"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."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
"For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old , and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."
(2 Pet 3:5-7 KJV)
Resolving the Genesis narrative requires the reconciliation of these apparent contradictions: 1). How can the Earth be only 6,000 years old (according to the Bible chronology) when the forensic evidence of Geology and the fossil record reveals that the Earth is very ancient? 2). How could DEATH have only started with the fall of man about 6,000 years ago (according to the Bible) when evidence for death is found throughout the geologic ages? 3). How can Man have been on the Earth for only about 6,000 years (according to the Bible), when there is evidence of man-like creatures inhabiting the Earth for hundreds of thousands of years?
2 Peter 3:5-7 is NOT a reference to Noah's flood. There are only two (2) places in the entire Bible where the Earth is flooded by water. One, of course, is at the time of Noah's flood (Genesis 7). The other is at Genesis 1:2 where it speaks about the condition of the Earth at the time just before God said, "Let there be light." Now, if 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not a cross-reference to Noah's flood, then it MUST be a cross-reference to Genesis 1:2 (there is no other alternative - simple logic). And if 2 Peter 3:5-7 is a cross-reference to Genesis 1:2, then the Holy Spirit is calling your attention to something very significant that millions of 'Young Earth' Creationists are blindly overlooking. Specifically, that a glorious ancient world that God created in the distant past (Genesis 1:1), had long since been utterly destroyed, plunged into deep darkness, and overflowed by a raging flood of great waters on a universal scale at the time of Genesis 1:2. The seven-days of Genesis, which follow, chronicle God's methodology of restoring the heavens and Earth and repopulating the world with living creatures, including modern man. There is a time gap between the first two verses of the Bible. It is a time gap that is obscurely declared, but not greatly detailed in the book of Genesis. It is the very first 'mystery' found in the Bible. Knowing that there is a time gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, and WHY there is a time gap, will open more perfect understanding of what the Creation narrative is actually saying, and begin to cut a clear path through the confusion of conflicting theories and interpretations that have occupied the Creation/Science debate.
At this point it is very important that we first show you the Biblical clues that tell us why 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not a reference to Noah's flood.
Clue #1: Compare the phrase "the heavens and earth, which are now" to the phrase the "heavens were of old":
What does that mean? Ask yourself this question: When Noah's flood happened did it change anything in the upper heavens? Would a flood on the Earth have any effect on the sun, moon, or stars? The obvious answer is NO. The heavens of Noah's days were the same heavens as in Adam's day; same sun, same moon, same stars, same planet Mars. FACT: Noah's flood had no effect on the upper heavens. All of Noah's flood's effects were confined to the Earth's surface and atmosphere. And although the Bible speaks about the "windows of heaven" being opened and water coming down (Genesis 7:11), the context of that reference is the "first" heaven of the Earth's atmosphere. That is where rain comes from. (Keep in mind: The Bible says there are three (3) heavens. See 2 Corinthians 12:2).
Again, note the contrasting comparison between the phrases the "heavens were of old" (before the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7) and the "heavens and earth which are now" (after the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7). If Noah's flood did not alter the upper heavens, then this verse must be speaking about an event other than Noah's flood. And Genesis 1:2 is our only other Biblical candidate.
Clue #2: Notice also in the passage that the earth is said to be "standing out" of the water and "in" the water. In our English language these terms suggest that these particular waters were not confined to the surface of the planet. The Bible says that part of the planet was "standing out" from these waters (that is, the sphere of the planet was partially "overflowed") and the location of the bulk of the waters was external to the Earth itself. The Bible says the planet was "in the water" of this particular flood (think of a round fishing floater bobbing in a flowing stream). In other words, part of the Earth is protruding from the waters and not simply just covered by waters on the surface. The literal English wording of this passage does not describe a flood event confined to the Earth's surface. This passage describes a deluge that raged across the solar system, and beyond. (Our solar system and outer space are the "second" heaven of the three heavens.)
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens..." (Genesis 2:4 KJV)
"For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8-9 KJV)
"Behold, the heaven and the heaven of heavens is the LORD's thy God” (Deuteronomy 10.14 KJV)
“I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven…” (2nd Corinthians 12.2-4 KJV)
Try to draw this mental picture: Think of a dark and ruined solar system with water strewn throughout it like one big messy galactic spill. That is what Genesis 1:2 is speaking about. And imagine the planet Earth drifting awash in this roaring and rolling formless mess. Where would those waters have come from? Well, it is an established scientific observation that aging stars create and give off lots of water. Certainly there must have been lots and lots of stars in the heavens that were "of old" and if the cosmos had gone dark and the stars died, then there would be excessive water everywhere throughout space. If that was indeed the case, then all those extinguished stars would need to be reignited to be seen in the present heavens. That is exactly what was done on the 4th day.
