DHK said:
The KJV is perfectly accurate in this translation as vaw is translated as an conjunctive 98% of the time.
Actually, the "waw" is conjuctive about two-thirds of the time, and I trust Hebrew scholars who translated the LXX more than I trust the Gospel According to DHK.
Now, curiously, most translations that I have in my possession disagree with the Gospel According to DHK. Let's see what they have to say:
NET (I'll include their note at the end of this post; the numbers in the verse correspond to notes): Now5 the earth6 was without shape and empty,7 and darkness8 was over the surface of the watery deep,9 but the Spirit of God10 was moving11 over the surface12 of the water.13
REV: Now, the earth, had become waste and wild, and darkness, was on the face of the roaring deep,—but, the Spirit of God, was brooding on the face of the waters,
CLV: Yet the earth became a chaos and vacant, and darkness was on the surface of the submerged chaos. Yet the spirit of the Elohim is vibrating over the surface of the water.
LXX: ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος, καὶ σκότος ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύσσου, καὶ πνεῦμα θεοῦ ἐπεφέρετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος.
The ESV, NASB, NIV, NCV, NLT, and YLT simply omit the "waw".
The ones that have a conjuntion are: KJV and the ASV. (See, I realize there are two sides to the issue and don't try to obfuscate the issue by ignoring things.)
So, 2 have a conjunction, 4 are disjunctive, and the rest simply avoid the issue.
Here are the NET notes. I've highlighted a few things, and also think you should notice the changes for water used in the verse:
Gen 1:2 -
5 tn
The disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + verb)
at the beginning of Gen_1:2 gives background information for the following narrative, explaining the state of things when "God said..." (Gen_1:3). Verse one is a title to the chapter, Gen_1:2 provides information about the state of things when God spoke, and Gen_1:3 begins the narrative per se with the typical narrative construction (vav consecutive followed by the prefixed verbal form). (This literary structure is paralleled in the second portion of the book: Gen_1:4 provides the title or summary of what follows, Gen_1:5-6 use disjunctive clause structures to give background information for the following narrative, and Gen_1:7 begins the narrative with the vav consecutive attached to a prefixed verbal form.) Some translate Gen_1:2 (i.e., Genesis 1:2a) "and the earth became," arguing that Gen_1:1 describes the original creation of the earth, while Gen_1:2 refers to a judgment that reduced it to a chaotic condition. Verses Gen_1:3 (i.e., Genesis 1:3ff.) then describe the re-creation of the earth. However, the disjunctive clause at the beginning of Gen_1:2 cannot be translated as if it were relating the next event in a sequence. If Gen_1:2 were sequential to Gen_1:1, the author would have used the vav consecutive followed by a prefixed verbal form and the subject.
6 tn That is, what we now call "the earth." The creation of the earth as we know it is described in Gen_1:9-10. Prior to this the substance which became the earth (= dry land) lay dormant under the water.
7 tn Traditional translations have followed a more literal rendering of "waste and void." The words describe a condition that is without form and empty. What we now know as "the earth" was actually an unfilled mass covered by water and darkness. Later תהו and בהו, when used in proximity, describe a situation resulting from judgment (Isa_34:11; Jer_4:23). Both prophets may be picturing judgment as the reversal of creation in which God's judgment causes the world to revert to its primordial condition. This later use of the terms has led some to conclude that Gen_1:2 presupposes the judgment of a prior world, but it is unsound method to read the later application of the imagery (in a context of judgment) back into Gen_1:2.
8 sn Darkness. The Hebrew word simply means "darkness," but in the Bible it has come to symbolize what opposes God, such as judgment (Exo_10:21), death (Psa_88:13), oppression (Isa_9:1), the wicked (1Sa_2:9) and in general, sin. In Isa_45:7 it parallels "evil." It is a fitting cover for the primeval waste, but it prepares the reader for the fact that God is about to reveal himself through his works.
9 tn The Hebrew term תְּהוֹם (tehôm, "deep") refers to the watery deep, the salty ocean--especially the primeval ocean that surrounds and underlies the earth (see Gen_7:11).
sn The watery deep. In the Babylonian account of creation Marduk killed the goddess Tiamat (the salty sea) and used her carcass to create heaven and earth. The form of the Hebrew word for "deep" is distinct enough from the name "Tiamat" to deny direct borrowing; however, it is possible that there is a polemical stress here. Ancient Israel does not see the ocean as a powerful deity to be destroyed in creation, only a force of nature that can be controlled by God.
10 tn The traditional rendering "Spirit of God" is preserved here, as opposed to a translation like "wind from/breath of God" (cf. NRSV) or "mighty wind" (cf. NEB), taking the word "God" to represent the superlative. Elsewhere in the OT the phrase refers consistently to the divine spirit that empowers and energizes individuals (see Gen_41:38; Exo_31:3; Exo_35:31; Num_24:2; 1Sa_10:10; 1Sa_11:6; 1Sa_19:20; 1Sa_19:23; Eze_11:24; 2Ch_15:1; 2Ch_24:20).
11 tn The Hebrew verb has been translated "hovering" or "moving" (as a bird over her young, see Deu_32:11). The Syriac cognate term means "to brood over; to incubate." How much of that sense might be attached here is hard to say, but the verb does depict the presence of the Spirit of God moving about mysteriously over the waters, presumably preparing for the acts of creation to follow. If one reads "mighty wind" (cf. NEB) then the verse describes how the powerful wind begins to blow in preparation for the creative act described in Gen_1:9-10. (God also used a wind to drive back the flood waters in Noah's day. See Gen_8:1.)
12 tn Heb "face."
13 sn The water. The text deliberately changes now from the term for the watery deep to the general word for water. The arena is now the life-giving water and not the chaotic abyss-like deep. The change may be merely stylistic, but it may also carry some significance. The deep carries with it the sense of the abyss, chaos, darkness--in short, that which is not good for life.
