SOURCE: "REFUTING COMPROMISE," by Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, chapter two, p101 et al.

IItIt seems that many good Christians may be misinterpreting exactly what may have happened between Genesis 1:1 & 1:2, and much of this may also be due to how G.H. Pember had written in his 19th century book, EARTH'S EARLIEST AGES.  Now in hindsight, Dr. Sarfati has recently done an in-depth analysis on the curious word 'became' which may very well have caused a Bible~reader to assume that something happened (as an interlude) between these two verses.  Let's see what Sarfati came up with, shall we?

In this 2008 book (which also contains a brilliant discourse on the literal days of Creation, the 'GAP THEORY' (as it is referred to is also discussed in chapter two of this very book.  The "gappists" as they are called would translate Genesis 1:2 as "The earth 'became' formless and void.  HOWEVER, if the word 'became' really meant "was" (as in my Bible-the RSV,) then there would be no problem...so why do some think it should be translated 'became' [?] To even translate this as such would open the door to all sorts of possibilities, like when Satan may have been thrown down to the earth, creating this 'formless & void' condition that needed to be addressed before Genesis i:3 could continue the action forward....

But the larger question should be: How could Satan fall into a world God had declared "very good" ?

It would also contradict the Sabbath command of EXODUS 20:8-11 which is based on the creation of the "heavens, earth, sea, and everything in them" in six ordinary days (102.)

FURTHERMORE, the  word 'Waw' is the name of a Hebrew letter that is used as a conjunction.  It can mean "and," "but," "now," "then" and several other things depending upon the context and type of 'waw' involved.  It occurs at the beginning of Genesis 1:2 and is translated in the KJV, "And (waw) the earth was without form, and void."

TECHNICALITIES OF THE HEBREW WORD USUAGE

One way to use 'waw' is as a disjunctive, and it is formed by 'waw' followed by a non-verb.  It also introduces a parenthetical statement; that is, it's alerting the reader to put the passage following in brackets, as it were--a descriptive phrase about the previous noun.  It does not indicate something following in a time sequence--this would have been indicated by a different Hebrew construction called the waw consecutive where 'waw' is followed by a verb. (The  waw consecutive is in fact used at the beginning of every day of creation --indeed, the beginning of every sentence.  In some cases it is used in the middle of a sentence--from Genesis 1:3 to 2:3--which is strong evidence that it is historical narrative (103.)

THE TECHNICAL CRUX OF THE MATTER

It is simply grammatically impossible to translate the verb ('hayah') as "became" when it is combined with a waw disjunctive--[where] in the Old Testament, 'waw' + a noun + ('qal' perfect, 3rd person) is always translated "was" or "came," but never "became." {{MY EMPHASIS}}

Also, the correct Hebrew idiom for "became" is to attach the verb"to be," for example "was" to the preposition "to" (Hebrew 'le').The verb "to be" does not mean "become" without this preposition.  SINCE GENESIS 1:2 LACKS THE PREPOSITION, IT CANNOT MEAN "BECAME" (103.) {{EXCELLENT DEDUCTION, WATSON!}}

WHERE'S THE JUDGMENT?

The Hebrew words 'tohu' & 'bohu,' transslated "without form" & "void" Genesis 1:2, are claimed by gap theorists to indicated a judgmental destruction rather than something in the process of being built.  But 'tohu' occurs several times in the Bible in which it is used in a morally neutral fashion, describing something which is unfinished, and confused, but not necessarily evil!  Hebrew scholars and the church have for centuries held the view  that Genesis i:2 is not a scene of judgment or an evil state created by the fall of angels, but a description of the original undeveloped state of the universe. The plain and simple meaning of what Moses says is that on the first day there was a mass covered by water, with no dry land involving features ('tohu' = "unformed"), and no inhabitants yet ('bohu' = "unfilled") [103-104.]

Some have attempted to use Jeremiah 4:23 to teach the gap theory, because it uses the same phrase 'tohu va bohu' to describe the results of a judgment.  Leading gap theorists like Arthur Custance used this fact to assert that "without form and void" must mean "laid waste by a judgment."  But this is fallacious--there is nothing in the Hebrew words 'tohu va bohu' themselves to suggest that.  The only reason they refer to being "laid waste" is due to the context in  which the phrase is found. The words simply mean "unformed and unfilled."This state can be due either to nothing else having been created , or some created thing having been removed.  The context of Jeremiah 4:23 is known as a literary allusion to Genesis 1:2--the judgment would be so severe that it would leave the final state as empty as the earth before God created anything (104.)

Since this review is the briefest of summary form to what Dr. Sarfati wrote to in chapter two of the above-mentioned book, I would suggest the complete reading of the WHOLE chapter---indeed the whole book, since I though so much of this book as to quiz Dr. Sarfati on it for 90 minutes on APRIL 25, 2011.

Byron LeBeau