Replenish the Earth

[James Lindquist]

Do you remember the 1968 movie "Planet of the Apes," staring Charlton Heston as Leo Davidson? Fast forwarding to the end, do you recall how it did end?

Leo (played by Charlton Heston) and Daena (played by Estella Warren) rode astride a horse on the beach when they came across something that brought Leo off the horse and to his knees. It was a gut retching scene. What made him act as he did? The audience is then made aware of Leo's concern. It is the Statue of Liberty buried up to her chest in sand. Woe! Was this scene prophetic?

Now - keep that visual in your mind and think of my last question, "Was this scene prophetic? Now read with me as I reflect on Genesis 1:28.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

God's Word did not say, ". . .Be fruitful, and multiply, and plenish the Earth. . ."

I bet you can see where I'm going with this. The word plenish means to fill up; to stock. The word replenish means to make full or complete again, as by furnishing a new supply.

Question: Has the Earth started over more than once. How many times have we gone through creation to the end? Until man gets it right? God had a perfect plan. It is us who have screwed things up.

I don't know if I believe this or not but it sure is food for thought. I've always had trouble with that one little word - replenish.

Have fun thinking about this one.

JL

[Greg, TheNET Coordinator]

James,

Only the King James version of the Bible uses the word "replenish." All of the later and better translations, even the most literal ones (such as Young's literal translation and the New American Standard Version) use the the word "fill" which does not connote starting over.

Genesis 1 is speaking of the beginning of the creation of the earth. Some holding to the gap theory have speculated on multiple "beginnings" of the earth, but this does not appear warranted from Scripture. It is poor Biblical exegisis to base such a theory on one word and that possibly mistranslated. All the rest of Scripture does not support the idea of multiple beginings of the earth.

By the way, Planet of the Apes was a great movie for its time and the surprise ending.... Wow! It does make one stop and reflect on the insanity of sin and mankind's self-destructive behavior.

[James Lindquist]

I agree. It was food for thought though and fun to contemplate. I loved the movie and the ending took me by surprise as it probably did for many others.

I believe that the KJV is probably the most accurate Bible we have. It is the closest to the original. Later versions are probably better to some because they have made the text more contemporary. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew and is from the scrolls. The Jewish Bible is the Tanakh and the KJV is all but verbatim to it. However, I still use other Bibles for my research. not the least of which are the two that you mentioned. I am no Bible scholar but it is just what I believe.from what I have been taught. I'm open, however. I'll research that a little more. Thanks.

Have a great day and thanks for joining in. I enjoyed reading the comments and thoughts. GB

[Greg, TheNET Coordinator]

James,

The NIV and other modern versions are based on older and more numerous manuscripts that the KJV. The discipline of textual criticism says (among other things) that older manuscripts have less time for copy errors to be introduced because of they, being older, are closer to the source than later manuscripts (think of the telephone game).

Second, textual criticism says that you get a better result from comparing more manuscripts than less manuscripts. If 6,000 manuscripts say one thing and five say something else, chances are the 6,000 are more accurate to the original than the five.

So that being the case, please read the folllowing from http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorigin.html

The reason the King James version differ from the NASV and the NIV in a number of readings is because it is translated from a different text-type than they are.

A.The King James Version was translated from Erasmus' printed Greek New Testament which made use of only five Greek manuscripts the oldest of which dated to the 1,100 A.D. These manuscripts were examples of the Byzantine text-type.

B.The NASV and the NIV make use of the United Bible Societies 4th Edition 1968 of the New Testament. This edition of the Greek New Testament relies more heavily on the Alexandrian text-type while making use of all 5,664 Greek manuscripts. The reasons that the NASV and NIV find the Alexandrian text-type more reliable are the following:

1.This text-type uses manuscripts date from 175-350 A.D. which includes most of the papyri, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.

2.The church fathers from 97-350 A.D. used this text-type when they quoted the New Testament.

3.The early translations of the New Testament used the Alexandrian text-type.

So, in terms of accuracy, newer translations are closer to the original than the King James because they rely on manuscripts up to 900 years older than that of the King James. And they have over 5,600 more manuscripts than those used for the King James translation.

