My Igneous Challenge

[Mr Strawberry]

I'm not going to dignify posts that imply I have some kind of narcissistic personality disorder with a response.

Denial noted.

 

[AV1611VET]

The problem with an "embedded age" is that is simply a careful wording of the claim that "God is lying". Even when I was a Christian I did not believe in a dishonest God. Yes, if a God wanted to, and was all powerful, he could have created you last Tuesday.

Embedded Age = maturity without history.

Last Tuesdayism = maturity with history.

There's a difference, and not knowing it can lead to:

... makes no sense to me.

Not to mention:

"God is lying".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Embedded Age = maturity without history.

Last Tuesdayism = maturity with history.

There's a difference, and not knowing it can lead to:


Not to mention:

Wrong, there is no difference between Last Tuesdayism and your Embedded Age. They both have a history. Last Tuedayism's history is simply much shorter. But in reality their histories' are almost identical. You want to chop off all but roughly 6500 hundred years of your history and Last Tuedayism wants to chop all all but a few days of your history. Statistically they are equal since they both chop off over 99.999% of our actual history. The difference is less than the margin of error for the age of the Earth.

And the "God is lying" idea is what you espouse. Once again, I could not believe in a Lying God. If God exists I do not think that he would lie. You might not like it when others point out that that is your claim, but you have been unable to justify the embedded age that you believe in.

 

[Oafman]

True and I respect that. But part of that is also false. For instance it is said by scientist's that Einstein proved Newton wrong

It is not. Newton's theory was not wrong, it was incomplete. Einstein went a long way towards completing it.

and now they say Einstein was wrong concerning the speed of light and time.

No they don't. Einstein was correct about the speed of light and time. But following the development of our understanding of quantum physics, and our understanding of black holes, it has become clear that Relativity does not quite explain everything.

They have discovered particles that move faster than light.

They have not. The results you're thinking of are yet to be corroborated, and probably have a different explanation.

Some discoveries shatter all previous beliefs and many well built towers of theories come crashing down.

No 'well built theory' has ever come crashing down. Numerous hypotheses have, but that's the whole point of science; form an idea, and find sufficient evidence to support it. In most cases, the evidence was not found, and sometimes contrary evidence was even found, and in either case the hypothesis was abandoned. But sometimes sufficient evidence was found, and then more and more evidence was found, from multiple different sources and methods, and it ALL agreed with what was predicted. You're then some way towards having a 'well built theory', and as I said, such a theory has never been disproven.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'm not going to dignify posts that imply I have some kind of narcissistic personality disorder with a response.

Not going to deny them either, we see...

 

[The Cadet]

Cadet, just out of curiosity, since I "deny reality so much," can you explain what I mean by EARTH ONE as my location?

It happens to be a major doctrine in the Christian faith.

I would think those who "know reality" so much should be able to easily answer it.

I never claimed that you deny reality. I simply pointed out that your epistemology is worthless. I don't know what EARTH ONE is. So what? I don't know a lot of things. I try my best to stay informed, but I don't know everything. But here's the thing - when I try to know something, I ensure that I have a good reason for believing it. A functional epistemology, if you will.

 

[AV1611VET]

I simply pointed out that your epistemology is worthless.

And on a Christian site, no less.

I guess it takes all kinds, doesn't it?

 

[TLK Valentine]

And on a Christian site, no less.

I guess it takes all kinds, doesn't it?

What do you care? "Independent" Baptist, and all that, right?

 

[AV1611VET]

What do you care? "Independent" Baptist, and all that, right?

I have a feeling that if "my epistemology" is "worthless," others' epistemology is as well.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have a feeling that if "my epistemology" is "worthless," others' epistemology are (is?) as well.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I have a feeling that if "my epistemology" is "worthless," others' epistemology is as well.

Because of course, it's all about you.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because of course, it's all about you.

QV post 98.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just because you use a failed epistemology is no reason to assume that all epistemology is of no use.

 

[TLK Valentine]

QV post 98.

QV post 105.

 

[AV1611VET]

Just because you use a failed epistemology is no reason to assume that all epistemology is of no use.

I would imagine that what goes around comes around with some people.

Unless some tailor their epistemology to agree with the epistemology of the questioning party, it runs the risk of being deemed "worthless."

I'm guilty of that as well, when I say, "[X] can take a hike."

Others are no different when they basically say the same thing about doctrine.

 

[AV1611VET]

QV post 105.

QV the Muppet Show.

Even your current avatar looks like Statler in his younger years.

 

[TLK Valentine]

QV the Muppet Show.

Even your current avatar looks like Statler in his younger years.

You usually don't resort to personal cracks, AV -- you used to have standards.

 

[AV1611VET]

You usually don't resort to personal cracks, AV -- you used to have standards.

It does.

I'm not kidding.

 

[whois]

I'm not kidding.

neither was maynard

 

[Subduction Zone]

I would imagine that what goes around comes around with some people.

Unless some tailor their epistemology to agree with the epistemology of the questioning party, it runs the risk of being deemed "worthless."

I'm guilty of that as well, when I say, "[X] can take a hike."

Others are no different when they basically say the same thing about doctrine.

Your epistemology is worthless since it tends to be self contradicting. In fact I am not even sure if the term epistemology applies to your method of belief.