Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Between the first creation, indicated by the first verse, and the description of chaos of the second verse,<br />
there occurred a cosmic catastrophe, an appalling cataclysm of worlds, whereby not only our earth was<br />
broken up into fragments, but even the solar system was displaced... [1926:55]<br />
Though Bartoli stresses his scientific credentials and presents archeological evidence (his<br />
book is subtitle “In the Light of the Recently Discovered Babylonian Documents,” which<br />
he claims support the Gap Theory), he spends much time on theological arguments,<br />
describing in detail the creation of angels, the rebellion of Satan and his fallen angels, and<br />
their corruption of the pre-Adamic world.<br />
Clarence Benson argued <strong>for</strong> the Gap Theory in The Earth—The Theatre of the<br />
Universe (1929). A passing star fragmented the planet of which asteroids are remnants;<br />
this catastrophe was associated with Satan’s Fall. Benson also, however, strongly<br />
endorsed Price’s Flood Geology. Gerald Winrod, founder of the Defenders of the<br />
Christian Faith, included the Gap Theory in <strong>Science</strong>, Christ and the Bible (1929). Citing<br />
alleged instances of out-of-order fossils, Winrod declared that “When the theory of<br />
evolution hits the rocks of geology, it goes to pieces.”<br />
Harry Rimmer, the flamboyant Bible-science proselytizer, was the major Gap<br />
Theory advocate during the time of the Scopes Trial and <strong>for</strong> some years afterwards. As<br />
already noted, Rimmer debated William B. Riley, another leading anti-evolutionist of the<br />
period, on Gap Theory versus Day-Age creationism (Riley and Rimmer 1929), and he<br />
invoked the Gap Theory to refute the accusation leveled in the “lawsuit against the Bible”<br />
(Rimmer 1956) that science had proved the Bible wrong by showing the earth is<br />
immensely old. Although he campaigned vigorously <strong>for</strong> the Gap Theory, Rimmer also<br />
paid deference to George McCready Price’s Flood Geology (1936:238-242), apparently<br />
not seeing any contradiction between explaining geology and paleontology in terms of<br />
Noah’s Flood and also in terms of a pre-Adamic creation. Rimmer tried to maintain a<br />
literal interpretation of Noah’s Flood, as well as of Joshua’s Long Day, Jonah and the<br />
Whale, and other biblical stories, providing “scientific” explanations <strong>for</strong> them.<br />
DAY-AGE THEORY<br />
The Day-Age Theory of creationism was the Gap Theory’s chief rival during the<br />
nineteenth century and much of this century—until young-earth creationism became<br />
popular again. It had various precedents in earlier centuries.<br />
The fourth-century theologian St. Augustine apparently maintained that creation<br />
was ex nihilo (not then the accepted view), but also argued that the process of creation<br />
was progressive, unfolding over time. (For this reason, strict creationists sometimes<br />
accuse him of being a protoevolutionist.) In any case, Augustine held that the ‘days’ of<br />
creation were not the same as our literal days. “It is more than probable that the seven<br />
days of Genesis were entirely different in their duration from those which now mark the<br />
succession of time...” (Augustine, quoted in H. Clark 1977:40). Augustine denied that<br />
we could assign any definite period (i.e. a thousand years, a popular interpretation) to the<br />
creation days. He viewed such scriptural statements not as literal facts, but as allegorical<br />
truth, and inspired the medieval tradition of allegorical interpretation of the Bible.<br />
This medieval attitude relegated inquiry about the natural world—science—to a<br />
strictly subordinate position under theology, with its search <strong>for</strong> allegorical meaning<br />
behind natural phenomena, which were but symbols capable of revealing biblical truth,