Genesis chapter one.

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 1:26a . . And God said: Let us make Man in our image, after our likeness.

The introduction of the plural personal pronouns "us" and "our" into the narrative at
this point has given rise to some interesting speculation regarding the identities of
the antecedents. Some insist they speak of God + a task force of angelic craftsmen.
But were that so, then humans would exist in the image and likeness of God and
also the image and likeness of angels.

Within the context of the first chapter of Genesis, God is revealed as 1) Himself, 2)
His spirit, and 3) His voice.

All three of those aspects of God's existence took part in creating human life; and
seeing as how they are spoken of as "us" and as "our" then I think it's safe to
regard those three aspects as sentient beings, i.e. persons.

According to Deut 6:4, God is a singularity; but not only Gen 1:26-27, but also
John 1:1-3 indicates that He wears more than one hat, so to speak; for example:

"God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by
the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His son, whom He has
appointed heir of all things; through whom also He made the worlds" (Heb 1:1-2)

The Hebrew word translated "Man" is 'adam (aw-dawm') which, in this case, simply
refers to human life; i.e. humanity. It's actually a specie name rather than a proper
name.

According to Gen 5:3 and Heb 1:1-3, image and likeness basically refers to
progeny, i.e. offspring.

Natural children are born in that position. But Man wasn't born from God-- i.e. via
procreation --rather, Man was created, viz: Man exists as God's handiwork, sort of
like how Geppetto made for himself a little wooden son named Pinocchio.

Now, Geppetto and Pinocchio both look human, though one is for real and the other
a doll. But Man's creator isn't human, nor does He look human. God is spirit
whereas Man is physical, and God is eternal whereas Man is temporal, and God is
self-sustaining whereas Man requires sustenance. So we have to be careful to keep
the progeny aspect within reason.

It's likely best to reckon that the creator endowed Man with His image and likeness
rather than Man inheriting the status as a child born in the home.

As God's kin, humans have a status far and away above the status of every other
form of life on Earth.

• Gen 1:26b . . let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over
the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the
ground.

Humanity's sovereignty, power, and control over nature is primarily where we find
the exercise of its image and likeness of God; in other words: Man does not answer
to nature-- just the opposite --nature answers to Man. (Ps 8:4-8)

The word for "rule" is from radah (raw-daw') and means: to tread down, i.e.
subjugate; specifically: to crumble off.

I saw a pretty interesting bumper sticker some time ago that went like this:

We Are Not Above The Earth;
We Are of the Earth.

Well . . I respect Native America's cultural sentiment underlying that statement;
and must admit that I agree with it to a certain extent. But the creator decreed that
though Man is of the earth; he is very definitely above it too, and has the God
given authority to subjugate every living thing on the planet including its forests, its
grasses, its rivers, its seas, its soil, its rocks, its air, its minerals, its mountains, its
valleys, and even its tectonic plates and the earth's very atmosphere itself.
According to Heb 2:8, humanity is on track to dominate even more.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 1:27 . . So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He
created him; male and female He created them.

We live in a time of dysphoria wherein folks are defying their chromosomes and
preferring to identify themselves as something other than their natural gender.

There's a term for people who believe themselves to be someone and/or something
other than what and/or who they really are. I think it might be called Dissociative
Disorder. There was a time when society confined people with those kinds of
conditions to psychiatric facilities for observation and therapy, but nowadays
political correctness requires that they be "included".

NOTE: The pronoun "them" in Gen 1:27 is a bit ambiguous. It can refer to the first
couple; but it can just as easily refer to the human species in total. In other words:
Gen 1:26-27 speaks of all of us; and by extension, so does Gen 2:16-17 because
according to Acts 17:26, that's how it worked out.

Some women would be offended by association with a male pronoun but it's a
biblical designation nonetheless. Regardless of one's natural gender, all human
beings are of the 'adam species and can be legitimately referred to as a him or as a
he because all of us, regardless of gender, are extensions of a solo specimen;
including Eve because she was made with human material taken from a man's
body. Bible students really have to watch for that because when they run across
the word "man" and/or "men" in the Bible, it doesn't always indicate males only.

• Gen 1:28a . . God blessed them and God said to them: Be fruitful and increase,

Some interpret that verse to be an edict requiring married people to have children;
and that they have no business getting married for any other reason. But the
wording is so obviously a blessing rather than a law.

