If Theistic Evolution, how long did day 7 last?

[Platte]

This feels a bit loaded, I'm expecting a backlash about the literalness of the creation account because I accept a literal resurrection. Just speak your mind brother, don't set people up.

To that end, I didn't say the creation account wasn't literal. What I said is in practice studying it as a non-literal account is more beneficial and impactful to Christian theology simply because I think the literal conversation too often distracts us from the deeper message, namely light being spoken into darkness. I'm actually indifferent to it being literal or not and tbh find it to be the most uninteresting part of the account.

This is also a Christian-only section of CF which means I implicitly accept the Nicene creed and by extension, look for the resurrection of the dead,and the life of the world to come.

Just referring to what Jesus said. If you don’t

This feels a bit loaded, I'm expecting a backlash about the literalness of the creation account because I accept a literal resurrection. Just speak your mind brother, don't set people up.

To that end, I didn't say the creation account wasn't literal. What I said is in practice studying it as a non-literal account is more beneficial and impactful to Christian theology simply because I think the literal conversation too often distracts us from the deeper message, namely light being spoken into darkness. I'm actually indifferent to it being literal or not and tbh find it to be the most uninteresting part of the account.

This is also a Christian-only section of CF which means I implicitly accept the Nicene creed and by extension, look for the resurrection of the dead,and the life of the world to come.

im just reminded of this when people don’t believe the Creation account that Moses gave us

“For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?”
‭‭John‬ ‭5‬:‭46‬-‭47‬

This feels a bit loaded, I'm expecting a backlash about the literalness of the creation account because I accept a literal resurrection. Just speak your mind brother, don't set people up.

To that end, I didn't say the creation account wasn't literal. What I said is in practice studying it as a non-literal account is more beneficial and impactful to Christian theology simply because I think the literal conversation too often distracts us from the deeper message, namely light being spoken into darkness. I'm actually indifferent to it being literal or not and tbh find it to be the most uninteresting part of the account.

This is also a Christian-only section of CF which means I implicitly accept the Nicene creed and by extension, look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.

Recorded History and the Worlds first civilization supports creation 6000 years ago

 

[DamianWarS]

Just referring to what Jesus said. If you don’t

im just reminded of this when people don’t believe the Creation account that Moses gave us

“For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?”
‭‭John‬ ‭5‬:‭46‬-‭47‬

Recorded History and the Worlds first civilization supports creation 6000 years ago

Sure, and thanks for feeling the need to share this with me. Now that you got it out, let's look at the salvation message of the account.

 

[Platte]

Sure, and thanks for feeling the need to share this with me. Now that you got it out, let's look at the salvation message of the account.

I apologize my post wasn’t intended to attack you in any way. I think it’s important that the account of Creation, which was graciously given to us by God, be understood as it is written. The importance of Creation to the ultimate message of Salvation should not be underestimated. There is NOTHING in Creation 6000 years ago and taking 6 days (normal days) (called a literal reading of Genesis) that is not supported by Science or, and more importantly, recorded History. Again, the importance of this Creation account to the ultimate acceptance of Salvation should not be underestimated.
God Bless

 

[DamianWarS]

I apologize my post wasn’t intended to attack you in any way. I think it’s important that the account of Creation, which was graciously given to us by God, be understood as it is written. The importance of Creation to the ultimate message of Salvation should not be underestimated. There is NOTHING in Creation 6000 years ago and taking 6 days (normal days) (called a literal reading of Genesis) that is not supported by Science or, and more importantly, recorded History. Again, the importance of this Creation account to the ultimate acceptance of Salvation should not be underestimated.
God Bless

I get you're passionate about this but it's not something I care to discuss. I mentioned that I think the literal discussion is distracting to the deeper messages and I see this again here. You seem more interesting in telling me why it's literal than discussing the salvation message expressed in metaphor not the literal. I'm not challenging if it's literal or not so your're misken if that is what you're fishing for.

Do you really want to dispute that speaking light into darkness is not a metaphor for salvation? Paul reveals an underlying salvation message in the creation account in 2 Cor 4:6. Let's continue the conversation Paul started.

 

[Platte]

I get you're passionate about this but it's not something I care to discuss. I mentioned that I think the literal discussion is distracting to the deeper messages and I see this again here. You seem more interesting in telling me why it's literal than discussing the salvation message expressed in metaphor not the literal. I'm not challenging if it's literal or not so your're misken if that is what you're fishing for.

Do you really want to dispute that speaking light into darkness is not a metaphor for salvation? Paul reveals an underlying salvation message in the creation account in 2 Cor 4:6. Let's continue the conversation Paul started.

You are underestimating the importance of Creation to the Salvation message. Marginalizing it is the opposite of what you should be doing

 

[DamianWarS]

You are underestimating the importance of Creation to the Salvation message. Marginalizing it is the opposite of what you should be doing

I'm looking at the creation account through a salvation lens, it's in fact all I want to talk about in the account. So you're comments seem misplaced.

 

[Platte]

I'm looking at the creation account through a salvation lens, it's in fact all I want to talk about in the account. So you're comments seem misplaced.

Well I must agree salvation is what it’s all about. When you say Salvation - what are you saying you are saved from?

 

[DamianWarS]

Well I must agree salvation is what it’s all about. When you say Salvation - what are you saying you are saved from?

I feel like you keep trying to set me up. just speak you're mind rather than these questions that you already know the answers to. I'll keep our conversation grounded to creation and with that in mind If we view the creation account through the lens of salvation, then light is the salvation event redeeming us from the state before light. This starts a transformation process and when complete ushers in day 7 and day 7 is the antithesis to this pre-light/ pre-salvation state in every way contrasting light with darkness, emptiness/fullness, formless/formed, unorganized/organized, incomplete/complete, chaos/rest etc... so day 7 is the goal and the answer to this state before light is spoken. if light is salvation then it is the rescue of darkness, and darkness is what we are saved from.

Again I defer to what Paul said "For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ."