Is the Gap Theory Biblical? Refuting James Knox on the “Gap Fact.”
Although it’s not held widely by biblical scholars today, many are compelled to believe that the Bible teaches a view that would reconcile a recent view of humanity with an ancient view of the universe.1
There are numerous variations, but it is most commonly known as The Gap Theory (GT).2
I’d like to devote some time to a version of this which has recently come to my attention, taught by pastor and Bible teacher, James Knox.
I don’t know anything about Knox, so I will do my best to refrain from any generalizations or unfair characterizations of his views. That said, I did find the overall tone of this presentation, well, troubling, and worth teasing out.
He’s a pulpiteer, for sure. He comes across as confident, compelling, and well-argued. Unfortunately, I found that a quick visit to each of his proof texts was enough to cast considerable doubt on his view.
There is, therefore, a lesson to underscore before moving any further: Test everything against the Scriptures, no matter who says it (including me).
It is this very practice that earned the Bereans an eternal commendation inscripturated in Acts 17. A compelling presentation or convincing oration should not produce a higher level of confidence in our minds about its truthfulness, goodness, or validity.
For anyone tempted to disagree, I’d merely ask you to consider how one the greatest orators of all-time—Adolf Hitler—was also one of the greatest menaces of all time. I’m not comparing Knox to Hitler; make no mistake, though—this presentation sounds compelling if you listen.
In fact, I want to be careful to separate this man from his claims, especially since I don’t know him. He opens his presentation with a call to Christian unity, and the clear message that he does not think this is an issue which should divide the church or separate believers.
On that, we can certainly agree.
I do, however, find his exegetical claims wanting, at best. Let’s take a few moments to explore them.
The TheoryAs we’ll examine proof texts for aspects of the theory in a moment, I’d like to provide a quick summary first.
According to the GT, between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, there is a nondescript amount of time in which at least three events happened: The creation and forming of a “first earth,” the fall of Satan and his being cast down to earth (and thus the actual entrance of sin into the world), and the destruction of this first earth by some sort of watery cataclysm.
Two general observations are necessary.
First, this is not a view that is explicitly taught by any one portion of Scripture. Proponents must peruse the Bible and piece together this theory by doing some exegetical math, so to speak.
This practice is not necessarily to be frowned upon. One could argue this is exactly what New Testament writers needed to do when seeking to understand how Jesus was, in fact, the promised Messiah of the Old Testament.
Hebrew scholar Dr. Mike Heiser has ably argued that this is what the Apostle Paul meant in 1 Corinthians 2:8. Had Jesus’ arrival been made explicit in just one passage of Scripture, such that there would have been no mistaking it, the “princes of this world” could have thwarted the plan.
The question is not in the validity of this practice (although some genre considerations might make that point arguable), but rather whether or not the texts pressed into service for Knox’s view will support his claims.
Second, one is hard-pressed to arrive at this view merely due to an honest examination of the text. In other words, this view was literally created and is most usually defended to reconcile the findings of modern science with obvious chronological details in Scripture.
Now, I question the basis for GT from the get-go since I think we do have evidence for a young earth from modern science. Regardless, this approach is an invalid starting point for any examination of the Bible.
Our goal is not to massage the words of Scripture and the findings of modern science together in order to form a nice fit.
Rather, it is to understand the meaning of the text, and determine the implications of it. If those implications demand that we reject a certain theory of modern science, so be it. If not, so be it.
A Problem with the ProgramOne of the issues in biblical studies has to do with systems, programs, and other spurious machinations that are invented to support a presupposed paradigm.
In other words, if an idea does not work across the Revelation in general, it cannot be held consistently in part. Once you understand the real program—the story being told by Scripture, one is hard-pr...
Create your
podcast in
minutes
It is Free