For, if we be observant and honest, we must often ourselves feel the difficulty of approaching the sacred writings without bias, seeing that we bring with us a number of stereotyped ideas, which we have received as absolutely certain, and never think of testing, but only seek to confirm. What happened with Pember should warn us that no matter how great a theologian we may be, or how respected and knowledgeable a Christian leader, as finite sinful human beings we cannot easily empty ourselves of preconceived ideas.We see that Pember did exactly what he preached against, and did not realize it.Most versions of the “gap” theory place millions of years of geologic time (including billions of fossil animals) in between these two first verses of Genesis.This is the “ruin-reconstruction” version of the gap theory.The most notably influential 19th century writer to popularize this view was G. Pember, in his book Earth's Earliest Ages, first published in 1884.Numerous editions of this work were published, with the 15th edition appearing in 1942. The 20th century writer who published the most academic defense of the gap theory was Arthur C.Some put the fall of Satan in this supposed period.But any rebellion of Satan during this gap of time contradicts God's description of His completed creation on day six as all being “very good” (Genesis ).
Recounting Pember's struggle helps us understand the implications of the gap theory.
Again: He gave the green herb alone for food “to every beast of the field, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth.” There were, therefore, no carnivora in the sinless world (page 35).
Pember taught from Isaiah that the Earth will be restored to what it was like at first.
Such is the ingrained nature of the “long ages” issue.
He did not want to question Scripture (he accepted the six literal days of creation), but he did not question the long ages either (perhaps he just took the word of Chalmers, who was a highly respected Christian). Many of today's respected Christian leaders show the same struggle in their commentaries as they then capitulate to “progressive creation” or even “theistic evolution.” On the Sixth Day God pronounced every thing which He had made to be very good, a declaration which would seem altogether inconsistent with the present condition of the animal as well as the vegetable kingdom.