Reality Check
By James Scott Bell

What Does the Bible Teach About Creation? Part 2

Last time, I revived a view of Genesis 1 that was quite common 100 years ago, and is, in my view, the strongest biblical position. Namely, there is an unspecified time gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. The NIV translation of 1:2 is as follows:

“Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters”.

The NIV translators, however, dropped a footnote after the first "was" -- in Hebrew, it can also mean "became." Furthermore, in the Septuagint (a very early translation of the Old Testament into Greek), the scholars began 1:2 with the word "But." Finally, the words "formless and empty" are a Hebrew phrase, "tohuw a bohuw," which can be translated "waste and void."

So putting all this together, verse 1:2 could be translated: "But the earth became a waste and a void . . . "

What that means is that something happened between the original creation of 1:1 and the earth becoming a waste and a void.

What happened? Well, if you look at Ezekiel 28, reading from verse 12, you have what scholars say is a description of the fall of Satan, which happened before Adam and Eve were created. Satan was once in Eden (a very different Eden than Adam and Eve; this one had all sorts of precious stones. It was glorious) but he rebelled with a host of his angels against God. What does God do with such rebellion? In Genesis 7, God flooded the earth. He probably did the same thing, brought a curse by way of flood, because we find in Genesis 1:2 the Spirit was hovering over what? Water!

Now, to home in on whether "waste and void" is the best translation of "tohuw a bohuw," I start with an axiom of Bible interpretation: the Bible cannot contradict itself. But if you look at the traditional rendering of Genesis 1:2 (the earth WAS "tohuw") and then at Isaiah 45:18 (God did NOT create the earth "tohuw") it appears to be a flat contradiction.

UNLESS you give the alternate interpretation of Genesis 1:2, namely that the earth BECAME "tohuw."

Another axiom: Scripture is the best interpreter of Scripture. Look first at the primary meaning of the key words, from Strong's Hebrew lexicon:

tohuw
1) formlessness, confusion, unreality, emptiness

bohuw
1) emptiness, void, waste

Look next at how the words are used throughout Scripture:
"tohuw" is clearly part of judgment/curse when used in conjunction with "bohuw" in the two other times they are paired [Jer. 34:23; Is. 4:23]. "tohuw" is negative in every other context (19 times in all).

If the word is always used by Scripture NEGATIVELY, then why would we use it POSITIVELY in Genesis 1:2? That, it seems to me, is contradictory to Scripture.

What remains is the obvious: God created the heavens and the earth, and it could have been millions or billions of years ago. Satan was given an exalted place in the Eden of this earth, but rebelled. God cursed the earth, but did not destroy it. Flood waters were the likely agency of the curse (which would account for all the ancient fossils). But then God redeems the earth (as he will redeem mankind!) and RE-creates it in one week. The days can very well be 24-hour days, because it is the redemption of an ancient earth.

And that's exactly what science sees--an old earth. The Bible and science do not contradict each other.

Next time, I'll handle a few objections, and then I'll be done.

www.jamesscottbell.com

Send me your opinions at jsbell@netlistings.com