"Mind the 'Gap,'" Modern Creationism and the KJB
Location
Room B
Start Date
1-10-2011 9:15 AM
End Date
1-10-2011 10:30 AM
Abstract
Despite the scientific community’s overwhelming support for an evolutionary explanation of the origins of the universe, nearly half of the American public believes in biblical creationism. This disjunction between scientific authority and popular religion is striking because it signifies that many place the inerrancy of the Bible and a literal reading of the book of Genesis above the findings of the mainstream scientific community. Most contemporary creationists hold to “Young Earth” creationism, the theory that God created the universe in six literal, twenty-four days no more than 6-10,000 years ago.
But creationism in the first decade of the twenty-first century differs greatly from creationism a century ago. By the late nineteenth century, a majority of creationists believed in a geologically ancient earth. For most evangelicals, young earth creationism seemed passé, out of touch with recent geological discoveries. Instead, these old earth creationists adopted one of two approaches to accommodate the fossil record. “Day Age” creationism made room for the geological ages by proposing that each individual day of creation actually represented a period of thousands, or even millions, of years. The counter position among creationists was the “Gap Theory” in which the Genesis account of creation described two distinct creative acts, separated by a period of time during which geological strata and the fossil record could have accumulated.
This paper will show that the Gap Theory—the most prevalent creationist belief at the turn of the twentieth century—could not have existed but for a translation decision made by the King James Translators regarding Genesis 1:1. The translators relied upon medieval rabbinical sources in translating the Old Testament, but the rabbis differed over whether or not Genesis 1:1 should begin with a dependent or an independent clause. If the King James Bible translators had opted for a dependent clause “In the beginning of God’s creating…” instead of the independent clause, “In the beginning, God created…” the Gap Theory would not have been a viable alternative for creationists three hundred years later.
If that had been so, more evangelicals would have opted for theistic evolutionism (or its cousin, the Day Age Theory) rather than defending the unpopular Young Earth Theory of creation. Without a viable Gap Theory, it is likely that fewer evangelicals would today be young earth creationists. The Gap Theory acted as a kind of “ark,” allowing evangelicals to harmonize their belief in biblical inerrancy with modern scientific discoveries without having to acknowledge the theory of evolution. Thus, when Young Earth Creationism rebounded in the 1960s, Gap Theorists were able to smoothly transition to Young Earth Creationism.
"Mind the 'Gap,'" Modern Creationism and the KJB
Room B
Despite the scientific community’s overwhelming support for an evolutionary explanation of the origins of the universe, nearly half of the American public believes in biblical creationism. This disjunction between scientific authority and popular religion is striking because it signifies that many place the inerrancy of the Bible and a literal reading of the book of Genesis above the findings of the mainstream scientific community. Most contemporary creationists hold to “Young Earth” creationism, the theory that God created the universe in six literal, twenty-four days no more than 6-10,000 years ago.
But creationism in the first decade of the twenty-first century differs greatly from creationism a century ago. By the late nineteenth century, a majority of creationists believed in a geologically ancient earth. For most evangelicals, young earth creationism seemed passé, out of touch with recent geological discoveries. Instead, these old earth creationists adopted one of two approaches to accommodate the fossil record. “Day Age” creationism made room for the geological ages by proposing that each individual day of creation actually represented a period of thousands, or even millions, of years. The counter position among creationists was the “Gap Theory” in which the Genesis account of creation described two distinct creative acts, separated by a period of time during which geological strata and the fossil record could have accumulated.
This paper will show that the Gap Theory—the most prevalent creationist belief at the turn of the twentieth century—could not have existed but for a translation decision made by the King James Translators regarding Genesis 1:1. The translators relied upon medieval rabbinical sources in translating the Old Testament, but the rabbis differed over whether or not Genesis 1:1 should begin with a dependent or an independent clause. If the King James Bible translators had opted for a dependent clause “In the beginning of God’s creating…” instead of the independent clause, “In the beginning, God created…” the Gap Theory would not have been a viable alternative for creationists three hundred years later.
If that had been so, more evangelicals would have opted for theistic evolutionism (or its cousin, the Day Age Theory) rather than defending the unpopular Young Earth Theory of creation. Without a viable Gap Theory, it is likely that fewer evangelicals would today be young earth creationists. The Gap Theory acted as a kind of “ark,” allowing evangelicals to harmonize their belief in biblical inerrancy with modern scientific discoveries without having to acknowledge the theory of evolution. Thus, when Young Earth Creationism rebounded in the 1960s, Gap Theorists were able to smoothly transition to Young Earth Creationism.
Comments
Dr. Paul Matzko is working on his doctorate in History and Religious Studies at Pennsylvania State University and is a research assistant. He has published “Evangelist Billy Sunday and the Evolution Controversy" in The Proceedings of the South Carolina Historical Association.