The Gap Theory

1. 60

   StevenPayneposted 13 years ago

   The gap theory is the space between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2, the time when Lucifer ruled and reigned on Earth before the fall. The bible speaks in different places about there being cities and merchants and technology and stones of fire. I am in the process of moving and all of my study guides are in a box in the middle of a 40 foot trailer and I am searching for a good source to read up on this that isnt going to cost money.
   Does anyone know of a Perry Stone like teaching site where I could read up on this theory. I have looked for articles written by Finis Jennings Dake and Perry Stone, both of which seem to be learned men and have only found articles that I would have to pay to read. Anyone know of somewhere or have any knowledge on the subject and would be willing to talk about it?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      StevenPayneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I meant be willing to talk about the subject on here if you know about it or know where I could go to read up on it. I think I mis typed that.

      replyreport
2. 0

   Twenty One Daysposted 13 years ago

   Steven, to my understanding, the scribes consider genesis a compilation by several people. The gap occurs because of a "reading order" and not necessarily chronological ( event 1, event 2). One thing that spawns the gap is the "timeline" from when man is created and the fall. My understanding concludes man existed and prospered during the Seventh Reality (Day) also known as the 1st Sabbath.
   
   James.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      StevenPayneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      man has nothing to do with the gap theory. it has to do with Lucifers reign on the planet earth as refered to in second peter 3:5-7.
      Second even if it was out of order, the hebrew word Tohu is what was used to descibed the earth in creation, "Tohu," is used 20 times in the Hebrew bible, and is used to mean "vain" or "waste." When has God ever created anything in less than perfected state? Why would he do so and if he did in fact create something flawed to begin with it falsifies his character and the bible in its entirety thus proving that God as described in the bible is a hoax. Bible wouldnt disprove itself in such a simple mannor.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Twenty One Daysposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Hmm, seems you are missing the point.
         
         One the Sixth of Days, man was there.
         On the Seventh of Days, man was there.
         
         The events are written in succession. Then elaborated.
         This includes the fall and was is to be the temporal dominion of ha-satan because of the fall.
         
         What does lucifer (literally translated light-bearer) have to do with anything regarding Genesis? Read Shadow Kings hub on that. Fascinating.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            StevenPayneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            FALL OF LUCIFER PEOPLE!!! I don't give a rip about the fall of man, all information need on that subject is pretty evident!

            replyreport
         2. 60

            StevenPayneposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            just read his hub by the way and it wasnt fascinating in the least. I agree that the english translation of the bible is a general outline at best, anyone who has studied the bible in any type of serious intention would be able to infer that. Besides the bible is a book of culture as it is anything else. so one group calls, "the fallen one" Lucifer and another calls him by another name what relevence does that really have?
            Fanny in America tends to mean your butt however in England it means something totally different. Who cares? The word Fag is offense to everyone unless in a group of people that mean it to be a smoke, the word nine would be offensive to german christians but in the english language it means a measure of counting. Knowledge should not be confused with wisdom, they are not the same thing.
            
            Lucifer by the way has a lot to do with the book of Genesis since he was present from the beginning as he existed before the creation of man hence the reason I pointed out the GAP THEORY between Gen. 1:1 and Gen 1:2.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               libby101aposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               I believe in the "Beyond the Gap Theory". If you'd like to know more about it... read my hub on it. I've did quite a bit of research on it. And there is quite a bit of information in the Bible to back this theory!

               replyreport
               1. 58

                  Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I just read this hub and would have to agree.
                  
                     I was expecting to see a reference to Genesis 1:20 which I think points to evolution.
                  
                  And God said let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and foul that may fly above the earth ...    Is this saying that the waters brought forth the foul of the air?   ...  and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly.
                      Sounds to me that every living thing that hath life was brought forth abundantly after their kind.
                  
                     I am not going to let these last three words dictate in my mind that their DNA was locked at that time.
                     Fouls of the air brought forth fouls that evolves over time into many different kinds of fouls.
                  
                     I do not think that the Genesis account disagrees with the Evolution theory when we read it carefully.
                  
                     As you pointed out in your HUB.  There are many clues to substantiate this.

                  replyreport
            2. 59

               Disappearingheadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               There is no Lucifer. Never was. It's a Latin word crowbared into the Hebrew. And it wasn't a reference to Satan falling either. Isaiah was drawing a parable between a well know Canaanite myth about the morning star who was the son of the Shahar the goddess of the dawn, and the sudden demise of Belshazzar.
               
               http://hubpages.com/hub/Who-is-this-Lucifer-Character

               replyreport
            3. 0

               Twenty One Daysposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               And again, the point:
               
               Genesis 1.1 to Genesis 1.2 reads:
               
               
               There is no mention of a "Lucifer" as an entity. The mention of lucifirus [latin Vulgate, 3rd century]; (photophorus in the Greek) refers to "light bringer or light bearer, a title of Christ (as read II Peter 1.19 and corresponds to the name "radiant and brilliant Morning Star" in Rev. 22.16.
               
               In fact, there is NO MENTION of a "Lucifer" in Torah nor correspondences titled New Testimony.
               
               The entity you are talking about -as Kevin said- was the result of ba`al belief. This belief system is one of the oldest recorded systems of pagan worship (read Enoch).

               replyreport
3. 75

   cheaptrickposted 13 years ago

   I get my Jeans at the GAP!
   ...prices are going Up
   ...most people are going down though...

   replyreport