RE: Jude 14 and the age of the world

Rasmussen, Ryan J. (
Thu, 15 Apr 1999 14:31:20 -0400

Has anyone looked at the 6 days as the design phase rather than the
construction phase? Many people read Genesis 1 as a "design/build"
effort of God where as things are conceived they are constructed. I
tend to believe that Genesis 1 was the design phase whereas Gen. 2 would
be considered the construction phase.

I can understand why the vast amount of complexity to this universe
would take a supernatural entity 6 days to formulate... not everything
God does takes a split second of time. Suddenly there was a "big
bang"... and He rested in confidence on the seventh day as the creation
unfolded knowing that His design in time will come to its fullness.

On a side note:
I still find it amazing that energy that makes up this universe is a
blatant signiture of God. The power of God. It can't be created. It
can't be destroyed. It IS. I AM THAT I AM. Still gives me chills.

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 1999 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: Jude 14 and the age of the world

>I think this proves that someone deviated from believing in the 6000
year old
>earth; but, it does not mean that this person had sound exegetical
>for his interpretation. Nor does it mean that the vast majority of
>and laity even in the 17th century did not believe the earth was around
>years old.

Hall further cites Origen as doubting that the "days" before the
of the sun could be 24 hour (from the same original reference). Hall
not citre any evidence as to how long Origen did think they were.

Whatever the general opinion was (as most folks probably did not think
about it) as to the age of the earth, these examples do show that
questioning the 6 24 hour day model plus approximately the length of the
genealogies is not purely an attempt to yield to modern scientific
evidence. Of course, modern scientific evidence has provided a much
greater impetus for closely examining the text, whereas earlier readers
were going largely on speculation.

David C.