What is the fascinating history
behind earth's creation?

Introduction

There are two separate creationist viewpoints when it comes to the first two verses in the Bible [1]. In Genesis the creation of the heavens and the earth are described:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.  The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." (Genesis 1:1-2)

The second point of view is that the preexisting earth became wasted and ruined and that God refashions it during the creation week.  From verse 3 on what is actually being described is a recreation account in seven 24-hour days or one week, which only involves the earth. The physical realm outside the earth, including time, energy and the spiritual realm, including angels, already exists.  Those that hold to this model of creation are often call Old Earth Creationists  [2].

Figure 1

The creation of the heavens and the earth is the topic of the first chapter in Genesis.  Were they created only a few thousand years ago or are the heavens and the earth older?

The purpose of writing this paper is to show that there is indeed a gap or a time period between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, and that the Old Earth Creation, the second of the two scenarios listed above, is correct.  By understanding that this gap exists a better understanding of Bible history will develop.  Timothy states that the entire Bible is inspired.   It can be used to further clarify the creation account.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."  (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

However, just because a gap is Biblical, consideration to the following is important:

The duration of the gap will be unspecified in this paper for two reasons; first and foremost the Bible does not mention, except in a general way, the length of the gap and secondly, the scientific dating methods that some creationists have used to date the gap are based on uncertain assumptions.  Although the gap is utilized because some creationists believe that the geologic ages must be accounted for by the insertions of hundreds of millions and or billions of years, the justification for the gap in this paper is based on Biblical evidence not some type of supposed harmonization with geological and evolutionary theory.  Just because some people believe that a gap must be used to allow theistic evolution to proceed does not mean that all people that believe in the gap are theistic evolutionists.  Also because some creationists use the gap as a place to insert the modern geologic record does not mean that all people that believe in the gap believe in the modern geologic record. 

There are many versions of the gap scenario.  The more freewheeling models consist of a world that preexisted before verse 2, which was inhabited by soulless, manlike creatures.  These manlike creatures are the supposed pre-Adamic fossils that are being unearthed today [3].  The world was destroyed by God's judgment and this is what laid down the vast beds of strata.  Therefore in this model of the gap the flood of Noah is often regulated to being a local event.  Once again believing in a gap does not necessarily mean that you must accept all the baggage that comes with that particular interpretation [4].

Although the gap is Biblical a non-belief in the gap does not makes you a heretic.  There are many intelligent, respected researchers that are biblically minded that have done much needed research in the field of creation that do not believe in the gap.  They believe that the entirety of the universe, physically and spiritually, was created a few thousand years ago, usually 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.  Even though they may not be in agreement with this one point this does not affect their status before God.  It is a non-salvation issue.  The opposite is also true; the salvation of gappists is not being questioned. To be ultimately saved requires a personal relationship with Jesus Christ (Romans 8:14-17).  Many people down through history have fulfilled the requirement for salvation without ever having considered the gap (Hebrew 11:38-40).

God's Revelation

In our search for understanding about what happened to the earth during the gap period the book of Ecclesiastes and Proverbs reveal some very important information.

"As you do not know what is the way of the wind, Or how the bones grow in the womb of her who is with child, So you do not know the works of God who makes everything." (Ecclesiastes 11:5)

"It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, But the glory of kings is to search out a matter." (Proverbs 25:2)

The point is man will never quite understand everything that God has done.  God has only revealed so much to man.  God has kept some things from human understanding.  Often Biblical concepts must be hammered out as the scriptures say "Precept upon precept…line upon line…Here a little, there a little."  But just because understanding is not evident or requires digging does not mean that the search should not continue.  On the other hand in his word, God has revealed or alluded to things that man cannot discover by himself.  Some things are spiritually discerned and God must reveal them.  An example of this would be the creation of the Sabbath on the seventh day of the creation week (Genesis 2:1-3).  By using only human understanding man could never discern the difference between the Sabbath and any other day of the week, therefore God must reveal this to man.  So in a sense a complete understanding of what occurred during the creation week will never be discovered.  Man can only understand what God has allowed him to understand.

Common Objections to the Gap

There are several major areas that supposedly show that there is no gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.  The major ones used by those that do not believe in a gap are listed below.

1. The gap theory is a new interpretation: Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847) and Cyrus I. Scofield (1843-1921) developer of the Scofield Reference Bible popularized this idea.  It has only been popular for the last 190 years.  It was introduced after geologic evidence indicated that the earth was very old.

