DOCSLIB.ORG

A Scriptural View of Crime –Jared A. Linebach, Shorter University

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Scriptural View of Crime –Jared A. Linebach, Shorter University The Journal of Christianity in the Social Sciences theories explain some crime but not all theories explain all crime. Opposing viewpoints from early criminological theory illustrate the shaky foundations of the criminological discipline. The classical school of criminology viewpoint is based on the free will of the offender, while the positivist school of criminology viewpoint is based on deterministic characteristics of the offender. As with most problems that theorists attempt to solve using opposite ends of a spectrum, neither can be completely accurate which means there must be some middle ground or alternative perspective that addresses the problem more fully. Though there is no “modern theory” – a theory posited within the last 500 years – that addresses the existence of criminality fully, there is a perspective that, when adopted, seems to address the root of criminal behavior. Prior to the establishment of the classical and positivist schools of criminology, a practical application of the supernatural theory of crime was the foundation for society. This supernatural perspective will be addressed later but it is the modern outgrowth of the Scriptural view of crime as specified within the pages of the Holy Bible. Over time, the Scriptural view of crime gave way to the supernatural theory because the supernatural theory made it easier to punish Adam & Eve & The Serpent, Image Credit: Pixabay individuals who engaged in criminal activity. This article will discuss the Biblical support for the total depravity of man – also known as the sin nature and original sin – as the root cause of criminal conduct. Herein, A Scriptural View of Crime the two terms, total depravity of man and sin nature, will be used interchangeably to refer to By Jared A. Linebach, Ph.D. the state of mankind as defined by God. The term original sin will be used to refer to the Shorter University fall of man as described in Genesis 3. It should also be noted at the outset that the There are many perspectives on the discussion of the sin nature will be from view of man, particularly as it relates to the God’s perspective not from man’s depravity of man. The abundance of theories perspective. There are plenty of other on how and why people commit crimes can theories that deal with the depravity of man easily be found in any criminological theories from man’s perspective. book. However, no single theory explains every act of social deviance. That is, all Defining Human Nature: Imago Dei 25 Christus Cultura bearers of God – they were as perfect as they, Humanity was created by God and for or we, would ever be. All of this was God. God created man from the dust of shattered after the temptation – not as a result earth and created woman from man on the of the temptation, but rather a result of sixth day of creation. This was the only time, yielding to the temptation – of Adam and Eve during the creation account, that God is at the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and recorded as identifying the whole of His work Evil in the midst of the garden (Genesis 2-3, as “very good” (Genesis 1:31, ESV). When ESV). Moses records the creation account and provides God’s discussion with Himself about Defining Human Nature: Sin Nature the creation of man, he does so using some In order to begin to define the specific terms: “’Let us make man in our concept of the sin nature, original sin must image, after our likeness’” (Genesis 1:26, first be established. While the term “original ESV). The meaning of image and likeness sin” is found nowhere in the 66 books that has casually come to represent a physical make up the canon of Scripture – the Holy likeness to God. However, the real meaning Bible – original sin, as a concept, is well is a bit less obvious. established by the Apostle Paul. The concept The use of “our image” and “likeness” of original sin is one that begins in the in Genesis indicates a deeper meaning than beginning. Original sin, as described in physical likeness, especially since “God is Genesis 3, portrays the first man, Adam, and spirit” (John 4:24, ESV). It seems much more his female counterpart, Eve the suitable likely that being made in the image of God helper, as having stepped outside the confines relates more to our moral, intellectual, and of God’s command. Adam and Eve ate of spiritual nature (Munyon, 1994). The image the forbidden fruit hanging from the Tree of of God is more about who we are and less the Knowledge of Good and Evil. It made about something we have or something we do no difference to a Holy God that Adam and (Munyon, 1994). Eve were coerced or entrapped in this Another scholar describes the image temptation to consume the fruit by the of God as both a “natural and moral image” serpent. While the serpent reaped its own (Menzies & Horton, 1993, p. 84). The natural consequences by presenting the temptation, image encompasses the intellectual aspects of the act of disobedience against the Divine was the person, but elaborates to include elements committed freely by Adam and Eve. of personality, sensibility, and rationality. In One result of the original sin, Adam contrast, the moral image houses our will, our and Eve were forced to leave the paradise freedom to make decisions. “Moral image in where God had originally placed them to live mankind is also the quality of our personality out their days. The original sin not only had that relates to the rightness or wrongness of geographic consequences, but it also had the use of our powers” (Menzies & Horton, physiological and psychological consequences. 