İlk önce teistik teolojide, insanların bilim yoluyla açıklayamadıkları olaylar için “Allah’ın işi” anlamında kullanılan “boşlukların Tanrı’sı” ifadesi, daha sonra farklı anlamlar yüklenerek ateist ve deist düşünce tarafından kullanılmıştır. Kavramı ilk defa kullanan Henry Drummond, bununla evrende açıklanamayan ontolojik veya epistemolojik bilinmezliklerin Tanrı tarafından bilinebileceğini ve doldurulabileceğini varsaymaktaydı. Ancak ateizm, bu ifadenin teizm tarafından Tanrı’nın varlığına dair bir argüman olarak kullanıldığını iddia ederek, bilimin ilerlemesiyle bilinemiyen boşlukların artık bilinebilir duruma geleceğini ve böylelikle zamanla Tanrı’ya ihtiyacın kalmayacağını savunmuştur. Deizmde ise bu ifade Tanrı’nın evreni yaratmasından sonra ona müdahale etmemesi şeklinde resmedilmektedir. Ancak, teistlerin “boşlukların Tanrı’sı” ifadesini Tanrı’nın ispatında kullandıkları bir argüman olarak görülmemektedir. Diğer bir ifade ile inananlar “biz şu meseleyi anlayamadık o halde Tanrı vardır” dememektedirler. Fakat bunun böyle kullanıldığı iddiası, ateistlerin antitez olarak sundukları argümanlarda ve bir Tanrı’nın varlığını kabul edip ancak hayata müdahalesinin olmadığını söyleyen deistlerin katı determinizm düşüncelerinde bulunmaktadır. Teistler bu kavramı Tanrı’nın varlığını ispatta bir argüman olarak kullandılar mı veya kullanıyorlar mı? Ayrıca bilim bazı hususları izah edince Tanrı’ya ihtiyaç kalmaz mı? Deistlerin Tanrı tasavvurunda “boşlukların Tanrı’sı” kavramı kendini nasıl yansıtmaktadır? Tanrı, âlemi yarattıktan sonra ona müdahalede bulunamaz mı? Bu ve benzeri sorulara cevap bulmayı hedeflediğimiz çalışmamızda öncelikle “boşlukların Tanrı’sı” ifadesini ve tarihçesini açıklayacağız. Daha sonra farklı Tanrı tasavvurlarının bu kavrama yükledikleri anlamları ve kelâmî açıdan değerlendirilmesini yapmaya çalışacağız.

For the first time, the expression “God of the gaps”, was used by the Evenjalist researcher Henry Drummond (1851-1897). And it was frequently used and discussed in the arguments of different God imagination. Drummond, defended with this expression that there was an area where the human mind could not be defined in nature, but that God know it and can be filled by Him again. In other words, it was assumed that ontological or epistemological unknowns could be known and filled by God.With the meaning that was attribute for the concept that the people couldn't explain academically and because of that they said “Refer to God and He will know only”. But with the time some of the points of the science with the result of description and discovery is filled now with science what was “Filled with God” in the first step. From this point atheist they said: “One day science will explain everything and after that there won't be any gaps. So as no more gaps will be controlled by God but will be by the science”.In the past, how the nature events consist was unknowable like how the rain occurs, how an earthquake occurrence and how the night and day occurs. These kind of events explained directly with God. But nowadays these and other nature events can be explained in expression of their causes and results. Accordingly, what is alleged about “there is no need for God” has been express in words.This theistic theology, which was placed in basis of gaps in the nature as a field of God's discovery, it has gradually replaced to Deizm with scientific explanations. German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer (D.1945), he stand out from this concept that it will lead to epistemological deviations about God and he emphasized that God should be sought in the essentially of life, not out of life. Bonhoeffer justified with this prevision. With this, (On this way) of the mechanical universe that is related of God's thoughts this detection style became later in to “deistic natural theology” and is being expressed like this. On the ground of the theological context of nature is God be portrayed as “God of the gaps”.  In one sense, when it is mentioned about Almighty God who created the universe, and on the other side who cannot response to him and it seems that there is a passive perception about God who is uncared about the people and unaware about what they are doing.If the Theist are trying to achieve some of unknowingly presence things about the existence of a God with the expression of “God of the gaps” it could be criticized. Because, if it will be understood like this it comes out to an situation that humans own ignorance is presenting like an evidence for the God's existence which is unacceptable. Beside, this idea will break the will of scientific research and it will be even possible that it prevents the progress in this field. But in our work we didn't see from the Theist of the expression “God of the gaps” as an argument for the proof of God. Believers with other words they do not say that “Whe didn't understand this situation so there is a God”.  On the contrary, we have found in the argument of the atheists what was used like an antithesis for the thoughts of solid determinism of the deists who accepted the existence of a God but said that he did not interfere with the life.Eventually, we think that this expression used in the field of the theistic thoughts is mixed with the field what is used in the atheist and deist thoughts. Those who says, as science progresses the gaps will filled in and there will not be need for God. It comes in front of us that their important dilemmas is that they are putting the faith out of the knowledge. While the most important way to know God is the existence of the outside world and information about him. Thereby, contrary to the claim that there will be no need for faith as the knowledge increases. It will be more realistic to say that as knowledge increases it will direct to confirm the faith and enquiry it. On the other side when viewed from the Kalamic perspective, the principle of the truth of the objects and the knowledge bet is taken together and it aspire to knowledge in the mind of the human and to the outside reality with availability to arriving for ma'rifatullah.Hereby, the object's existence is absolutely accepted in the Kalam and is making with it analogize of metaphysical dimension. This is not from the gaps but it seems that it's being moved from the existence. If there is going to be searched for an evidence of God's existence it has to be from the Kalam's first application of the inference of the fullness and not from the gaps. God is not only the “God of the gaps” but he is also the God of “the gaps and the fullness, creator and the creates of all”. We attest to knowing about existing/creating of God's existence, the absolute will and the might and not about the gaps that we don't know. Today the expression “God of the gaps” it's not being accepted by the theists. But contrary they try to understand/make sense about the universe and the contents. Eventually, in the Islamic faith, for the universe and for the God's existence who rules the human, is “at any moment in a work” or “doing how he wants” not inappropriate for the expression “God of the gaps” that has been attributed for the meaning by the atheism and deism.On the last analysis about the expression “God of the gaps” the word “God” doesn't seems like the God of the religion. The belief of the God for the non-intervention of the life it's not in the real meaning that there is an believe for the God. Because it is not enough to know and to prove God's existence outside of the universe. He/It must bring the God he believe in, in his own universe.