Creation
2. What do you think of the Gap-theory? |
Before I
answer your question, I would like to say something about the origin of this
theory and to explain what this theory affirms, so that all those who have
never heard of it may understand what this theory affirms and my answer. The
paternity of this theory, which is often called gap-theory, belongs above all
to a Scottish preacher called Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847), who tried to
reconcile the book of Genesis with the new discoveries concerning the age of
the earth. This theory is very widespread even among Pentecostal Churches.
For instance, the Italian Assemblies of God (ADI, which stands for Assemblee
di Dio in Italia) teaches it. What does this theory affirm? In order to
explain what it affirms I am going to quote part of an article written by
Francesco Toppi, pastor of an ADI’s Church, which appeared in 1988 on the
fortnightly magazine ‘Cristiani Oggi’ [Christians Today], which is one of the
official magazines published by the above mentioned denomination. Here are
the words of Francesco Toppi: ‘In the
beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless
and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was
hovering over the waters’ (Genesis 1:1-2 - NIV). Genesis 1:1 ‘In the
beginning God created the heavens and the earth’ does not describe the first
step of the creation, it does not refer to the creation of the formless
matter out of nothing but to a perfect creation: “The heavens and the earth”
(….) This original physical creation is complete in itself, like all the
things that God creates, even though we don’t know the details of this first
creation (….) Genesis 1:2 would be the result of a destruction, of a
catastrophe and implies a result of an episode of the ‘protohistory’ of the
universe. This first original creation of Genesis 1:1 was followed by an
indeterminate period of time, to which can correspond all the geological eras
of billions of years nowadays settled through radiometric instruments (….)
the great cataclysm that left the earth “formless and empty and darkness was
over the surface of the deep” must have been an event of cosmic importance
and thus it can refer only to the rebellion of Satan, to his expulsion from
heaven and to his fall from heaven to the earth: (…) therefore Genesis 1:3-31
describes the ‘re-creation’ during which the Creator reconstructed from the
formless matter of the original creation existing before the adamic creation’
(Cristiani Oggi, 1988, n° 4, page 2 – Translated by myself). This
interpretation ‘allows us to state that the Bible does not contradict
science’ (Ibid., page 2). To sum up, first there was the perfect creation
made by God; however, because of the fall of Satan from heaven, that creation
became formless and void, so God had to remake it. Therefore the six days of
creation actually were not days of creation but days of re-creation or
restoration. Between verse 1 and verse 2 of the first chapter of the book of Genesis
we can calmly place the various geological eras of billions of years the
scientists speak about! |
Now, as
things are, I must say with all boldness that in my judgement the gap-theory
is a false doctrine. I have come to this conclusion, after a careful
examination of the Scripture, for the following reasons. |
If things
were as the proponents of the gap-theory say, the Scripture would be broken
for these reasons. First of all, that would mean that the things about which
the first chapter of the book of Genesis speaks are things which were remade
by God, therefore we should no longer speak of a creation but of a
re-creation. Whereas the Scripture, referring to the events of the first
chapter of Genesis, speaks continually of creation. For after God rested from
His work on the seventh day, the Scripture says: “This is the history of the
heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God
made the earth and the heavens” (Genesis 2:4 – NKJV). God Himself, when He
commanded the Israelites to remember the seventh day to keep it holy, said to
them: “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that
in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the
sabbath day, and hallowed it” (Exodus 20:11). Is it not enough clear that
there were no other creation-days before the six creation-days? If the first
day was not the one described in verse 3 because there had been a first day
billions of years before, why does the Scripture say “so the evening and the
morning were the first day” (Genesis 1:5), “were the second day” (1:8), “were
the third day” (1:13) and so on? What then would these expressions mean?