1993, p. 85). It is this sense of right and The physiological consequences came in the wrong that allow us to relate to God. form of hard manual labor, pain in childbirth, These two perfectly formed first and death – thought not immediate physical humans – Adam and Eve – came to reside in death. The psychological consequences came the Garden of Eden. They enjoyed fellowship in the form of subjugation to one’s husband with God, walking with Him in the cool of and the realization that one would eventually the day. They enjoyed the fruit of the garden die. Original sin, while limited to the Garden and were allowed to eat of any of it except of Eden, has lasting consequences for all of that from one tree. They enjoyed perfect humanity. communion and communication with God in The original sin is only the starting that place. There, they were perfect image 26 The Journal of Christianity in the Social Sciences The flow and purpose of these point for the conversation about the sin passages clearly indicate the divine nature. Just as with original sin, the terms sin conceptualization of the sin nature. Sin and nature or the total depravity of man are not the sin nature entered the human race through found in the Scriptures. However, just like Adam “in an abuse of the freedom given to original sin, the framework for understanding created beings equipped with a will” (Menzies the sin nature is abundantly clear. The & Horton, 1993, p. 87) and has been concepts of sin nature and total depravity can transmitted to every other human, making the be expressed in positive and negative terms. entire human race sinners and worthy of the “Negatively, it means that man, as a result of consequences for that sin: death (Romans the fall, has lost his original righteousness and 6:23). The exact mode of transmission for the love for God. Positively, it means that man’s sin nature is a mystery. Genetic transmission moral nature has become corrupted, and that and evolutionary development transmission he has an irresistible bias toward evil” are two posited modes of transmission. (Barabas, 1967, p. 213). Scripture gives no clear answer to the The notion of the sin nature is most question about how the sin nature is clearly expressed by the Apostle Paul in his propagated within the human race. What is writings. First, Romans 5 provides the known is that sin is an all-pervasive tendency clearest picture of the sin nature within man. which must be dealt with if the human race is A deeper analysis of New Testament passages to live as God intended. will be assessed later but Romans chapter five gives an excellent description of the Human Nature in the Old Testament transmission of the sin nature. “Therefore, The Old Testament discusses the just as sin entered the world through one man characteristics of human nature. The account [Adam], and death through sin, and in this begins in Genesis 2 after the creation of all way death came to all men, because all things, to be discussed in greater detail later. sinned” (Romans 5:12, NIV). The Apostle The major theme relating to the sin nature in Paul’s point is expounded in five additional the Old Testament is that, since the original passages in Romans 5: sin of Adam – known simply as “the fall” – , • “the many died by the trespass of the the human race was and is sinful from before one man” (Romans 5:15, NIV) we were born. Psalm 51:1-5 states “Have • “the result of the one man’s sin: The mercy on me, O God, according to your judgment followed one sin and steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions. Wash me brought condemnation [to all]” thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me (Romans 5:16, NIV) from my sin! For I know my transgressions, • “by the trespass of the one man, death and my sin is ever before me.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Word Made Flesh
    1 The Word Made Flesh et’s begin our study of the Gospel of John with what is called the LPrologue, one of the loftiest and most inspiring passages in the New Testament. It lays out the major premise of the Gospel, so it’s a good way to start our exploration. In spite of its weight and importance, the Prologue is actually quite short, consisting of just the first eighteen verses of John. However, because of their weight and importance, we could easily write an entire book just on these verses. Most scholars believe that portions of these first eighteen verses were an early Christian hymn influenced by Greek and Jewish philosophical ideas. John incorporated the hymn, reworking it a bit, because it captured profound ideas about who Jesus is and the meaning of his life. Before delving into the meat of this section, I want to point out what you no doubt have already noticed, that the Gospel begins 15 Copyright © 2015 by Abingdon Press. All rights reserved. 9781501805332_INT_Layout.indd 15 10/20/15 1:12 PM John: The Gospel of Light and Life with these three words: “In the beginning.” You’ll recall that another book of the Bible starts with these same words. Genesis 1:1 starts, “In the beginning. ” John’s use of these words is no accident. He is pointing back to the creation story. For now, I merely want you to notice the reference, and I’ll say more about it at various points throughout the book. The premise of the entire Gospel, so beautifully introduced in the Prologue, is that Jesus embodies God’s Word.