2. The Bible does not support a gap:  A gap can only be placed in the first two verses of Genesis by violating the linguistics and the intent of the scriptures.

3. There was no sin before Adam: There was no death prior to sin, and Adam brought sin. All fossils—dead things—are post Adamic.

4. The creation was pronounced good:  If the earth were built on the dead remains of a past world how could God proclaim, "it was good."

5. Angels were created on the first day:  Angels have no prehistory before the creation week, therefore angels and humans are chronological contemporaries. 

The above listing is not inclusive of all the objections that the young earth creationist have leveled against the gappists, but they are the most common and often used.  All of these major objections and a few minor objections are going to be examined in detail to see if they really can be used to counter a belief in the gap.

Is the Gap Model Recent?

Figure 2

Is the gap theory of recent origin?  Was it formulated to counter modern geologic theory and its need for the earth to be older than a few thousand years?

" The modern gap theory was proposed in 1814 by Thomas Chalmers, a leading Scottish theologian.  Some geologists of his day had argued that the earth was much older than Genesis implies.  Chalmers, therefore, proposed the gap theory to harmonize Genesis with the demands of those geologists.  There is no clear record of anyone prior to 1814 interpreting Genesis 1:1-2 in this way. "

Is it true that the gap theory is of recent origin?—the answer is a resounding—NO!  The gap model has a long and distinguished history and has been supported by many ancient Hebrew and Biblical scholars.  Consider the following quotes from Arthur C. Custance's writings [7].  These quotes are from his book Without Form and Void, chapter one entitled: A Long-held View.  Notice how these dates are much older than the mid 1814 date.

" Jewish commentators made the discovery, but their early literature (the Midrash for example) reveals that they had some intimation of an early pre-Adamic catastrophe affecting the whole earth.   Similarly, clear evidence appears in the oldest extant Version of the Hebrew Scriptures (the Targum of Onkelos) and some intimation may be seen in the "punctuation marks" of the Massoretic text of Genesis Chapter One.  Early Jewish writers subsequently built up some abstruse arguments about God's dealings with Israel on the basis of this belief and it would seem that Paul in his Epistle to the Corinthians is at one point making indirect reference to this traditional background (see 2 Corinthians 4:6). A few of the early Church Fathers accepted this interpretation and based some of their doctrines upon it. It is true that both they and their Jewish antecedents used arguments which to us seem at times to have no force whatever, but this is not the issue. The truth is, as we shall see, that the idea of a once ordered world having been brought to ruin as a consequence of divine judgment just prior to the creation of Adam, was apparently quite widespread.   It was not debated: it was merely held by some and not by others. Those who held it referred to it and built up arguments upon it without apparently feeling the need to apologize for believing as they did, nor for explaining the grounds for their faith. (p. 2)

Hugo St. Victor (1097-1141) was a Flemish scholar and a member of the Augustinian Monastery of St. Victor and later Prior of the monastery in Paris.   He wrote: "Perhaps enough has already been debated about these matters thus far, if we add only this, 'how long did the world remain in this disorder before the regular re-ordering (dis-positio) of it was taken in hand? For the fact that the first substance of all things arose at the very beginning of time – or rather, with time itself - is settled by the statement that, 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth'.  But how long it continued in this state of confusion. Scripture does not clearly show." (p. 12)

Two centuries later, Thomas Aquinas (1226 -1274) reiterated this view when he wrote: "but it seems better to maintain (the view) that the creation was prior to any of the days (literally, before any day)." (p. 12-13)

And even more specific was the most learned of all medieval commentators on Genesis, Pererius (1535 - 1610) who wrote: "Even though before the first day, the heavens and the elements were made subsequent to the substance (ie., basic essence of creative activity) nevertheless they were not perfected and completely furnished until the period of the six days: for then was given to them (their) furnishing, (their) fulfillment (filling up), and (their) completion.   However, just how long that darkened state of the world lasted, ie., whether it lasted more than one day or less than one day, this is not clear to me, nor (I hold) is it clear to any other mortal man unless to one to whom it has been divinely made so." (p. 14)

However, among those who approached the problem from this angle was the famous Dr. E. B. Pusey of Oxford University whose work on Daniel provided him with an opportunity to give a summary statement of his own views on the matter.   First of all, he deals strictly with the questions of grammar and syntax…. (p. 24)

