gen 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

To go even further we have the same phrase "were of old", and it carries the same meaning as 2 Peter 3:5. It deals with the time frame, not their state of being.

1Sa 27:8 And David and his men went up, and invaded the Geshurites, and the Gezrites, and the Amalekites: for those nations were of old the inhabitants of the land, as thou goest to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt.

These weren't former inhabitants of the land (well not until David slew then all, but I think you get the point.) Remember that Amalek was the first nation Israel ran into after leaving Egypt, so these definitely are nations that have been inhabitants for a long time.

Besides, I just found a verse that completely blows everything out of the water.

Rev 21:1 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.

I don't think it's possible to get around this one. The first heaven and first earth? Anything that is first preceeds anything in a line of succesion. The only way I can see there being a gap is if the "old" heavens and "old" earth weren't destroyed, but luckily there weren't "old" heavens and an "old" earth, there was just a flood that happened on earth killed all flesh in an ancient time.