Similarities Between The Day-Age Theory And The Gap Theory Of Evolution

Many assume that it is the theory of evolution that alone stands as the nemesis of Biblical creation. And it is true; evolution does stand in sharp contrast and contradiction to the claims of Genesis, heading a vast and dogmatic attack against the faith required to observe creation; but, it is not alone, for it heads a pack of other, thoroughly disguised and deceptively poisonous theories. Regardless of the success of evolutionary teaching, it is the moderate and compromising ideas that truly breakdown the unity of believers. Moses, trained in all the wisdom of his day, could have given any number of stories to suffice as the one representing the beginning of the world and all life in it. He, however, chose to ignore the primeval gods of Egypt and Babylon that would have permeated the educated world in which he was instructed. He didn't dabble in mythology, but he didn't toil with science either. He gave the facts that he knew; he gave no excuses or explanations, and from those, the reader could decide whether
These are both used to compensate for the time necessary for evolutionary processes to successfully transpire. It is the age of earth that often divides scientists and believers so these theories are used to satisfy the needs of both factions. In the day-age theory, the days mentioned during the creation week are assumed to actually refer to "epochs, or ages, or vast periods of time," "not… literal days of twenty-four hours." The gap theory is similar in that it espouses the idea that "[b]etween the first and second verses of Genesis…[is] a gap of countless ages…ending with the Glacial age said to be described in Genesis 1:2." Consequently, everything beyond verse two of Genesis chapter one tells the story of a re-habitation rather than an original creation. Both of these theories are meant as a way to reconcile geological evidence that seemingly supports an old