But, before any reconstruction of the heavens and Earth could begin, God had to do something with all that water scattered across space (Genesis 1:2). That is why the Bible says the waters were divided (Genesis 1:6-7). It was the first order of business after the Lord God turned on the work lights (Genesis 1:3) and began to clear up the mess:
"And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so."
(Genesis 1:7 KJV)
The bottom line interpretation of the Genesis narrative is this: Those seven days of Genesis were indeed seven literal 24 hour days, but they are not a description of the original creation of all things (Genesis 1:1). Rather they are a Divine special regeneration of the cosmos from what was here before the present world of Man. In other words, there are two creation events in Genesis. The first is described in a one-sentence statement at Genesis 1:1 and the second was accomplished in 7 days and very detailed, beginning at Genesis 1:3. This is why the Bible at Genesis 2:4 says:
"These are the generations [plural] of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens," (Genesis 2:4 KJV)
Again, the Creation account contains the story of two creative events. Only the latter event, the seven days, is outlined in great detail. The first one requires study and searching out and, most importantly, requires FAITH in the infallibility of God's written Word.
We now begin this in-depth study by a thoughtful, logical, and critical examination of the most hotly debated passage in the book of Genesis:
"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."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
Most people gloss over this verse almost like it is not even there. Ask a random sampling of people on the street, "What was the first thing that God created?" and over 90% of the time the answer will be "Light!"
"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."
(Genesis 1:3-5 KJV)
And those 90% who answered "Light" are dead wrong, according to the Bible. Here is why.
Let's apply some English grammar, common sense, and basic science to the issue. Look back at verse Genesis 1:2 and read it again. On the very first of the Genesis days, before God says, "let there be light," several things are already there. Most notably, 1.) the Earth, 2.) waters, 3.) the "deep," and 4.) darkness. These four things already exist on the first day, so light was not the first thing God created. The first thing God created was the "heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). Genesis 1:2 describes the CONDITION of the Earth at a point in time AFTER the "heavens and earth" were first created. Genesis 1:3 is the beginning of a seven day restoration process. More precisely, it was the Divine work of making a new GENERATION of the "heavens and earth":
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
(Genesis 2:4 KJV)
Technical point: Where the wording of Genesis 1:3 says, "let there be light," that in no way implies the initial creation of light; it implies turning on the light or calling for light to shine. In fact, the physics for "light" were already in place back in verse 1:2 because time, matter, and space are already established and "light" is an integral part of the space-time fabric. The "darkness" of Genesis 1:2 merely indicates an absence of light, in time and space.
In response to this line of reasoning Young Earth Creationists will then argue that God created the Earth "without form and void," (and we must assume also the waters and the space called the deep, and the concept of time) at the very beginning of the first day. But the Holy Spirit has a counter-argument to that objection. Compare these two verses and the Hebrew word definitions:
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 , he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
(Isaiah 45:18 KJV)
"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."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
Isaiah 45:18 tells us that the Lord God did NOT originally create the Earth in such a desolate condition. The word "vain" in Isaiah 45:18 and the term "without form" in Genesis 1:2 are from the same Hebrew word (tohuw). These verses by themselves, when rightly-divided in either language, destroy the core premise of Young Earth Creationism. Genesis 1:2 compared with Isaiah 45:18 rules out God initially making the Earth as a formless mud ball, then turning on the work lights and starting the decorating process.
As the verse clearly says, the Earth is already there. Although it is "without form and void" on the surface of the planet and covered in waters, it is most certainly already the formed planet Earth. It even has a name...it's called THE EARTH. The presence of water, in either liquid form or ice (or both), tells us that this planet already has some form of an atmosphere. Since nowhere else in the Genesis narrative does the Spirit tell about God establishing the Earth's geologic structure, we can safely assume that the planet's crust, mantle, and core structure are already fully differentiated. There is already nuclear decay in the mantle producing the heat that drives the Earth's tectonic and volcanic processes. And the dynamo at the Earth's core was already generating the magnetic field which protects the Earth's surface from lethal radiation from outer space. Oh yes, and outer space is already there too because the Earth is in space rotating on its axis on a 24 hour clock (the evening and the morning).
And after seeing that all these things are already present, can we realistically be expected to accept the Young Earth Creationist's argument? Are we to believe that God went "poof" and made the planet Earth, outer space, time, and lots of water, all at the very beginning of the very first day, without a single sentence outlining this complex work? Especially since God then only says, "let there be light" and calls it a day? That seems somewhat out of character in light of the fact that God then spends another five full working days afterward on just the surface features with the Bible fully documenting the work in great detail. Did Moses sleep through that part of the lecture? I don't think so.
