The Gap and The Sumer Creation Myth

[Davy]

I love you, brother. I specially love you in fighting against OSAS, but I am gonna have to agree to disagree with you on this one.

My points in post #123 are pretty rock solid for me.

I love you too brother, but I have to disagree with you too.

The idea that Genesis 1:1 is a summary goes against the fact that nowhere later in Genesis 1 does God declare creation of the land. This should be obvious especially beginning in verse 2, because the "waters" there are being shown UPON an already existing earth underneath those waters. We know this because of those waters being moved per 6 through 9 verses.

Gen 1:2
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
KJV

Waters? No earth yet, but there were WATERS? How's that? Oh, because God can do anything, the earth was created out of waters floating in space? I thought your interpretation of tohuw va bowhu was a vacuity of nothing existing, which would mean no WATERS there yet.

Even the description of those existing "face of the waters" show an already existing earth; as also "face of the deep", which Hebrew tehowm is an expression used to point to subterranean waters inside the earth.

What Bullinger showed with the attempt to remove the Hebrew meaning for "was" when pointing to 'became' is also a strong pointer, as that point has been covered here too.

But Paul in Romans 8:18-25 in relation to Isaiah 45:18 is one of the real hammer proofs, because Paul says God placed the creation in vanity to bondage of corruption, when God said He did not create the earth "in vain" (tohuw).

So there's definitely enough 'direct' Scripture evidence in other Books in God's Word to point to God's original 'perfect' creation before... He placed it in bondage to corruption for this 2nd world earth age of today.

 

[Davy]

"Before time began there was only darkness and the goddess Nammu, the Primordial Sea. She gave birth to Anki, the Universe- at first they were Heaven and Earth in one, a vast mountain of soil and sky mixed together. Anki produced Enlil, the air. Enlil separated his parents into An, the sky and Ki the mother earth. He pulled his mother down to form solid ground and pushed his father up to form the heavens. He then created the moon god Nanna, who then created the sun god Utu. Enlil and Ki, air and earth joined to produce Enki, the god of water, vegetation and wisdom, and the lord of the universe. Enki gathered together part of the Primordial Sea and squeezed it into rivers Tigris and Euphrates. He caused there to be cattle on the earth and fish in the rivers. He built marshland around the rivers and made the soil rich and fertile. Meanwhile in heaven, the gods were having a large, drunken banquet. They decided to create humans. The first race was made of clay, and weak in body and mind. At the time everyone was too drunk to see how poorly they were made. The humans descended to live on Enki’s earth. Before long it became clear that this race had too many problems to survive and be a credit to the gods who created them. The gods decided to destroy them all in a great flood. Only two people were worthy enough to survive- a man named Ziusudra and his wife. Enki came to them with instructions. They were to build a wooden ark and hide there until the flood waters subsided. The gods redirected the Tigris and Euphrates and caused a violent flood, washing all the humans to their deaths. The storms raged day and night until there was no dry land. Ziusudra and his wife were safe in their wooden ark. They wept at the loss of mankind. Finally the rivers shrank back and the land around them re-emerged. Ziusudra and his wife began a new generation of men and women and set up their villages on the shores of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The Big MythTM © 2011 Distant T"
http://www.bigmyth.com/download/SUMERIAN_CREATION.pdf

I do not see any connections.

