Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation

[AV1611VET]

Alright AV, if you did not start off with that, what lead you to deduce that's the age of the universe?

I go by what science says it is, for the sake of arguing.

Like I said, if tomorrow science says the universe is only 4 billion years old, then tomorrow I'll teach that the universe was embedded with 4 billion years of age.

If tomorrow, science says the universe is 30 trillion years old, then tomorrow I'll teach that the universe was embedded with 30 trillion years.

 

[Freodin]

Adam's physical age the day he was created was important.

I used to say he was 20, until someone once mentioned they thought he was 30, so I go by that now.

But you do bring up a good point.

Let's say God embedded 1000 years into Adam when He created him.

When the Fall occurred, and Adam lost his glorified state, his advanced age would have killed him.

The Fall occured... when? How long had Adam lived at that time? And how long did he live afterward?

960 years of age is quite ripe, in my view.

I used to say he was 20, until someone once mentioned they thought he was 30, so I go by that now.

That sound quite arbitrary. What if I say 50? Will you change to that? Or 60? 120?

 

[AV1611VET]

Humbug!
With these criteria you could just as well say the world was created yesterday for all the sense it makes.

You really don't understand much do you?

I would highly suggest you drop your attitude and allow yourself to learn more about what you're debating.

If I "just as well said the world was created yesterday", that would go against what the Bible says, wouldn't it?

People think we can just sit around and make up anything we want, and that is so not true.

When it comes to the Creation Week, God clearly spells out what He did, when He did it, why He did it, where He did it, how He did it, what order He did it in, and even who the eyewitnesses were.

 

[Cabal]

Adam's physical age the day he was created was important.

I used to say he was 20, until someone once mentioned they thought he was 30, so I go by that now.

But you do bring up a good point.

Let's say God embedded 1000 years into Adam when He created him.

When the Fall occurred, and Adam lost his glorified state, his advanced age would have killed him.

Wait, what? Embedded age has the effect of actual age post-fall?

You really are just making this up as you go along, aren't you?

 

[TheReasoner]

I go by what science says it is, for the sake of arguing.

Like I said, if tomorrow science says the universe is only 4 billion years old, then tomorrow I'll teach that the universe was embedded with 4 billion years of age.

If tomorrow, science says the universe is 30 trillion years old, then tomorrow I'll teach that the universe was embedded with 30 trillion years.

No AV. That was not my question. My question was, what evidence do you have that it was created ex nihilo 6000 years ago? The bible does not count. There must be more evidence than the way you read the bible. After all no theologist I have spoken to - including highly conservative ones - say that their interpretation of the creation parable is the only possible one. They may believe it is the only true one, but I am yet to meet one who can argue that it is the only possible one. And since there are more than one possible interpretations of that text then the interpretation any one human being has may be incorrect. We're humans and are as such never perfect.

 

[Cabal]

People think we can just sit around and make up anything we want, and that is so not true.

And yet...

When it comes to the Creation Week, God clearly spells out what He did, when He did it, why He did it, where He did it, how He did it, what order He did it in, and even who the eyewitnesses were.

Yes, so clearly you have to ad-hoc the main principles.

 

[AV1611VET]

The Fall occured... when?

According to C.I. Scofield, approximately 1 year after the earth's existence --- so roughly BC4003.

How long had Adam lived at that time?

One year --- thus he was 31 years old at the time.

And how long did he live afterward?

According to Genesis 5:5, Adam live 930 years on the earth.

This would make him 960 years old when He died.

960 years of age is quite ripe, in my view.

Not exactly.

After the Fall, the average age of a person started declining --- it didn't just drop to its current length.

That sound quite arbitrary. What if I say 50? Will you change to that? Or 60? 120?

No --- we like to give old Methuselah credit for being the oldest when he died ---

 

[AV1611VET]

Wait, what? Embedded age has the effect of actual age post-fall?

That's what embedded age is --- the actual age of something.

If you put Adam next to a person who had grown to the age of 30, you would not be able to tell the difference.

(With the exception of scarring, of course.)

Remember my thread, where I asked if God could create a dress tomorrow, so old it would fall apart with age if you touched it?

 

[Freodin]

According to C.I. Scofield, approximately 1 year after the earth's existence --- so roughly BC4003.One year --- thus he was 31 years old at the time.According to Genesis 5:5, Adam live 930 years on the earth.

This would make him 960 years old when He died.Not exactly.

After the Fall, the average age of a person started declining --- it didn't just drop to its current length.No --- we like to give old Methuselah credit for being the oldest when he died ---

So it IS arbitrary. He could as well have been 40 or 120 and lived to be 1050. The Bible does not say. It´s only what you want it to be.