It's always best to regard blessings as benefits, approval, and/or empowerment
unless clearly indicated otherwise. Some blessings have to be merited (e.g. Deut
28:1-13) but not this one. It was neither requested nor was it earned— it was
freely given without any strings attached and nothing asked in return.

Without the empowerment of fertility, Man would be just as sterile as a soup spoon.
So it was a very essential blessing. And a very interesting blessing it is because the
blessing of fertility empowers living things to pass their own kind of life on to a next
generation. God quit creating after six days. So unless creatures were enabled to
reproduce, all would soon die out and become quite extinct in a very short time.

Libido therefore, is an essential element of the blessing of fertility. God intended for
His creatures to reproduce; and to ensure that they did, He wired them all with an
attraction to the opposite sex of their own kind rather than instilling within them a
sense of duty.

It isn't necessary to cajole creatures to mate; no, they will do so on their own,
propelled by built-in sensual proclivities and predilections. Had libido not been
included in the blessing, human life would've become an endangered species within
just a few generations. Anybody familiar with the birds and bees understands very
well that attraction is crucial to multiplication.

NOTE: The popular interpretation of Matt 5:27-28 is extremely contrary to the
blessing of fertility. It has served to warp thousands of innocent young psyches,
and burdened men with unnecessary guilt complexes over sex and the human
body.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 1:28b . . fill the earth and master it; and rule the fish of the sea, the birds of
the sky, and all the living things that creep on earth.

The Hebrew word translated "master" is from kabash (kaw-bash') which
emphasizes coercion and force; and means: to disregard; to conquer, and to
violate.

The word for "rule" is from radah (raw-daw') and means: to tread down; to
subjugate.

kabash and radah are very strong language. Those two words combined leave no
room for doubt regarding Man's supremacy in the sphere of things. God blessed
humanity with the authority to dominate and to violate planet Earth at will, and
exploit it to his own advantage. Man answers to no plant nor animal on this entire
globe. The whole Earth is within the scope of humanity's purview. If aliens ever
come here unannounced, they can be arrested for trespassing, and/or charged for
parking because this earth is 'adam's domain.

But the interesting thing is; the 'adam specie is also the monarch of the whole
cosmos; not just the dinky little third rock from the Sun where he hangs his hat.

"For in that He put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under
him." (Heb 2:6-8)

• Gen 1:29-30 . . God said: See, I give you every seed-bearing plant that is upon
all the earth, and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit; they shall be yours for
food. And to all the animals on land, to all the winged creatures of the sky, and to
everything that creeps on earth, in which there is the breath of life, I give all the
green plants for food. And it was so.

Prior to the Flood; humans, beasts, creepy crawlies, and winged creatures too--
even the lions and tigers and hawks and eagles and pythons, vultures and
crocodiles --subsisted on vegetation. Precisely what kind of diet God intended for
aqua life isn't stated. But even today there are a number of aquatic species of
vegetation important to the survival of a variety of creatures that live in water.

That raises an interesting question: why do carnivores have teeth so uniquely
suited for killing other creatures and ripping their flesh? Well, I think it's clear they
didn't use their teeth like that at first.

For example; buck-toothed beavers have incisors that could take your hand off but
they don't use them for that purpose. Male musk deer have saber-like upper canine
teeth and their diet is moss and grass and sometimes twigs and lichen. And
everybody knows about Wally the walrus' big ol' tusks; which he doesn't use to kill
his food, but rather, to plow up the sea bottom in search of his favorite mollusks.

Though the fossilized remains of a therapsid called Tiarajudens eccentricus exhibits
saber tusks, it is believed to have efficiently chewed leaves and stems with
interlocking incisors and cow-like molars.

In the future kingdom of God, carnivores won't be carnivorous any more, and
nothing in the animal kingdom will any longer pose a danger to either Man or to
each other. (Isa 11:6-9)
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
• Gen 1:31 . . And God saw all that He had made, and found it very good. And
there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

Some feel that the cosmos-- all of its forms of life, matter, and energy --was
created incomplete, not quite up to snuff: that it was to Man that God entrusted the
task of putting on the finishing touches. But that is very doubtful. Why ever would
God, after an overall inspection, conclude His work by pronouncing it all good-- and
not just good, but "very" good. Why would He say the creation was very good if in
truth it was incomplete?