[James Lindquist]

Very informative Greg. Thank you so much for taking the time to relay this info to me. I DO use the NIV alt because I have the NIV Study Bible. What a blessing that is. By just reading the cross references you could probably read the whole Bible. I use probably five or six different Bibles in my studies. I also use many commentaries like the Barnes, Clarkes, Gill, Abbott, and etc. I also use an old Scofield that my Gramma gave to me as a child. I also use the Tanakh.

Again, thanks for the time spent.

Jim

[LT]

James,

I did some research on this recently and came across an interesting item to note. Between 1300 and 1700 the English word "replinsh" meant something completely different from today. During that period of time it meant to "fill." Only sometime after the 1700s did the word come to mean "refill", thus when the KJV 1611 was written the definition and understanding were quite ddifferent and more inline with what we see translated in the more modern versions of the Bible.

Lord Bless,
LT

[James Lindquist]

Thanks LT. I'm getting an education. It's hard when you've been told things for many years (and it makes sense). Wish I knew how to read Hebrew and Greek, I'd get the actual skinny on everything.

The only way we have of discerning what God meant when He dictated His words to the writers IS His Word. And when fifteen different versions have fifteen different translations how are we supposed to discern His will. The written Word is the only way we have of discerning His will. I haven't attended seminary but I'm a fair student of His Word. Guess we'll all find out in glory. There's an old adage that says, "we are dying by degrees," or something to that affect.

This is why I use the Strongs Lexicon Bible a lot. Regardless of the version and English translations, the Greek and Hebrew words remain constant.

Thanks for the input. To me, it was fun to throw the question out there. I didn't believe that we've went around a number of times and I surely don't want to build doctrine on one verse, but the words sometimes can throw us. The Greek language is so descriptive that it's hard for anyone to translate in English anyway.

Moses said it best in Deuteronomy 29:29, that the secret things belong to the Lord. When things are revealed to us, the secret things will belong to us. I believe that the book of Daniel will be unsealed soon and there will be prophesies that will make us think twice and understand things that we didn't understand before.

Have a good one LT,

Jim

[Rita Cullimore]

My question is: Genesis 1:1-2
1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Ge 1:1-2). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

When has God ever created something that was without form and void? Unless, by these words, the Bible is saying that the creation of the earth started with nothing? But it did start with something or it couldn't to formless and void. But the water is there. How did that get there?

Those 2 verses have probably triggered more thoughts for me than any other in the entire Word of God.

Blessings,
Rita
I have more questions than these few here!

[LT]

Rita,

In verse 1 God created the heavens and the earth. This is part of the first day. Gap theorist would like to separate verse 1 and verse 2 and give room for a span of time that veries based upon which theory one presents. We need not embrace a theory, but take God at His word as it is presented. Let's look at verse 2 for a better answer. I come from a more literal view.

Verse 2 states that it was formless and empty. We also see that the earth is covered with water as stated, plus land is not established until verse 9. We also see that the Holy Spirit is hovering over the water. It is reasonable to believe that there is no gravity yet, as the sun and moon have not beed placed in the universe. Thus, the water is held in pace by the Holy Spirit's presence hovering over the water. There is no light or life, just the planet covered fully by water and the heavens. Water is without a stable form, being that it is liquid and ever shifting as a fluid.

Thus,
Empty or void relates to no life as God is all about life.
Formless relates to the water, liquid, covering the earth.

How did the water get there? God created the earth with water on it in verse 1. God does not give every detail to us, but to assume that God created the heavens and the earth and then a cataclysmic event occured and then God started over once or multiple times seems unreasonable at best.

Lord Bless,
LT

[James Lindquist]

I agree, but it was fun and the movie was great. It momentarily made me stop and think. It's hard to understand though sometimes when certain words are used. Since the KJV is taken from the original Hebrew text (Old Testament) and is just about verbatim from the Tanakh, I believe that it is the most accurate Bible we have. I know there will be differences on that one but it's just how I believe.

Thanks for joining in.

[James Lindquist]

Me also. I can think of many more verses that create some food for thought. I guess we'll all know the truth when in glory. The movie was great though. What a shocker ending.

[Rick Kelly]

Hi James,

Below is the explanation of the so called "gap theory". Many scripture references. The earth that was then - Billions or more years old. The earth that is now - About 6 thousand years old. The new heaven & earth to come - Eternal.

I Hope this helps....


notes on Isaiah 45:18
This Is From The Companion Bible.

