If Theistic Evolution, how long did day 7 last?

[Platte]

Who cares how long it took, if it was a billion years or 6 days the message I receive is still the same which is God is the light that was spoken into me and because of that I have rest.

This is the part that loses clarity for me. The message you receive? Are you referring to the message of Salvation? What is giving you rest? Sorry just trying to understand why you would make the statement that you did.

 

[Carl Emerson]

This is the part that loses clarity for me. The message you receive? Are you referring to the message of Salvation? What is giving you rest? Sorry just trying to understand why you would make the statement that you did.

Check out Heb 4...

Today is the day of salvation - the ongoing 7th day...

If it were not, how could He offer Sabbath Peace on any day ?

 

[Platte]

Check out Heb 4...

Today is the day of salvation - the ongoing 7th day...

If it were not, how could He offer Sabbath Peace on any day ?

I guess those comments after saying it doesn’t matter how long creation took or how long ago it was. That’s what confused me. And I think I was wondering what he meant by Salvation and how does it give him peace.

 

[Job 33:6]

Genesis describes ancient Isrealite cosmology, not science. Not modern science.

 

[Platte]

Genesis describes ancient Isrealite cosmology, not science. Not modern science.

I think of Genesis as a historical description. Not cosmology or science. It’s simply providing a historical account of creation.

 

[davetaff]

Hi everyone,
(since I can't answer posts in the section where non-believers are allowed to post)...
a little challenge to everyone believing in the so-called theistic evolution, which I believe is untrue.
Ok?
So if day 1 to day 6 is said to have lasted many millions of years each, how long is day 7 - which is God's rest - following this line of thought?

On one occasion, I've heard a reply in the sense that it simply lasted shorter than the other days... is this how you think?
So why would God's word the Bible choose "day" for a long time span at the beginning of chapter and just a few verses later, "day" describes a rather short period of time? And who is supposed to understand God jumping from one meaning to another in the same chapter?

Someone else said he believed that God still is resting as of today. However, he's worked hard in the mean time initiating the flood, for instance.

I'm curious to learn what you think on this one.

Regards,
Thomas

Hi everything that happend before the flood was destroyed in the flood so God began again with Noah and everything on the ark.
This creation would take 6 days 1000 years long the end result mankind in the image of God which is Jesus Christ when he presents himself before the Father with the multitude of believers this is mankind in the image of God then begins Christs millennial reign and the Fathers sabbath rest.

Love and Peace
Dave

 

[davetaff]

Hi why are we trying to make sense of what happend before the flood God destroyed everything in the flood except Noah and what was on the ark its what happend after the flood that should be of interest to us
.
Love and Peace
Dave

 

[Job 33:6]

I think of Genesis as a historical description. Not cosmology or science. It’s simply providing a historical account of creation.

Genesis describes ancient near east cosmology. You can ignore this if you want, but indeed it's there. It does not describe modern science. Even as a text that describes history as well.

 

[Platte]

Genesis describes ancient near east cosmology. You can ignore this if you want, but indeed it's there. It does not describe modern science. Even as a text that describes history as well.

From a High Level perspective the Bible describes things the way I would understand it. How would you describe things differently from a 3 tier system based on your understanding of the universe. The New Testament and Jesus describe things the same way the Old Testament does. If the one who created the Universe describes it that way what is your point? That it’s not accurate? Or that we shouldn’t accept Gods description?

 

[Job 33:6]

From a High Level perspective the Bible describes things the way I would understand it. How would you describe things differently from a 3 tier system based on your understanding of the universe. The New Testament and Jesus describe things the same way the Old Testament does. If the one who created the Universe describes it that way what is your point? That it’s not accurate? Or that we shouldn’t accept Gods description?

When did Jesus ever teach that the earth rested upon pillars with a solid sky restraining the waters above?

 

[Platte]

When did Jesus ever teach that the earth rested upon pillars with a solid sky restraining the waters above?

Silly.

Again I’d say point out what you think is described wrong in the Bible and tell me how you would describe it.

 

[Job 33:6]

Silly.

Again I’d say point out what you think is described wrong in the Bible and tell me how you would describe it.

So, I've informed you that the old testament references ancient isrealites cosmology. You've responded by saying that Jesus describes cosmology the same way that the old testament does.

My follow up is, where?

