[_ Old Earth _] What Is The Gap Theory

[Lewis]

Many people have tried to place a gap of indeterminate time between the first two verses of Genesis chapter 1. There are many different versions as to what supposedly happened in this "gap" of time. Most versions of the "gap" theory place millions of years of geologic time (including billions of fossil animals) in between these two first verses of Genesis. This is the "ruin-reconstruction" version of the gap theory.

However, this undermines the gospel as it allows for death, bloodshed, disease, and suffering before Adam's sin. Because most "ruin-reconstruction" theorists have accepted the millions of years dating for the fossil record, they have thus allowed the fallible theories of scientists to determine the meaning of Scripture.

Some put the fall of Satan in this supposed period. But any rebellion of Satan during this gap of time contradicts God's description of His completed creation on day six as all being "very good" (Genesis 1:31).

All versions of the gap theory impose outside ideas on Scripture and thus open the door for further compromise.

These are the verses where there is supposed to be a gap:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was without form, and empty; and the darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters (Genesis 1:1-2).


Where did the "gap theory" come from?

There have been many attempts over the years to harmonize the Genesis account of creation with accepted geology (and its teaching of billions of years for the age of the earth), such as "theistic evolution" and "progressive creation."

The gap theory was another significant attempt by Christian theologians to reconcile the time scale of world history found in Genesis with the popular belief that geologists provide "undeniable" evidence that the world is exceedingly old (billions of years).

Thomas Chalmers (Courtesy of Eden Communications).
Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847), a notable Scottish theologian and first moderator of the Free Church of Scotland, was perhaps the man most responsible for the gap theory.[1] The idea can be traced back to the rather obscure writings of the Dutchman Episcopius (1583-1643), and was first recorded from one of Chalmers' lectures in 1814.[2] Rev. William Buckland, a geologist, did much to popularize the idea.

Although Chalmers' writings give very little information about the gap theory,[3] many of the details are obtained from other writers such as the 19th century geologist Hugh Miller, who quoted from Chalmers' lectures on the subject.[4]

This ruin-reconstruction view is held by many who use Bible study aids such as the Scofield Reference Bible, Dake's Annotated Reference Bible, and The Newberry Reference Bible.

The most notably influential 19th century writer to popularize this view was G.H. Pember, in his book Earth's Earliest Ages,[5] first published in 1884. Numerous editions of this work were published, with the 15th edition appearing in 1942.[6]

The 20th century writer who published the most academic defense of the gap theory was Arthur C. Custance in his work Without Form and Void.[7]

The basic reason for developing and promoting the gap theory can be seen from the following very telling quotes:

Scofield Study Bible: Relegate fossils to the primitive creation, and no conflict of science with the Genesis cosmogony remains.[8]

Dake's Annotated Reference Bible: When men finally agree on the age of the earth, then place the many years (over the historical 6,000) between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, there will be no conflict between the Book of Genesis and science.[9]


The above quotes are typical of the many compromise positions -- accepting so-called "science"[10] and its long ages for the earth, and incorporating this into Scripture.

A Testimony of Struggle

Geologic strata (photo copyrighted) (Courtesy of Eden Communications).
Pember's struggle with long "geologic ages" has been the struggle of many Christians, ever since the idea of millions of years for the fossil record became popular in the early 19th century. Many respected Christian leaders of today wrestle with this same issue.

Recounting Pember's struggle helps us understand the implications of the gap theory. The following is based on or quoted from his book Earth's Earliest Ages.

Pember, like today's conservative Christians, defended the authority of Scripture. He was adamant that one had to start from Scripture alone, and not bring preconceived ideas to Scripture, thus changing its meaning. He boldly chastened people who came to the Bible "filled with myths, philosophies, and prejudices, which they could not altogether throw off, but retained, in part at least, and mingled -- quite unwillingly, perhaps -- with the truth of God" (page 5). He describes how the Church is weakened when man's philosophies are used to interpret God's Word:

For, by skillfully blending their own systems with the truths of Scripture, they so bewildered the minds of the multitude that but few retained the power of distinguishing the revelation of God from the craftily interwoven teachings of men (page 7).

