A significant word in Gen 2:1 is the term "host." It says the Lord finished "all the host of them," that is of all the "heavens and the; earth." "Host" can most easily be defined and the inhabitants of a place. It can refer to physical objects like the stars in heaven (Deut 4:19; 17:3; Amos 5:26), to armies on both heaven and earth (Gen 21:22; Exo 14:4; 2Ch 18:18; Job 25:3 etc.), and also to heavenly beings such as angels and cherubim (Gen 32:2; Jos 5:14; 1Ki 22:19; Psa 103:21, 148:2; Isa 24:21; Luke 2:13).
A verse very similar to Gen 2:1 is Neh 9:6,
Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein...and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.
Here it is clear the "host of heaven" refers to the beings of heaven because they can worship the Lord. Now notice how it says the Lord made "heaven" and the "heaven of heavens, with all their host." According to Gen 1:6-8 the Lord made at least one "heaven" on the second day, so since the Scriptures do not specifically state when the Lord created the beings comprising the spiritual "host of heaven," one could surmise from Neh 9:6 creation day two was the time. The verse has the heavens and their host created before the earth which fits the Genesis account perfectly (Exo 20:11; Psa 33:6, 146:6; etc.).
Thus there is no scriptural reason not to conclude day two of creation was the "day" the Lord created the "third heaven" ("heaven of heavens"), the second heaven (named "Heaven") and all their spiritual inhabitants. (He didn't make the physical inhabitants until day four with the sun, moon, and stars). This includes the cherubim, seraphim, angels, Lucifer, morning stars, sons of God, and any other principalities that dwell there. The straightforward reading of Genesis chapter 1 and other verses that refer to the events found there lead to that conclusion.
This order of creation also fits perfectly with the order revealed directly by the Lord in Job 38:4-11. He questions Job in 38:4-5 with,
4, Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5, Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
We already know when the foundations of the earth were laid, in Gen 1:9-10 (Heb 1:10). That is where the Lord brought the dry land out of the water and named it "Earth."
Note: Gentle reader...many of you have been so influenced by some of the brethren that you still think Job 38:4 is referring to some planet called "earth" floating in space. We have showed over and over again the Bible defines the dry landmass as earth. Let the Bible define its own terms!
The earth being landmasses such as continents allows all the verses that speak of the earth having foundations (Psa 102:25, 104:5) and pillars (1Sa 2:8; Job 9:6) make sense. How does a whole planet floating in space have a foundation or pillars holding it up? Here in Job 38:4-6 the Lord is clearly referring to the dry land He brought up out of the sea. This is when He laid the earth's foundation to the sea bottom, sized it to his measurements, surveyed its lines or pillars, and placed some type of corner stone.
The foundation of the earth is now called the continental shelf. This could be the "bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars" that Jonah speaks of in Jon 2:6. As for the pillars and corner stone, man has not discovered them yet, but you can rest assured they are there.
With the "sons of God" and "morning stars" created with the firmament and heaven on creation day two, they were all available to sing together and shout for joy when the Lord brought the earth up from the chaos of the sea (Job 38:7)! It doesn't matter that they were only a day old. The Lord likely created them with massive instinct and intellectual capability as he later did with Adam.
The last major argument we will look at of the Gap Theorists is their claim that Lucifer and "his angels" were the inhabitants of their pre-Adamic earth and because of Lucifer's rebellion that earth was destroyed. Clarence Larkin describes it this way in his classic Dispensational Truth,
"The intimation in this scripture [Eze 28] then is, that Satan, with a host of angelic beings, was placed in charge of the original or primeval earth, and that he through pride (1Tim. 3:6; Isa. 14:12-14) sought to be equal with God, and that to punish him the earth was thrown into a chaotic state, and Satan and his angels, amounting to a third of the angelic hosts (Rev. 12:4) were excluded from Heaven, and took up their abode in the heavenlies...."
Larkin goes on to say about "demons,"
"...the "demons" are believed by many to be the disembodied spirits of the inhabitants of the Pre-Adamite Earth, and their efforts to reembody themselves in human beings, as in the days of Christ, is looked upon as evidence that they once possessed bodies similar to human bodies."