While it has become a custom to challenge the Hebrew scholarship of anyone who supports the "Gap Theory", and while it has thus be come possible to get away with such pontifical statements as "no Hebrew scholar supports this view" (!), there never has been any question as to the scholarship of Pusey who nevertheless did support it. (p. 26-27)

It is well to remember that a substantial number of other Hebrew scholars have adopted this view on the linguistic evidences Martin Anstey, Alfred Edersheim (to whom Hebrew was almost a native language), H. Browne, G. V. Garland, N. Snaith (who seems to me to favor "became" for "was"), T. Jollie Smith, A. I. McCaul, R. Jameison, and many others*. (*See appendix 1 of Without Form and Void for excerpts from these sources) (p.  28)"

Figure 3		As an in-depth example of a Hebraic and Biblical scholar, who supported the idea of a recreation scenario for the first two verses in the Bible, consider the life of William Whiston [8]. Whiston born in England (1667-1752) sought to harmonize religion and science.  He was ordained in 1698 and served as a chaplain to the Anglican Bishop. He published A New Theory of the Earth [9] in 1696.  See figure to the left [10].  In this work he claimed that the Noachian deluge had been caused by the passing of the earth through the watery tail of a comet.  Afterwards he was an assistant to Sir Isaac Newton and succeeded him as professor of mathematics at Cambridge in 1703.  He was a friend of Edmund Halley, the discoverer of the cyclic nature of comets. At a later date he wrote Astronomical Principles of Religion.  Although he wrote many religious works he is best known for translating the works of Josephus into English. Young Earth Creationist often claim that the gap theory was introduced in the mid 1800's to counter the rising threat of modern geologic thought and vast periods of time.  All of the following quotes [11] are from Whiston's A New Theory of the Earth published in 1696.  This was more than 90 years earlier than James Hutton's Theory of the Earth, which was published in 1785.
A diagram from William Whiston's book, A New Theory of the Earth showing the trajectory of the earth and the flood-causing comet.  Whiston wrote extensively about the gap.

James Hutton is often called the father of modern geology.  In reality, the gap model is very old and it preceded the need for geologic time.

The creation of the earth out of a confused chaos:

"That the notions they have entertained of the Nature, Stile, and Extent of the Creation of the World in six days, are false, precarious, and no less contrary to the Holy Scriptures themselves, that to sound Reason and true Philosophy.  The proposition therefore which shall be the subject of this Dissertation, and includes the whole point before us, shall be this:  The Mosaick Creation is not a Nice and Philosophical account of the Origin of All Things; but an Historical and True Representation of the formation of our single Earth out of a Confused Chaos, and of the successive and visible change thereof each day, till it became the habitation of Mankind. " (p. 3)

The astronomical heaven was created first sometime in the past, then God refashions a confused chaotic earth through His holy spirit:

" …And the Earth was without Form and Void, and Darkness was upon the Face of the Deep, and the Spirit of God moved on the Face of the Waters. Where 'tis clear, that as soon as the Holy Writer descends to the Description of the Chaos, and the commencing of the Six Days Creation, he mentions not a word of any Production out of Nothing (before supposed and asserted to have been past and done, In the Beginning) he omits, and thereby evidently excludes that heaven, or those Superior Systems of the World already spoken of, from any place therein, and by the whole coherence plainly confines the Narration following to the Earth alone with its dependencies.

" Moses does not say, as the common Expositors do, "That just at the commencing of the Six Days Work, the Earth, and all the rest of the World was originally produced; But that, When God had (formerly) created all the World, which is usually distinguished into the Heaven and the Earth, the latter of these, (the consideration whereof was alone pertinent to the present design) at the time preceding the Six Day Work, was in a Wild, Irregular, and Dark condition: or such a perfect Chaos, as nothing but the power of God, and his Spirit's moving on, and influencing the same, could ever have reduced into a habitable World." " (p. 5-6)

The sun, moon, and stars were created sometime before the six-day recreation week and not on the fourth day of the week:

" Now, in order to the giving what satisfaction I can in this Point; let it be considered, That the Light being not said to be created by Moses, its Original were without difficulty to be accounted for, if the other Point, the making of the Heavenly Bodies were once settled, which therefore is the sole remaining difficulty in the case before us.  And that would be no harder, if the Translation of the Word of Moses were but amended, and the Verse hereto relating, read thus, And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the Heaven, to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for season, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the firmament of the Heaven to give light upon the Earth, and it was so.  And God having (before) made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; and having (before) made the stars also, God set them in the firmament of the Heavens to give light upon the Earth, &c. or which is all one, And God had  (before) made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he had (before) made the stars also, and God set them in the firmament, &c.

