Chette
Well time is a very interesting subject. One of evolutions arguments is a Radiometric dating. This is all based on the belief that the speed of light and thus radioactive decay is constant. However, in the last few decades there has been substantial evidence that the speed of light has been slowing, and might have actually been billions of times faster just a few thousand years ago.
This evidence was first introduced by a Christian physicist in Austrailia named Barry Setterfield. He wrote a detailed paper on this back in the 80's. Of course, secular science ridiculed his study at first. But since then, numerous other physicists have shown that there is indeed strong evidence that the speed of light is slowing. This is a big controversy in science as it would overthrow Einstein's Theory of Relativity and the Big Bang theory. But more and more scientists are accepting this new view.
Now, this stuff is a little over my head, but basically it says that radioactive dating is on a different time scale than earth which is based on rotations around the sun and the revolution of the earth itself.
So, although the world is only about 6,000 years old in earth time, it can be billions of years old in radioactive time. This would explain how starlight from stars many millions of light years distance could be seen on earth although the earth is only about 6,000 years old. If light was billions of times faster, it could have reached earth almost instantaneously, even though these stars are very distant.
Here is Barry Setterfields site, there is lots of good information here.
http://www.setterfield.org/
Some of this is very complex and difficult to read and understand. Try some of the Setterfield Simplified articles first.
As far as the earth being "without form", this doesn't necessarily indicate destruction to me. It was just a ball covered completely in water, it had no features. When God caused the dry land to appear, then the world took on form or design.
Barry Setterfield believes in a Plasma model of creation, there might be something to this. He actually discusses what God might have meant by "void and without form" in Genesis at the end of the article.
http://www.setterfield.org/plasmamodelintroduction.html
Now, I don't agree with everything Barry Setterfield says. For one thing he often quotes other versions of the Bible (as well as the KJV).