The   Gap Theory























                                               In the beginning...?


If we want to learn more about Mystery Babylon, if we want to discover
more of the obscurities of ancient biblical history, we really need to start at
the beginning. So many of us were taught that God created the world in
six days; and rested on the seventh. For centuries, many of us who believe
the Bible have accepted this time-frame as absolute truth. We trusted the
men who translated our Bible into English; and that they made no mistakes
in methods of translation. Yet, the best way to
truly understand the Bible is
to look at it in its original Hebrew. What if the original language of the
Bible could, perhaps, say some things that are
different than what most of
us have always believed?

These translators - authorized by King James (in the 1611 King James
Version) - were, no doubt, under the assumption that the world was
created in six days. This was probably something they were always taught;
as well as people before them. But, the words of the Hebrew language - as
in many languages -
can have a variety of meanings. The translators of the
King James (our first major translation into English) could have easily tried
to "fit" certain English words with their traditional assumptions; not only in
regards to creation, but other biblical stories! Take these verses, for
example:


  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
                                                   - Gen. 1:1 (KJV)


The next verse states that:


  And the earth was without form, and void...
                                           - Gen. 1:2 (KJV)


According to C. I. Scofield, Thomas Chalmers, and other biblical scholars,
something dramatic may have happened between the time of this first and
second verse. Were the King James translators accurate in their translation,
or were they based on assumptions? As stated earlier, Hebrew words could
easily have more than one meaning. With that in hand, let's see if these
early translators indeed tried to translate the words correctly, or try to
make the words "fit" into what they have always assumed.

In Genesis 1:2, the use of the word
was (from the Hebrew word hayah)
indicates that something might have taken place
beyond what these King
James Translators believed. According to
Strong's Concordance - a great
guide to Hebrew words - this word can also mean "to be," "to come to
pass," "to come about," or to "fall out."[1] Did the earth
begin the way
Genesis 1:2 said it did, or did it
become that way?

The English words
without form, in the above verse, were translated from
the Hebrew word
tohuw; which can also mean "to lie waste," "that which
is wasted," "a place of chaos," or "confusion."[2] The Hebrew word for
void is bohuw, here; which can also mean "a state of waste" or
"emptiness."[3] If we insert these other possible meanings, we could have
an entirely different verse:


  And the earth came to be a place of chaos, and waste.

                                           -or-

  And the earth had fallen from its original form, and became
  a place of chaos and waste.


The question remains: was the earth created "without form and void" or
did something happen to
bring it that way? If we look at these verses in
this way we could surmise there might have been something of
great
importance
occurring between the first and second verses of the Bible.

Also, we see in Genesis 1:1 that God created the
heaven and the earth
(interestingly enough, the word
heaven in the singular). When we look at
the end of the Six-Day Creation, however, we see "the
heavens and earth
were finished, and all the host of them" (Genesis 2:1). Now, the word is in
the plural. Why? Could the first
heaven have been formed at the time of
Genesis 1:1, and another
heaven - possibly one of many - have been
formed at the end of the Six-Day Creation? Is it possible there was more
than one
heaven created by God - created and subsequently destroyed
over time?

Could some parts of our earth, sky, and beyond, just need a "reworking;"
while other parts needed to be created again, outright? As we dig look
deeper into this: why would God desire to create a world which is
formless
and
void, anyhow? Isn't a creation supposed to be considered a finished
product?


  For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that
  formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not
  in vain, he formed it to be inhabited; I am the LORD; and there is
  none else.                                                          - Isa. 45:18 (KJV)


Many people believe that the Bible never contradicts itself; the author
included. Therefore, if Isaiah 45:18 tells us that God made the earth "not in
vain," then that would contradict the meaning of Genesis 1:2! But, what if
there was
another meaning: could there have been a previously established
"
world" that God needed to destroy (for whatever reason)? Just like the
heaven example (above): could God have needed to establish another
organized cosmos in the Six-Day Creation - refashioning a different
world,
and a different
heaven, to replace the former?

The Gap Theory agrees with the planet earth (in the wording of Genesis
1:1) as being created by God. But, it also suggest that there might have
been an organized, harmonious order to the earth - known as the previous

world
- created at this same time. For whatever reason beyond our
understanding, God might not have been satisfied with this previous
world;
and decided to destroy it - and remake it into something else. The physical
planet (i.e. the
earth) remained intact, however. What changed is how the
organized cosmos - the present "world" - was set up. This cycle of
destruction and reformation might have occurred a number of times, over
the life of the planet.