"Before time began there was only darkness and the goddess Nammu, the Primordial Sea. She gave birth to Anki, the Universe- at first they were Heaven and Earth in one, a vast mountain of soil and sky mixed together. Anki produced Enlil, the air. Enlil separated his parents into An, the sky and Ki the mother earth. He pulled his mother down to form solid ground and pushed his father up to form the heavens. He then created the moon god Nanna, who then created the sun god Utu. Enlil and Ki, air and earth joined to produce Enki, the god of water, vegetation and wisdom, and the lord of the universe. Enki gathered together part of the Primordial Sea and squeezed it into rivers Tigris and Euphrates. He caused there to be cattle on the earth and fish in the rivers. He built marshland around the rivers and made the soil rich and fertile. Meanwhile in heaven, the gods were having a large, drunken banquet. They decided to create humans. The first race was made of clay, and weak in body and mind. At the time everyone was too drunk to see how poorly they were made. The humans descended to live on Enki’s earth. Before long it became clear that this race had too many problems to survive and be a credit to the gods who created them. The gods decided to destroy them all in a great flood. Only two people were worthy enough to survive- a man named Ziusudra and his wife. Enki came to them with instructions. They were to build a wooden ark and hide there until the flood waters subsided. The gods redirected the Tigris and Euphrates and caused a violent flood, washing all the humans to their deaths. The storms raged day and night until there was no dry land. Ziusudra and his wife were safe in their wooden ark. They wept at the loss of mankind. Finally the rivers shrank back and the land around them re-emerged. Ziusudra and his wife began a new generation of men and women and set up their villages on the shores of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The Big MythTM © 2011 Distant T"
http://www.bigmyth.com/download/SUMERIAN_CREATION.pdf

I do not see any connections.

Try this...

https://www.amazon.com/Sargon-Magnificent-Mrs-Sydney-Bristowe/dp/1162589329

 

[GenemZ]

Of course God repeated the tohuw va bohuw idea to the rebellious Jews in Jeremiah's day to show what was coming via the king of Babylon, which I already mentioned that. But that tohuw va bohuw does not mean a gaseous vacuum nothing existence like there was nothing there; and it is silly to assume that with God's example there in Jeremiah 4, especially since He gave that about an 'existing' state of things going into corruption, which is how the Hebrew tohuw is most often used in The Old Testament.

Who are you arguing with? Me?

Your comment was tohuw va bohuw if you were.

Are you saying that I claimed 'tohuw va bohuw' means a gaseous vacuum nothing existence like there was nothing there?

It means something was definitely there. Just like Hiroshima and Nagasaki were still there after the atomic bomb hit. Its "how they were there" that it speaks of. Chaos and ruin.. with an eerie sense of emptiness blanketing around it.

 

[GenemZ]

What Bullinger showed with the attempt to remove the Hebrew meaning for "was" when pointing to 'became' is also a strong pointer, as that point has been covered here too.

It was "was."

What is missed (and was highlighted in the Masoretic text) that in the Hebrew there is an indicator to have a *pause* between verses 1 and 2.

Why?

They got their teaching orally. Not by reading a Bible on their laps. The orator teaching was presenting something with great drama to the hearers. It was very dynamic.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and earth!"

Then.. onto verse 2.

[PAUSE for dramatic effect] Verse one ended and there was a 'fade out' as we see in some movies and old style radio presentations.

Then? Fading in to the next scene.

We enter into a different point in time with a state of the earth being declared. A state that was in wreak and havoc and confusion.

The readers of Hebrew knew intuitively that it had to "become" that way. Yet? It does say "was."

Because the Torah was to be read before all and it had elements of drama contained within its readings. There is even Jewish humor to be found in the Torah that we completely miss in translation because it was a play on Hebrew words that does not work in the English. It was also done in the Greek texts as well. Jewish humor snuck in from time to time.

I learn from those who teach from the Hebrew and Greek. My pastor was a scholar dedicate to over 50 years of study of the original languages. Why so dedicated? God will provide for those seeking the truth in a world of confusion because of the ignorance of men.

Here is an example of such dramatic reading we can see in our own language...

"In the beginning John Smith built his log home on top of a mountain..."​

(here is a noted fade out)...A PAUSE..
......(to be followed with a fade in)​

"Now the house was in shambles and the mountain riddled with cannon fire."​

Well?

We know that it says "was."

Yet, we should have known it had to become that way.. For, John Smith would not have built it that way.

But? Some here will stubbornly argue because it says, "was?" That it could not have become that way... (see how stupid it gets when we do not know the original languages)

Grace and peace......

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I love you too brother, but I have to disagree with you too.