    [Show full text]
  • Sin. Systematic Theology.Wayne Grudem
    Systematic Theology Wayne Grudem Chapter 24! SIN What is sin? Where did it come from? Do we inherit a sinful nature from Adam? Do we inherit guilt from Adam? EXPLANATION AND SCRIPTURAL BASIS A. The Definition of Sin The history of the human race as presented in Scripture is primarily a history of man in a state of sin and rebellion against God and of God’s plan of redemption to bring man back to himself. Therefore, it is appropriate now to consider the nature of the sin that separates man from God. We may define sin as follows: Sin is any failure to conform to the moral law of God in act, attitude, or nature. Sin is here defined in relation to God and his moral law. Sin includes not only individual acts such as stealing or lying or committing murder, but also attitudes that are contrary to the attitudes God requires of us. We see this already in the Ten Commandments, which not only prohibit sinful actions but also wrong attitudes: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor” (Ex. 20:17 NIV). Here God specifies that a desire to steal or to commit adultery is also sin in his sight. The Sermon on the Mount also prohibits sinful attitudes such as anger (Matt. 5:22) or lust (Matt. 5:28). Paul lists attitudes such as jealousy, anger, and selfishness (Gal. 5:20) as things that are works of the flesh opposed to the desires of the Spirit (Gal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Garment of Adam in Jewish, Muslim, and Christian Tradition
    24 The Garmentof Adam in Jewish, Muslim, and ChristianTradition Stephen D. Ricks Although rarely occurring in any detail, the motif of Adam's garment appears with surprising frequency in ancient Jewish and Christian literature. (I am using the term "Adam's garment" as a cover term to include any garment bestowed by a divine being to one of the patri­ archs that is preserved and passed on, in many instances, from one generation to another. I will thus also consider garments divinely granted to other patriarchal figures, including Noah, Abraham, and Joseph.) Although attested less often than in the Jewish and Christian sources, the motif also occurs in the literature of early Islam, espe­ cially in the Isra'iliyyiit literature in the Muslim authors al­ ThaclabI and al-Kisa'I as well as in the Rasii'il Ikhwiin al­ ~afa (Epistles of the Brethren of Purity). Particularly when discussing the garment of Adam in the Jewish tradition, I will shatter chronological boundaries, ranging from the biblical, pseudepigraphic, and midrashic references to the garment of Adam to its medieval attestations. 1 In what fol­ lows, I wish to consider (1) the garment of Adam as a pri­ mordial creation; (2) the garment as a locus of power, a symbol of authority, and a high priestly garb; and (3) the garment of Adam and heavenly robes. 2 705 706 STEPHEN D. RICKS 1. The Garment of Adam as a Primordial Creation The traditions of Adam's garment in the Hebrew Bible begin quite sparely, with a single verse in Genesis 3:21, where we are informed that "God made garments of skins for Adam and for his wife and clothed them." Probably the oldest rabbinic traditions include the view that God gave garments to Adam and Eve before the Fall but that these were not garments of skin (Hebrew 'or) but instead gar­ ments of light (Hebrew 'or).