In reality, humans haven't improved the planet at all. They've actually ravaged
Earth and left it with terrible damage-- leveled mountains, dried up rivers, emptied
lakes, drained marshes, indiscriminately obliterated habitat, wiped out animals to
extinction, scraped away perfectly good cropland and replaced it with warehouses
and factories and malls and residential communities.

A prime example of this kind of destruction is INTEL's massive Ronler Acres
Campus located on what was once agricultural land in Hillsboro Oregon. Thousands
of cubic yards of perfectly good topsoil was scraped away during construction of the
facility. What did they do with it? Was it transferred elsewhere in order to use it for
farming? No, instead INTEL used it to build a massive privacy berm all around the
facility where the soil will never again grow food. NIKE did the very same thing with
the topsoil scraped away during construction of its facility in Beaverton.

Denuded watersheds have caused unnecessary erosion and stream sedimentation.
Man dams rivers, thus disrupting ancient fish migrations. He's over-exploited
natural resources, filled the atmosphere with toxins and greenhouse gas emissions,
poisoned aquifers, contaminated soil and waterways with chemical fertilizers,
pesticides, and herbicides; littered the oceans with billions of pounds of plastic
debris, (India's sacred river Ganges alone deposits an estimated 6,000 tons of
plastic annually into the Bay of Bengal) made possible super germs, and seriously
upset the balance of nature.

It seems that most everything 'adam touches, he ruins; and as if the Earth isn't
enough, he's moved out into space where in the years since Russia launched its
first Sputnik into low Earth orbit on Oct 04, 1957, humans have littered the sky
around their planet with 13,000 catalogued pieces of space junk, which is only a
fraction of the more than 600,000 objects circling the globe larger than one
centimeter (a centimeter is a little over 3/8ths of an inch). Humans have even
discarded 374,782 pounds of litter on the Moon, including the golf balls that
astronaut Alan Shepherd left behind.

So; when God looked over His work and "found" that it was very good, does that
mean He was surprised it came out like it did? (chuckle) No. It would be a strange
craftsman indeed who couldn't look over their work with satisfaction in a job well
done.

I believe the universe's architect knew precisely what He was doing, and where He
was going with His work; and was highly pleased that it came out exactly as
planned. I seriously doubt that God was feeling His way along like experimenters in
medicine and chemistry. Nobody could build a fully functioning cosmos and all of its
forms of life, matter, and energy unless they knew what they were doing from
beginning to end.

Concludes The 1st Chapter Of Genesis
_

 

[SetFree]

Isaiah 45:7 (NIV)

I form the light and create darkness,

I bring prosperity and create disaster;

I, the Lord, do all these things.

But God was speaking that for this 'present' creation that is in a state of corruption. The reason is because of Satan's original rebellion. See Romans 8:18-25.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Yes, contradiction. (Is. 45:18) is clear that God did not create the earth formless and void and in darkness.

The only 'summary' verse is (Gen. 1:1). "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

The 6 day restoration is very explicit.

Lees

Sorry, I have been very busy and have not had time to pursue this thread.

Is. 45:18 is talking about the 6-day creation, all of Genesis Chapter 1. The formless/void part was at the beginning, just like if you make a clay pot, you start with a lump and fashion it into a pot. So there is no contradiction.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Of course I am saying that because there is a gap. What do you mean how so? It is plain as day.

I was very clear in what I said. The gap exists in (Is. 61:2). It reads as Messiah will come preaching, "To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God." It reads with no time difference.

But Jesus clarified there is a time difference, a gap, between the two. 2022 years so far.

I have noticed you have not commented on the gap between (Deut. 10:5) and (10:6). Why not?

Lees

Why do you think that "the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God" represents a gap? It is simply stating two things that the Messiah announced, which may be separated in time, though nothing in Isaiah 61:2 suggests they have to be separated in time.

Re Deut. 10:5-6, I see no problem. Likely there is more detail in the book of Exodus.

 

[Lees]

Why do you think that "the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God" represents a gap? It is simply stating two things that the Messiah announced, which may be separated in time, though nothing in Isaiah 61:2 suggests they have to be separated in time.

Re Deut. 10:5-6, I see no problem. Likely there is more detail in the book of Exodus.

Well, that is the whole point. There is nothing in (Is. 61:2) to indicate any separation. But we know there is. And that there is a long history in between. A gap.

Same is true with (Deut. 10:5-6) as I showed in post #(23)

Lees

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Well, that is the whole point. There is nothing in (Is. 61:2) to indicate any separation. But we know there is. And that there is a long history in between. A gap.

