You've spent most of this thread calling me an insult to christ, questioning my faith, calling me a fool and claiming I have no love of the truth.
Either you really wanted to insult me or you have Tourette's syndrome of the fingers.
>You’ve spent most of this thread calling me an insult to christ,
Actually I said that once, and then explained myself subsequently. Heck, I even apologized for my “quick tongue”.
>questioning my faith,
I never questioned your faith in the sense you seem to be taking it. I asked you to explain it.
Actually, I would wager that we actually hold many similar beliefs, however the best way to KNOW your position is to attack it, take it apart, “ask questions,” poke-and-prod it. So, that was what I did, and I tried to make it clear by presenting questions... that you simply “didn’t get it”/that I wanted to argue, in the philosophic sense WAS/IS frustrating.
Most of the questions rooted from the intent of: Explain why the creation story MUST be read as six literal 24-hour days.
A divergence of our belief-sets would apparently be the importance of the literallity of the Creation story’s 24-hour day. I think that, because God, the Creator, is outside of time the duration doesn’t matter, in the end. And you know something, Jesus doesn’t base his redemptive power on our “being right”... in fact, it is because we tend to be wrong that we NEED Him.
>calling me a fool and claiming I have no love of the truth.
Well, that’s what I said it seemed like to me. Apparently “it appears” and “it seems to me” are attacks in your mind and not an invitation to explain yourself. (I would gladly read why you believe my perceptions to be wrong.)