Friday, January 11, 2013

Do not get stuck on the 6 day Creation

In the beginning God create the heavens and the earth, now the earth was (a) (tohu wabohu) formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep,and the over the waters..Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Let me ask my audience if God ever needed two or three tries at anything- or when the Son healed someone was it ever a partial healing?

Why then after creation did God need a "second chance" ?

Please note my (a) footnote above. It is in all NIV bibles- It's no big deal except it changes what happened after creation COMPLETELY. The note is explained "or possibly became" formless and empty. The other two times when tohu wabohu is used to describe a condition produced by divine judgment in the only other two texts where the other two words compare in conjuction (isa 34:11) ( Jer 4:23) Schofield Refererence Bible

I am no Hebrew scholar so I cannot make a case for the footnote other than the Schofield note. At any rate, due to the huge sea change it brings to these verses one would think that it deserves more than a microscopic footnote.

I prefer "became formless and empty" as opposed to "was formless and empty" because God's perfect creation in verse one" "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Why then would the next verse say immediately  "Now the earth was formless and empty right after God tells us "In  the beginning God created the heavens and the earth??

As I said above God does all things perfectly but something happened to His perfect creation. Some of the speculation is that Lucifer, trying to exceed God, was thrown out with his minions. Isa 14:12. Eze 28:12

Something big happened that God seemingly started over.

So if you are in the sciences and people mock the creation remember the tiny footnote which make it impossible to know the age of the earth.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. has this definition of the gap theory which you allude to:..
    The gap theory postulates that an indefinite span of time exists between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. This time span is usually considered to be quite large (millions of years) and is also reputed to encompass the so-called “geologic ages.” Proponents of the gap theory also postulate that a cataclysmic judgment was pronounced upon the earth during this period as the result of the fall of Lucifer (Satan) and that the ensuing verses of Genesis chapter 1 describe a re-creation or reforming of the earth from a chaotic state and not an initial creative effort on the part of God.

  3. Huh, interesting. I've heard of gap theory but haven't considered the idea of "starting over." I'm not sure I necessarily believe that the earth being (as opposed to becoming) formless and void means that much because why can't it be in steps? An artist can have a canvas, color the entire thing neutrally, and then begin to add details.

    But wondering about what happened during that in-between time is really thought provoking. I've also wondered a lot about what happened during the three days before Jesus was resurrected. What did he do? What did he see? So many mysteries that will one day all be revealed!

  4. I like the Gap theory, and I think it can explain the extreme old age of the earth. But I don't think there was a whole creation that got wiped out and started over again. The whole first chapter of Genesis is a progressive creation. So why should I think that "God creates everything perfectly" implies that there was a *complete* creation that got wiped out? The gap however is a perfect way to harmonize the Big Bang --- which is one of the most amazing concepts and totally consistent with God bringing all things forth from nothing --- with the creation.

    I think one of the coolest things is that even evolutionists, although they strive, can't point to man being more than 40,000 years old or so. And that we have a common ancestor! Seems pretty coincidental, and I am sure they will do whatever they can to try to get away from it.

    At any rate, the massive changes that the Earth would have undergone in the flood --- the disappearing of the firmament, the massive destruction of plant life, the intense pressure from all the water that could cause the shifting of tectonic plates --- would mess with both the geological record and carbon 14 dating. The main fallacy in scientific thinking is that everything in the past is the way it is now. Which is a reasonable, but I think wrong, assumption.

  5. Grey , I like your bringing up the Flood, quite "inductive" if you get my drift-pops