And the result is that inconsistent and unsound interpretations have been handed down from generation to generation, and received as if they were integral parts of the Scriptures themselves; while any texts which seemed violently opposed were allegorized, spiritualized, or explained away, till they ceased to be troublesome, or perchance, were even made subservient (page 8).


He then warns Christians:

For, if we be observant and honest, we must often ourselves feel the difficulty of approaching the sacred writings without bias, seeing that we bring with us a number of stereotyped ideas, which we have received as absolutely certain, and never think of testing, but only seek to confirm.[11]


What happened with Pember should warn us that no matter how great a theologian we may be, or how respected and knowledgeable a Christian leader, as finite sinful human beings we cannot easily empty ourselves of preconceived ideas. We see that Pember did exactly what he preached against, and did not realize it. Such is the ingrained nature of the "long ages" issue. He did not want to question Scripture (he accepted the six literal days of creation), but he did not question the long ages either (perhaps he just took the word of Chalmers, who was a highly respected Christian). So he struggled with what to do. Many of today's respected Christian leaders show the same struggle in their commentaries as they then capitulate to "progressive creation" or even "theistic evolution."[12]

Fossil graveyard. Photo by Paul S. Taylor. Copyright, Eden Communications.
Pember recognized that a fossil record of death, decay, and disease before sin was totally inconsistent with the Bible's teaching:

For, as the fossil remains clearly show not only were disease and death -- inseparable companions of sin -- then prevalent among the living creatures of the earth, but even ferocity and slaughter.

He understood there could be no carnivores before sin:

On the Sixth Day God pronounced every thing which He had made to be very good, a declaration which would seem altogether inconsistent with the present condition of the animal as well as the vegetable kingdom. Again: He gave the green herb alone for food "to every beast of the field, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth." There were, therefore, no carnivora in the sinless world (page 35).

Pember taught from Isaiah that the earth will be restored to what it was like at first. There will be no more death, disease, or carnivorous activity. However, because he had accepted the long ages for the fossil record, what was he to do with all this death, disease, and destruction in the record?

Since, then, the fossil remains are those of creatures anterior to Adam, and yet show evident tokens of disease, death, and mutual destruction, they must have belonged to another world, and have a sin-stained history of their own (page 35).

Thus, in trying to reconcile the long ages with Scripture, Pember justifies the gap theory:

There is room for any length of time between the first and second verses of the Bible. And again; since we have no inspired account of geological formations, we are at liberty to believe that they were developed just in the order which we find them. The whole process took place in pre-Adamite times, in connection, perhaps, with another race of beings, and, consequently, does not at present concern us (page 28).

With this background, let us consider this gap theory in detail. Basically, this theory incorporates three strands of thought:

1. A literal view of Genesis.
2. Belief in an extremely long but unidentified age for the earth.
3. An obligation to fit the origin of most of the geologic strata and other geologic evidence between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. Gap theorists oppose evolution, but believe in an ancient origin of the universe.

There are many variations of the gap theory. According to Fields, the theory can be summarized as follows:

In the far distant dateless past, God created a perfect heaven and perfect earth. Satan was ruler of the earth which was peopled by a race of "men" without any souls. Eventually, Satan, who dwelled in a garden of Eden composed of minerals (Ezekiel 28), rebelled by desiring to become like God (Isaiah 14). Because of Satan's fall, sin entered the universe and brought on the earth God's judgment in the form of a flood (indicated by the water of 1:2), and then a global ice age when the light and heat from the sun were somehow removed.
Fossil teeth (photo copyrighted) (Courtesy of Eden Communications).
All the plant, animal, and human fossils upon the earth today date from this "Lucifer's flood" and do not bear any genetic relationship with the plants, animals, and fossils living upon the earth today.[13]

Some versions of the gap theory state that the fossil record (geologic column) formed over millions of years, and then God destroyed the earth with a catastrophe (Lucifer's flood) that left it "without form and void."

Western Bible commentaries written before the 18th century, and before the belief in a long age for the earth became popular, knew nothing of any gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. Certainly some commentaries proposed intervals of various lengths of time for reasons relating to Satan's fall,[14] but none proposed a "ruin-reconstruction" situation, or pre-Adamite world.

In the 19th century, it became popular to believe that the geological changes occurred slowly, and roughly at the present rate (uniformitarianism[15]). With increased acceptance of uniformitarianism, many theologians urged reinterpretation of Genesis (with ideas such as day-age, "progressive" creation, theistic evolution, days-of-revelation, etc. - see Six Days? Honestly!).

