In the previous post, when we studied Genesis 1.2, I had mentioned the Gap Theory of Genesis. The first two verses of Genesis read as follows:

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.

If we treat the ages of people given in Genesis and the rest of the Pentateuch as literal solar years, we will come to the conclusion that the earth is only about 4000 years old. However, archaeology and scientific techniques such as radiocarbon dating suggest that the earth is much, much older, of the order of a few billion years old.

In order to keep a literalistic approach to the Genesis account and accord it with the scientifically accepted age of the earth, some interpreters of Genesis have suggested that there is a gap in the first two verses of Genesis. They suggest translating the verses as follow:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth became desolate and void, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. [emphasis added]

The idea is that v. 1 mentions the original creation of God. Subsequently, the original creation was marred, presumably due to Satan’s rebellion. As a result of this the earth became desolate. And then God restored creation in the six days that are mentioned in Genesis 1, drawing a distinction between בָּרָ֣א (bara) used in v. 1 and עָשָׂה (asah) used after v. 3.

One problem with this interpretation is that it reads so much into the text. There is no clear distinction between בָּרָ֣א (bara) and עָשָׂה (asah) as required by this interpretation. Moreover, there is no mention of any rebellion in relation to an original creation in the text nor anywhere else in the bible nor even in any extra-biblical document, making this an instance of speculation of the highest order.

Furthermore, there is no justification for translating the word הָיְתָ֥ה (hāyəṯāh), as ‘became’. הָיְתָ֥ה (hāyəṯāh) is the Qal perfect, third person feminine singular form of the verb הָיָה (hayah). And while הָיָה (hayah) can mean ‘become’, according to  Gary D. Pratico and Miles V. Van Pelt, in reference to the Qal stem, “The Perfect conjugation is used to express a completed action or state of being whether in the past, present or future.” In this case, rendering it with the non-stative ‘became’ rather than the stative ‘was’ seems to be special pleading to me.

Interestingly, even Dr. Monty White, on Answers in Genesis, a site which advocates a strict young earth creation, rejects the Gap Theory, though concluding that the it is “an attempt to harmonise the facts of Scripture with the ideas of fallen men.” While I reject the conclusions of White and Answers in Genesis in general, I must admit that at least they have a consistent hermeneutic for interpreting scripture.

However, for me the most problematic feature of the Gap Theory is it presents God as being unable to deal with his original creation, allowing it to become desolate and then re-fashioning the world at some subsequent date. It presents this creation that God declares later to be very good as something of a Plan B or an afterthought for God, forced upon him by the rebellion of Satan. However, the unequivocal assertion of scripture is that this creation is good – very good. And so, in addition to the semantic and linguistic reasons given earlier, I reject the Gap Theory on theological grounds.

Prayer:

Our good and gracious God. We remember that you stated that this creation that you made and placed us in is good. Enable us always to remember this, remembering also to love your creation in the way you love it. Give us wisdom to interact with your creation in ways that are wholesome and give us the joy of working towards and seeing its flourishing. We ask this in the name of Jesus. Amen.