Same is true with (Deut. 10:5-6) as I showed in post #(23)

Lees

How do we know there is this long period between? Where do you get that conclusion from?

 

[Lees]

How do we know there is this long period between? Where do you get that conclusion from?

I believe I explained it in post #(22) and (23). Please read those.

So. concerning (Is. 61:2) compare (Luke 4:19-20). Jesus was quoting (Is. 61:1-2).

(Is. 61:2) says, "To proclaim the accepatable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

When Jesus quoted this in (Luke 4:19-20), He stopped in the middle of (Is. 61:2), leaving out 'and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn."

Recognize it is Christ who made the division there. And it is Christ that directed these verses toward Himself. (Luke 4:21) "And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears." His first coming was not the day of vengeance. That will be accomplished at His Second Coming. Which is why Christ left it out. See (Is. 63:1-4) and (Rev. 19:11-16)

Point being: you have an unknown amount of time between the preaching of glad tidings in the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeace. The First and Second comings of Christ. But until Christ stated it, the plain reading in (Is. 61:2) is that they are both ocurring at the same time. That gap to date is 2022 years wide.

Point being: There are gaps of time in the Scripture. But must be supported by other Scripture. And I believe Scripture supports the gap between (Gen. 1:1) and (Gen. 1:2).

Please see again post #(23) for my explanation of the gap in (Deut. 10:5-6)

Lees

 

[SetFree]

Of course you realize that a prophecy would certainly have a gap between it's initial proclamation and its fulfillment. And that the punctuation is something added by the translators.

Also, gaps don't prove gaps. The supposed gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 is totally contrary to the Bible, especially if you try to insert any form of life in that gap that then is killed off. God's creation was very good:

Genesis 1:31 "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day."

That "very good" is not tainted by a failed earlier creation.

I happen to believe there is an indeterminate time gap between the Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 verses, what some call the 'Gap Theory'. And I believe that while also believing the idea of God having created everything.

The Genesis 1:2 verse is actually showing the result of a destruction event, not a creation from the beginning. The Hebrew phrase tohu va bohu ("without form, and void") is also used in Jeremiah 4:23-28 about a destruction God did upon this earth. And Hebrew tohu is often used about something that was once in a good state, going into a waste condition (see all it's Old Testament usages - OT:8414).

That is what Apostle Paul is pointing to in Romans 8:18-25. There he says God placed the creation in bondage of corruption, and it along with us seeks a release from that bondage.

And in the Jeremiah 4:27-28 verses, God revealed He would not make a full end, but for this reason (the destruction shown there), the earth shall mourn, and the heavens above be black. That is the state of the creation Apostle Paul is speaking of.

That begs the question then, just 'when'... did God place His creation in bondage to corruption, like Paul said? And that reference to the earth mourning, and the heavens being black, suggest it's about today's violent weather system over the earth.

And when I read the Genesis 1:1-9 verses, I don't see God created the earth past verse 1. It was at Genesis 1:1 when God originally created the heavens and the earth, in a Perfect state, not in bondage to corruption. But right after that, something happened, because Genesis 1:2 isn't showing the creation in a nothingness nebula vapor state, but with an already existing earth that is covered in water.

Then the verses that follow show God moving those waters overspread upon the whole earth, forming today's sky atmosphere, and then moving the rest of the waters until the dry land appears (or re-appears).

All that coincides with what Revelation 21:1 reveals in final that there will be no more sea in the future world to come. Where will all those waters go then? Back up in the atmosphere where they originally were at God's perfect creation of Genesis 1:1. The main reason why today's violent weather patterns happen in today's bondage creation is because of holes in the atmosphere around the earth. If those holes were plugged the earth's atmosphere and temperature would be like a greenhouse, even temps all over year round, the whole earth becoming like a paradise.

What I believe happened in between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 was Satan's original rebellion in coveting God's throne. God used a flood of waters to end that old world when Satan rebelled, that's what I believe the Scriptures are pointing to. That means there have been 2 world-wide flood destructions upon this earth. And I believe Apostle Peter is pointing to that first one of Genesis 1:2 in 2 Peter 3 with "the world that then was" which was overflowed with water.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

^ I am afraid you are fabricating a lot of stories with no solid basis. Genesis 1:1 is an introductory statement. The rest of the chapter describes how God created the heavens and the earth. Exodus 20:11 says,
“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”
Note the phrase "and all that is in them." So, there is no way you can interpret the entirety of Genesis Chapter 1 as anything but a total of 6 days. There is no gap. The gap was concocted by those who felt they had to accommodate the so-called theory of evolution into the Bible.

