Test thread for YEC'ism.

[AV1611VET]

So, if I'm following correctly, you're saying that what you believe is based on a process of selecting a conclusion, and then training yourself to construct a kind of meta-logic which allows you to successfully defend that position rhetorically. If you can't, it means that your powers of meta-logic are not yet sufficiently advanced, not that your pre-selected conclusion might be in error.

Did I get that about right?

QV Post 56 --- I said it's because I have to agree with what science says on the age of things. And I'll gladly do so, so long as it doesn't contradict the Scriptures.

 

[AintNoMonkey]

I'll gladly do so, so long as it doesn't contradict the Scriptures.

And this is your downfall. An epic lack of reason. It's like you've gouged out your eyes with a fork because you didn't want to see what was right in front of you.

But that's your choice, who am I to stop you?

 

[BrainHertz]

QV Post 56 --- I said it's because I have to agree with what science says on the age of things. And I'll gladly do so, so long as it doesn't contradict the Scriptures.

So it sounds like I was correct?

Edit: by the way, why don't you read up on radiometric dating? It's not like it's that difficult.

 

[AV1611VET]

And YECs wouldn't accept a non-YEC's word on anything whatsoever.

I wouldn't know. If that's totally true (and I'm sure it's not), then they wouldn't accept a thing I say, either; since I'm not a YEC.

So, why not bone up on your knowledge of radiometric dating and be ready to defend it?

Because, in the back of my mind, I agree with scientists about its validity. And even if it is shown to be wrong in the future, there's still the fact that Adam was clearly a mature man when he was created --- which clearly shows embedded age.

Seems a shame to keep your precious idea hidden just because it might run afoul of people smarter than yourself.

What "precious idea" am I keeping hidden?

 

[AV1611VET]

I've never seen you defend ANY position with logic or viable, available data.

Modus Operandi intact then.

 

[AV1611VET]

And this is your downfall. An epic lack of reason.

Au contraire --- God is so much higher than reason.

[bible]Isaiah 55:8-9[/bible]

 

[AV1611VET]

So it sounds like I was correct?

Edit: by the way, why don't you read up on radiometric dating? It's not like it's that difficult.

Why should I? As I have stated, I already agree with you.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I wouldn't know. If that's totally true (and I'm sure it's not), then they wouldn't accept a thing I say, either; since I'm not a YEC.

Well, I am exaggerating for effect, but not by much.

Why not go up against some real YECs and see for yourself?

Because, in the back of my mind, I agree with scientists about its validity.

Back and front of your mind, I would say -- but accepting something, and being able to explain it to people whose entire faith rests on rejecting it, are two different things.

And even if it is shown to be wrong in the future, there's still the fact that Adam was clearly a mature man when he was created --- which clearly shows embedded age.

Actually, it shows nothing of the kind, AV -- the first human being was created quite differently than human beings normally are -- we cannot assume for a moment that your "Adam" was nothing more than a normal human benefitting from a divingly inspired growth spurt.

And -- although this is hardly the time to discuss this -- why must you assume that age can happen without history? Even the YECs will shred you on that one.

What "precious idea" am I keeping hidden?

Your "Embedded age," hidden from the YECs. Are you so in love with it that you could not bear to see it disproven?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Modus Operandi intact then.

Indeed -- which is the one thing for you to worry about if you ever decide to debate other YECs -- they have far more expreience in rejecting reason and reality than you do.

 

[BrainHertz]

Why should I? As I have stated, I already agree with you.

Interesting viewpoint... do you only study how a conclusion was arrived at if you think you might disagree with that conclusion?

 

[AintNoMonkey]

Modus Operandi intact then.

What a way to live. I wonder if I could live in a fantasy land like that. I suspect it'll take a lot of grass, as I'm not too good at suspending reality.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, I am exaggerating for effect, but not by much.

Why not go up against some real YECs and see for yourself?

Let me repeat Post 35 ---

Actually, GrayCat, I'm not even a YEC, and to be honest, I don't feel that I'm in my right element. In fact, I could be doing a disservice to true YECs here, and giving them a bad name.

(I wish one would speak up.)

It's time to get back to Embedded Age.

Your "Embedded age," hidden from the YECs. Are you so in love with it that you could not bear to see it disproven?

I'm not gonna Google the times I've said I'd love to be a YEC, but don't feel that I can adequately defend that position.

 

[AV1611VET]

Indeed -- which is the one thing for you to worry about if you ever decide to debate other YECs -- they have far more expreience in rejecting reason and reality than you do.

I wouldn't know --- I've never debated one yet --- but I'll take your word for it.

 

[BrainHertz]

I'm not gonna Google the times I've said I'd love to be a YEC, but don't feel that I can adequately defend that position.

You already said that earlier, it's just that most people here are unable to grok.

As I said earlier, it's a very curious way to think; to claim to want to believe something different from that which you actually believe, but are held back by what you consider inadequate rhetorical or meta-logic skills.

 

[AV1611VET]

Interesting viewpoint... do you only study how a conclusion was arrived at if you think you might disagree with that conclusion?

Not necessarily --- any conclusion that violates the Scriptures, I reject automatically.

 

[AV1611VET]

What a way to live. I wonder if I could live in a fantasy land like that. I suspect it'll take a lot of grass, as I'm not too good at suspending reality.

I respect the fact that I live in a fallen universe; and, like this universe, I too await the return of Christ.

 

[BrainHertz]

Not necessarily --- any conclusion that violates the Scriptures, I reject automatically.

Yes, I got that, but that wasn't my question. You said that there was no point in you studying radiometric dating because you already agree with its conclusion regarding the age of the Earth. By extension, then, why bother studying what scriptures have to say on the subject?

 

[AV1611VET]

As I said earlier, it's a very curious way to think; to claim to want to believe something different from that which you actually believe, but are held back by what you consider inadequate rhetorical or meta-logic skills.

I'm sure if I ever get pwned by a YEC, I'll change my perspective; but that'll have to happen first.

 

[BrainHertz]

I'm sure if I ever get pwned by a YEC, I'll change my perspective; but that'll have to happen first.

I was responding to your remark "I'd love to be a YEC". Do you understand why I think it strange?

 

[FishFace]

Jesus beat me to it ---

Literally speaking, he's talking about God's "word," here, whichever word that may be. One word does not the Bible make.
Or is this yet another passage which has to be taken non-literally.