The Gapists have a lot of doctrine riding on their pre-Adamic earth. No wonder they strive so hard to keep it afloat.
The two passages about the "fall" of Lucifer (Isa 14; Eze 28) are inexplicit and quite ambiguous. Each one is primarily directed to a heathen king but also have overtones they speak of the spiritual power behind the kings as well. Since we agree with our Gapist brethren that these passages likely speak of Lucifer as that spiritual entity, we will only look at their contentions as to when these events occurred.
Note: Since no place in Scripture, including these passages, explicitly states Satan is referenced in these two passages, the contention that he is, is only speculation. The main reason Gapists and many Non-Gapists alike believe it likely refers to Satan is there is no other person revealed in Scripture who could fit the description...except, maybe Satan's protege—the coming Antichrist. In fact, Isaiah 14 seems to fit future events quite well.
Nevertheless, that Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 make at the best only implicit reference to Satan, that makes the Gap Theory an implicit belief based upon other implicit beliefs! The potential for error is enormous. This is NOT ground one should establish doctrine upon and to consider such a convoluted and contrived belief as FACT is an abuse of language and sign of insecurity. Facts can be proven, the Gap Theory is multiple tiers away from having proof, and insisting it is fact without this proof indicates its proponents recognize its inherent weaknesses.
Determining the time frame and sequence of events in Ezekiel 28:13-19 and Isaiah 14 is a challenge. Plus trying to determine which statements belong only to the human king and which are exclusive to Lucifer is even tougher. Your author knows of no one who has mastered it (especially when Ezekiel chapter 31 is considered). For instance, Eze 28:13 says,
Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering...the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
One can only apply these words to the human king in a highly figurative or hyperbolic manner. The king of Tyre was never in Eden, was not naturally covered with precious stones, and was not directly created with musical instruments as part of his person! Since these words cannot literally apply to the king, they must apply to the spirit behind the king before he fell.
The problem for the Gap Theorists is the words about Eden. It appears Satan was there before he fell. Genesis 2 and 3 tell us about the Garden of Eden and how Adam and Eve lived there. The garden was planted in Gen 2:8 and Adam was placed in it soon after, but since the Gap Theorists insist Lucifer fell before Gen 1:2, how could he possibly have been in Eden?
Their answer is one of the most contrived arguments of their whole system. They merely claim, without one shred of solid scriptural evidence, there must have been another Eden composed of minerals rather than plants on a previous earth! How convenient. If the Scriptures don't say what you want them to say, just invent your own facts!
This contention alone should be a "wake-up" call to any believer considering the Gap Theory. Any belief system that has to resort to such highly questionable assumptions to keep it afloat should be looked at very, very skeptically and only adopted if there is no other feasible explanation.
Note: To add even more mystery about "Eden" and the "garden of God," look at Ezekiel 31:8-9. This passage speaks about "Pharaoh king of Egypt," and the Lord said "The cedars in the garden of God could not hide him," and He made him so "fair" "that all the trees of Eden, that were in the garden of God, envied him." It could be said that in some way Pharaoh was in Eden as well!
Ezekiel 28:13 and 28:15 also contain another dilemma for the Gap Theorists - the "day" Lucifer/Satan was "created." Most Gap Theorists will rightly insist that the days of Genesis 1 are literal 24 hour days and that chapter mentions the first "day" in the Bible, but this immediately presents a problem with Eze 28:13. If Lucifer was actually created on a "day," that would put his creation AFTER Gen 1:2. So what do the Gapists do here? They simply say the Ezekiel 28 "day" is not really a typical day. They contend it is a generic usage of the word "day" that speaks of any particular period of time. Granted "day" is sometimes used this way in the Scriptures ("day of the Lord," etc.), but "day" in Eze 28:13 is the context of God creating something like He did in Genesis chapter 1. The Gap Theorists resort to a non-literal usage for "day" in this instance while in the same breath boasting about how they take each word "literally."
Another passage the Gap Theorists appeal to concerning Satan is John 8:44 (also see 1Jo 3:8),
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth..."
