Intro:
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1
Story/Body:
Now the earth was... Genesis 1:2
If Genesis 1:1 is not an event, but an intro to what is about to take place. verse 2 says there was an earth before God actually created one, and that makes absolutely no sense, and defies logic.
Something cannot exist and at the same time not exist.
How do you explain that?
You just have to look at other translations.
The nrsv, for example says, in the beginning when God created the heavens and the Earth, and the Earth was formless and void.
Some translations say now, some say and.
Some translation simply say, when God began to create the heavens and the Earth, now the Earth was formless and void or and.
You have to look at many translations to see this, you can't just lock down on one translation.
And honestly it helps to look into the Hebrew as well. There's a debate in Bible translations and scholarship in which the text can be translated in construct form, or it can have a dependent or independent clause.
It's a grammatical debate.
Like saying, In the beginning when George began to study, his notebook was empty (The notebook was empty for some undetermined amount of time beforehand). Vs. In the beginning, George began to study. Now his book was empty (As though the notebook was empty as a product or result of him beginning to study).
The Bible can be translated correctly both ways. English can be correctly written both ways. And the original Hebrew text doesn't clarify on whether the text is saying one or the other.
And this has led to a lot of confusion and conflict over centuries of church history. That mean you can read Jewish scribes debating this topic a thousand years ago.
And so in order to see this, you have to look at multiple translations so that you can identify the distinction. Because if you only look at a couple select translations, you won't see the dependent clause alternative translation that helps highlight the issue.
And they are both legitimate translations. Or families of translations I'll say, because there are many translations in both groups.