As a reminder, 3 - tiered ancient isrealite cosmology in the Bible describes a solid sky dome resting atop an earth set on pillars, surrounded on all sides by water.

I'm not aware of Jesus saying anything about this.

 

[Job 33:6]

Silly.

Again I’d say point out what you think is described wrong in the Bible and tell me how you would describe it.

You think there is something silly about Bible passages describing the earth on pillars?

 

[Platte]

You think there is something silly about Bible passages describing the earth on pillars?

I don’t agree. But what’s your point? Do you have one?

 

[Yarddog]

Hi everyone,
(since I can't answer posts in the section where non-believers are allowed to post)...
a little challenge to everyone believing in the so-called theistic evolution, which I believe is untrue.
Ok?
So if day 1 to day 6 is said to have lasted many millions of years each, how long is day 7 - which is God's rest - following this line of thought?

On one occasion, I've heard a reply in the sense that it simply lasted shorter than the other days... is this how you think?
So why would God's word the Bible choose "day" for a long time span at the beginning of chapter and just a few verses later, "day" describes a rather short period of time? And who is supposed to understand God jumping from one meaning to another in the same chapter?

Someone else said he believed that God still is resting as of today. However, he's worked hard in the mean time initiating the flood, for instance.

I'm curious to learn what you think on this one.

Regards,
Thomas

The 7th day is God's rest which is eternal.

 

[DamianWarS]

This is the part that loses clarity for me. The message you receive? Are you referring to the message of Salvation? What is giving you rest? Sorry just trying to understand why you would make the statement that you did.

when I read the creation account as a literal narrative the net result is not a whole lot. I don't need the creation account to know God created the heavens and the earth and the order of it all in a literal vacuum seems obscure and enigmatic. But when I stop forcing a literal narrative as its goal a gospel message of light being spoken into darkness ending in rest emerges that has immeasurable impact. It's not that I'm saying it's not literal, which I'm indifferent to, it's that in practice reading it as a non-literal account is more beneficial and impactful to Christian theology. Believe what you want about its literalness, but don't study it for those reasons, study it as a salvation message.

You could say the creation account is goal-driven to built to the 7th day and cement it in to bolster the 4th commandment and if so then this too is not about the literal, it's about looking at the creation account as building to law (specifically the 4th commandment) which I find to be anti-climatic and counter-gospel. Let's call a spade a spade here, which are we first? Sabbatrians or Christians? Christ is the central message of scripture and however wrong this sounds the sabbath is not the central message as the sabbath can only be defined through Christ. If creation, the 7th day or the 4th commandment cannot point to Christ then we've missed the point so I'm just cutting to the chase and viewing it under the lens of Christ rather then the lens of the Sabbath.

Paul makes a quick comment in 1 Cor 4:6 saying "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." not often looked at but Paul here is actually giving us a form of commentary on the creation account conflating the light of creation with the gospel message. This calibrates the account into a salvation context under biblical authority. If the light of day 1 is a gospel/salavtion message what is the dark formless void that the spirit of God overs over? what is the meaning of waters above and below that a new body of land rises out of? What are the seed-bearing plants? What is the sense of filling up the formed bodies of day 1, 2 and 3 with days 4, 5, 6? What is the command to multiply, and then of course when complete what is this rest?

the salvation message in the creation account is light being spoken into a dark formless void which should by no means be controversal. Light into darkness is probably the most used metaphor in the bible so this should be no surprise why it is the first act of creation even to the ruin of logic since the sun is created after the light. Light is the initiating act of creation as it is with salvation so in this context it's clear why light is placed first whereas in a literal vacuum the logic of it doesn't add up. In the account the days goes on forming and organizing, filling and multiplying and when complete ushers in rest. Perhaps Phil 1:6 sums up this account by saying "he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ".

"rest" is "sabbath" in the account. it is a verb, not a noun and can be translated as "cease". God of course is perfect in all ways so has no need for rest and any act that is done is done with direct intention. God's work of creation was complete and because it was complete he ceased creating. rest then is a product of a completed work which of course is a parallel to the work of God with us that Phil 1:6 puts attention to. This 2 sided coin of completion and rest adds layers to the meaning of sabbath and builds this message of salvation from light to rest that is missing when we only connect the dots to the 4th commandment. The 4th commandment echos this message but the 7th day does not echo the 4th commandment if that makes sense, the message is the same since the beginning. God sends light, transforms us and gives us rest. What gives us rest? If Christ is the central message of scripture then of course Christ is the central message of the creation account and the central message of the law including the 4th commandment. he is the one who gives us rest.