Their argument with this verse is since the Devil was a murderer "from the beginning" and the "beginning" is in Gen 1:1, then Satan must have fell in the "gap" which is after or "from" Gen 1:1 but before Gen 1:2. Sounds nice doesn't it, but with just a brief examination of how "beginning" is used in the Bible we learn our brethren are being disingenuous. Actually, we only need to look at one other verse with the word "beginning" in it and they will reveal their own duplicity and inconsistency! Look at Mark 10:6,
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Here we have an account of the Lord using "beginning" that is even more specific to creation than its use in John 8:44. Surely the Gap Theorists would consider this "beginning" to be the same "beginning" as the one in John 8:44 wouldn't they? Especially since this one mentions creation specifically? Uh, No. They can't have man created at the "beginning of the creation God" in Gen 1:1 because it doesn't allow for their Genesis Gap! They insist there can't be any men on Lucifer's earth. Man didn't come until the end of the "re-creation" of earth. When questioned on this they say something like, "There are many different beginnings in the Bible. This is speaking of the beginning of mankind, not the beginning of creation...," yet it says "creation right in the verse!
As we previously mentioned, the heavenly host, which includes a heavenly beings such as angels and cherubim, were likely created on day two with the firmament or Heaven. We also saw that the Lord said "every thing" he created during the six days of creation was "very good." Thus the fall of Lucifer or Satan must have occurred sometime between Gen 2:4 and 3:1.
How long a time period is between Genesis 2:4 and 3:1 is unknown. It may have been weeks, months, or even several years. Ezekiel 28 appears to state Lucifer was in Eden. It is interesting to observe that Adam was not created in Eden. The Lord planted the garden there and then "took the man" and "put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it" (Gen 2:8, 15). So Eden was not Adam's original home, and the time period between the Lord creating the garden and placing Adam there may have been the time Lucifer was there and subsequently fell (Isa 14:12-16), and all "his" fellow "spirits" with him (1Pe 3:19; Jude 1:6).
(Have you ever considered another reason why the Lord charged Adam with "dress[ing]" the garden, maybe Lucifer/Satan messed it up! Pure speculation, but an interesting thought.)
Some of the Gapists will again bring up John 8:44 at this point and say Satan was "a murderer from the beginning" and insist it must have happened in the Gap, but they are not thinking this through. If the "beginning" is the initial creation, none of them believe Lucifer/Satan was created evil so he had to have fallen sometime after the earliest "beginning;" as the text states, "from the beginning." Also, the verse says Satan was a "murderer." When did he murder anyone? Of course, it was Adam and Eve he beguiled into an act of death well after the week of creation. So it is clear the Lord is using the words "from the beginning" to encompass creation and the fall.
Although there is much more about Satan and the time of creation in general we would like to know, the scenario we presented above, in spite of its "gaps" (smile), does not violate any Scripture, and neither does it present any fanciful, dogmatic claims.
Some Gapists will quote 2 Corinthians 4:4 where Paul speaks of Satan as being the "god of this world" and claim the Devil was given dominion over the Pre-Adamic earth as a "king" or "prince," lost his dominion at his fall and expulsion, and then won it back again from Adam at Adam's fall. That Satan is now the "god of this world" is of no dispute, but again the Gapists are confounding the terms world and earth. The world in 1Co 4:4 is the worldly system of kingdoms, nations, and men. It does not refer to material earth. When Satan took the Lord on a high mountain He showed Him the "kingdoms of the world" and said,
"...All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it" (Luke 4:5-6)
So the worldly power and glory of kingdoms and nations belong to the Devil (the Lord did not dispute Satan's claim and actually called him the "prince of this world" in other places, i.e. Joh 12:31, 14:30, 16:11), but there is no indication he controls the material earth itself.
The Scriptures do not specifically tell us how or when these kingdoms were "delivered" to Satan, but it indeed may have been when Adam ate of the forbidden tree. Adam may have forfeited his "kingly" or "princely" dominion over the world to the serpent at that time. Nevertheless, even if true, that in no way even implies that Satan was "king" on a previous earth or that a previous earth even existed.