The idea that Genesis 1:1 is a summary goes against the fact that nowhere later in Genesis 1 does God declare creation of the land. This should be obvious especially beginning in verse 2, because the "waters" there are being shown UPON an already existing earth underneath those waters. We know this because of those waters being moved per 6 through 9 verses.

Gen 1:2
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
KJV

Waters? No earth yet, but there were WATERS? How's that? Oh, because God can do anything, the earth was created out of waters floating in space? I thought your interpretation of tohuw va bowhu was a vacuity of nothing existing, which would mean no WATERS there yet.

Even the description of those existing "face of the waters" show an already existing earth; as also "face of the deep", which Hebrew tehowm is an expression used to point to subterranean waters inside the earth.

What Bullinger showed with the attempt to remove the Hebrew meaning for "was" when pointing to 'became' is also a strong pointer, as that point has been covered here too.

But Paul in Romans 8:18-25 in relation to Isaiah 45:18 is one of the real hammer proofs, because Paul says God placed the creation in vanity to bondage of corruption, when God said He did not create the earth "in vain" (tohuw).

So there's definitely enough 'direct' Scripture evidence in other Books in God's Word to point to God's original 'perfect' creation before... He placed it in bondage to corruption for this 2nd world earth age of today.

I believe the waters existed prior to God creating everything we read about in Genesis 1.
Why there was water existing prior is only speculation at best.

What I do know is that it is not a coincidence that there are two unique sentence structures repeating themselves. For the...

(a) Unique sentence structure of Genesis 1:1 giving us a brief summary about what is about to happen with the rest of the chapter (Genesis 1) giving us the details is tied to...

(b) The unique sentence structure of Genesis 1:26-27 (The creation of male and femaile on Day 6) is a brief summary of the details described in Genesis chapter 2.​

By your reading it in another way (Seeing something that is not specifically spoken about in the text), you are destroying this unique sentence structure.

As for Isaiah 45:18: There is no mention or hint of the Gap Theory. It is merely saying that God did not create the Earth in vain but to be inhabited. Meaning, God did not make the Earth to be like the moon, or Saturn, etc. because those other planets were not created to support human life like the Earth can. He did not create in vain in regards to human life. There is no words mentioned in Isaiah 45:18 that says, “...and so before Adam existed, there was a world that was judged.” These are the kind of words that I would need in order to believe in a Gap Viewpoint.

As for Romans 8:18-25: If you were to skip back to Romans 5:12, it talks about how death came about by Adam's sin, and if you were to tie it in how the ground was cursed in Genesis 3, it is a logical conclusion that Paul is referring to how the animal kingdom was affected by the Fall in Romans 8:18-25.

20 “For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.”
(Romans 8:20-22).​

Notice verse 21. It says the creature shall be delivered from bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

This is an event that is yet future. The animals will be delivered in the future. So this is talking about the current animal kingdom here upon this Earth, and not a previous Earth that was wiped out.

Notice also verse 22. It says that the whole of creation groans and travails in pain together until now. Again, this is the whole of creation (animals, plants, etc.) now. The creation... now. It is not referring to a previous creation that was entirely wiped out. So Romans 8:18-25 is not referring to some past creation of animals in the a destroyed world prior to the six day creation we see in Genesis 1. Paul says the creation groans and travails in pain together until now. So this has to be referring to only animals created in the six day creation we read about in Genesis 1. It cannot be referring to an animal kingdom prior that was entirely wiped out. Plus we read in Genesis 1, “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” (Genesis 1:31). The creation cannot be called,
“very good” if it was already stained by sin and death.

 

[sawdust]

In the first chapter of Genesis the word translated "was" in verse two occurs 27 times. It is translated become or becoming in 26 of those 27 times. Makes one wonder why the translation is inconsistent.

 

[GenemZ]

In the first chapter of Genesis the word translated "was" in verse two occurs 27 times. It is translated become or becoming in 26 of those 27 times. Makes one wonder why the translation is inconsistent.