Additionally, violent storms would not have existed in the original pre-fall creation, so therefore would not be a part of Genesis 1 but would have begun sometime after Genesis Chapter 3. One could, perhaps, argue that the violet storms may not have come into the picture until after the worldwide flood of Noah's day.

 

[SetFree]

^ I am afraid you are fabricating a lot of stories with no solid basis. Genesis 1:1 is an introductory statement. The rest of the chapter describes how God created the heavens and the earth. Exodus 20:11 says,
“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”
Note the phrase "and all that is in them." So, there is no way you can interpret the entirety of Genesis Chapter 1 as anything but a total of 6 days. There is no gap. The gap was concocted by those who felt they had to accommodate the so-called theory of evolution into the Bible.

Additionally, violent storms would not have existed in the original pre-fall creation, so therefore would not be a part of Genesis 1 but would have begun sometime after Genesis Chapter 3. One could, perhaps, argue that the violet storms may not have come into the picture until after the worldwide flood of Noah's day.

Not fabricating anything, simply keeping to the Genesis 1 Scripture as written, because there is no creation of the 'land' past Genesis 1:1 in the beginning. And this does not detract from God creating this 'present' world in 6 days as written. The tradition of man you heed about Genesis 1 disagrees with what Apostle Peter taught in 2 Peter 3 about the three world earth ages.

2 Peter 3:5-6
5 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:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
KJV

Peter says there that "the world that then was" perished. With that, "by the word of God the heavens were of old" is a direct pointer to God's perfect original creation in the beginning at Genesis 1:1.

And Peter saying, "and the earth standing out of the water and in the water", is a reference to the Genesis 1:6-9 verses with God moving a portion of the waters overspread upon the already existing earth at verse 2. And by that He formed today's sky atmosphere around the earth. Then the rest of the waters still upon the earth, He moves them around until the land appears, revealing the earth was underneath all those waters all along. That is the meaning of Peter's, "the earth standing out of the water and in the water".

Thusly, Peter is revealing 3 world earth ages:
1 - "the world that then was"
2 - "the heavens and the earth, which are now"
3 - "new heavens and a new earth"

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Thusly, Peter is revealing 3 world earth ages:
1 - "the world that then was"
2 - "the heavens and the earth, which are now"
3 - "new heavens and a new earth"

1 - "the world that then was"--this is the pre-flood (of Noah) world.
2 - "the heavens and the earth, which are now"--This is the world from Noah's flood to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
3 - "new heavens and a new earth"--This is the Church age after the destruction of Jerusalem, which represented the termination of the Old Covenant.

So I still fail to see where a world existed before Genesis 1:2 that was destroyed. It just is not found in the Bible.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

I believe I explained it in post #(22) and (23). Please read those.

So. concerning (Is. 61:2) compare (Luke 4:19-20). Jesus was quoting (Is. 61:1-2).

(Is. 61:2) says, "To proclaim the accepatable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

When Jesus quoted this in (Luke 4:19-20), He stopped in the middle of (Is. 61:2), leaving out 'and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn."

Recognize it is Christ who made the division there. And it is Christ that directed these verses toward Himself. (Luke 4:21) "And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears." His first coming was not the day of vengeance. That will be accomplished at His Second Coming. Which is why Christ left it out. See (Is. 63:1-4) and (Rev. 19:11-16)

Point being: you have an unknown amount of time between the preaching of glad tidings in the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeace. The First and Second comings of Christ. But until Christ stated it, the plain reading in (Is. 61:2) is that they are both ocurring at the same time. That gap to date is 2022 years wide.

Point being: There are gaps of time in the Scripture. But must be supported by other Scripture. And I believe Scripture supports the gap between (Gen. 1:1) and (Gen. 1:2).

Please see again post #(23) for my explanation of the gap in (Deut. 10:5-6)

Lees

We know the time frame for the "gap" between Jesus preaching the acceptable year of the Lord and the day of vengeance of God and that gap is approximately 37 years from about 33 AD to 70 AD. And Jesus did preach the day of vengeance in Matthew 23 and 24 (and corresponding chapters of Mark and Luke).