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin
    THE GREAT CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN by Jonathan Edwards “They that be whole, need not a physician; but they that are sick.” - Matthew 9:12 1 CONTENTS Advertisement 3 The Author’s Preface 7 PART ONE Wherein Are Considered Some Evidences of Original Sin From Facts and Events, as Founded by Observation and Experience, Together With Representations and Testimonies of Holy Scripture, and the Confession and Assertion of Opposers. Chapter One 8 Chapter Two 69 PART TWO Containing Observations on Particular Parts of the Holy Scripture Which Prove the Doctrine of Original Sin. Chapter One 78 Chapter Two 102 Chapter Three 110 Chapter Four 130 PART THREE The Evidence Given Us, Relative to the Doctrine of Original Sin, in What the Scriptures Reveal Concerning the Redemption by Christ. Chapter One 143 Chapter Two 148 PART FOUR Containing Answers to Objections. Chapter One 155 Chapter Two 158 Chapter Three 164 Chapter Four 177 2 ADVERTISEMENT CONTAINING A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THIS BOOK AND ITS AUTHOR, BY THE FIRST EDITOR The Reverend Author of the following piece, was removed by death before its publication. But, ere his decease, the copy was finished and brought to the press; and a number of sheets passed his own review. They who were acquainted with the author, or know his just character, and have any taste for the serious theme, will want nothing to be said in recommendation of the ensuing tract, but only that Mr. Edwards wrote it. Several valuable pieces on this subject have lately been published, upon the same side of the question.
    [Show full text]
  • Latter-Day Saint Liturgy: the Administration of the Body and Blood of Jesus
    religions Article Latter-Day Saint Liturgy: The Administration of the Body and Blood of Jesus James E. Faulconer Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA; [email protected] Abstract: Latter-day Saint (“Mormon”) liturgy opens its participants to a world undefined by a stark border between the transcendent and immanent, with an emphasis on embodiment and relationality. The formal rites of the temple, and in particular that part of the rite called “the endowment”, act as a frame that erases the immanent–transcendent border. Within that frame, the more informal liturgy of the weekly administration of the blood and body of Christ, known as “the sacrament”, transforms otherwise mundane acts of living into acts of worship that sanctify life as a whole. I take a phenomenological approach, hoping that doing so will deepen interpretations that a more textually based approach might miss. Drawing on the works of Robert Orsi, Edward S. Casey, Paul Moyaert, and Nicola King, I argue that the Latter-day Saint sacrament is not merely a ritualized sign of Christ’s sacrifice. Instead, through the sacrament, Christ perdures with its participants in an act of communal memorialization by which church members incarnate the coming of the divine community of love and fellow suffering. Participants inhabit a hermeneutically transformed world as covenant children born again into the family of God. Keywords: Mormon; Latter-day Saint; liturgy; rites; sacrament; endowment; temple; memory Citation: Faulconer, James E. 2021. Latter-Day Saint Liturgy: The In 1839, in contrast to most other early nineteenth-century American religious leaders, Administration of the Body and Joseph Smith, the founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints1 said, “Being Blood of Jesus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Apostles' Creed the Nicene Creed
    4 The Faith We Profess The Apostles’ Creed The Nicene Creed I believe in God, We believe in one God, the Father almighty, the Father, the Almighty, creator of heaven and earth. maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only We believe in one Lord, Jesus Son, our Lord. Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven: He was conceived by the by the power of the Holy Spirit power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and born of the Virgin Mary. and became man. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, For our sake he was crucified was crucified, died, and was buried. under Pontius Pilate; He descended into hell. he suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose again. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; He ascended into heaven he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right and is seated at the right hand of the Father. hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the He will come again in glory to living and the dead. judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end An Introduction to the Apostles’ Creed 5 The Apostles’ Creed The Nicene Creed I believe in the Holy Spirit, We believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the Lord, the giver of Life, the communion of saints, who proceeds from the the forgiveness of sins, Father and the Son.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nicene Creed: the Niceno- the Apostles’ Creed: Caesarea: Constantinopolitan Creed
