Jeremiah 4:23 and the Formless and Void Earth

Jeremiah Chapter 4:

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

Jeremiah 4:23 uses the same phrase as Genesis 1:2 to describe conditions on the earth. In the case of Jeremiah the context makes more clear that the word for earth (ertez) should be translated "land" which is an allowable meaning because this word does not necessarily refer to the entire globe even when prefaced by the word "kol" or "all". Because of the similar phrasing, those of the Cosmic Temple view of the creation account have said that Genesis 1:2 wasn't talking about the physical condition of the earth, except to say that it was wanton and lawless for the lack of God's words and law. The idea is that the "Creation Account" of Genesis one wasn't about creating anything in the material universe, but God setting up His religious system and temple very much like the pagan ANE religions around ancient Israel had done.

The Christ-centered model has a different view of the text than this. Not completely, but fundamentally. That is, the Cosmic Temple folks don't get all the details wrong, but they connect the details they get right to the wrong dots, presenting a false picture. If one only looks at the dots which they get correct, it seems pretty reasonable. When you look at all of the dots they connect, you find that they don't include all the dots they should and use some that they shouldn't to show an incorrect picture. But for now, let's just focus on this passage and the creation account.

What produced light in the creation account was the Word of God entering His creation. It isn't really speaking primarily, if at all, about solar illumination. This partly explains why the appearance of the sun is almost an afterthought regarding the days. The creation account is speaking about forming two realms at once using the same language, the arrangement of both the temporal and the eternal realms. So there is agreement in the Christ-centered model and the Cosmic Temple view that the words had a spiritual component. The disagreement is over what that message is and secondarily in what sense the words had a physical component. 

The Cosmic Temple folks don't reject concordism per se but the presence of concordism in the creation account. That is, they think the text is saying nothing about the material universe so there is no need to align the text with what science says happened in the material universe. They err by so doing. Strict or primary concordists would say it is mostly or completely talking about the physical universe. They also miss the big picture, though they err less than the Cosmic Temple folk do because the latter say it only has a spiritual meaning but then get that meaning wrong. In the Christ-centered model the text is secondarily talking about the material universe, but primarily the eternal realm where the work and person of Christ is the focus. So the creation account is talking about the natural universe, and it is scientifically correct when it does so, because it is inspired by God. But it is primarily talking about the eternal realm and the work of Christ- also because it is inspired by God.

Applying that train of thought to this passage, some would look at Jeremiah and say "so this is what scripture is saying when it says that the earth is formless and void, and that is well short of a molten earth with the sun still shrouded in a nebula".  They conclude that Genesis 1:1-2 is also speaking solely about the lack of a religious system being ordered.

There are at least two main problems with this view of the text. One problem is that the prophet is describing a vision, not something that is happening or has happened. You can tell this because earlier in the chapter God is talking about bringing the Assyrian to wreck havoc on the land. It is something that hasn't happened yet, but either will or could. He is describing what things will be like if God's Word is cut off from and lacking in the land. Conditions in the land locally will revert back to how they were in the earth before His Word entered the cosmos in Genesis chapter one. Reality is affected both spiritually and physically. I wrote about this in my book, how His Word brings order, life and illumination to our world, both physically and spiritually. Take away our connection to Him, and it unwinds into the gloom of night again.

But it does say in verse 27 that He will not make a "full end". So it seems that the prophet had a vision of the land going back to it's initial state, physically and spiritually, but the LORD said that He would stop short of that. The land will be made "desolate". That is a strong word, but it is short of what was described in the vision. Look up the meaning of the words for "formless" and "void" and compare them to the meaning of that used for "desolation". They describe a more primeval state than the latter. That He says "yet I will not make a full end" indicates that it won't get that far. Instead, terrible things short of that will happen- the land will be made desolate. As bad as it will get, it could have been worse. God could permanently withdraw His Word from the land, and worse things would happen physically and spiritually. It could go back to like it was before His Word entered the cosmos.

Further the text describes changes in the physical world which could fairly be viewed as the land losing physical form. So that fits with a concordist view of Genesis 1:1-2, it doesn't undermine it. The key is the prophet is not describing what happened in the physical realm, but a prophetic vision of what would happen, should God remove the light-bringing blessing of His Word completely from that place. Again, it would look like things did before He put His Word into creation. In conclusion, there is a model of early Genesis that does connect all of these dots, and when you do the picture is of Christ and His work.

Get the book.

You Tube Channel

Please "like" and "share".