The only common sense, logical, and truly Biblical conclusion that these things collectively tell us is that the seven days of Genesis were a reconstruction from the ruins of what was already there. It was a new "generation" of all things. The Word makes a statement of fact on the Earth's ruined condition and then proceeds to tell us how God regenerated all things. That is the simplicity and truth of the narrative. Man has been guilty of reading his own understanding into the meaning of Genesis, instead of just taking God at His word.
The Earth's preserved geological history (which, by the way, God also authored), tells us that this planet is very old. Therefore, there MUST be a Biblical explanation that confirms this observation and provides a Biblical reason why these things are so. And the Ruin-Reconstruction interpretation does exactly that. The Bible gives no specific time when God first created the heaven and the Earth (Genesis 1:1), but it does give the time when the Earth is found in this desolate condition and for the start of the seven, literal, 24 hour days. That time was, indeed, geologically very recently. In this respect only is the Young Earth Creationist fully correct. This is the context for the "gap" on which Ruin-Reconstruction doctrine is based. Exactly how long that time gap represents nobody can say for sure, but it most certainly could accommodate hundreds of millions of years, or less, but a gap is most certainly there.
God is the Divine Author of both the Scriptures and the Earth’s Geologic record. Both are from His hand. Both witness to historical and spiritual Truth. He established the principles and physics by which we can search out the answers to things preserved within the Earth’s geology. His Scriptures provide us with a definitive source of Authority and a faithful guide to verify the validity of those answers. Therefore, it is our firm belief that there cannot possibly be any real contradiction in facts between Geology and Genesis. Any such contradictions only arise within the paradigm of our understanding, be it scientific or scriptural.
Let's be honest. Creationism will never find fair and equal standing and acceptance with the non-believing world’s accepted paradigm of origins. The truth of the Bible must be accepted by faith as the Word of God. The world has placed its “faith” in the Theory of Evolution and carnal reasoning. The supernatural intervention or acts of an invisible Divine Sovereign can neither be proved nor disproved by the scientific method. Regrettably, a large segment of Fundamental Christianity has placed its faith in an interpretation of Genesis which denies not only the historical facts contained within the Earth itself but, in some cases, the concise wording of the Holy Bible as well. A rightly-divided exegesis of the Genesis account, however, reveals the full truth when the geologic evidence is examined in the light of a truly literal Scriptural context.
Without the original Hebrew and Greek Bible manuscripts, (The originals no longer exist - only variants of copies.) one must either put his trust in the opinions of modern scholars or in a reliable Bible translation he can trust as a final authority in all matters.
In the course of their work the translators of the King James Bible were led to leave two subtle textual indicators within their 1611 English translation of the book of Genesis to call the readers' attention to the doctrine of a time gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 in the creation narrative, and this was done almost 400 years ago, long before Darwin or the founding of the modern geological sciences. These indicators are not found in more recent English translations, because contemporary scholars say they were "mistranslations" of the Hebrew words. But were they really?
The first of these two "mistranslations" involves these two verses:
" In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
(Genesis 1:1 KJV)
"Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them."
(Genesis 2:1 KJV)
The word "heaven" (singular) in Genesis 1:1 and the word "heavens" (plural) at Genesis 2:1 are both from the same Hebrew word (shâmayim). Modern scholars insist that the word "heaven" in Genesis 1:1 should also be rendered plural; thus all new versions say "heavens" in Genesis 1:1. Technically, that is not quite correct. The tense in the Hebrew is the "dual." It is easily confused with the plural, inasmuch as Hebrew words take on an "im" ending when made plural. "Ha'shamayim" looks like a plural word. However, the "ayim" ending is a special case called the 'dual.' It always describes exactly two (unlike the strict plural), but the two are considered as one. We have a similar case in English. For example, when we speak of a "pair of pants" or a "pair of glasses," we never think of these items as more than one despite the "s" ending on the nouns (normally a plural indicator). The AV1611 translators obviously knew this.
In respect to Gap Theory doctrine, the implication is that there was a structural difference in the "heavens" of the old world (when the heaven and Earth were originally created) as compared to the three-heavens structure God established in the new world after the seven days regeneration.
The second "mistranslation" concerns these two verses:
"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."
(Genesis 1:28 KJV)
"And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth."