    Jonathan J. Armstrong, Ph.D. Moody Bible Institute The Creed of Eusebius of The Nicene Creed: The Niceno- The Apostles’ Creed: Caesarea: Constantinopolitan Creed: We believe in one only God, We believe in one God, the We believe in one God, the I believe in God the Father Father almighty, maker of all things Father almighty, creator of things Father almighty, maker of heaven almighty, maker of heaven and earth; visible and invisible; and earth, and of all things visible And in Jesus Christ his only Son visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the and invisible; our Lord, who was conceived by the And in the Lord Jesus Christ, for he Son of God, the only-begotten of his And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, is the Word of God, God of God, light Father, of the substance of the only begotten Son of God, begotten of light, life of life, his only Son, the Father, God of God, light of light, of his Father before all worlds, light suffered under Pontius Pilate, was first-born of all creatures, begotten very God of very God, begotten, not of light, very God of very God, crucified, dead, and buried; he of the Father before all time, by made, being of one substance begotten not made, being of one descended into hell; the third day he (ὁμοούσιον) with the Father, by whom also everything was created, substance with the Father, by whom rose again from the dead; he whom all things were made, both all things were made, who for us men who became flesh for our ascended into heaven, and sits on which be in heaven and in earth, who and for our salvation came down the right hand of God the Father redemption, who lived and suffered for us men and for our salvation from heaven and was incarnate by among men, rose again the third day, came down from heaven and was the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, almighty; from thence he shall come returned to the Father, and will come incarnate and was made man.
    [Show full text]
  • How Can Original Sin Be Inherited?
    DEAR FATHER KERPER Michelangelo, The Fall and Expulsion from Garden of Eden. Web Gallery of Art sinned against obedience. But this act How can original represents much more: they actually rejected friendship with God and, even worse, attempted to supplant God as God. sin be inherited? To see this more clearly, we must rewind the Genesis tape back to chapter ear Father Kerper: I’ve always had a huge 1. Here we find that God had created problem with original sin. It seems so unfair. I can the first human beings “in the image of God.” (Genesis 1:27) As such, they understand punishing someone who has broken a immediately enjoyed friendship and law. That’s perfectly just. But why should someone even kinship with God, who had Dwho’s done nothing wrong get punished for what someone else lovingly created them so that they could share everything with Him. did millions of years ago? Though Adam and Eve had everything that human beings could Many people share your understandable In the case of speeding, the possibly enjoy, the serpent tempted reaction against the doctrine of original punishment – say a $200 ticket – is them to seek even more. Recall the sin. As you’ve expressed so well, it does always imposed directly on the specific serpent’s words to Eve: “God knows in indeed seem to violate the basic norms of person who committed an isolated fact that the day you eat it [the forbidden fairness. But it really doesn’t. How so? illegal act. Moreover, the punishment is fruit] your eyes will be opened and you To overcome this charge of unfairness, designed to prevent dangerous and illegal will be like gods.” (Genesis 3:5) we must do two things: first, reconsider behavior by creating terribly unpleasant By eating the forbidden fruit, Adam the meaning of punishment; and second, consequences, namely costly fines and and Eve attempted to seize equality rediscover the social nature – and social eventually the loss of one’s license.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gates of Hell Matthew 16:13-20 Before the Pandemic Altered Our
    The Gates of Hell said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Simon Peter Matthew 16:13-20 replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! Before the pandemic altered our lives we used to turn and For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my greet one another right before the first hymn. Some would Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and even be so bold as to cross the center aisle to shake hands on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell with someone on the other side. shall not prevail against it. It’s a nice thing to do, but also has its roots in Matthew 5. It All of us have used a gate. We know what they are for. They says there: [I]f you are offering your gift at the altar and open allow us to pass through. They close to keep us in or there remember that your brother has something against out. I use the one in my back yard frequently. I open it to get you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be to the garden. I close it to keep Ruby inside the fence. The reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gates at Backbone stand open spring, summer, and fall. But gift. (22-23) in the winter they are close. You can’t get in with your car.