" In which rendering, 'tis only changing the perfectum for the plusquam perfectum, and ever thing is clear and easy, and the Objection vanishes of its own accord; the Creation of the heavenly Bodies being hereby assigned to a former time, and the Work of the fourth day no other than the placing them in our Firmament, according as the account hereafter to be given does require. "

The heavenly bodies were not created but appeared to an earth bound observer on the fourth day:

" …the Heavenly Bodies…described…with relation to our Earth, and as Members and Appurtenances of our Atmosphere…'Twas entirely with regard to our Light and Darkness, our Day and Night, that all was done, as far as can be collected from the words of Moses.  Thus, as soon as the Heavenly Bodies are made, though they be universally useful, they are placed in the Firmament of Heaven, (a Phrase used in our History for our Air only) to divide our day from night, to be to us for signs and seasons, for day and year; to be for lights in the firmament of heaven to give light upon the earth; to rule over our day and night, to divide our light from darkness.  And as to the order of the Introduction, 'tis not that of their proper Greatness or Dignity, but that of their respective Appearances and Uses here below…Agreeably whereto when our Air is clogged with gross Vapors, so as to hide or disfigure their faces to us, The Sun is said to be turned into darkness, the Moon into blood… " (p. 18)

The heavenly bodies were created prior to the recreation week.  They were visible on the fourth day because the opaque atmosphere cleared and allowed their light to reach the surface of the earth:

" Now 'tis easy to tell what is meant by their Creation in the case before us, when it has appeared that their Production out of nothing was precedence to the six day Work, and that they are wholly considered as belonging to our Earth, and placed in our Air; viz. their primary being so placed; their first becoming visible to Men on Earth, or in other words, their original appearing to be there…The Sun, Moon, and Stars, are then said first to Be, or to be made, when afterwards the Air was rendered so very clear and transparent, that those Luminaries became conspicuous, and their Bodies distinctly visible, as in a clear Day or Night they now appear to us. " (p. 23)

Comments on how the scriptures should be interpreted literally and not by preconceived notions.  The literal interpretation of the scriptures indicates a gap:

" And in like manner, 'tis but just to believe, that so much of the Mosaick Creation, as related directly to the Earth and its appurtenances, and so came at once with the comprehension of the History, and of the capacities of the Readers, ought literally to be Interpreted; though some thing extraneous to the Formation of the Earth, and beyond the notice of the people, to be taken in a deferent acceptation…And 'tis evident that the Holy Book ought not to be tormented or eluded, as to their obvious sense, on every occasion, under pretence that some particular Texts are to be construed another way.  That SACRED RULE ought for ever RELIGIOUSLY to be observed, That we never forsake the plain, obvious, easie and natural sense, unless where the nature of the thing it self, parallel palaces, or evident reason, afford a solid and sufficient ground for so doing. " (p. 26)

Only the earth as affirmed and spoken by ancient sources and Moses was chaotic [12].  The disordered state of the earth did not extend beyond the earth.

" I prove that the History before us, extends not beyond the Earth and it Appendages, because that confused Mass or rude heap of Heterogeneous matter, which we call the Chaos whence all the several parts, were derived extended no farther.  I will here I suppose be allowed me that the ancient Chaos, so famous among the ancient Philosophers, and so evidently referred to by Moses, was the entire and single source or promptuary of the six days productions…that the Chaos was so far from comprehending the entire matter of the Universe, nay or of the Solar System, that it reached not so far as the Moon, nor indeed any farther than that Terraqueous Globe we now Inhabit. " (p. 32)

" The Chaos mentioned by Moses is by him expressly called The Earth, in contradistinction on to The Heavens, or the other Systems of the Universe; and all its parts taken notice of in the Sacred History, appear, by the following Series of the Scripture, to belong to our Earth and no other.  The words of Moses are, In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth; and the earth was without form and void, and darkness was on the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.  Where I think 'tis plain, as has already observed, that when the Author comes to the Chaos of Foundation of the six day work, he excludes the Heavens from any share therein, and call the Chaos it self An Earth, without from and void, with Darkness upon the of the Abyss; and this ought to grant, these being the very words from which 'tis concluded that the Heathen Chaos was no other than what Moses derived the World from. " (p. 33-34)

" The Mosaick and ancient Chaos could not include the Sun or fixed Stars… " (p. 35)