 

[Lewis]

Problems with the Gap Theory
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/a ... blems.html

 

[Quath]

If there was a Garden of Eden, there had to be death or no animal ate food, even alive plants. Animals could not shed skin because their cells would die. I once heard that if yeast was not constrained by death and nutrition, it could reproduce enough to cover the Earth in a day.

The only way out is some kind of magic. If you want to use magic as a basis for belief, then you have to go no further and don't need to look at evidence. Whatever is shown to you, just say that God used magic to do that.

With magic I can make up any belief and support it.

Quath

 

[ikester7579]

As far as applying the gap theory to the word, one has to remember that anything beyond a day was not created until the sun, moon, and stars were created. So a certain span of time is implied before that time span was created.

Gap theory is applied to day one. Sun, moon, and stars are not created until day 4. And it was the creation of these objects that supplied the time span for seasons and years.

 

[peace4all]

I never understood how peopel cna have an answer, and THEN try to make proof for it..... Instead of using proof and logic and your surroundings to formulate an answer.

 

[Lewis]

I never understood how peopel cna have an answer, and THEN try to make proof for it..... Instead of using proof and logic and your surroundings to formulate an answer.

Spoken like a true secularist.

 

[ikester7579]

If there was a Garden of Eden, there had to be death or no animal ate food, even alive plants. Animals could not shed skin because their cells would die. I once heard that if yeast was not constrained by death and nutrition, it could reproduce enough to cover the Earth in a day.

The only way out is some kind of magic. If you want to use magic as a basis for belief, then you have to go no further and don't need to look at evidence. Whatever is shown to you, just say that God used magic to do that.

With magic I can make up any belief and support it.

Quath

So are you saying that God uses magic? Which by the way connects God to using witchcraft. Because God does have power to create something from nothing. And it's not magic. So would you like to provide verses where it says God uses magic to create?

Or do you have a problem with the "God did it" phrase?

 

[Quath]

So are you saying that God uses magic? Which by the way connects God to using witchcraft. Because God does have power to create something from nothing. And it's not magic. So would you like to provide verses where it says God uses magic to create?

Or do you have a problem with the "God did it" phrase?

I am saying "magic" in the sense that natural laws that we observe are broken or ignored. For example, if cells did not die or animals did not eat, where did they get the energy to move? If God snapped his fingers and it all worked, then I would say it is magic. Or God could engineer everything to photosenthesize light and moved the sun closer and created extra heat fins to cool the earth..... However, it gets overly complicated and doesn't sound right.

"God did it" is alwfully close to A Wizard did it.

 

[peace4all]

Wizard!

great episode.

Everyone sits and looks at a magician, and if they don't know better, they believe he really did break the laws of physics and matter properties and life, and jsut sawed his assistant in half while hanging upside down in a straight jacket over a pool of sharks with lasers on their heads... But, when you know better, you know that there is something behind it. Steps involved, a formula, a way that it really works.

 

[ikester7579]

So are you saying that God uses magic? Which by the way connects God to using witchcraft. Because God does have power to create something from nothing. And it's not magic. So would you like to provide verses where it says God uses magic to create?

Or do you have a problem with the "God did it" phrase?

I am saying "magic" in the sense that natural laws that we observe are broken or ignored. For example, if cells did not die or animals did not eat, where did they get the energy to move? If God snapped his fingers and it all worked, then I would say it is magic. Or God could engineer everything to photosenthesize light and moved the sun closer and created extra heat fins to cool the earth..... However, it gets overly complicated and doesn't sound right.

"God did it" is alwfully close to A Wizard did it.

If this is what you truly think about God, then I would suggest you change your world view so we would understand why you said it.

So if you think what God did is witchcraft, wizzard, satanic, etc... power. As a christian, where would you get that idea from the word of God? Can you provide verses? And do you also deny all the miracles, which by your definition would be poofing stuff as well.

The miracles would include all the healings, the flood, any part of creation, Christ being able to die and rise again, Christ being able to forgive sin. In fact, all of God's word.

What does God's word say about this?

2tim 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Power=miracles whether you want to believe them or not.