    [Show full text]
  • ORIGINAL SIN, INFANT SALVATION, and the BAPTISM of INFANTS —A Critique of Some Contemporary Baptist Authors—
    MJT 12 (2001) 47-79 ORIGINAL SIN, INFANT SALVATION, AND THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS —A Critique of Some Contemporary Baptist Authors— by J. Mark Beach Introduction IN REFORMED THINKING the covenant of grace forms the basis for the practice of infant baptism. This practice, however, has been much contested within Protestant theology, causing the mercury on the theological thermometer to rise from time to time. Heated polemics, of course, are not foreign to the topic of infant baptism. Countless articles, treatises, books, and pamphlets have been written in favor of and in opposition to the baptism of infants. Certainly theologians and scholars have not lacked resolve and conviction regarding this subject; nonetheless, no unanimity has resulted as a consequence of nearly half a millennium of polemics. Proponents from each side of the debate have been unable to achieve a consensus among Protestants regarding the proper subjects of baptism. The issue remains a cause for division. Thus, after nearly five hundred years of debate, some theologians are pleading for a truce within the evangelical church. Wayne Grudem, for example, while himself arguing vigorously for believer’s baptism, does not think baptism ought to be a point of division among churches. He suggests that paedobaptists and advocates of believer’s baptism jointly acknowledge that “baptism is not a major doctrine of the faith.” Grudem recognizes that this would require concessions on the part of 48 • MID-AMERICA JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY Baptists and paedobaptists alike so that both views of baptism could be “taught and practiced” in their respective churches. 1 Grudem’s suggestion comes, as noted above, after he has waged his own polemic against infant baptism.
    [Show full text]
  • Temple Symbolism in the Conflict of Adam and Eve
    Studia Antiqua Volume 2 | Number 2 Article 7 February 2003 Temple Symbolism in The onflicC t of Adam and Eve Duane Wilson Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/studiaantiqua Part of the Biblical Studies Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Wilson, Duane. "Temple Symbolism in The onflC ict of Adam and Eve." Studia Antiqua 2, no. 2 (2003). http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/studiaantiqua/vol2/iss2/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the All Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Studia Antiqua by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Temple Symbolism in The Conflict of Adam and Eve Duane Wilson The Conflict of Adam and Eve is a fascinating pseudepigraphic work that tells the story of the couple after they are cast out of the Garden of Eden. After they left the garden, God commanded them to live in a cave called the Cave of Treasures. This paper explores the function of the Cave of Treasures as a temple to Adam and Eve. Some of the aspects of temple worship discussed include the gar- ment, the use of tokens, and aspects of prayer and revelation. The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan is a pseudepigraphic work of unknown authorship that was written in Arabic between the seventh and ninth centuries a.d.1 It was later translated into Ethiopic. The text is divided into three parts, the first of which contains a lengthy story about Adam and Eve after they were cast out of the Garden of Eden.
    [Show full text]
  • Does Ezekiel 28:11–19 Affirm the Fall of Satan in Genesis 1:1–2 As Claimed in the Gap Theory?
    VIEWPOINT || JOURNAL OF CREATION 32(3) 2018 Does Ezekiel 28:11–19 affirm the fall of Satan in Genesis 1:1–2 as claimed in the gap theory? Joel Tay and KeeFui Kon The gap theory claims that Ezekiel 28:11–19 and Isaiah 14:12–15 refer to the fall of Satan in the mineral Garden of Eden before Creation Week. This event is said to have occurred in between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. Gap proponents are intimidated by secular geologists who claim that the earth is billions of years old. By inserting billions of years between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, gap proponents assume that this allows them to reconcile Scripture with the idea of long ages. This paper demonstrates that the passage in Ezekiel 28 cannot relate to this supposed time gap even if the passage refers to the fall of Satan. If the text is understood as a reference to the fall of Satan, we would still be required to interpret the timing of Satan’s fall as an event that occurred after the sixth day of creation, and the final judgment of Satan is reserved for fire rather than water. We show that the gap theory is an extrabiblical and artificial construct that has been imposed upon the text of Genesis 1:1–2, and that Ezekiel 28 is actually problematic for the gap theory. ap theory claims that there was a previous earth that was 5. God destroyed the earth and everything in it with a Gcreated and then destroyed billions of years ago because worldwide Flood that produced the fossils and rock layers of the rebellion of Lucifer.
    [Show full text]