 

[Fritz Kobus]

. . . The Hebrew phrase tohu va bohu ("without form, and void") is also used in Jeremiah 4:23-28 about a destruction God did upon this earth. And Hebrew tohu is often used about something that was once in a good state, going into a waste condition (see all it's Old Testament usages - OT:8414). . .

Jeremiah 4:23 "I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light."

"earth" is the translation of 'ereṣ.
Strong's says,
אֶרֶץ ʼerets, eh'-rets; from an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land):—× common, country, earth, field, ground, land, × natins, way, + wilderness, world.

So Jeremian 4:23 appears to be talking about the without form and void that will become of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD.

 

[Lees]

We know the time frame for the "gap" between Jesus preaching the acceptable year of the Lord and the day of vengeance of God and that gap is approximately 37 years from about 33 AD to 70 AD. And Jesus did preach the day of vengeance in Matthew 23 and 24 (and corresponding chapters of Mark and Luke).

I disagree that 70 AD is the 'day of vengeance' spoken of in (Is. 61:2). Though that surely was a day of vengeance. And if you take the position that 70 AD is that day, you still have a gap of time between 'the acceptable year of the LORD" and the "day of vengeance". And in (Is. 61:2) that gap of time is not recognizable. Which means the possibility of a gap exists between (Gen. 1:1) and (Gen. 1:2), if Scripture warrants. And I believe it does.

The proclaiming or preaching is associated with the coming of Messiah, Christ, to enact those things He is preaching. (Is. 61:1) "...he hath sent me....." (Luke 4:18) "...he hath sent me...." "...to heal...to set at liberty....) In (Matt. 24-25) Christ is only speaking as a Prophet of things to come in the future.

I believe that 'day of vengeance' is the 2nd Coming of Christ as described in (Is. 63:1-6) (Rev. 19:11-16) (2 Thess 1:7-8).

And, you take the unenviable position that Christ should have kept on reading. Remember, it was He who marked the division.

Lees

 

[SetFree]

1 - "the world that then was"--this is the pre-flood (of Noah) world.
2 - "the heavens and the earth, which are now"--This is the world from Noah's flood to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
3 - "new heavens and a new earth"--This is the Church age after the destruction of Jerusalem, which represented the termination of the Old Covenant.

So I still fail to see where a world existed before Genesis 1:2 that was destroyed. It just is not found in the Bible.

I grasp that is the traditional view of 2 Peter 3, however, in the 2 Peter 3:5-6 he is actually pointing to Genesis 1:1, the creation in the beginning...

2 Peter 3:5-6
5 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:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
KJV

We know that is about Genesis 1:1 because of, "by the word of God the heavens were of old". At Genesis 1:1 is when God spoke and His creation came into existence. That old world then perished by a flood, long before Noah, because the earth is laying a waste at Genesis 1:2. The Strong's Exhaustive Concordance defines the Hebrew tohu va bohu ("without form, and void") as 'a waste' and an indistinguishable ruin'.

The "heavens and the earth, which are now" starts at Genesis 1:2 forward. And that is a 2nd world earth age, from Genesis 1:2 to present day. It is this 2nd world earth age that is preserved unto destruction by fire on the last day. That has not happened yet.

The new heavens and a new earth is about God's future Kingdom and Eternity. It will not happen until after.... Christ's future 1,000 years reign of Revelation 20 (I do not believe men's doctrine of Amillennialism).

 

[SetFree]

Jeremiah 4:23 "I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light."

"earth" is the translation of 'ereṣ.
Strong's says,
אֶרֶץ ʼerets, eh'-rets; from an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land):—× common, country, earth, field, ground, land, × natins, way, + wilderness, world.

So Jeremian 4:23 appears to be talking about the without form and void that will become of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD.

Sorry, I do not interpret that at all in the Jeremiah 4:24-28 Scripture. God is using His prophet Jeremiah there to forewarn the Jews that He is getting ready to bring Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, upon them to destroy. Then starting in Jeremiah 4:24 by repeating the "without form, and void", etc., He is trying to remind them of a destruction upon the earth He did before, like an example of what was coming upon them...

Jer 4:20-28
20 Destruction upon destruction is cried; for the whole land is spoiled: suddenly are My tents spoiled, and My curtains in a moment.
21 How long shall I see the standard, and hear the sound of the trumpet?
22 For My people is foolish, they have not known Me; they are sottish children, and they have none understanding: they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.

