Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Since both a theory of Embedded Age, and an Old Universe manage to explain observable phenomenon, and Old Universe is simpler, what reasons are there for accepting Embedded Age over an Old Universe?
thats a nice concise definition btw.
__________________ "There is no struggle too vast, no odds too overwhelming, for ever should we fail- should we fall- we will know that we have lived." --Anomander Rake.
"We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light." --Plato
"I cried unto the LORD with my voice, and He heard me out of His holy hill." Psalm 3:4
"The virtuous man is never a novice in worldly things." Marcus Valerius Martialis
Since both a theory of Embedded Age, and an Old Universe manage to explain observable phenomenon, and Old Universe is simpler, what reasons are there for accepting Embedded Age over an Old Universe?
If by 'Old Universe', you mean OEC (Old Earth Creation), Old Earth Creation embraces many different theories; such as Gap and Day/Age, at the expense of Bible dating.
In other words, a BC4004 creation date is sacrificed in the name of deep time.
Embedded Age, by contrast, is one narrow explanation; and explains how the universe can be both old and young at the same time.
Once you factor in requires omnipotence laws of science not in effect no evidence left behind Then it's possible to explain any occurrence, event, or phenomena that we experience.
"God did it."
And, 2nd question, what does this really bring to the table? It explains how YEC meshes with all the evidence against it, I'll give you that. But what else?
Finally, take a guess as to why god would try to fool us about the age of the world.
Whenever I see things like "no evidence left behind" highlighted as a unique feature, I'm left thinking "how can these guys know anything about it - surely that's an impossibility?"
Also, I have completely failed to find anything in Genesis (not just Genesis 1) that in the least bit touches upon embedded age. And where does it say this embedding of age was witnessed by angels? I can't find it.
So my question is this: - "Show me why this embedded age stuff is not just an excuse to explain away the thorny creationist problem of scientific age determinations being hundreds of thousand times adrift from supposed biblical chronology?"
I suppose it could, but you would need some kind of documentation to back it up, or you just might find yourself all alone.
Originally Posted by dewaddict84
Once you factor in requires omnipotence laws of science not in effect no evidence left behind Then it's possible to explain any occurrence, event, or phenomena that we experience.
"God did it."
Yes and no --- it depends on your frame of reference.
If you're coming from a blank slate, then you need to formulate a coherent cosmology (again, based on documentation you didn't write yourself) and submit it for scrutiny; but if you're coming from an 'anything goes' perspective, then you need documentation to prevent any outside interference.
In short, you need something that allows to step on the gas, as well as apply the brakes.
I feel confident, for example, stating that angiosperms existed before the sun; but I would not be confident saying man existed before the sun.
I could sit and make stuff up all day, but sooner or later I'm going to contradict what is written in the documentation, and I'm going to have to retract.
Originally Posted by dewaddict84
And, 2nd question, what does this really bring to the table? It explains how YEC meshes with all the evidence against it, I'll give you that. But what else?
Faith.
Originally Posted by dewaddict84
Finally, take a guess as to why god would try to fool us about the age of the world.
There is no foolery going on, since Embedded Agers and Atheists should be in complete agreement with each other on the earth's age.
If tomorrow, scientists discover that the earth is actually only 800 million years old, you'll see me tomorrow claiming the earth is 800 million years old.
Whenever I see things like "no evidence left behind" highlighted as a unique feature, I'm left thinking "how can these guys know anything about it - surely that's an impossibility?"
That's why we need something to guide us, and some prefer science to be their guide in how this universe started, and some choose the Bible as their guide as to how this universe started --- (and some use both).
Originally Posted by Mike Elphick
Also, I have completely failed to find anything in Genesis (not just Genesis 1) that in the least bit touches upon embedded age.
Embedded age is arrived at by taking the physical age of the universe and subtracting the number of years that have elapsed since BC4004.
To [over]simplify this, let's reduce it to a simple formula: PA - UD = EA.
PA = physical age of the universe
UD = Ussher's Dating method of BC4004 = 6012 currently
EA = embedded age = amount of greatest age embedded into the universe
Originally Posted by Mike Elphick
And where does it say this embedding of age was witnessed by angels? I can't find it.
Job 38:6-7 shows the angels present and celebrating when the foundations of the earth were laid.
Originally Posted by Mike Elphick
So my question is this: - "Show me why this embedded age stuff is not just an excuse to explain away the thorny creationist problem of scientific age determinations being hundreds of thousand times adrift from supposed biblical chronology?"
It's not an 'excuse', it's a cosmology based on a literal interpretation of the Bible, along with what scientists agree about the age of the universe.
Linear Mode
