The Modern Creation Trilogy. Dr. Henry M. Morris
Читать онлайн книгу.
earth and then proceed to restock it with the same basic forms of life He had just destroyed. The God of the Bible is not capricious.
There is a great worldwide cataclysm described in the Bible, and that, of course, is the flood of Noah. This cataclysm is described in considerable detail and is frequently mentioned in later parts of the Bible, whereas the supposed pre-Adamic cataclysm is never described at all. The reasons, causes, and effects of the Flood are given. The Flood of water provides a satisfying explanation for the water-deposited sedimentary rocks and fossils and, therefore, eliminates any real scientific need for the geological ages. Thus, consistent advocates of the gap theory always downplay the flood of Noah’s day as either local or of little global consequence.
Catastrophism does provide the key to the geological ages, not an imagined cataclysm before Genesis 1:2 that supposedly allows us to retain the geological age system, but, rather, the very real Noachian cataclysm which destroys it.
4. Biblical Problems with the Gap Theory
The biblical problems that the gap theory entails are no less damaging than the scientific difficulties. The summary statement of Genesis 2:1–3 seems clearly to include the whole universe: “The heavens and the earth . . . all the host of them . . . all his work which God created and made.” Or at least it comprehends the same universe as Genesis 1:1: “The heavens and the earth. . . .” In fact, no reference to the creation of the heavens occurs in the entire chapter except in Genesis 1:1, which therefore is included in the summary of Genesis 2:1.
This fact is made even clearer in Exodus 20:11: “In six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is.” If this verse means what it says, then the creation of the heaven and the earth was included within the work of the six days. Therefore, the initial creative act of Genesis 1:1 was a part of God’s work on Day One, and there is no time for any significant “gap” before Genesis 1:2.
If anyone is impressed by the fact that “made” (Hebrew asah) is used in Exodus 20:11 instead of “created” (Hebrew bara), the phrase “all that in them is” should make it plain that the whole earth structure — not just the earth’s surface — is included in the entities that were “made” in the six days. The gap theory, on the other hand, attributes most of the earth’s crust, including the sedimentary rocks and their fossil contents, to the pre-world, and assumes that they remained in place during the great cataclysm and the subsequent six-day period of “re-creation.” This view obviously contradicts the comprehensive statement of Exodus 20:11, regardless of whether asah is used in this verse (as it often is when God is the subject) to express essentially the same meaning as bara. In any case, it does not mean “re-made,” as the gap theory requires.
Similarly, God’s evaluation of “all that he had made” as “very good” (Gen. 1:31) is strange and grotesque if the sedimentary rocks under the feet of Adam and Eve were at the same time filled with the fossilized remains of billions of years of suffering and death, so that almost everywhere man would look on the earth, he would encounter this vast graveyard. It could hardly look “very good” to men; how could it be pronounced “very good” by God?
The exegesis required by the gap theory for the six days’ work of Genesis 1 is also strained and forced, rather than natural and normal. Thus, “Let there be light,” in verse 3 must be interpreted as “Let light pierce through the atmospheric debris following the cataclysm and again reach the earth’s surface.” Similarly, the simple statement of verse 16, “And God made two great lights . . . the stars also,” must be understood as saying, “God removed all the cloud contamination still remaining from the cataclysm so that now the sun, moon, and stars could be seen again on earth.” Similar strained translations are needed for other passages.
Furthermore, the translation required by the gap theory for Genesis 1:2 — “The earth became [instead of ‘was’] waste and void” — is itself highly questionable. There is admittedly a difference of opinion among Hebrew scholars about whether this is a permissible translation, but it should be noted that practically all the generally recognized and standard Old Testament translations render the verb “was” instead of “became.” It is the regular Hebrew verb of being (hayetha), instead of the verb that is normally used to denote a change of state (haphak). Although hayetha can, under some circumstances, be translated as “became” instead of “was,” such a meaning must be clearly required by the context. In at least 98 percent of its occurrences in the Pentateuch it is properly translated as “was.” The question then is whether the internal context in Genesis 1:1–5 requires or justifies this unusual translation. Advocates of the gap theory have not yet shown this to be the case. In fact, the use of the connective “and” (waw) between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 seems to imply that the state described in the second verse followed immediately upon the action described in the first verse. Verse 2 clearly consists of an explanation as to how the earth was at creation, not how it became later.
Actually, every verse in Genesis 1 (except the first) begins with “and” (Hebrew waw), implying continuous action. Many times a verse amplifies the meaning of the verse prior to it; thus there is no time implied at all. There seems to be no legitimate justification for allowing a gap between verses one and two. The entire chapter is one long run-on sentence!
It is recognized that a few Hebrew scholars argue vigorously that “became” should be used in verse 2. When experts and specialists disagree, it should perhaps be left an open question. Even if there is such a “gap” between the two verses, there is no contextual justification for understanding it as a gap of long duration. It could just as well have been, say, a minute or an hour, as five billion years.
Similarly, there is nothing in verse 2 to imply a great cataclysmic judgment from God. The initial aspect of creation as described in that verse was not “perfect,” in the sense that it was “complete,” until God pronounced it complete and “very good” at the end of the six days of His creative work. But it was perfect for His immediate purpose.
One would be justified in concluding, therefore, that the “gap” exegesis of Genesis 1:1–2 is very tenuous.
5. Critique of Proof-Texts for the Gap Theory
Although Genesis 1:1–2 does not lend itself well to the gap theory in its immediate context, there are several suggested proof-texts for the theory that have been adduced from other parts of the Bible. These must now be examined. Regardless of these proof-texts, one should not forget the overwhelming scientific and theological difficulties inherent in the idea that the geological ages occurred between the two verses, and that these ages terminated in a global cataclysm. This theory should not be used to explain the geological ages or to justify a great age for the earth. The gap theory creates many serious scientific problems and solves none.
With this warning in mind, let us see whether the proof-texts really do require a gap interpretation. The first of these is Genesis 1:28, where God commands Adam and Eve to “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” The verb translated as “replenish” is the Hebrew male, which means simply “fill” or “be filled” or a similar expression. It is so translated in all the many other places where it is used, with only a few very questionable exceptions.
Jeremiah 4:23 is also frequently cited: “I beheld the earth, and lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.” This is quoted in a context of divine judgment, and so it is said that Genesis 1:2 likewise reflects such a judgment. It is quite certain, however, that the divine judgment described in Jeremiah 4:23 has nothing to do with Genesis, except that it uses similar expressions. It is a prophecy of a coming judgment on the land of Israel (see Jer. 4:14, 22, 31), not a history of past judgment on the earth. The words “earth” and “land” are the same in Hebrew. One can translate the verse correctly as follows: “I beheld the land, and lo it was waste and empty, and the sky, and it had no light.” This prophecy was to be fulfilled during the coming “day of Jacob’s trouble” (Jer. 30:7).
Another proof-text advanced is Isaiah 24:1: “Behold, the Lord maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof.” Again, in the context, this verse is quite obviously a prophecy of the coming judgment upon the land and