Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation

[Bushido216]

The answer I'm giving is: "I don't know".

And if you're going to change "supernova" to "reality" --- go ahead --- but be forewarned that it is just going to come back on you and confuse you in the end.

I can't reconcile evolution with Embedded Age either; for obvious reasons.

So if you want to go with something other than, 'God did it', then you're not going to understand such concepts as:

1. stars being the homes of angels
2. the plan of salvation in the stars
3. supernovas testifying of God's judgment on the angels
4. etc.

In short, you will stunt your grown when it comes to learning the deeper concepts of Theology.

So, if this is theology, why is it here?

You've stated a few times that your beliefs aren't based in science, stand apart from science, and can't be tested by science.

We should have this moved.

 

[Bushido216]

The answer I'm giving is: "I don't know".

And if you're going to change "supernova" to "reality" --- go ahead --- but be forewarned that it is just going to come back on you and confuse you in the end.

I can't reconcile evolution with Embedded Age either; for obvious reasons.

So if you want to go with something other than, 'God did it', then you're not going to understand such concepts as:

1. stars being the homes of angels
2. the plan of salvation in the stars
3. supernovas testifying of God's judgment on the angels
4. etc.

In short, you will stunt your grown when it comes to learning the deeper concepts of Theology.

So, if this is theology, why is it here?

You've stated a few times that your beliefs aren't based in science, stand apart from science, and can't be tested by science.

We should have this moved.

Edit: Sorry for the double post: Server timeouts hit me.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm sorry but the bible disagrees with you on this subject

Neat --- since the Bible disagrees with me, and you guys disagree with the Bible, then you guys must agree with me; but since you don't agree with me, then you must be wrong about the Bible disagreeing with me, which means the Bible agrees with me (or rather, I agree with the Bible).

Either way, you make me look right --- thank you.

 

[AV1611VET]

So, if this is theology, why is it here?

It's actually where it should be; but as usual, everyone wants to talk anything but the Creation Week, which is a subject that requires a high degree of concentration and discipline.

Like sheep who can't stay in their pasture, most people can't stay in Genesis 1 for anymore than two or three pages.

Then I get faced with a dilemma: go after them and beg them to come back, or let them stand at a distance and make noises.

This thread is an excellent example.

 

[thaumaturgy]

...

 

[MoonLancer]

Neat --- since the Bible disagrees with me, and you guys disagree with the Bible, then you guys must agree with me; but since you don't agree with me, then you must be wrong about the Bible disagreeing with me, which means the Bible agrees with me (or rather, I agree with the Bible).

nice cartoon logic. almost as bad as yes no yes no no yes no yes. The real world doesn't work this way av. You have zero intellectual honestly

 

[AV1611VET]

nice cartoon logic. almost as bad as yes no yes no no yes no yes.

I believe that's called Bugs Bunnying, and I don't stoop to that.

 

[Sanguis]

It's actually where it should be; but as usual, everyone wants to talk anything but the Creation Week, which is a subject that requires a high degree of concentration and discipline.

Wrong, again.

The Creation Week doesn't require a high degree of concentration or discipline, all it requires is a high level of imagination and gullibility.

 

[Sanguis]

So if you want to go with something other than, 'God did it', then you're not going to understand such concepts as:

1. stars being the homes of angels
2. the plan of salvation in the stars
3. supernovas testifying of God's judgment on the angels
4. etc.

In short, you will stunt your grown when it comes to learning the deeper concepts of Theology.

Haha. Sorry, Av, but here, it's you that lacks understanding of a few concepts.

Stars are massive balls of burning hydrogen and helium. They're very efficient fusion reactors. They're heavy element factories.

They're not homes.

Nothing lives inside stars.

There's no "Home Sweet Home" rug on the porch of any stars.

If you genuinely believe that, then you are seriously deluded. You need help. No really. This isn't the kind of problem you can just mask with prescription drugs, you actually need counseling, and if that fails, then you belong locked up in a padded cell, with a straight jacket.

No one who believes stars are actually houses is sane. It's just messed up. Really messed up.

 

[hangback]

Stars are massive balls of burning hydrogen and helium. They're very efficient fusion reactors. They're heavy element factories.

They're not homes.

Nothing lives inside stars.

There's no "Home Sweet Home" rug on the porch of any stars.

No one who believes stars are actually houses is sane. It's just messed up. Really messed up.

I don't think AV1611VETs pastor thinks he's messed up, but I suspect his pastor is as far gone as AV1611VET.

 

[chrisnu]

So if you want to go with something other than, 'God did it', then you're not going to understand such concepts as:

1. stars being the homes of angels
2. the plan of salvation in the stars
3. supernovas testifying of God's judgment on the angels
4. etc.

In short, you will stunt your grown when it comes to learning the deeper concepts of Theology.

