PO Box 310 Mt Ommaney
Australia 4074

Is there a time gap between the first two verses of the Bible?

As always, we’ll let the plain English of the Authorized Bible, to tell us what it means as we study to show ourselves approved to no-one but God himself (2Tim2:15).

Which of the following is correct?

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. (Gen 1:2)


And the earth BECAME 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.

A major argument of the gap theorists is that the second is correct. Of course, this means that they must change the clear and plain reading of the Authorized Bible – the King James, to fit their doctrinal position.

As we have stated in a previous tract, the second verse of the Bible begins with the Hebrew conjuctive waw which is a disjunctive, and that means, the second verse is simply a description of the first verse.

On this evidence alone, there is no room whatsoever, for sequential action of a becoming to occur in verse two.

In fact the three uses of the word ‘and’ in And the earth, and darkness and And the Spirit of God in this verse, are all, and only, descriptions of Gen 1:1.

Verse two is simply describing the condition of the earth after it was created.

But the Hebrew word “hayetha” can be translated various ways can’t it?

Correct, but this doesn’t mean that it should be. Let’s look at the possibilities:

“Strong’s Number 1961 hayah – a primitive root - was, come, to pass, came, has been, were happened, become, pertained, better for thee”.

In writing a Master’s Thesis on the topic of Christianity and Evolution, E.K. Gedney surveyed twenty leading Hebrew scholars in the USA, and ask them if there was any grammar evidence that would support the gap theory of Gen 1:2.

They all said there wasn’t – they all said that the word ‘hayetha’ is correctly translated ‘was’ not ‘became’.

Hayetha’ is normally and simply translated as ‘was’, such that, of the 264 times the Hebrew word ‘hayetha’ is used in the OT, it is translated as ‘was’ in 258 occurrences.


The other six clearly show why the context demands why ‘hayetha’ must be translated as ‘became’.


(a)      Examples of ‘hayetha’ translated as ‘was’

The same grammatical construction of ‘hayetha’ being translated as ‘was’ is found in the following:

Gen 2:25

And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Adam and Eve were already naked, they didn’t become naked.

Gen 3:1

 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said,

The serpent didn’t become more subtil, he was already.

Jonah 3:3

So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey.

Obviously, when Jonah went unto Nineveh, it was already an exceeding great city. It did not become a great city after Jonah had entered it.

Gen 41:56

And the famine was over all the face of the earth: And Joseph opened all the storehouses, and sold unto the Egyptians; and the famine waxed sore in the land of Egypt.

By the time Joseph opened all the storehouses, the famine was already in the land of Egypt – not after his opening them.

Ex 1:5

And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already.

Judges 9:51

But there was a strong tower within the city, and thither fled all the men and women, and all they of the city, and shut it to them, and gat them up to the top of the tower.

There was already a strong tower in the city to which they fled. 

Zech 3:3

Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel.

When Zechariah saw Joshua, he was already clothed – he didn’t become clothed.


(b)      Six examples of ‘hayetha’ translated as ‘became’.


… God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil:…

Gen 19:26

But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt.

Clearly, Lot’s wife became a pillar of salt after she looked back. She wasn’t already a pillar of salt before she did.   

Gen 21:20

And God was with the lad; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer.

Ex 7:19

And the LORD spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and stretch out thine hand upon the waters of Egypt, … that they may become blood; …

Ex 8:17

… for Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod, and smote the dust of the earth, and it became lice in man, and in beast; all the dust of the land became lice throughout all the land of Egypt.

Ex 9:10

And they took ashes of the furnace,…and Moses sprinkled it up toward heaven; and it became a boil breaking forth with blains upon man, and upon beast.

Text without context is pretext

With Gen 1:2, there are no immediate words in the surrounding text that would even hint at the suggestion, that the word ‘hayetha’ should be translated ‘became’.

As verse two is the description of verse one, the use of the word ‘was’ allows the text to flow smoothly and without interruption, and is

one, that does not represent a change of condition of the earth.

For the gappists to use the word ‘became’, simply highlights the old adage, that a verse out of context is pretext.

The Greek Game

Those familiar with the Greek Game, will recognize this version of it, whereby you can look up the different meanings of a word in the back of a concordance and select the appropriate one for you. Of course, this will entail your substituting the King James word already in use.

In this case, the gappist, in order to support the theory of a gap between Gen 1:1–2, simply inserts the word ‘became’ for ‘was’.

The NIV has ‘became’

If we need any reminding as to the incorrect translation of ‘hayetha’, we need look no further than the NIV. In true satanic style of posing a question, the foot-note attached to the word ‘was’ in Gen 1:2 reads as follows:

“Or possibly became

There we have it folks, straight from the mouth of the enemy.


CONCLUSION? … There is no gap!


And doesn’t satan just hate the plain reading of the Authorized Bible!


The evidence is legion as to why there is no gap between Gen 1:1-2.

You the need the following tracts on:

1.  Freemasonry, Gnosticism and Hindu Cosmic Cyles being at the heart of the Gap Theory

2.  The use of the word and’ as a waw disjunctive beginning Gen 1:2 that merely describes the Gen 1:1

3.  The use of the words ‘create’ and ‘made’ as synonynms



Australian Bible Ministries, PO Box 5058 Mt. Gravatt East 4122 Qld, Australia