 

[AV1611VET]

My question was, what evidence do you have that it was created ex nihilo 6000 years ago? The bible does not count. There must be more evidence than the way you read the bible.

1

After all no theologist I have spoken to - including highly conservative ones - say that their interpretation of the creation parable is the only possible one.

--- Creation "parable"?

They may believe it is the only true one, but I am yet to meet one who can argue that it is the only possible one. And since there are more than one possible interpretations of that text then the interpretation any one human being has may be incorrect. We're humans and are as such never perfect.

This is why it is important we adhere to a literal translation.

It forces even those hostile to the Word of God to admit to what It is saying.

 

[TheReasoner]

Alright AV, I have another question for you.

Since this hypothesis of yours is untestable, and since it has nothing to do with our salvation, why do you promote it?
Before answering please consider all the people who today reject Christianity because of the apparent conflict between observations and creationism?
Is your position worth their souls?
After all, as you say the universe IS 13.7 billion years old (if our estimates are correct). That is it's real age regardless of when the universe was created.
Especially, given that the bible can be read as a whole, still have meaning and the same importance spiritually if you consider that one parable differently. Isn't this a little like a Lutheran and a Baptist arguing about whether someone should be baptised as a child or as an adult? Does it have anything at all to do with salvation?

 

[Freodin]

That's what embedded age is --- the actual age of something.

If you put Adam next to a person who had grown to the age of 30, you would not be able to tell the difference.

And this is the whole problem with your E.A. idea... there is no way to distinguish between what age something IS and what age it LOOKS LIKE!

My brother is seven years older that me. He looks ten years younger than me.

Remember my thread, where I asked if God could create a dress tomorrow, so old it would fall apart with age if you touched it?

And where you were repeatedly told by me that things DO NOT FALL APART WITH AGE!

 

[AV1611VET]

So it IS arbitrary. He could as well have been 40 or 120 and lived to be 1050. The Bible does not say. It´s only what you want it to be.

I usually go by artists' renditions.

 

[TheReasoner]

1

Repeating something doesn't make it any more intelligent.

--- Creation "parable"?This is why it is important we adhere to a literal translation.

Yes. Parable.

It forces even those hostile to the Word of God to admit to what It is saying.

Really? Well, what about the literalists who burned witches? Or what about those who promote a flat world? After all, there are plenty of verses in the bible that say it's flat if read literally. What about the verses in the OT that make ludicrous claims about the physiology of certain animals. The mountain badger does not chew cud for example.
And the bible does contain more parables besides the creation one. Are we to think that the parable of the sheep and the goats is a literal description of God only accepting sheep into heaven whereas those darned goats will have to burn?

You cannot read it literally.

 

[AV1611VET]

Alright AV, I have another question for you.

Since this hypothesis of yours is untestable, and since it has nothing to do with our salvation, why do you promote it?

Because some people are looking for a way to combine Scripture with Science; especially when it comes to the Creation Week; and Embedded Age Creation does just that.

I like to describe it as an eclectic between YEC and OEC.

It takes the best of both paradigms and combines them into one coherent cosmology.

 

[Freodin]

I usually go by artists' renditions.

And the "artists´ renditions" are a) based on our currect experience and b) usually portrait Adam with a navel.

You usually go with what suits your own ideas best.

 

[TheReasoner]

Because some people are looking for a way to combine Scripture with Science; especially when it comes to the Creation Week; and Embedded Age Creation does just that.

I like to describe it as an eclectic between YEC and OEC.

It takes the best of both paradigms and combines them into one coherent cosmology.

I think you should consider the strong anthropic principle.
I think if you REALLY believe in God and the fallibility of man then you have to be open for such beliefs as ea to be wrong. I strongly oppose ea because I cannot conceive of a lying God. Nor can I defend something which leads people to believe Christianity is a deceitful and harmful religion. Creationism does that.


I ask you again: Since your position is based on your own infallibility and causes people to abandon their faith and become adamant atheists, how can you defend it?

 

[AV1611VET]

And this is the whole problem with your E.A. idea... there is no way to distinguish between what age something IS and what age it LOOKS LIKE!

My brother is seven years older that me. He looks ten years younger than me.

So what?

What does that have to do with anything?

Adam probably looked like a teenager, yet was 30 years old.

This would have been because he started his life out at 30 --- glorified and perfect.

When he was 100, he probably looked 35.

Remember Caleb?

85 years old, and yet he was itching to get Joshua to give him his inheritance so he could get up there in the mountains and do some serious martial activity.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes. Parable.

Have a good day, sir.

 

[Cabal]

When he was 100, he probably looked 35.

So even though in theory he could look young he would actually be on the point of falling apart with age?