Without Form and Void: A Study of the Meaning of Genesis [Arthur C. Custance] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Without Form and Void has 6 ratings and 1 review. Arthur C. Custance Author Arthur Custance wrote his book “Without Form and Void” to argue that. “Without Form And Void: A Study of the Meaning of Genesis ” by – Arthur C. Custance – ISBN: , Classic Reprint Press.

Author: Tagul Yozshuhn
Country: Sao Tome and Principe
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Relationship
Published (Last): 14 September 2014
Pages: 459
PDF File Size: 17.88 Mb
ePub File Size: 4.82 Mb
ISBN: 510-1-88984-576-4
Downloads: 1713
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Migis

It is a curious circumstance in Delitzsch’s case, for. Admittedly not a very clear account, but at least one. If its antecedence can be established with any certainty, one then has to find some other reason than the threat of Geology for its having arisen. Adam rated it it was amazing Feb 03, It is a rare thing nowadays to find in a scholarly work on Genesis any acknowledgment of the fact that there is evidence of a discontinuity between the first two dorm of Custancce One and that this was ever recognized by commentators until modern Geology arose to challenge the Mosaic cosmogony.

John Loupe marked it as to-read Sep 19, At any rate, whatever use or abuse they may have made of. Perhaps he really means creating order on the earth rather than actually creating the globe itself. Admittedly, this mode of interpretation is strange to us, but there. This convenient little device was attributed by many to Thomas Chalmers in the middle of the 19th century. According to the Babylonian.

Without Form and Void – Frontpage

Custance shows that there are two permissible translations of the Hebrew associated with this phrase. Pusey, Oxford Professor of Hebrew, diedor in one of its views for example, Franz Delitzsch, German Hebraist, diedwho held to the second view but not the first.


These indeed are the worlds of which it is said that the blessed God created them and destroyed themand, on that accountthe earth was desolate and empty. He made no attempt therefore to “fill in” where Scripture anf “left out”.

Whether witgout poems attributed to Caedmon were really his is a moot point, but someone in the seventh century knew about this tradition. The analogy is most pointed and reasonable.

In this work he sets forth a number of reasons. None of these writers ventured. Glorious ministers fodm their Lord, spoke his praise with zeal, lauded the Master of their being, and were excellently happy in the majesty of God. The creation of the withouh is thus included in the summary statement of Gen.

Bishop Gleig added one argument in support of this view which others had not considered. With the passage of time, the question of a discontinuity became crystallized more concretely and was discussed in greater detail.

In his Commentary on Genesis published inDillman renders Gen. Nazianzen, and others, and was taught by Josephus Philoponius In his. Since all such effects were presumed to be moral judgments and since man had not yet been created, the angels were blamed. But Driver did admit in his The Book of Genesisthat it was “exegetically admissible”.

Without Form and Void: A Study of the Meaning of Genesis 1:2

But there were some who, being. The writers would not have agreed with Ussher that. Had Moses’ object been merely to ex. If the translation of ‘but’ and ‘had become’ is correct, the implication is far different. According to Bernard Ramm, the subject received its first scient. Where, then, nothing was ckstance on the one side, there could. He notes that the Septuagint translators made an odd exception in their translation from Hebrew into Greek in that only in Gen.

This shows us that after the captivity God will again enlighten us, and send us the Messiah This statement, suffering as it does to modern eyes from custabce.


They might very probably have assented to custahce chronology as applied to the creation of Adam but they would have set the creation of the Universe the heavens and the earth further back in time by some unstated amount. Moses positively affirming that there was not am old earth. In fact, inverting the word order is the only amd that Hebrew can do this.

There is no reason to suppose that early man was any less observant than his modern descendants, or any less curious about the cause of such mass des- truction of living forms. But surely if we render Hayetha as “was”, we cannot but read this meaning into the text.

Early Jewish writers subsequently built up some abstruse arguments about God’s dealings with Israel voiv the basis of this belief and it would seem that Paul in his Epistle to the Corinth- ians is at one point making indirect reference to this traditional background.

This convenient little device was attrib. Since almost all English translations render it the first way, one might be tempted to think that the answer is obvious, straightforward, and free from any ambiguity. And Pusey himself notes that Delitzsch, who in earlier editions had argued against his own view, “subsequently embraced it”. Young has written a valuable monograph entitled, Fkrm in Genesis One in which, though he rejects the concept of an earth under judgment, yet finds good linguistic grounds to believe that in the narrative vojd Genesis 1 there exists an interval between Gen.