Isaiah 45:18

18. For thus saith the LORD °That created the heavens; God Himself °That formed the earth and °made it; he hath established it, °He created it not °in vain, He formed it to be inhabited: " I am the LORD;
and there is none else.

That created = the Creator of. Note how these expressions are heaped together to impress us with the fact that the One Who created all ought to be able to tell us, better than ignorant man, how He created it.
That formed = The Former of. Hebrew yazar = to fashion.
made = the Maker of. He created. It did not come of itself by evolution (see Appendix 5 and 8). Reference to Pentateuch (Genesis 1:1)
in vain = tohu. The same word as in Genesis 1:2 ("without form"). Therefore it must have become tohu: which is exactly what Genesis 1:2 declares (See Below). In Genesis 1:1 we have "the world that then was" (compare 2Peter 3:6); and in verse 2 we have ruin into which it fell.

We are not told how, when, or why, or how long it lasted. When geologists have settled how many years they require, they may place them between verses 1 and 2 of Genesis 1.

In Genesis 1:2-2:4, we have "the heavens and the earth which are now" of 2Peter 3:7. Both are set in contrast with the "new heavens and the new earth" of 2Peter 3:13.

1The Lord = Hebrew; Yehovah

notes on Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
This Is From The Companion Bible.

1. IN the beginning °God °created °the heaven and the earth.
2. °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.

1. "THE WORLD THAT THEN WAS" (2Peter 3:5,6). See Structure, page 1. Creation in eternity past, to which all Fossils and "Remains" belongs.

God. Hebrew Elohim, plural. First occurence connects it with creation, and denotes, by usage, the Creator in relation to His creatures. See Appendix 4. The Hebrew accent Athnach places the emphasis, and gives pause, on "God" as being Himself the great worker, separating the Worker from His work.

created (sing.). Occurs 6 times in this Introduction. Other acts 46 times. See Appendix 5. Perfection implied. Deuteronomy 32:4. 2Samuel 22:31. Job 38:7. Pslams 111; 147:3-5. Proverbs 3:19. Ecclesiastes 3:11-14. [Even the Greek Cosmos = ornament. Exodus 33:4-6. Isaiah 49:18. Jeremiah 4:30. Ezekiel 7:20. 1Peter 3:3]

the heaven and the earth. With Hebrew Particle 'eth before each, emphasising the Article "the", and thus distinguishing both from 2:1. "Heavens" in Hebrew always in plural. See note on Deuteronomy 4:26.

2. And. Note the Figure of Speech Polysyndeton (See appendix 6), by which, in the 34 verses of this Introduction, each one of 102 separate acts are emphasised; and the important word "God" in verse 1 is carried like a lamp through the whole of this Introduction (1:1 - 2:3).

the earth. Figure of Speech Anadiplosis. See appendix 6.

was = become. See Genesis 2:7; 4:3; 9:15; 19:26. Exodus 32:1. Deuteronomy 27:9. 2Samuel 7:24, etc. Also rendered came to pass, Genesis 4:14; 22:1; 23:1; 27:1. Joshua 4:1; 5:1. 1Kings 13:32. Isaiah 14:24 etc. Also rendered be (in the sense of become), verse 3 etc., and where the verb "to be" is not in italic type. Hence, Exodus 3:1, kept=became keeper, quit = become men, etc. See Appendix 7.

without form = waste. Hebrew tohu va bohu. Figure of Speech Paronomasia See appendix 6. Not created tohu (Isaiah 45:18 See Above), but became tohu (Genesis 1:2. 2Peter 3:5,6). "An enemy hath done this" (Matthew 13:25,28,39. compare 1Corithians 14:33). See Appendix 8.

was. This is the italic type, because no verb "to be" in Hebrew (see Appendix 7). In like manner man became a ruin (Genesis 3. Psalms 14:1-3; 51:5; 53:1-3. Ecclesiastes 7:20. Romans 7:18).

face. Figure of Speech Pleonasm. See appendix 6.

the Spirit of God moved (see Appendix 9) = The beginning of "the heavens and the earth which are now" (2Peter 3:7). It is even so in the New Creation. The Spirit moves (John 3:3-8. Romans 8:5,9,14. Galatians 4:29. 2Corinthians 5:17,18
therain.org

Bless you Brother
In JESUS
.Rick.

p.s. I thought it was an excellent movie. I enjoy good science fiction. Read a lot of it to.