" The Mosaick Creation is confined to our Earth, with its Appurtenances, because otherwise the time of the Creation of each Body was so extremely disproportionate to the Work itself, as is perfectly irreconcilable to the Divine Wisdom of it Creator, and the account of the Works themselves as they are set down by Moses. " (p. 41)

Many ancient writers understood that the first two verses in Genesis actually are separated by some amount of time.  The amount of time is not important; the duration of the gap will be discussed later.  What is important is to understand that verse one and two do not belong in the creation week.  The earth was created in verse one, later after the passing of some amount of time it was found in a chaotic state in verse two and was recreated as a fit habitation for humanity.  As affirmed by all these quotes the gap theory existed from a very early time historically.  It was simply refined by Chalmers and others.  In reality the gap has always existed and was simply used by those theologians that wanted to try to marry scripture and science.

Do Hebrew Scholars Support a Gap?

The claim is often made that competent scholars do not support the gap because the gap is extra-Biblical.  In reality many Biblical and Hebraic scholars support the gap model and as will be shown later the Bible supports the Old Earth gap model. 

Alfred Edersheim (1825-1889) was born in Vienna to Jewish parents.  He was well educated in the Talmudic traditions of his parent's faith.  After conversion to Christianity he became a minister and then eventually a Church of England Vicar.  This position as both a Jewish and Christian scholar made him an authority on Biblical subjects.  He also had an extensive knowledge of the Judean/Roman culture of the first century.  He wrote extensively and authored many books, two of his most popular are: The Temple: It's Ministry And Services [13], Bible History: Old Testament [14].  He was also well studied and fluent in Hebrew.

In his book Bible History: Old Testament, which is a 7 volume set he states the following in Volume 1 [15]:

" Then, in the second verse, we find earth described as it was at the close of the last great revolution, preceding the present state of things: "And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep." An almost indefinite space of time, and many changes, may therefore have intervened between the creation of heaven and earth, as mentioned in ver. 1, and the chaotic state of our earth, as described in ver. 2. As for the exact date of the first creation, it may be safely affirmed that we have not yet the knowledge sufficient to arrive at any really trustworthy conclusion. "

Another Biblical Scholar was Robert Jamieson.  In 1871 along with two other scholars he published a commentary on the whole Bible [16].  In this monumental work, under the heading Old Testament Genesis Chapter 1; Ge. 1:1, 2; The creation of Heaven and Earth, the following comments appear:

" 'In the beginning' - period of remote and unknown antiquity, hid in the depths of eternal ages; and so the phrase is used in Proverbs 8:22,23. 

"the earth was without form and void"—or in "confusion and emptiness," as the words are rendered in Isaiah 34:11. This globe, at some undescribed period, having been convulsed and broken up, was a dark and watery waste for ages perhaps, till out of this chaotic state, the present fabric of the world was made to arise. 

"the Spirit of God moved"—literally, continued brooding over it, as a fowl does, when hatching eggs. The immediate agency of the Spirit, by working on the dead and discordant elements, combined, arranged, and ripened them into a state adapted for being the scene of a new creation. The account of this new creation properly begins at the end of this second verse; and the details of the process are described in the natural way an onlooker would have done, who beheld the changes that successively took place. "

Alfred Edersheim and Robert Jamieson are only a few of the many well-known scholars that support the gap.  The reason that these scholars and many others are in agreement with a gap model is because the scriptures support a time period between verse 1 and 2.  Young Earth Creationist's claims that no competent scholars support the gap are not true!

Obviously if the Bible did not support the gap there would be an obvious lack of scholarly writing about it.  So what exactly in the Bible can be used to support the gap model?  Examining the scriptures will reveal that the overall plan of the scriptures supports the gap concept [17].

Does the Bible Support a Gap — Hebrew words bara and asah

Before an examination of where the Young Earth Creationists are Biblically mistaken is undertaken, think about the logic of one of their arguments.  This involves two Hebrew words, bara and asah. A typical Young Earth Creation position is that the word bara means; create, and the word asah means; make, and these two words are interchangeable.  Often verse 26 and 27 of the first chapter of Genesis is used as a reference.

" Then God said, "Let Us make (asah) man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." " (Genesis 1:26) 

" So God created (bara) man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. "  (Genesis 1:27)

Therefore according to this position the word asah and bara can be used interchangeably since they both mean to make and or to create. Once the Young Earth position that asah and bara are linguistically equal is accepted then this is used to interpret Genesis 1:16.