I believe its because in some cases the translators sensed (from the context) how it should be translated to convey the correct "intent." The ancients thought in a DIFFERENT PATTERN.

For instance.. If Jew came from outside and it was raining?

He would not say.. "It is raining." He may simply say ... "raining."

 

[GenemZ]

I believe the waters existed prior to God creating everything we read about in Genesis 1.
Why there was water existing prior is only speculation at best.

The Hebrew states that the Spirit was 'hovering over the waters," like a hen when she incubates her eggs. The Spirit was... "Warming up the frozen waters."

There had been no light = no heat = frozen.

The Spirit was warming up the giant icepack that God had surrounded the planet with. By freezing a universal flood after He totally and utterly destroyed what remained of the prehistoric creation.

The Hebrew also indicates "raging waters."

The more you know and understand the Hebrew? Less room for speculations. More room for "insight" instead.

"And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and
more in knowledge and depth of insight." Phipns 1:9
​

grace and peace!

 

[sawdust]

I believe its because in some cases the translators sensed (from the context) how it should be translated to convey the correct "intent." The ancients thought in a DIFFERENT PATTERN.

For instance.. If Jew came from outside and it was raining?

He would not say.. "It is raining." He may simply say ... "raining."

That might explain ancient translations but it doesn't explain the modern ones. To say the earth "became" something and saying it "was" something gives two different understandings. Isn't the purpose of modern translations so it can be understood in modern word usage?

 

[GenemZ]

That might explain ancient translations but it doesn't explain the modern ones. To say the earth "became" something and saying it "was" something gives two different understandings. Isn't the purpose of modern translations so it can be understood in modern word usage?

It can say "was." But, in the context of Jewish thinking and how the Torah was presented with public oration they knew it indicates "became."

The Masoretic text indicates a "stop/pause" that the reader was to follow between verses 1 and 2.

It was presented like an old fashioned radio enactment with a fading out of one scene, and entering into a new realm when it fades back in.

It would be like an old person retelling a story of his youth... The scene fades out, and the next thing we know we see him young again acting out the story he had begun telling.

Kind of like the fade out technique used in the story, the Christmas Carol, with Scrooge being flashed back to Christmas past. When flashed back? He was seeing it as if is WAS happening in the present.

In that kind of sense of time jumping... In Genesis 1:2, the earth "was" found in a state of having been ruined. It was taken out of the time of the "beginning. "

Thus allowing us to view the state of the planet as in the present moment it spoke of. The Hebrew thinker would automatically have known that it hade "become" that way. Because God would not have created the world in such a ruined chaotic mess. Those understanding what the Hebrew means just knew it had to "become" that way. Without the Masoretic text having a note, to show the need to pause in reading? Is why we see the literalist finding an excuse for his pound of flesh to boss around on a technicality.

Note my next post, please.

 

[GenemZ]

Clearly this reflects the tradition under lying the translation which

appears in the Targum of Onkelos to be noted below.

Furthermore, in the Massoretic Text in which the Jewish scholars

tried to incorporate enough "indicators" to guide the reader as to

correct punctuation there is one small mark which is technically

known as Rebhia which is classified as a "disjunctive accent" in-

tended to notify the reader that he should pause before proceeding to

the next verse. In short, this mark indicates a "break" in the text.

Such a mark appears at the end of Genesis 1.1. This mark has been

noted by several scholars including Luther. It is one indication

among others, that the initial waw (

) which introduces verse 2

should be rendered "but" rather than "and", a dis-junctive rather

than a con-junctive." Without Form and Void - Chapter 1

 

[BeyondET]

I love you too brother, but I have to disagree with you too.

The idea that Genesis 1:1 is a summary goes against the fact that nowhere later in Genesis 1 does God declare creation of the land. This should be obvious especially beginning in verse 2, because the "waters" there are being shown UPON an already existing earth underneath those waters. We know this because of those waters being moved per 6 through 9 verses.

Gen 1:2
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
KJV

Waters? No earth yet, but there were WATERS? How's that? Oh, because God can do anything, the earth was created out of waters floating in space? I thought your interpretation of tohuw va bowhu was a vacuity of nothing existing, which would mean no WATERS there yet.