Don’t you think that we would implicitly acknowledge that in the book of
Genesis there are some lies? |
Let us talk
about man now. If this theory were true, we should come to the conclusion
that Adam was not the first man: why? Because if “in the beginning God
created the heavens and the earth” meant that God made a perfect creation
which afterward was destroyed by the fall of Satan from heaven, that would
mean that at that time God had created also man and woman on the earth since
that creation would have been imperfect without the creation of the human
being. Therefore, before Adam there would have been other human beings on the
earth, that is to say, there would have been other human beings before the
earth became formless and empty. But this is not possible because the
Scripture calls Adam the first man, as Paul says to the Corinthians: “The
first man Adam became a living being” (1 Corinthians |
How can we
explain then the fact that in the book of Genesis it is written that the
earth was formless and empty (this passage, according to the proponents of
the gap-theory, support their thesis)? We explain it in this way: when God
created the earth it did not have the form it has now, but it was formless.
Therefore the earth did not become formless but at the beginning of the
creation it was made formless by God and afterward God formed it. For you
should keep in mind that at the beginning the continents were not visible as
they are now because they were submerged (underwater) as it is written that
on the third day God said: “Let the waters under the heaven be gathered
together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so” (Genesis
1:9). And the words of the Psalmist are in agreement with this, as it is
written: “You covered it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood
above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled; at the voice of Your thunder
they hastened away. They went up over the mountains; they went down into the
valleys, to the place which You founded for them” (Psalm 104:6-8 - NKJV).
Therefore when we read that at the beginning the earth was formless we have
to bear in mind that the earth had not yet risen out of water, in that it
rose out of water on the third day as Peter says: “By God’s word the heavens
existed and the earth was formed out of water and with water” - 2 Peter 3:5
NIV). Furthermore, the earth was empty because we know that the plants, the
animals and man, were made by God on the third day (plants) and on the sixth
day (animals and man). That’s why the Scripture states that the earth was
empty and not only formless. Therefore we must not be surprised to read that
the earth was empty. |
We can say
a similar thing also about man, because man did not take immediately the form
he has now because the Scripture says that “the Lord God formed man of the
dust of the ground” (Genesis 2:7). The expression ‘the Lord God formed man’
implies that at the beginning he was formless and afterward he took the form
that God had determined (we don’t know how long the formation of man lasted,
anyway it took place during a day of 24 hours, I mean it might have lasted 5
seconds or 5 minutes or 15 minutes or 1 hour or 2 hours, etc.; we can say
that the formation of man took place between the morning and the evening of
the sixth day). That’s not a strange thing because even the baby who is going
to be born, before taking the form he will have when his mother gives birth
to him, at the beginning was formless and has undergone a process of
formation which in this case lasted several months. When David said: “Your
eyes saw my unformed body” (Psalm 139:16 - NIV) did he not mean that at the
beginning his body was unformed (or shapeless)? Please note that everything
is the work of God because David said to God: “For you created my inmost
being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb” (Psalm 139:13 – NIV) and Job
said: “Your hands shaped me and made me” (Job 10:8 – NIV). However, when the
hands of God began to form man he was not only shapeless but also empty
because there was no life in him. It was when God finished forming his body
that He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living
soul (Genesis 2:7). Therefore, that’s the way God works, but unfortunately His
way of working things, so clearly described in the Scripture, has been
darkened by the above theory, which is nothing but an idea that sprang from a
wrong interpretation given to the words “was formless and empty”. However, it
is an idea that while on the one hand is inconsistent with the teaching of
the Scripture concerning the creation, on the other hand it builds a sort of
bridge between science and the book of Genesis because somehow it confirms
that the geological eras of the scientists – which we don’t accept at all –
actually can be placed in the book of Genesis. In other words, this theory
sprang from the need to reconcile science and Scripture. And the damage
caused by it is evident. Know this, brother, that many believers, wanting to reconcile
the untrue theories of science with the truth of the Scripture, have wandered
from the truth! So, brother, do not give heed to this human science which has
deceived many believers and caused them to err from the truth: hold fast the
things which are written in the Bible as they are without trying to give
logical or scientific explanation to the things which are incomprehensible in
your eyes. |