Wait, what?

Can you back this up with multiple passages of Scripture, please?

I wonder if you're going to tell me that Jesus is literally inside my heart, and doesn't like the French fries I ate earlier today.

 

[Sanguis]

I don't think AV1611VETs pastor thinks he's messed up, but I suspect his pastor is as far gone as AV1611VET.

And they all live together in their little club of crazy.

 

[Sophophile]

The reason for this is, as I demonstrated, there is no way to reconcile our observations of the supernova with your Embedded Age concept. If there was a way to reconcile these things, your answer would be something other than "I don't know". So unless you can provide an answer other than "I don't know", I take it that you concede the point that Embedded Age does not reconcile with direct observations of reality.

The answer I'm giving is: "I don't know".

And if you're going to change "supernova" to "reality" --- go ahead --- but be forewarned that it is just going to come back on you and confuse you in the end.

Thanks for the response AV1611VET

And thanks for confirming exactly what I've been saying all along: Your Embedded Age concept denies that the supernova is real. Even though we saw it, and took photos of it, and detected neutrinos from it with underground detectors, and are still observing the aftermath of the explosion now, your claim is that the supernova never really exploded. So when we saw it explode, we were seeing an illusion of something that never happened.

Thus, you have conceded my point. Embedded Age does not reconcile your interpretation of scripture with observed reality. To reconcile means "bring into agreement or harmony; make compatible or consistent". You cannot claim to be reconciling two things when you simply dismiss one of them and sweep it under the rug with the claim (based on no evidence whatsoever) that it is not "really real".

So if you want to go with something other than, 'God did it', then you're not going to understand such concepts as:

1. stars being the homes of angels
2. the plan of salvation in the stars
3. supernovas testifying of God's judgment on the angels
4. etc.

In short, you will stunt your grown when it comes to learning the deeper concepts of Theology.

AV1611VET, I am perfectly willing to accept that "God did it". However, that is not the question under discussion. The relevant question we are discussing is: When did God do it?

You cannot answer this question with respect to SN1987A, because you know and I know that there is no answer that is logically consistent with your concept of Embedded Age. Thus, something we can directly observe with our own eyes refutes and disproves your Embedded Age concept.

Its really that simple.

Take care.
S.

 

[Cabal]

I wonder if you're going to tell me that Jesus is literally inside my heart, and doesn't like the French fries I ate earlier today.

Now you're just being silly.

Wait till you get told you think with your heart!

I wish I was kidding!

 

[Freodin]

Neat --- since the Bible disagrees with me, and you guys disagree with the Bible, then you guys must agree with me; but since you don't agree with me, then you must be wrong about the Bible disagreeing with me, which means the Bible agrees with me (or rather, I agree with the Bible).

Either way, you make me look right --- thank you.

Incorrect, and easily provable.

Example: the question is "How much is 2+2?"

You say: 5
The Bible disagrees with you and says "17.5"
I disagree with both of you and say "42".

Conclusion: there can be more than two opposite opinions on a topic.

q.e.d.

 

[AV1611VET]

Wrong, again.

The Creation Week doesn't require a high degree of concentration or discipline, all it requires is a high level of imagination and gullibility.

You're new here, but if you're vigilant enough, you should have no problem noticing that a conversation on the Creation Week, embedded age or otherwise, cannot stay limited to the Creation Week for any length of time at all.

Almost every question (from sin to fossils) deals with what happened well after the Creation Week.

In short, they want to discuss everything BUT the Creation Week --- then blame us because they don't understand it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Haha. Sorry, Av, but here, it's you that lacks understanding of a few concepts.

Stars are massive balls of burning hydrogen and helium. They're very efficient fusion reactors. They're heavy element factories.

They're not homes.

Nothing lives inside stars.

There's no "Home Sweet Home" rug on the porch of any stars.

If you genuinely believe that, then you are seriously deluded. You need help. No really. This isn't the kind of problem you can just mask with prescription drugs, you actually need counseling, and if that fails, then you belong locked up in a padded cell, with a straight jacket.

No one who believes stars are actually houses is sane. It's just messed up. Really messed up.

I think this thread is a good indicator of why you joined here --- to pester us.

Life has its frustrations, and some people come here to take them out on others.

Not to learn.

 

[AV1611VET]

I don't think AV1611VETs pastor thinks he's messed up, but I suspect his pastor is as far gone as AV1611VET.

I've suggested this book many times:

​

 

[AV1611VET]

Wait, what?

Can you back this up with multiple passages of Scripture, please?

I wonder if you're going to tell me that Jesus is literally inside my heart, and doesn't like the French fries I ate earlier today.

If there's any way you can get a copy of this book:

​

I would highly recommend you do so --- assuming you're really interested.

 

[AV1611VET]

And they all live together in their little club of crazy.

Uh-huh.