Replies

Just mythoughts: "Prepare yourself to be amazed, because the transition of that word to ‘was’ when it should be became is one of many words from the original Hebrew and Greek that have been transitioned." I doubt that, because there's no evidence for it I can find. But, no doubt there is a story here, and just possibly I can independently confirm or refute it. The question is whether the word normally translated in Genesis 1:2 as "was" might include the meaning of "became"? If it did, then at most the translation is ambigious, and might support some of your other interpretations. But even so, I see no way the word "beginning" means anything other than "beginning".

Seek and ye shall find.

I did not quote Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

A declaratory statement. No 'date' given as to when the beginning began, or how long this time consisted. We can get an estimate by what has been discovered.

Genesis 1:2 AND the earth (only speaks to and about the earth) (my King James places that word was in italics, which means the word used is questionable) and because of Isaiah 45:18 there can be no doubt that something happened to cause the earth to become "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.

This is NOT Noah's flood, but it is the flood that Jeremiah 4:22-27 describes where in nothing living survived. And Peter in IIPeter 3 says verse 1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance;

2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, (Moses, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Solomon, etc.) and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

Finger are tired so I am skipping verses 3-4 for no other reason.

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 (age) that then WAS, being overflowed with water, perished:

Peter is referencing Genesis 1:2, directly, and verifying what Jeremiah and Isaiah penned. How one knows, because Peter already addressed Noah's flood in IIPeter 2, and Genesis 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of Adam that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. This is what Peter is speaking about of the 'old' world (age) in regards to Noah's flood.

Just mythoughts: "Genesis 1:2 AND the earth (only speaks to and about the earth) (my King James places that word was in italics, which means the word used is questionable)..."

Here's what is not questionable --
Young's Literal Translation:

"the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness is on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters,"

So, your earnest wish to read the word "was" to mean "became" is not granted by the text, according to any expert that I can find.

Just mythoughts: "This is NOT Noah's flood, but it is the flood that Jeremiah 4:22-27 describes where in nothing living survived."

I can't see what difference it makes, or what any of this has to do with discussions on the topic of evolution.