Our current
world - the world we see right in front of us - might have been
reworked from the ashes of a former world's indistinguishable ruin; which
adds a different light to our "Six-Day Creation." The physical
earth has
always been there; the harmonized arrangement of it - the
world - was
fashioned, and re-fashioned, by God.

The following verses of the Bible seem to reinforce the possibility of this
theory:


  Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath
  appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds
 
                                                                       - Heb. 1:2 (KJV)

  Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word
  of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do
  appear.                                                            - Heb. 11:3 (KJV)


Why the plural? Although the Bible could actually be referring to other
planets, here; it seems unlikely. II Peter 3 seems to reinforces the above:


II Pet. 3:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water,
  perished.
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.


Many scholars have assumed these verses refer to only Noah and his
flood. Yet, could they actually refer to the "world" which might have
existed before our own? We notice other verses which seem to argue
against these "worlds" as being related to the Flood of Noah:


II Sam. 22:
2 And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer;
3 … thou savest me from violence.
5 When the waves of death compassed me, the floods of ungodly men
  made me afraid;
8 Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations of heaven moved
  and shook, because he was wroth.
10 He bowed the heavens also, and came down; and darkness was under
  his feet.
12 And he made darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and
  thick clouds of the skies.
15 And he sent out arrows, and scattered them; and discomfited them.
16 And the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world
  were discovered, at the rebuking of the LORD.

Psa. 18:
1 I will love thee, O LORD, my strength.
4 The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of ungodly men
  made me afraid.
7 Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations also of the hills
  moved and were shaken, because he was wroth.
9 He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under
  his feet.
11 He made darkness his secret place; his pavilion round about him
   were dark waters and thick clouds of the skies.
12 At the brightness that was before him his thick clouds passed, hail
   stones and coals of fire.
13 The LORD also thundered in the heavens, and the Highest gave his
   voice; hail stones and coals of fire.
14 Yea, he sent out his arrows, and scattered them; and he shot out
   lightnings, and discomfited them.
15 Then the channels of waters were seen, and the foundations of the
   world were discovered at thy rebuke, O LORD.


In the flood of Noah, we do not have any account of the earth "shaking"
and "trembling." No hail stones. There was only 40 days and nights of rain;
not such prevailing darkness. Also, as we'll notice, both of these verses
state that the
foundation of a new world were, also, brought about! What
new world? The flood of Noah didn't devastate the entire world to a point
where it had to have a new foundation. Could this have represented
another destruction - maybe the world
before Adam?



















In the words of Genesis 1:2, we recall:


  And the earth was without form, and void...


Considering The Gap Theory, couldn't Genesis 1:2 also possibly be
describing a planet that had
become "without form and void," rather than
something newly formed? Couldn't there be the possibility of a
new
foundation being put in place, here? Again, why would a Creator create
something that was
already demolished? Makes absolutely no sense, as it
sets. Couldn't our current "world" truly be a reformulation of an extinct
"world" of the past?

This first
reinterpretation of Biblical Scripture could easily set the stage
for
more reinterpretations of early stories in Genesis; possibly allowing
them to also be viewed in different ways.

The deeper we go, the easier it is to see a whole
new view of our early
history, as well as our world. On the other side of the coin, however: could
we believe that there might be those out there - like those King James
translators - who remain bound by tradition; and would rather downplay -
even cover up - the possibility of these
other interpretations? So, in order
for us to go deeper, and find the answers,
Untold Garden of Eden may be
able to help us unravel a lot more of these obscurities.

There is also a lot more to be found in the book
The Rise of Mystery
Babylon.


                                           Footnotes:

[1]  Strong’s H1961 – hayah, http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?
Strongs=H1961&t=KJV.html (accessed Dec. 23, 2009).
[2]  
Strong’s H8414 - tohuw, http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?
Strongs=H8414&t=KJV.html (accessed Dec. 23, 2009).
[3]  
Strongs’s H922 - bohuw, http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?
Strongs=H922&t=KJV.html (accessed Dec. 23, 2009).


Copyright 2010, Brett T., All Rights Reserved
           Through faith we understand that the worlds were
                   framed by the word of God... (Heb. 11:3)