Even the description of those existing "face of the waters" show an already existing earth; as also "face of the deep", which Hebrew tehowm is an expression used to point to subterranean waters inside the earth.

What Bullinger showed with the attempt to remove the Hebrew meaning for "was" when pointing to 'became' is also a strong pointer, as that point has been covered here too.

But Paul in Romans 8:18-25 in relation to Isaiah 45:18 is one of the real hammer proofs, because Paul says God placed the creation in vanity to bondage of corruption, when God said He did not create the earth "in vain" (tohuw).

So there's definitely enough 'direct' Scripture evidence in other Books in God's Word to point to God's original 'perfect' creation before... He placed it in bondage to corruption for this 2nd world earth age of today.

I love you too brother, but I have to disagree with you too.

The idea that Genesis 1:1 is a summary goes against the fact that nowhere later in Genesis 1 does God declare creation of the land. This should be obvious especially beginning in verse 2, because the "waters" there are being shown UPON an already existing earth underneath those waters. We know this because of those waters being moved per 6 through 9 verses.

Gen 1:2
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
KJV

Waters? No earth yet, but there were WATERS? How's that? Oh, because God can do anything, the earth was created out of waters floating in space? I thought your interpretation of tohuw va bowhu was a vacuity of nothing existing, which would mean no WATERS there yet.

Even the description of those existing "face of the waters" show an already existing earth; as also "face of the deep", which Hebrew tehowm is an expression used to point to subterranean waters inside the earth.

What Bullinger showed with the attempt to remove the Hebrew meaning for "was" when pointing to 'became' is also a strong pointer, as that point has been covered here too.

But Paul in Romans 8:18-25 in relation to Isaiah 45:18 is one of the real hammer proofs, because Paul says God placed the creation in vanity to bondage of corruption, when God said He did not create the earth "in vain" (tohuw).

So there's definitely enough 'direct' Scripture evidence in other Books in God's Word to point to God's original 'perfect' creation before... He placed it in bondage to corruption for this 2nd world earth age of today.

But the deep was never mentioned as being divided like the waters was divided before any dry land appearing and the above water is only mentioned once at the separation. and light separated from darkness over the deep

 

[Davy]

Your comment was tohuw va bohuw if you were.

Are you saying that I claimed 'tohuw va bohuw' means a gaseous vacuum nothing existence like there was nothing there?

It means something was definitely there. Just like Hiroshima and Nagasaki were still there after the atomic bomb hit. Its "how they were there" that it speaks of. Chaos and ruin.. with an eerie sense of emptiness blanketing around it.

You were the one who said the following about tohuw va bohuw ("without form, and void"):

genez said:
"It means hardly "empty and void."

In the majority of OT cases, Hebrew tohuw is used to point to something existing that went to confusion, or into vanity, or to nothing. It's about something that first exists then goes bad (Deut.32:10; 1 Sam.12:21; Job 6:18; Ps.107:40; Isa.40:23; etc.). This is why He said in Isaiah 45:18 that He did not create the earth tohuw ("in vain").

 

[GenemZ]

You were the one who said the following about tohuw va bohuw ("without form, and void"):

genez said:
"It means hardly "empty and void."

In the majority of OT cases, Hebrew tohuw is used to point to something existing that went to confusion, or into vanity, or to nothing. It's about something that first exists then goes bad (Deut.32:10; 1 Sam.12:21; Job 6:18; Ps.107:40; Isa.40:23; etc.). This is why He said in Isaiah 45:18 that He did not create the earth tohuw ("in vain").

I does hardly mean "empty and void." The Jews back then would say it was utterly ruined and topsy turvy with an eerie sense of emptiness ... as one would feel while looking over a burning battle field where an enemy was decimated and left to rot in total defeat

That wording is why Jeremiah chose Genesis 1:2 to strike fear in the Jews living in depraved rebellion.