The fur really flies over the KJV Bible translators' choice of English words in these two verses, but especially so in Genesis 1:28 of the creation narrative. Modern scholars (and most Young Earth Creationists) insist that the Hebrew word (male) should be translated as "fill," which certainly is one meaning of the Hebrew word, and is rendered as "fill" in most newer translations. But in the case of Genesis 9:1 where Noah and his family are instructed to RE-populate an earth that has been wiped out by the flood, the word "replenish" as translated in the old KJV Bible renders a more accurate English meaning than does the word "fill." Because the KJV translators used the word "replenish" in both Genesis 9:1 and Genesis 1:28, on the surface this seems to indicate that the translators were pointing to a similarity in circumstances between Adam and Noah in their respective Divine commissions. If the word "replenish" stands in Genesis 1:28, then both Adam and Noah are told to repopulate a desolate earth after a major destructive event, specifically, a flood. (Note: Remember, the earth was flooded at Genesis 1:2 before the seven days of Genesis.):
"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."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
Since the flood of Noah's time was a judgment upon the world of that time, then a flood before Adam's creation would imply a previous judgment upon an old world order before the seven days of the creation narrative.
To insist that the word "fill" is the best rendering implies that the King James Bible translators did not understand the true meaning of the Hebrew word and "mistranslated" male in both those verses. But did they really? Just five verses before rendering male as "replenish" in Genesis 1:28, the same translators rendered male as "fill" in Genesis 1:22:
"And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth."
(Genesis 1:22 KJV)
This fact shows that those translators most certainly knew the subtle differences in meanings of the Hebrew word male and were well aware of the interpretive implications of using the English word "replenish" in Genesis 1:28 and 9:1 in the King James translation.
Now, if these were the only places in the Scriptures that gave support to the "Gap Theory" interpretation, that would be very skimpy evidence indeed upon which to base sound doctrine. But, as we have already pointed out, there are other literal wording considerations within the Holy Bible that raise valid interpretative issues. For example, there is the issue of the Biblical word "Generations":
Like mankind, the Bible says that the Earth and the heavens also have "generations" in their histories:
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,"
(Genesis 2:4 KJV)
"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;"
(Genesis 5:1 KJV)
"These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
(Genesis 6:9 KJV)
In all three of the verses above the word "generations" is defined as a line of descent, a family history from one generation to the next. The Hebrew word for generations is plural in all cases. If God only made the heavens and Earth once, as Young Earth Creationists would have you believe, then the term "generations" should have been in the singular, which it is NOT in either Hebrew or the KJV English translation.
The Holy Scriptures are clearly saying that the seven days' work was a new generation of the heavens and the Earth when God made the world of Man following the desolation found at the time of Genesis 1:2. Something similar will be done in the future. The Bible says there will be yet another generation of the heavens and Earth at the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:
"And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
(Matthew 19:28 KJV)
"Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness."
(2 Peter 3:13 KJV)
"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind."
(Isaiah 65:17 KJV)
The geologic and fossil records are the surviving evidence that God preserved for us to testify to the truth that the Earth is very old and was inhabited for a long period before the seven days of Genesis chapter one. Those records, preserved in stone, also provide evidence of a long reign of Death upon the old Earth and the end of the old world order by a universal destructive event.
One of the greatest remaining mysteries of modern geology is an episode of mass destruction and extinction which occurred in the recent geological age called the Pleistocene, the age just before the Holocene, which is called the age of Man. This extinction event appears to be closely linked with the Ice Age. Evidence of this global catastrophe consists, in part, of vast "animal cemeteries," found many places around the world, which seem to show a catastrophic and sudden destruction of life all across the planet only a few thousand years ago. This evidence was documented by many back in the 19th century, but this evidence is mostly ignored by the leading scientists of our day because it does not fit into the prevailing Evolutionary paradigm. The Young Earth Creationists, however, have seized upon these reports as their proof of Noah's flood.
Clearly, if we believe the literal wording of the Bible, there was indeed a universal creative event during the seven days of Genesis, about 6,000 literal years ago. But the literal wording of the Bible and the Earth's geology reveals that there is more to the story - it was not the original creation of all things. Understanding the time gap in Genesis opens a vast knowledge gap. You just can't rely on your own understanding or the traditions of man to obtain this knowledge. You have to TRUST THE BOOK.
"For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."
(Isaiah 55:8-9 KJV)
Young Earth Creationists adamantly claim that a literal reading of Romans 5:12 proves there was no previous "world" before Adam. Yet they ignore the term "world that then was" in 2 Peter 3:5-7.
"For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old , and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished : But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."
(2 Pet 3:5-7 KJV)
And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
(Revelation 21:1 KJV)
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
"For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old , and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."