 

[Platte]

when I read the creation account as a literal narrative the net result is not a whole lot. I don't need the creation account to know God created the heavens and the earth and the order of it all in a literal vacuum seems obscure and enigmatic. But when I stop forcing a literal narrative as its goal a gospel message of light being spoken into darkness ending in rest emerges that has immeasurable impact. It's not that I'm saying it's not literal, which I'm indifferent to, it's that in practice reading it as a non-literal account is more beneficial and impactful to Christian theology. Believe what you want about its literalness, but don't study it for those reasons, study it as a salvation message.

You could say the creation account is goal-driven to built to the 7th day and cement it in to bolster the 4th commandment and if so then this too is not about the literal, it's about looking at the creation account as building to law (specifically the 4th commandment) which I find to be anti-climatic and counter-gospel. Let's call a spade a spade here, which are we first? Sabbatrians or Christians? Christ is the central message of scripture and however wrong this sounds the sabbath is not the central message as the sabbath can only be defined through Christ. If creation, the 7th day or the 4th commandment cannot point to Christ then we've missed the point so I'm just cutting to the chase and viewing it under the lens of Christ rather then the lens of the Sabbath.

Paul makes a quick comment in 1 Cor 4:6 saying "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." not often looked at but Paul here is actually giving us a form of commentary on the creation account conflating the light of creation with the gospel message. This calibrates the account into a salvation context under biblical authority. If the light of day 1 is a gospel/salavtion message what is the dark formless void that the spirit of God overs over? what is the meaning of waters above and below that a new body of land rises out of? What are the seed-bearing plants? What is the sense of filling up the formed bodies of day 1, 2 and 3 with days 4, 5, 6? What is the command to multiply, and then of course when complete what is this rest?

the salvation message in the creation account is light being spoken into a dark formless void which should by no means be controversal. Light into darkness is probably the most used metaphor in the bible so this should be no surprise why it is the first act of creation even to the ruin of logic since the sun is created after the light. Light is the initiating act of creation as it is with salvation so in this context it's clear why light is placed first whereas in a literal vacuum the logic of it doesn't add up. In the account the days goes on forming and organizing, filling and multiplying and when complete ushers in rest. Perhaps Phil 1:6 sums up this account by saying "he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ".

"rest" is "sabbath" in the account. it is a verb, not a noun and can be translated as "cease". God of course is perfect in all ways so has no need for rest and any act that is done is done with direct intention. God's work of creation was complete and because it was complete he ceased creating. rest then is a product of a completed work which of course is a parallel to the work of God with us that Phil 1:6 puts attention to. This 2 sided coin of completion and rest adds layers to the meaning of sabbath and builds this message of salvation from light to rest that is missing when we only connect the dots to the 4th commandment. The 4th commandment echos this message but the 7th day does not echo the 4th commandment if that makes sense, the message is the same since the beginning. God sends light, transforms us and gives us rest. What gives us rest? If Christ is the central message of scripture then of course Christ is the central message of the creation account and the central message of the law including the 4th commandment. he is the one who gives us rest.

So just to clarity. You believe that after you die you will literally be brought back to life, given a new body and spend eternity with God as part of His family?

 

[DamianWarS]

So just to clarity. You believe that after you die you will literally be brought back to life, given a new body and spend eternity with God as part of His family?

That certainly could be a message taken from the creation account as well by the old being made new, and the general hope of salvation through Christ, but I think it's too digressed of topic to comment on here.

 

[Platte]

That certainly could be a message taken from the creation account as well by the old being made new, and the general hope of salvation through Christ, but I think it's too digressed of topic to comment on here.

But do you believe: You believe that after you die you will literally be brought back to life, given a new body and spend eternity with God as part of His family?

Just a yes or no question. Since you don’t take the creation account literally I was just seeing if you take the Salvation account literally

 

[DamianWarS]

But do you believe: You believe that after you die you will literally be brought back to life, given a new body and spend eternity with God as part of His family?

Just a yes or no question. Since you don’t take the creation account literally I was just seeing if you take the Salvation account literally

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.