Jews who had been using pagan religion as their excuse to have ceremonially arranged sex orgies that involved throwing their babies into fire.. Into fire so the screams of the babies could be used to arouse them even further. Yes! Depraved! Yes... they were depraved.

God was not going to be gentle with the Jews before Jeremiah. Genesis 1:2 (to the Hebrew speaking Jews) meant utter ruin and destruction.

That is why Jeremiah had to modify Genesis 1:2 a bit, by making it known that they would not be totally destroyed (as we see happened in Genesis 1:2)

You got to start making sense out of this. If you can not handle the harsh realities of God's judgment when it was called for? You will balk and resist.


Jeremiah 4:23 - 27 sheds light on the harsh intent of Genesis 1:2.

I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone. (notice how the light disappeared)
I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
I looked, and there were no people; (generic Hebrew term for humanoid)
every bird in the sky had flown away.
I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;
all its towns lay in ruins
before the Lord, before his fierce anger.

This is what the Lord says:

“The whole land will be ruined,
though I will not destroy it completely.
​

Jeremiah had to add an addendum to Gen 1:2 with that last verse, so that Satan and his angels would not get the wrong idea, and think God was about to do to the Jews what God had done to their prehistoric creation. A world that Satan and his angels messed up by bringing on God's judgment...

To make sure they knew ... That a remnant of Jews will survive!

 

[Davy]

I believe the waters existed prior to God creating everything we read about in Genesis 1.
Why there was water existing prior is only speculation at best.

That's kind of what modern science believes, i.e., that all life sprang from the protozoa organism in water. At least that's what my college biology text taught. They are pointing to men's theory of evolution with that idea, which is why I do not believe that.

At Genesis 1:1 I believe God spoke, like Apostle Peter said, and the universe with all its qualities suddenly came into existence. The KJV translation of Genesis 1:2 actually follows that idea of science's theories, because they translated tohuw va bohuw to mean a vacuum state of nothingness, when that is not the condition that verse is pointing to.

What I do know is that it is not a coincidence that there are two unique sentence structures repeating themselves. For the...

(a) Unique sentence structure of Genesis 1:1 giving us a brief summary about what is about to happen with the rest of the chapter (Genesis 1) giving us the details is tied to...
​

That interpretation of Genesis 1:1 as a summary is tradition. It is natural to want to see it that way before one has done in-depth Bible study in the whole Bible. So you cannot claim it is unique to that idea, simply because that one verse does not stand on its own. We have to keep reading in Genesis 1, and even in the whole Bible before realizing it's pointing to a previous original 'perfect' creation of the earth which because of Satan's rebellion, God brought a destruction upon the earth to end that time, and bring this 2nd world earth age. That is actually what the Jeremiah 4:23-28 verses are about.

​

(b) The unique sentence structure of Genesis 1:26-27 (The creation of male and femaile on Day 6) is a brief summary of the details described in Genesis chapter 2.​

Not really, because in the Hebrew the word aadam appears in one place in Genesis 1 with the Hebrew article and particle, and in another part of that chapter without, as just aadam by itself. That was not translated by the KJV translators, so one reading the KJV (or other translations) won't know that. That is pointing to God having created all the races of mankind and... the man Adam He formed in His Garden, both on the 6th day. And in Genesis 2:7 it's about the man Adam (eth ha aadam), and not mankind in general.

By your reading it in another way (Seeing something that is not specifically spoken about in the text), you are destroying this unique sentence structure.

You should stop with the false assumption that these things are not in the Biblical text. Bullinger explains these things in the text here:

The Synonymous Words Used for Man. - Appendix to the Companion Bible

As for Isaiah 45:18: There is no mention or hint of the Gap Theory.

Once again, you throw out attempts to affirm your view without actually backing it up. One can try and affirm something, in wanting it to be true, like a statement as 'if'... it were fact. But that's not proof.

There is a Gap of unknown time between God's first creation of the universe at verse 1, and His destruction of that time with the earth laying in a waste state at verse 2. The proof is in the His description of what He did to the old earth per Jeremiah 4:23-28, and also by Peter in 2 Peter 3, and by Paul in Romans 8.