(2 Pet 3:5-7 KJV)
Resolving the Genesis narrative requires the reconciliation of these apparent contradictions: 1). How can the Earth be only 6,000 years old (according to the Bible chronology) when the forensic evidence of Geology and the fossil record reveals that the Earth is very ancient? 2). How could DEATH have only started with the fall of man about 6,000 years ago (according to the Bible) when evidence for death is found throughout the geologic ages? 3). How can Man have been on the Earth for only about 6,000 years (according to the Bible), when there is evidence of man-like creatures inhabiting the Earth for hundreds of thousands of years?
2 Peter 3:5-7 is NOT a reference to Noah's flood. There are only two (2) places in the entire Bible where the Earth is flooded by water. One, of course, is at the time of Noah's flood (Genesis 7). The other is at Genesis 1:2 where it speaks about the condition of the Earth at the time just before God said, "Let there be light." Now, if 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not a cross-reference to Noah's flood, then it MUST be a cross-reference to Genesis 1:2 (there is no other alternative - simple logic). And if 2 Peter 3:5-7 is a cross-reference to Genesis 1:2, then the Holy Spirit is calling your attention to something very significant that millions of 'Young Earth' Creationists are blindly overlooking. Specifically, that a glorious ancient world that God created in the distant past (Genesis 1:1), had long since been utterly destroyed, plunged into deep darkness, and overflowed by a raging flood of great waters on a universal scale at the time of Genesis 1:2. The seven-days of Genesis, which follow, chronicle God's methodology of restoring the heavens and Earth and repopulating the world with living creatures, including modern man. There is a time gap between the first two verses of the Bible. It is a time gap that is obscurely declared, but not greatly detailed in the book of Genesis. It is the very first 'mystery' found in the Bible. Knowing that there is a time gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, and WHY there is a time gap, will open more perfect understanding of what the Creation narrative is actually saying, and begin to cut a clear path through the confusion of conflicting theories and interpretations that have occupied the Creation/Science debate.
At this point it is very important that we first show you the Biblical clues that tell us why 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not a reference to Noah's flood.
Clue #1: Compare the phrase "the heavens and earth, which are now" to the phrase the "heavens were of old":
What does that mean? Ask yourself this question: When Noah's flood happened did it change anything in the upper heavens? Would a flood on the Earth have any effect on the sun, moon, or stars? The obvious answer is NO. The heavens of Noah's days were the same heavens as in Adam's day; same sun, same moon, same stars, same planet Mars. FACT: Noah's flood had no effect on the upper heavens. All of Noah's flood's effects were confined to the Earth's surface and atmosphere. And although the Bible speaks about the "windows of heaven" being opened and water coming down (Genesis 7:11), the context of that reference is the "first" heaven of the Earth's atmosphere. That is where rain comes from. (Keep in mind: The Bible says there are three (3) heavens. See 2 Corinthians 12:2).
Again, note the contrasting comparison between the phrases the "heavens were of old" (before the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7) and the "heavens and earth which are now" (after the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7). If Noah's flood did not alter the upper heavens, then this verse must be speaking about an event other than Noah's flood. And Genesis 1:2 is our only other Biblical candidate.
Clue #2: Notice also in the passage that the earth is said to be "standing out" of the water and "in" the water. In our English language these terms suggest that these particular waters were not confined to the surface of the planet. The Bible says that part of the planet was "standing out" from these waters (that is, the sphere of the planet was partially "overflowed") and the location of the bulk of the waters was external to the Earth itself. The Bible says the planet was "in the water" of this particular flood (think of a round fishing floater bobbing in a flowing stream). In other words, part of the Earth is protruding from the waters and not simply just covered by waters on the surface. The literal English wording of this passage does not describe a flood event confined to the Earth's surface. This passage describes a deluge that raged across the solar system, and beyond. (Our solar system and outer space are the "second" heaven of the three heavens.)
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens..." (Genesis 2:4 KJV)
"For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8-9 KJV)
"Behold, the heaven and the heaven of heavens is the LORD's thy God” (Deuteronomy 10.14 KJV)
“I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven…” (2nd Corinthians 12.2-4 KJV)
Try to draw this mental picture: Think of a dark and ruined solar system with water strewn throughout it like one big messy galactic spill. That is what Genesis 1:2 is speaking about. And imagine the planet Earth drifting awash in this roaring and rolling formless mess. Where would those waters have come from? Well, it is an established scientific observation that aging stars create and give off lots of water. Certainly there must have been lots and lots of stars in the heavens that were "of old" and if the cosmos had gone dark and the stars died, then there would be excessive water everywhere throughout space. If that was indeed the case, then all those extinguished stars would need to be reignited to be seen in the present heavens. That is exactly what was done on the 4th day.
