From: Harold Holmyard
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 11:40 PM
HH: Yes, the verb can mean "was" or "became," but the best current
scholarly thinking discounts the Gap Theory. One reason for this is that
the sentence starts with the noun subject, which suggests that the
statement is giving attendant circumstances. The second clause seems
clearly to be doing this. It is verbless, implying "and darkness was
over the surface of the deep." The third clause is the same way. It,
too, is verbless, except for a participle, saying that "the Spirit of
God was hovering over the surface of the water." In Hebrew when the
clause starts with a noun and is verbless, it often is giving attendant
circumstance. Here the attendant circumstances are to the fact that God
created the heavens and earth. Since the last two clauses seem to be
circumstantial, it is natural if the first clause is also
circumstantial: "the earth was empty and void." This general description
shows the starting point from which God's actions will develop the
world. Other scholars may take a different position, but that is what I
understand it to be saying.
[Steve Miller] When a sentence starts with "and <noun>" as in Gen 1:2, it
often indicates a break in the narrative as in Gen 2:5; 3:1; 4:1. The vast
majority of the sentences in narrative begin "and <verb>".
I thought that the 2nd and 3rd clauses of Gen 1:2 being verbless, just meant
that they inherit the verb from the 1st clause. I thought this was very
common in Biblical Hebrew.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.