Sample reading
Chapter II. The existence of a gap of time.
Gap Creationism is an ancient idea. The first theologian who thought of such an idea was St. Justin Martyr. He was born in the year 100 and coverted to Christianity in the year 130 of our Lord. He was pesecuted for his faith and was beheaded in the year 165. St. Justin Martyr supposes an indefinte period between the Creation and the first ordering of all things. This puts the idea of gap creationism 1,700 years before the scientific data of geology gave it credibility.
Another great theologian and philosopher that believed in gap creationism was St. Augustine of Hippo. He was born in the year 354 and died in 430. He believend in a considerable interval between the Creation related in the first verse of Genesis and of an account given in the third and following verses.
There is a great space of time since gap creationism was taught in our history. The reason was that many false teachings of our Lord and Savior came into existence by falsely lead believers, and much time was spent straightening out such false doctrines. Also, the Dark Ages entered into the existence of the world, and education was frowned upon.
After the Dark Ages, the gap theory was traced to a man named Simon Episcopius who was born in 1583 and died in 1643, and who was a theologian and scholar of his time. In the works of Episcopius, the gap theory of creationism show up in more detail. Thus, the gap theory of the old-earth theory predates the present-day geology by 200 years.
The gap theory has been portrayed as an attempt to change the Word of God as a way to appease the scientific discoveries. Scientist have gotten its idea of an age-old universe from ministers of the Word of God years before geological evidence came into existence. How is it possible then to claim that the gap theory compromises the Word of God? Also, present-day evolution was not coined until after the writings of Charles Darwin. By the way, Charles Darwin was a minister of the Word of God who graduated in the top ten of his theology class. Some major changes were made to his work for approval by the unbelieving scientists of the time. Darwin believed in God as the creator of the universe.
Charles Darwin has been misunderstood by both religion and science. His teaching have been misrepresented by science and condemned by most believers in God when it ought not to be the case. The word evolution is not even in his writings, but some geologist insist that we come from apes. It is a historical fact that many modern-day geologist believe in evolution, but the early geologist were Christians, and they believed in a vast amount of years for the Creation to occur. Evolutionists have taken the geological evidence and twisted these facts to promote evolution of the species. No such evidence is seen in geological formations.
Rev. Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847), a mathematician and a respected minister, was a leader in the Free Church of Scotland. Thomas Chalmers became one of the most popular preacher of his time. He taught the gap theory, and it was accepted by many. Rev. Thomas Chalmers, in a review of Cuvier's Theory of the Earth, taught that there was a vast period for the formation of the geological ages and the organic ages to have occurred after Genesis 1 when God created out of nothingness. Genesis 1:2 was a period, which life became void and formless; and the sun, the moon, and the stars were temporarily extingushed. Genesis 1:3 was to be preserved as the natural twenty-four-hour periods and the restoration of the old heavens and the earth.
Science in this author's opinion has made a terrible mistake. They have taken the fact of the geological ages, the fossils of vegetable and applied those fossils to the idea that man must have developed just the same way without any fossils of man evolving from apes. Man was made in the image of God so he could have not evolved from apes, your are implying that God himself has evolved, for man was made in his image. Man was far more superior to the plants or beasts of the field.
Dr. John Pye-Smith (1774-1851), who was a good acquaintance of Thomas Chalmers, had almost the same view as Rev. Chalmers. In the Congregational Lecture Sixth Series, Scripture and Geology in 1840, he gives a brilliant defense of the gap theory of creation and a scholarly offence for the promotion of that theory. This man's credibility was attacked by ignorant believers in God and also by geologists.He wrote more extensively on the subject of gap creationism than most others who believed in this gap theory.
Rev. Denis Crofton was another advocate for the gap theory of creation. In his book Genesis and Geology printed in 1853, he gives many scriptures on the gap theory and biblically defends the theory with boldness and brilliance. There were many other ministers that defended such a theory. Yet many evangelical Christians tell us that they all changed their minds about the gap theory of creation, which simply is not true. This is a misrepresentation of the historical fact of the gap theory of creation.
Rev. William Buckland was the first to read rock formations and the first to find a lizard that was considered a dinosaur. He was the first to find a complete skeleton that predates Adam. He believed that it was the minister's duty to study what the creator has created and to learn more about God. In 1820, he published a book The Connection of Geology with Religion explained. William Buckland believed in a gap-theory catastrophe. In 1823, he published a book Observations on the Organic Remains Contained in Caves, Fissures, and diluvial Gravel and Other Geological Phenomena, Attesting the Action of a Universal Deluge. When you read this book, you can see the subtleties against the young-earth concept.
Other geologists agreed with the age-old theory of creation. Hugh Miller in his 1857 book The Testimony of the Rocks states both sides of the issue of young-earth and old-earth theory of Creation. He personally makes a stand for the old-age earth theory though it is different than gap creationism, and it is stated in this book although we are told that he believed otherwise.
Also, reverend and professor of geology, Edward Hitchcock defends the concept of the old-age earth and gap creationism with scripture and geology. In his 1851 book Religion of Geology and Its Connected Sciences, he clearly states the gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. The list continues to grow while I do my research and buy rare book on the gap theory of creation. These are just a gew of the major players in the old-earth concept. Why do we not teach this concept anymore and pretend that the great minds of Christians from the past are insignificant?
These are just a few prominent individuals that believed in the gap theory of creation. Creationists have labeled them as compromisers of the Word of God. Compromisers believe in scientific evidences in geology and say that the world is old, and the scriptures do support those ideas, Creationists believe in a literal six-day Creation and believe the universe is no older than 10,000 years and say the scriptures do not support the universe as being old. Therefore, creationists have given those that believe in the gap theory of creation a negative label to discourage others from believing in the same way as gap creationist.
Our best expositors of scripture, says Rev. David King of Glasgow, seem to be now pretty generally agreed, that the opening verse in Genesis has no connection with the verses that follow. They think it may be understood as making a separate and independent state ment regarding the creation proper, and that the phrase in the beginning may be expressive of an indefinitely remote antiquity. On this principle the Bible recognizes, in the first instance, the great age of the earth, and then tells us of the changes it underwent at a period long subsequent, in order to render it a fit abode for the family of man. The work of the six days was not, according to this view, a creation in the strict sense of the term, but a renovation, a remodeling of preexisting materials. (Principles of Geology Explained and Viewed in Their Relations to Revealed and Natural Religion first edition p. 40)