Then God made (asah) two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. [He made] the stars also." (Genesis 1:16)

Also according to the Young Earth position then the meaning of Exodus 20:11 becomes evident.

"For [in] six days the LORD made (asah) the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it." (Exodus 20:11)

Therefore the sun, moon and stars were created on the fourth day and all of Genesis 1:1-2 occur on the same day, the first day of the creation week.  Thus there is no gap after the 1^st verse of Genesis, and the earth is only a few thousand years old.  As a result the Young Earth position is clinched by their supposed understanding of the words asah and bara. 

If the words asah and bara are not synonymous and cannot be used interchangeably then the logic of the Young Earth position disappears.  What must be understood is that all words have certain nuances that can easily be overlooked.  Take for example the two English words slap and hit. They are often used interchangeably.  For example in the following sentence the sense of the sentence would not changed if either word were used. 

The man covered his face with his hands, because as he moved through the forest the tree branches were going to slap / hit him in the face.

Either word is acceptable because either word conveys the proper sense of what is happening.  Something is "coming in contact" with the face of the man.  Consider another example this time it will be evident that only one of these words will fit the sentence in question.

Using her open hand the angry wife was going to slap her unfaithful husband.

In the previous example the proper word to use would be slap.  It fits the sense of what is going to happen. Consider one more sentence and it will be evident that the word hit is the appropriate choice.

The driver had not fastened his seat belt and he knew the other car was going to hit him.

In other words just because words can be used interchangeably does not mean that they mean the same thing. If they meant the same thing in all cases there would not be the need to have two separate words.  Asah and bara are examples of this principle.  In some places the word asah can be substituted for bara and vicea versa.  This does not mean they are defined exactly alike.  In the example of the sentences above, technically either word slap or hit could be used in either sentence if what happened was unknown. If what happened was known then selecting the proper word would be simple.  The translators of Genesis 2:26-27; Genesis 1:16 and Exodus 20:11 were translating from the position of ignorance, they did not know what had occurred, and therefore they translated these verses in a non-gap context.

If a translator knew that a gap had occurred then he could easily have translated Genesis 1:2 in a context that would support the gap and still be linguistically justifiable.  It is the contention of this paper that you would be in a better linguistic position if this were done.

The word bara and the word asah do not mean the same thing.  The word bara means to create out of nothing the word asah means to make or fashion out of preexisting material or to appoint something that already exists to a certain position.  It is often used in the Old Testament to indicate ordination or appointment to a position.  Examining Strong concordance [18] the following is noted:

asah (#6213) to do or make, accomplish, appoint, bestow, bring forth, furnish, grant, offer, prepare, procure, provide, set, show, yield.

bara (#1254) – to create or creator

These two words have widely different meanings.  Understanding that asah can mean to appoint or bring forth sends new light on the scriptures that have been previously analyzed. 

" Then God said, "Let Us make (asah—bring forth/appoint) man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." " (Genesis 1:26)

" So God created (bara—created) man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. " (Genesis 1:27)

In verse 26 God is taking man, something that is already in existence and he is bringing him forth or appointing him to be in his image.  He does not create man in this verse He appoints him in the image of God. In verse 27 God hearkens back to the original creation of man when he brought him into existence out of nothing.  This is a bara creation.

"Then God made (asah—brought forth/appointed) two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. [He made] the stars also." (Genesis 1:16)

Figure 4		Verse 16 of Genesis 1 occurs on the fourth day.  What happened on this day is that the heavenly bodies which were created prior to the creation week and already existed were at this time brought forth or appointed to be the rulers of the night and day.  What apparently happened is the atmosphere cleared enough that the previously hidden sun, moon, and stars appeared to an earthbound observer.  See picture on the left [19]. Notice that the words "He made" are in brackets indicating that this is not part of the original Hebrew.  The stars were also appointed not created at this time period—the fourth day of the recreation week.  A more correct translation should read as follows:
On the fourth day of recreation account God allowed the sun, moon, and stars to be visible to an earthbound observer.  He did this by clearing the atmosphere of suspended dust, dirt, and clouds.

"Then God brought forth and appointed two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, also the stars." (Genesis 1:16)

An example of the proper usage of asah and it relation to the moon is given in the Psalms.  This verse verifies that the moon in Genesis 1:16 was not created (bara) but it was appointed (asah) on the fourth day [20].