But, before any reconstruction of the heavens and Earth could begin, God had to do something with all that water scattered across space (Genesis 1:2). That is why the Bible says the waters were divided (Genesis 1:6-7). It was the first order of business after the Lord God turned on the work lights (Genesis 1:3) and began to clear up the mess:
"And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so."
(Genesis 1:7 KJV)
The bottom line interpretation of the Genesis narrative is this: Those seven days of Genesis were indeed seven literal 24 hour days, but they are not a description of the original creation of all things (Genesis 1:1). Rather they are a Divine special regeneration of the cosmos from what was here before the present world of Man. In other words, there are two creation events in Genesis. The first is described in a one-sentence statement at Genesis 1:1 and the second was accomplished in 7 days and very detailed, beginning at Genesis 1:3. This is why the Bible at Genesis 2:4 says:
"These are the generations [plural] of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens," (Genesis 2:4 KJV)
Again, the Creation account contains the story of two creative events. Only the latter event, the seven days, is outlined in great detail. The first one requires study and searching out and, most importantly, requires FAITH in the infallibility of God's written Word.
We now begin this in-depth study by a thoughtful, logical, and critical examination of the most hotly debated passage in the book of Genesis:
"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."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
Most people gloss over this verse almost like it is not even there. Ask a random sampling of people on the street, "What was the first thing that God created?" and over 90% of the time the answer will be "Light!"
"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."
(Genesis 1:3-5 KJV)
And those 90% who answered "Light" are dead wrong, according to the Bible. Here is why.
Let's apply some English grammar, common sense, and basic science to the issue. Look back at verse Genesis 1:2 and read it again. On the very first of the Genesis days, before God says, "let there be light," several things are already there. Most notably, 1.) the Earth, 2.) waters, 3.) the "deep," and 4.) darkness. These four things already exist on the first day, so light was not the first thing God created. The first thing God created was the "heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). Genesis 1:2 describes the CONDITION of the Earth at a point in time AFTER the "heavens and earth" were first created. Genesis 1:3 is the beginning of a seven day restoration process. More precisely, it was the Divine work of making a new GENERATION of the "heavens and earth":
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
(Genesis 2:4 KJV)
Technical point: Where the wording of Genesis 1:3 says, "let there be light," that in no way implies the initial creation of light; it implies turning on the light or calling for light to shine. In fact, the physics for "light" were already in place back in verse 1:2 because time, matter, and space are already established and "light" is an integral part of the space-time fabric. The "darkness" of Genesis 1:2 merely indicates an absence of light, in time and space.
In response to this line of reasoning Young Earth Creationists will then argue that God created the Earth "without form and void," (and we must assume also the waters and the space called the deep, and the concept of time) at the very beginning of the first day. But the Holy Spirit has a counter-argument to that objection. Compare these two verses and the Hebrew word definitions:
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 , he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
(Isaiah 45:18 KJV)
"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."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
Isaiah 45:18 tells us that the Lord God did NOT originally create the Earth in such a desolate condition. The word "vain" in Isaiah 45:18 and the term "without form" in Genesis 1:2 are from the same Hebrew word (tohuw). These verses by themselves, when rightly-divided in either language, destroy the core premise of Young Earth Creationism. Genesis 1:2 compared with Isaiah 45:18 rules out God initially making the Earth as a formless mud ball, then turning on the work lights and starting the decorating process.
As the verse clearly says, the Earth is already there. Although it is "without form and void" on the surface of the planet and covered in waters, it is most certainly already the formed planet Earth. It even has a name...it's called THE EARTH. The presence of water, in either liquid form or ice (or both), tells us that this planet already has some form of an atmosphere. Since nowhere else in the Genesis narrative does the Spirit tell about God establishing the Earth's geologic structure, we can safely assume that the planet's crust, mantle, and core structure are already fully differentiated. There is already nuclear decay in the mantle producing the heat that drives the Earth's tectonic and volcanic processes. And the dynamo at the Earth's core was already generating the magnetic field which protects the Earth's surface from lethal radiation from outer space. Oh yes, and outer space is already there too because the Earth is in space rotating on its axis on a 24 hour clock (the evening and the morning).
And after seeing that all these things are already present, can we realistically be expected to accept the Young Earth Creationist's argument? Are we to believe that God went "poof" and made the planet Earth, outer space, time, and lots of water, all at the very beginning of the very first day, without a single sentence outlining this complex work? Especially since God then only says, "let there be light" and calls it a day? That seems somewhat out of character in light of the fact that God then spends another five full working days afterward on just the surface features with the Bible fully documenting the work in great detail. Did Moses sleep through that part of the lecture? I don't think so.
