The ‘God of the Gaps’ Error

The God of the Gaps error goes like this: If scientists cannot explain how something occurs in nature, then it MUST be due to a special miracle by God.

By Deacon Frederick Bartels
29 January 2024

I pulled this Neil deGrasse Tyson quote from X:

Does it mean, if you don’t understand something, and the community of physicists don’t understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? Because if it is, here’s a list of things in the past that physicists at the time didn’t understand [and now we do understand] …. If that’s how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on—so just be ready for that to happen, if that’s how you want to come at the problem.

If this quote is accurate, Tyson is describing what is called the “God of the Gaps” error. What is this error, and why is it important for Christians and other believers not to fall into it?

The God of the Gaps error goes like this: If scientists cannot explain how something occurs in nature, then it MUST be due to a special miracle by God. The error is found in attributing recurring natural events, which science cannot fully explain, to God alone. It tends to conflate the domain of the physical sciences with the domain of theology.

One of the problems with this error is that once science can explain how something happens in nature by natural processes, then people who previously attributed a particular natural phenomenon to God are made to look stupid, superstitious, and irrational—and that’s not a good thing.

Physical Science in Contrast to Theology

It’s important to understand the domain of the natural sciences in contrast to the domain of theology.

The physical sciences have a specific order of inquiry: they investigate physical things in the universe using observation, analysis, and testing. For instance, does life evolve and, if so, how? What is the temperature of the sun and how long will it burn? How did stars form? How old is the earth? What causes gravity?

Can the natural sciences prove God? Technically speaking, these sciences cannot prove whether God exists because God transcends the physical universe, although they can gather evidence that points to the existence of God. An example is the tremendous, intricate order in the universe and its fine tuning at its origin, which is necessary for a universe like ours. But the physical sciences cannot prove whether God exists or not because he is beyond their order of inquiry. Said another way, they do not have the tools required to arrive at a conclusion one way or the other.

Using the scientific method, scientists can come to know what is true about the physical universe and the natural processes within it, although their findings are preliminary because they often do not have all the evidence sets. This is obvious from the fact that scientific theories and conclusions develop (or completely change) over time. Nevertheless, the Church acknowledges the importance of the natural sciences in learning about the universe in which we live.

Theology, on the other hand, has God as its object of inquiry. Catholic theologians use Tradition and Scripture (divine revelation) to better understand God and his revelation, always doing so in a way that aligns with the authentic teaching of the Magisterium of the Spirit-guided Church. The role of theology is therefore distinct from the domain of the natural sciences.

Is Science a Threat to God?

Sometimes people see scientific theories, even those with loads of evidence, as a threat to God. For instance, some Christians who read the Genesis account of creation in a literalistic way, view scientific evidence in favor of a 13.6 billion year old universe—which is exceedingly well corroborated—as a threat to God’s almighty power and the inerrancy of scripture. The idea is that God MUST have created the universe in a literal period of six 24 hour days. Modern cosmology, then, MUST be wrong.

The Catholic Church points out that the Genesis creation story uses symbolic language to convey real truths. For example, Genesis teaches that there is only one God and he indeed created the physical universe, speaking it into being by the power of his word. We can know that the creation story in Genesis is symbolic by examining the distinct days of creation. For instance, vegetation was created on day three, but the sun was not created until day four. This shows that the Genesis creation account should not be taken literalistically.

The creation story does not scientifically explain the age of the universe or how it developed. Its author(s) did not intend to do that. Therefore, Genesis does not rule out an ancient universe because the six days of creation are symbolic. It’s up to the physical sciences to determine the age of the universe, how it took shape and developed over time. Whatever science may find in this area, is not in any way a threat to God’s existence or his almighty power, or the fact that God is the first-order, primary cause of the universe and all the creatures within it.

God is the Creator

As Catholics, we know God brought the universe into being from nothing. He activated and sustains the creatures within it. And he allows them to act as secondary causes in order to develop the universe according to his divine providence. The natural sciences can never prove that to be false because it is a truth which falls outside of their order of inquiry.

Although science is getting better at explaining natural phenomena in the universe, it does not in any way mean that “God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that’s getting smaller and smaller.” Our Christian beliefs are not based on evidence from the natural sciences, but rather on God’s divine revelation to his people, as well as, secondarily, convincing evidence sets based on reason and, even, science.