It is merely saying that God did not create the Earth in vain but to be inhabited. Meaning, God did not make the Earth to be like the moon, or Saturn, etc. because those other planets were not created to support human life like the Earth can. He did not create in vain in regards to human life. There is no words mentioned in Isaiah 45:18 that says, “...and so before Adam existed, there was a world that was judged.” These are the kind of words that I would need in order to believe in a Gap Viewpoint.

Nah, the meaning of 'tohuw' there is specific, because God gave a contrast to its meaning in that Isaiah 45:18 verse. Obviously you missed it in favor of the view of men's traditions.

Isa 45:18
18 For thus saith the LORD That created the heavens; God Himself That formed the earth and made it; He hath established it, He created it not in vain (tohuw), He formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
KJV

What's the opposite of the earth having been formed to be inhabited, i.e., to be lived upon? The opposite state is the earth in an uninhabitable condition, a state of ruin. That is the state of 'vanity' that Apostle Paul referred to in Romans 8 that God placed His creation in, bondage to corruption Paul said...

Rom 8:20-21
20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of Him Who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
KJV

The word "creature" means 'the creation'. The Greek for "vanity" is pointing to the same idea as Hebrew tohuw. The FACT is, in order for God to have placed His creation in a state of vanity (tohuw), it means He did NOT originally create it that way. That is... what He said plainly in Isaiah 45:18, that He did NOT create the earth tohuw ("in vain"). It means He did not originally create the earth in that tohuw bondage state.

 

[GenemZ]

Not really, because in the Hebrew the word aadam appears in one place in Genesis 1 with the Hebrew article and particle, and in another part of that chapter without, as just aadam by itself. That was not translated by the KJV translators, so one reading the KJV (or other translations) won't know that. That is pointing to God having created all the races of mankind and... the man Adam He formed in His Garden, both on the 6th day. And in Genesis 2:7 it's about the man Adam (eth ha aadam), and not mankind in general.

In Genesis 1:27.. God created [bara] male and female souls. No body was yet provided for those souls. Created those souls "out from nothing." Its the soul that makes us male or female...

In chapter 2? We do not see the Lord not creating [bara] bodies for those created souls. But, instead, like an artist.. the Lord molded and formed [jatsar] a body for the man extracted from the elements of the earth. Its why we see multi minerals sold in health food store containing elements found in the soil.

I believe God brought about all the races in existence when He scattered mankind all over the face of the earth following the Tower of Babel rebellion...

In order for man to adjust to their new environment,. and keep them in place?... The Lord adapted their bodies to fit the area on earth where God designated for each race.

After all? If the Lord could instantly transform the serpent to becoming legless? God could equally have no problem producing for each race what would best to adapt them to the lands they would find themselves settling in by His decree.

Bingo!

 

[Davy]

But the deep was never mentioned as being divided like the waters was divided before any dry land appearing and the above water is only mentioned once at the separation. and light separated from darkness over the deep

Gen 1:2
2 And the earth was (became) without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
KJV

E.W. Bullinger's note on Gen.1:2 "was":
"Genesis 1:2
was = became. See Gen 2:7; 4:3; 9:15; 19:26; Ex 32:1; Deut 27:9; 2 Sam 7:24, &c. Also rendered came to pass Gen 4:14; 22:1; 23:1; 27:1; Josh 4:1; 5:1; 1 Kings 13:32; Isa 14:24, &c. Also rendered be (in the sense of become) Gen 1:3, &c, and where the verb "to be" is not in italic type. Hence, Ex 3:1, kept = became keeper, quit = become men,"
(from E. W. Bullinger's Companion Bible: Notes and Appendices. Biblesoft Formatted Electronic Database Copyright © 2014 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)

In verses 3 through 5, God brings light, and separates light from the darkness. Yet His creation of the sun and moon for this present world isn't until verse 14 later, pointing that we need to look deeper at this first mention of the division between light and dark.