The only common sense, logical, and truly Biblical conclusion that these things collectively tell us is that the seven days of Genesis were a reconstruction from the ruins of what was already there. It was a new "generation" of all things. The Word makes a statement of fact on the Earth's ruined condition and then proceeds to tell us how God regenerated all things. That is the simplicity and truth of the narrative. Man has been guilty of reading his own understanding into the meaning of Genesis, instead of just taking God at His word.
The Earth's preserved geological history (which, by the way, God also authored), tells us that this planet is very old. Therefore, there MUST be a Biblical explanation that confirms this observation and provides a Biblical reason why these things are so. And the Ruin-Reconstruction interpretation does exactly that. The Bible gives no specific time when God first created the heaven and the Earth (Genesis 1:1), but it does give the time when the Earth is found in this desolate condition and for the start of the seven, literal, 24 hour days. That time was, indeed, geologically very recently. In this respect only is the Young Earth Creationist fully correct. This is the context for the "gap" on which Ruin-Reconstruction doctrine is based. Exactly how long that time gap represents nobody can say for sure, but it most certainly could accommodate hundreds of millions of years, or less, but a gap is most certainly there.
God is the Divine Author of both the Scriptures and the Earth’s Geologic record. Both are from His hand. Both witness to historical and spiritual Truth. He established the principles and physics by which we can search out the answers to things preserved within the Earth’s geology. His Scriptures provide us with a definitive source of Authority and a faithful guide to verify the validity of those answers. Therefore, it is our firm belief that there cannot possibly be any real contradiction in facts between Geology and Genesis. Any such contradictions only arise within the paradigm of our understanding, be it scientific or scriptural.
Let's be honest. Creationism will never find fair and equal standing and acceptance with the non-believing world’s accepted paradigm of origins. The truth of the Bible must be accepted by faith as the Word of God. The world has placed its “faith” in the Theory of Evolution and carnal reasoning. The supernatural intervention or acts of an invisible Divine Sovereign can neither be proved nor disproved by the scientific method. Regrettably, a large segment of Fundamental Christianity has placed its faith in an interpretation of Genesis which denies not only the historical facts contained within the Earth itself but, in some cases, the concise wording of the Holy Bible as well. A rightly-divided exegesis of the Genesis account, however, reveals the full truth when the geologic evidence is examined in the light of a truly literal Scriptural context.
Without the original Hebrew and Greek Bible manuscripts, (The originals no longer exist - only variants of copies.) one must either put his trust in the opinions of modern scholars or in a reliable Bible translation he can trust as a final authority in all matters.
In the course of their work the translators of the King James Bible were led to leave two subtle textual indicators within their 1611 English translation of the book of Genesis to call the readers' attention to the doctrine of a time gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 in the creation narrative, and this was done almost 400 years ago, long before Darwin or the founding of the modern geological sciences. These indicators are not found in more recent English translations, because contemporary scholars say they were "mistranslations" of the Hebrew words. But were they really?
The first of these two "mistranslations" involves these two verses:
" In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
(Genesis 1:1 KJV)
"Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them."
(Genesis 2:1 KJV)
The word "heaven" (singular) in Genesis 1:1 and the word "heavens" (plural) at Genesis 2:1 are both from the same Hebrew word (shâmayim). Modern scholars insist that the word "heaven" in Genesis 1:1 should also be rendered plural; thus all new versions say "heavens" in Genesis 1:1. Technically, that is not quite correct. The tense in the Hebrew is the "dual." It is easily confused with the plural, inasmuch as Hebrew words take on an "im" ending when made plural. "Ha'shamayim" looks like a plural word. However, the "ayim" ending is a special case called the 'dual.' It always describes exactly two (unlike the strict plural), but the two are considered as one. We have a similar case in English. For example, when we speak of a "pair of pants" or a "pair of glasses," we never think of these items as more than one despite the "s" ending on the nouns (normally a plural indicator). The AV1611 translators obviously knew this.
In respect to Gap Theory doctrine, the implication is that there was a structural difference in the "heavens" of the old world (when the heaven and Earth were originally created) as compared to the three-heavens structure God established in the new world after the seven days regeneration.
The second "mistranslation" concerns these two verses:
"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."
(Genesis 1:28 KJV)
"And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth."
