@FrankLuke I believe the main issue for "Gap Theory" proponents is the language 'suggests' the intent that "God doesn't leave anything void", THEREFORE, the 'Gap' explains a previous unknown world in which dinosaurs, Cro-Magnon man, and fossilized records 'fit' into a pre-creation world. It's an attempt for 'science' to be reconciled with biblical fundamentalism, and supposedly 'each side wins'.

@FrankLuke (Cont.) However, when those with some 'hermeneutical/exegetical' expertise begin to pick away at whether or not God's 'intent' allows for this 'previous' creation, then it becomes a pure fabrication, not supported by any valid text. You can believe it if you want to, you just can't validly support it(IMO).

@AJHenderson Have you heard of an incident where windows won't allow someone with sufficient rep to post comments-yet they can give answers? I'm suspicious of my browser(IE), but before I tear into it, I want to make sure it isn't some SE quirk.

amazon.com/Biblical-Hebrew-Beginners-Paul-Eickmann/dp/…

^^^ Hey @Davïd @FrankLuke I found a Spanish translation of this book in a free download. I found it quite handy. :)

@JonEricson I'm trying to provoke a discussion on optional syntax for CommonMark, I thought you and @Davïd might be interested in the thread - if something like this is adopted I think there is a much higher chance of eventual adoption of table or footnote syntax on SE as I doubt they'll adopt clumsy namespaces or anything that isn't in the CommonMark spec.

@JackDouglas I was going to ask where in the world CommonMark came from and what it has to do with the price of fish in China when Standard Markdown was the current Big Thing™, but apparently I've been under a rock for a couple days.

@Caleb To be fair, you would only have had to be under that rock for a couple hours. Or possibly minutes.

@Davïd I did have a little trouble finding out what was up because my first attempt to search for clues used DuckDuckGo and the new content hasn't hit their index yet. Google was a bit more helpful in that it got me to the blog post Jeff did about the rename.

@PaulVargas youtube.com/watch?v=JDXae5sz068

@user2479 no, that's pretty weird

@Susan, my response to the gap theory is almost ready. If someone wants to re-ask the question, I can post soon.

@FrankLuke @Susan I would be happy to ask the question - but the "dodgy" one is still active on the site. I could continue Scott's edit work - but I wonder what our "orignal OP" would think about what has happened to "his" question... Thoughts?

@Davïd I think the consensus has been that a new question should be asked, so go for it! This prevents the old OP from being prompted to voice any opinion about it frees you from any theoretical obligation to respect his voice.

@Davïd The OP has not signed into the site since that frenzy of quarrelsome additions to his post, and he made it clear that he had no further interest in this site.

@Susan @JackDouglas I have a little doubt ... Does it have some effect the VtR over the VtD?

There is a vote to reopen the question.

I can only see the following options in the question: share | edit | reopen(1) | flag

There @PaulVargas, but please keep in mind that chatflags should only be used for cases of moderation, not help with editing a message ;)

Like offensive stuff and whatnot.

@Undo No problem. Thank you very much. ;)

you're welcome ;)

@Susan I'm putting one together now. My inclination is to frame it with respect to linguistic evidence -- although I'm not sure that will give scope for everything that @FrankLuke has to offer. :) The new Q can always be edited, of course.

@Davïd personally, I'm also most interested in linguistic considerations, and I think that's probably the aspect of this that our site is best equipped to handle, both in terms of subject matter and appropriate scope.

@Susan Sounds like convergence to me, then. :) I'll ping here when I'm done.

@Davïd There's quite a bit of other stuff over on C.SE, but the only question remotely addressing the linguistics ("does היתה mean 'became'?") doesn't elicit an answer that provides much explanation

@Davïd I've been sticking almost completely with the grammar in my examination. The only exception I can think of is when I chastise Custance for quoting Zohar as an authentic 1st century source without even thinking about considering he should acknowledge that the scholarly work shows it to be a forgery. And that challenge to authenticity has been there since Zohar was first published in the 13th century.

@FrankLuke That's a help - I'll try to make the Q both "informative" and "inviting" ... as I say, though, it can be tweaked!

@FrankLuke @David One of our leaders told me that he thought that the Earth was repaired. He gets that conclusion from Isaiah 45:18 (the RVR1960 says "compuso" for כֽוֹנְנָ֔הּ, perhaps a inadequate translation).

@PaulVargas @FrankLuke I think that's an "intertext" noted by the Scofield Reference Bible - the original "viral" source of biblical interpretation....

^^^ @FrankLuke - go wild. ;) @Susan @user2479 Hope that form of the question is productive.

@Susan ! Four of the top seven questions on the "active" view are on "hold"!

I take it C.SE is way more fun than BH.SE, then...

@Davïd thanks! And +1.

@Davïd Great question! ;)