"He appointed (asah) the moon for seasons; The sun knows it going down. " (Psalm 104:19)

Now with the correct understanding of these two Hebrew words Exodus 20:11 fits the gap scenario nicely.  This verse is not talking about the original creation of these things but of the reworking that took place during the recreation account.  Notice once again that the word "in" is bracketed indicating that it is not part of the original and was added by the translators. Once it is understood that the recreation events are being discussed the verse actually flows better without the word "in". 

" For [in] six days the LORD made (asah—appointed, prepared, furnished, offered) the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it."   (Exodus 20:11)

The Hebrew word hayah

The original Hebrew and the historical context of the rest of the Bible has led the gappists to conclude that an unspecified time period exists between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.  The Young Earth Creationists disagree with this view and translated the first two verses as follows:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.  The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." (Genesis 1:1-2)

According to this view the heavens, the earth, and all things that exist were created on the first day of the creation week a few thousand years ago.  The Old Earth Creationists, on the other hand, believe that earth had a preexistence and became disordered and was recreated after verse two.  They believe that the original meaning of verse two supports this concept.  They translate the first two verses as follows:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth became without form, and void (indicating confused and disordered); and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." (Genesis 1:1-2)  

The crux of the difference is the small English word in verse two—was!  Was the earth created on the first day of the week and was it in a new but unformed state in verse two as the Young Earth Creationist say [21].  Or, did the earth have a prehistory and it became a cosmic wasteland as translated by the Old Earth Creationist.  A large part [22] of the difference of opinion rest on a proper understanding of the linguistics of verse two. 

The Hebrew word in question is the word hayah.  In the Bible this word, a verb, has been translated; was, come to pass, came, has been, were, happened, become, pertained, better for thee.  A popular Hebrew lexicon [23] says the following about the various uses and definitions of this word:

hayah (#1961) – was, to happen, fall out, occur, take place, to come about, come to pass, to become, to become like, to be instituted, be established, to exist, be in existence, to abide, remain, continue, to stand, lie, be in, be at, be situated, to occur, be done, be brought about, to be done, be finished, be gone.

Examples of was (hayah) better translated as became

Many volumes and papers have been written about the confusion that this one small word has caused in the creation field.  The easiest way to see how this word can be used in Genesis 1:2 is to see how it has been used in parallel verses in other parts of the Bible.  A good example of the use of the word hayah in a parallel verse is Genesis 4:2, (KJV) "And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground." Make note of how these two verses compare in their essential structure (KJV used for clarity):

"…the heaven and the earth.  And the earth was (hayah) without form, and void…" (Genesis 1:2)

"…bare his brother Abel.  And Abel was (hayah) a keeper of sheep…" (Genesis 4:2)

In both sentences the first sentence ends with a noun (earth/Abel), which completes the sentence.  In the second sentence both begin with the word "And."  Then the original noun repeats (earth/Abel).  Then this repeated noun is followed by the word "was"—hayah. In every way the grammar and structure of both sentences is identical.  Obviously upon examining Genesis 4:2 it is understood that Abel was not born a keeper of sheep and that over the course of time he became a keeper of sheep.  In this sense hayah could be translated "…and Abel became (hayah) a keeper of sheep…" It therefore follows that verse two of Genesis 1 can be translated as follows:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth became (hayah) without form, and void (indicating confused and disordered); and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." (Genesis 1:1-2) 

Other examples of this principle, where the word hayah has been translated was and more properly means a change in state (became), occurs in the following verses:

" And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was (became-hayah) the mother of all living." (Genesis 3:20)

" And Adah bore Jabal. He was (became-hayah) the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock." (Genesis 4:20)

Works Cited and Research Notes

[1].  Unless otherwise noted all scriptural notations are from: The Bible.  The New King James Version.  Thomas Nelson Publishers.  Nashville, TN.  1994.

[2]. Genesis. Artwork by Joe Tucciarone. Used with permission. 2403 West Friday Circle Cocoa, Florida 32926. http://members.aol.com/INTERSTELL/joe.html 

[3].  There is much scientific evidence that states that the all humans are genetically related.  In other words, science and the scriptures both agree that all men, generally speaking and this includes Homo erectus, Neanderthal man, and Cro-Magnon man, have descended from one source-Adam and Eve.  Other supposed hominid apelike ancestors are simply misinterpreted fossils, in reality extinct apes.  To believe in a gap does not mean you believe in pre-Adamic soulless/spiritless proto-humans.