 

[Davy]

I does hardly mean "empty and void." The Jews back then would say it was utterly ruined and topsy turvy with an eerie sense of emptiness ... as one would feel while looking over a burning battle field where an enemy was decimated and left to rot in total defeat

That wording is why Jeremiah chose Genesis 1:2 to strike fear in the Jews living in depraved rebellion.

Jeremiah was telling them what God said. It was God speaking to the rebellious Jews in the Jeremiah 4:23-28 Scripture...

Jer 4:22-27
22 For My people is foolish, they have not known Me; they are sottish children, and they have none understanding: they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.

23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.

25 I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.

26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.

27 For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.
KJV


As I have said before, I say again, God gave the above (through His prophet Jeremiah) to the rebellious Jews of that time, to show them how He caused a destruction upon the earth in the past, and that as a type of threat to those Jews that He was getting ready to bring the king of Babylon upon them to destroy Jerusalem and take them captive.

Another hint to that destruction of old referred to there about Genesis 1:2, is what Apostle Paul showed at the end of Hebrews 12 about a previous destruction upon the earth that God did of old...


Heb 12:25-29
25 See that ye refuse not Him That speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused Him That spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from Him That speaketh from heaven:

26 Whose voice then shook the earth: but now He hath promised, saying, "Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven."

When was that previous shaking of the earth Paul spoke of there? That phrase, "Yet once more" means it is going to happen again, but this next time will include the shaking of heaven! That future time of shaking is at the end of this present world. It's prophesied in Isaiah 2:19; Isaiah 13:13; Joel 3:16; Haggai 2:6-7.



Then is explained just what that "Yet once more" is a sign of; it's about the removing of the rudiments of this present world, the "elements" of man's works which Peter spoke of in 2 Peter 3:10 for the "day of the Lord" event in our near future.

27 And this word, "Yet once more", signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.
KJV

That means the removing of man's kingdoms off this present earth, and the establishing of God's Kingdom on earth at His Son's return (Zephaniah 3:8). That level of shaking removing evil works happened once before on this old earth??? YES!

Did that shaking end the time of Noah's world? No, God ended Noah's day only with a flood of waters; there's no mention of a shaking of the earth with that event.

 

[Davy]

In Genesis 1:27.. God created [bara] male and female souls. No body was yet provided for those souls. Created those souls "out from nothing." Its the soul that makes us male or female...

That's too much speculation for me. FACT: the eth ha aadam created in Genesis 1 (meaning the man Adam), is the eth ha aadam of the Genesis 2:7 verse. The 'aadam' by itself in Genesis 1 points to 'mankind' in general.

That suggests God also created the races of mankind on His 6th day, but did not place them in His Garden. Only the man Adam (eth ha aadam) did God place in His Garden. Those outside His Garden represent those like in the "land of Nod" where Cain went to.

 

[BeyondET]

Gen 1:2
2 And the earth was (became) without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
KJV

E.W. Bullinger's note on Gen.1:2 "was":
"Genesis 1:2
was = became. See Gen 2:7; 4:3; 9:15; 19:26; Ex 32:1; Deut 27:9; 2 Sam 7:24, &c. Also rendered came to pass Gen 4:14; 22:1; 23:1; 27:1; Josh 4:1; 5:1; 1 Kings 13:32; Isa 14:24, &c. Also rendered be (in the sense of become) Gen 1:3, &c, and where the verb "to be" is not in italic type. Hence, Ex 3:1, kept = became keeper, quit = become men,"
(from E. W. Bullinger's Companion Bible: Notes and Appendices. Biblesoft Formatted Electronic Database Copyright © 2014 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)

In verses 3 through 5, God brings light, and separates light from the darkness. Yet His creation of the sun and moon for this present world isn't until verse 14 later, pointing that we need to look deeper at this first mention of the division between light and dark.

I don’t know I think hayah is translated properly in genesis it can be used for became but that is not often in scripture and the not in vain simply for a purpose