God is angry at them, and declares how they are 'sottish' (ignorant) and lack understanding.

Then to try and remind them of His destruction on the earth in the past, He gives the following, which happened back in between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, and was the result of the earth laying a waste at Genesis 1:2.

Jeremiah 4:23
23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

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

There is that same Hebrew tohu va bohu ("without form, and void") phrase used to describe the earth at Genesis 1:2. In this example, it is showing beyond all doubt the earth laid in a waste state. Even in Hebrews 12:25-29 it is pointing to this past destruction between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, because Hebrews says, "Whose voice then shook the earth: but now He hath promised saying: Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven" (Hebrews 12:26).

God did not shake the earth at the time of Noah with that flood, so this is not speaking of the time of Noah. Hebrews 12 is pointing to 'another'... coming destruction upon this earth, the one to happen on the last day of this present... world, by God's consuming fire burning man's works off the earth, per 2 Peter 3:10 on the "day of the Lord".

The following is about the previous destruction of God shaking this old earth, right before Genesis 1:2...

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

Not the days of Noah, because there were 8 souls aboard the ark. I believe the old world when Satan was perfect in his ways, involved an angelic existence upon this earth, existing along with the dinosaurs.

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

That description of "the fruitful place was a wilderness" is another example of the real meaning of "without form, and void". It's about something that was once in a good state turning into a waste, or becoming nothing. The cities of that time I believe are the ancient remains found today like Gobekli Tepe in Turkey, suggesting there were ancient civilizations long before ours.

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

28 For this shall the earth mourn, and the heavens above be black: because I have spoken it, I have purposed it, and will not repent, neither will I turn back from it.
KJV

That is not about the days of Noah. That is about this 2nd world earth age we have been in since God put back the sky around the earth, and moved the waters of that old flood back in Genesis 1:2-9.

I believe the old world that God destroyed in between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 is what He is talking about here.

And to reiterate 2 Peter 3:
1. "the world that then was" = the previous world earth age that God destroyed to end Satan's rebellion of old.

2. "the heavens and the earth, which are now" = today's 2nd world earth age, started at the putting back at Genesis 1:2 to present.

3. "new heavens and a new earth" = the future Eternity once Satan, hell, and the wicked are destroyed in the future "lake of fire". This 3rd world earth age has definitely not... happened yet today.

 

[SetFree]

Jeremiah 4:23 "I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light."

"earth" is the translation of 'ereṣ.
Strong's says,
אֶרֶץ ʼerets, eh'-rets; from an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land):—× common, country, earth, field, ground, land, × natins, way, + wilderness, world.

So Jeremian 4:23 appears to be talking about the without form and void that will become of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD.

Also, notice what Apostle Paul says...

Rom 8:18-25
18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

Paul is contrasting this present world time with the future world to come (i.e., the new heavens and a new earth). The sufferings of today cannot be compared with the glory of that future time after Christ's future return.

19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

This word "creature" is Greek ktisis, which is rendered as "creation" further below, so Paul is definitely speaking about God's creation here.

20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of Him Who hath subjected the same in hope,

The creation was also made "subject to vanity"? And that not by its own will? When did that happen? Not at Noah's day, but before, back when Satan rebelled in coveting God's throne.

21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

God placed His creation in "bondage of corruption"? When? Again, not in Noah's day, because God did not destroy plant life on the earth with the flood of Noah.

22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
KJV

Today's creation, since Genesis 1:2, groans in pain together to this day, this present time. Why?

Because this 'present' 2nd world earth age is not a Perfect state of God's creation like He 'originally' made it.

Take an honest look at today's creation and compare. Everything involving today's creation is in a state degradation, everything is decaying, eroding, perishing. This present creation after what Satan did is meant to model his destruction by the sin he committed against God in that old time of God's original perfect creation.

We are given comparisons of how God's original perfect creation might have been per His Word regarding His declared future new heavens and a new earth time, like in Isaiah 11. There we are told the "...wolf also will dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid...", and "...the lion shall eat straw like the ox..." (Isaiah 11:6-7).

In Revelation 21:1 we are told there will be no more sea. Just where do you think all those waters upon the earth today will go in that future world to come? These are examples God is actually giving us of how things were before, in His original perfect creation, prior to Satan's rebellion. Today's creation is in a state of bondage, just as our spirit/soul also is in these imperfect flesh bodies, which is why our spirit/soul also groans inside us...

Rom 8:23
23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
KJV