[4].  This is similar to understanding that Jesus Christ did not have long hair.  Just because you reject the longhaired contemporary Jesus does not mean you reject the Jesus of the Bible.  In a similar vein if you reject the seven-day creation account and accept the biblical seven-day recreation account—the gap, this does not mean you must accept all the attendant baggage and various theories that come with the gap.  Some of this baggage has been added by the Young Earth Creationists and some has been added by the Old Earth Creationists.

[5].  The Grand Canyon.  Photo Courtesy of the United States Park Service (USPS).  photo by B. W. Hamilton.

[6].  Brown W.  In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood. 7th ed.  Center for Scientific Creation. Phoenix AZ.  p. 274.  2001.

[7]. Custance, Arthur C.  Without Form and Void a Study of the Meaning of Genesis 1:2.  Doorway Pub.  1989. or online at http://custance.org

[8].  Encyclopedia Britannica 15^th ed.  William Whiston. Micropaedia.   Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc.  Chicago IL. 1985.

[9].  Whiston, William.  A New Theory of the Earth.  Arno Press.  New York. 1978 (originally published in1696).

[10].  Whiston, William. 1696. Figure 7, p. 101.

[11] Whiston, William.  1696.  Section: of the Mosaick Creation.

[12].   Whiston believed that the earth had an original chaotic state as mentioned in Genesis 1:2.  He further contends that the earth being similar to a comet or the atmosphere of a comet caused this chaotic state.

[13].  Edersheim, Alfred.  The Temple it's Ministry and Services. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1978.

[14].  Edersheim, Alfred.  Bible History, Old Testament.   Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.  1995.

[15].  Edersheim, Alfred.  Bible History, Old Testament. Book 1: the World Before the Flood, and the History of the Patriarchs, Chapter 1: Creation-Man in the Garden of Eden-The Fall.  Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. 1995.

[16].  Jamieson, Robert. Fausset, A.R. Brown, David. Commentary Critical and Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible.  Christian Classics Ethereal Library.  Grand Rapid, MI 1871.

[17].  In Jesus' time many arguments involved the scriptures and word meanings.  Jesus Christ often corrected the Pharisees, scribes, and the teachers of the law for not understanding the real intent of the scriptures.  He spent a great deal of time correcting mistaken impressions of what they thought the scriptures were saying.  The following which involved marriage and the resurrection is an example:

"Jesus answered and said to them, 'You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.'" - Matthew 22:29

What many people overlook is that the conversations involved were all being spoken in Hebrew (some scholars say Aramaic).  Even though Jesus and his adversaries were all fluent in Hebrew and or Aramaic and they understood the nuances and hidden meanings of the language they still could not agree on what the scriptures were saying.  In other words what is more important than linguistics and an intimate understanding of the Hebrew language is attitude.

[18].  Strong J.  Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.  Crusade Bible Pub., Inc. Nashville TN.  2002 ed.  All numbers in the text refer to the number system used in this reference. 

[19]. Photo courtesy of: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). photo #fly00224.

[20].  Many believe that the Bible states that the seasons began at the creation week.  This is incorrect.  This is based on a faulty understanding of Genesis 1:14. The seasons actually began after the Noachian flood. 

"Then God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons (mowed), and for day and years." - (Genesis 1:14)

The word translated seasons in this verse is the Hebrew word mowed which means appointments.  In Leviticus 23:2, 4 the word translated feasts is the same word—mowed.  The sun, moon, and stars were used to develop chronological systems, calendars, months, etc. on which the observance of the feasts (God's appointments) were based.

"And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, "Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: 'The feasts (mowed) of the LORD, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, these are My feasts (mowed)…These are the feasts (mowed) of the LORD, holy convocations which you shall proclaim at their appointed times (mowed)"  [KJV-proclaim in their seasons (mowed)]. - Leviticus 23:1-2, 4

[21].  The New International Versions has an interesting marginal note for verse two and translates this verse as follows:

"Now the earth was (or possibly became—marginal note) formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the spirit of God was hovering over the waters." (Genesis 1:2)

[22].  There are other reasons for belief in the gap of verse two.  These reasons include the context of the rest of the scriptures and a proper understanding of where Satan and the angelic world fit in historically and chronologically.  These reasons are examined in other parts of this paper.

[23].   All Hebrew words and definitions are from: Brown F. Driver S. Briggs C. Hebrew and English Lexicon. Reprint edition.  Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. Peabody, MA. 1996.

All Greek words and definitions are from: Thayer, Joseph H.  Thayer Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Coded with Strong's Concordance Numbers.   Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.  Peabody, MA.  1996.