The fur really flies over the KJV Bible translators' choice of English words in these two verses, but especially so in Genesis 1:28 of the creation narrative. Modern scholars (and most Young Earth Creationists) insist that the Hebrew word (male) should be translated as "fill," which certainly is one meaning of the Hebrew word, and is rendered as "fill" in most newer translations. But in the case of Genesis 9:1 where Noah and his family are instructed to RE-populate an earth that has been wiped out by the flood, the word "replenish" as translated in the old KJV Bible renders a more accurate English meaning than does the word "fill." Because the KJV translators used the word "replenish" in both Genesis 9:1 and Genesis 1:28, on the surface this seems to indicate that the translators were pointing to a similarity in circumstances between Adam and Noah in their respective Divine commissions. If the word "replenish" stands in Genesis 1:28, then both Adam and Noah are told to repopulate a desolate earth after a major destructive event, specifically, a flood. (Note: Remember, the earth was flooded at Genesis 1:2 before the seven days of Genesis.):
"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."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)
Since the flood of Noah's time was a judgment upon the world of that time, then a flood before Adam's creation would imply a previous judgment upon an old world order before the seven days of the creation narrative.
To insist that the word "fill" is the best rendering implies that the King James Bible translators did not understand the true meaning of the Hebrew word and "mistranslated" male in both those verses. But did they really? Just five verses before rendering male as "replenish" in Genesis 1:28, the same translators rendered male as "fill" in Genesis 1:22:
"And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth."
(Genesis 1:22 KJV)
This fact shows that those translators most certainly knew the subtle differences in meanings of the Hebrew word male and were well aware of the interpretive implications of using the English word "replenish" in Genesis 1:28 and 9:1 in the King James translation.
Now, if these were the only places in the Scriptures that gave support to the "Gap Theory" interpretation, that would be very skimpy evidence indeed upon which to base sound doctrine. But, as we have already pointed out, there are other literal wording considerations within the Holy Bible that raise valid interpretative issues. For example, there is the issue of the Biblical word "Generations":
Like mankind, the Bible says that the Earth and the heavens also have "generations" in their histories:
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,"
(Genesis 2:4 KJV)
"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;"
(Genesis 5:1 KJV)
"These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
(Genesis 6:9 KJV)
In all three of the verses above the word "generations" is defined as a line of descent, a family history from one generation to the next. The Hebrew word for generations is plural in all cases. If God only made the heavens and Earth once, as Young Earth Creationists would have you believe, then the term "generations" should have been in the singular, which it is NOT in either Hebrew or the KJV English translation.
The Holy Scriptures are clearly saying that the seven days' work was a new generation of the heavens and the Earth when God made the world of Man following the desolation found at the time of Genesis 1:2. Something similar will be done in the future. The Bible says there will be yet another generation of the heavens and Earth at the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ:
"And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
(Matthew 19:28 KJV)
"Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness."
(2 Peter 3:13 KJV)
"For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind."
(Isaiah 65:17 KJV)
The geologic and fossil records are the surviving evidence that God preserved for us to testify to the truth that the Earth is very old and was inhabited for a long period before the seven days of Genesis chapter one. Those records, preserved in stone, also provide evidence of a long reign of Death upon the old Earth and the end of the old world order by a universal destructive event.
One of the greatest remaining mysteries of modern geology is an episode of mass destruction and extinction which occurred in the recent geological age called the Pleistocene, the age just before the Holocene, which is called the age of Man. This extinction event appears to be closely linked with the Ice Age. Evidence of this global catastrophe consists, in part, of vast "animal cemeteries," found many places around the world, which seem to show a catastrophic and sudden destruction of life all across the planet only a few thousand years ago. This evidence was documented by many back in the 19th century, but this evidence is mostly ignored by the leading scientists of our day because it does not fit into the prevailing Evolutionary paradigm. The Young Earth Creationists, however, have seized upon these reports as their proof of Noah's flood.
Clearly, if we believe the literal wording of the Bible, there was indeed a universal creative event during the seven days of Genesis, about 6,000 literal years ago. But the literal wording of the Bible and the Earth's geology reveals that there is more to the story - it was not the original creation of all things. Understanding the time gap in Genesis opens a vast knowledge gap. You just can't rely on your own understanding or the traditions of man to obtain this knowledge. You have to TRUST THE BOOK.
"For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."
(Isaiah 55:8-9 KJV)
Young Earth Creationists adamantly claim that a literal reading of Romans 5:12 proves there was no previous "world" before Adam. Yet they ignore the term "world that then was" in 2 Peter 3:5-7.
"For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old , and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished : But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."
(2 Pet 3:5-7 KJV)
And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
(Revelation 21:1 KJV)