>Okay. I'm one of those guys who have been arguing that it is not the
>intention of Genesis to convey the Young-earth view--conveniently leaving
>out any mention of what the writer(s) thought about the issue.It would be
>interesting to know (and probably impossible to know) whether the
>writer(s) made a distinction between the truth about God they were
>conveying and the context they were conveying it in -- ANE views of
>cosmology and culture. IOW there are two sets of intentions involved
>here: God's and the writer's. The writer's intentions were the
>necessary result of the fact that all messages are conditioned culturally
>to some extent and were not necessarily in opposition to God's intent in
>inspiring the writer(s) to produce the document.
You are close to falling into the trap I couldn't get out of. If God,
being God, knew the truth about the creation, and inspired an account in
Genesis, it is quite possible that God's intention was to convey the
truth(God not being a liar) but the writer's understanding of the message
may have been very incomplete. Thus it is quite possible for God's
intention to be something other that the traditional view. Of course, I
vote for the Days of Proclamation view.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm