<< There is also the gap theory, which makes the six
days of Genesis 1 to be the quick recreation after the destruction of
what had developed over ages. This must be discounted because I
understand that the "was" of v. 2 cannot be translated "became," which
this view requires. >>
Hebrew normally requires a lamedh to follow a hayah if the meaning is
"become," and Gen 1:2 does not have a lamedh. But there are two or three
instances where the OT uses hayah without the lamedh to mean "become." so,
1:2 from a purely grammatical point of view could be translated
"become"---albeit the gap theory does not work anyway.
PS. Please don't ask me for the references unless you are willing to wait
until I run across my notes again---as I have notes on Gen 1 spread all over
and cannot easily find this; but, I gurantee the references exist.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 22 2001 - 02:15:16 EDT