Recent content by driewerf

How unfortunate. I was editing my post while you were replying. Do you mind to read it again?

So you want only softball questions. Nothing challenging. At the first challenge you want to cancel the questioner. The more robuster of your ideas isn't tested by softball questions but by hard ones. You only display weakness and insecurity. @AV1611VET: you should reader my signature and think...

Nonsense. Prove that there was a" creation week". And yes we see plenty of events outside the 6000 years time frame.

Feel free to do what you want. But let me stress that one of your fellow christiins did equate god with a fraudster.

Again you claim that, without any shred of reason to believe it. Was there even an Adam, for starters? That is the way you guys describe him. Don't blame me for just highlighting that. see also post #362.

It has been pointed out that we see supernovae remnants that have "never existed"; lava layers of eruptions that would have never happened, Civilizations outside the 6000 year time frame. This has been pointed out to you multiple times. Limiting "embedded age" to only Adam is lying by omission...

Committing fraud. But you forget two things 1) It is fake, while AV1611VET insists that embedded age is real age 2) The real age can often be detected. It has been pointed out to AV1611VET that he described god as a fraudster. It is highly interesting that you now do exactly the same thing. I...

What I want or don't want is irrelevant. What matters is what you guys profess and are able to live by yourself. "Every man" isn't hard to understand. Maybe Jesus, being perfect didn't need an guideline. But you guys obviously need it.

In the meaning of claiming or making statements, allegations, yes indeed. Yes indeed. It is well in the spirit of this discussion since you claim that age can be acquired embedded sans the passage of time Is that new to you? have allows identified as an atheist. I have never used the phrase...

I fail to se how asking for a good reason to consider you pet theory is a waste of your time. Especially in a thread dedicated to that theory. But each to its own, I suppose.

If you think you have given an acceptable reason to believe in Embedded Age, then QV us to that post. You're very good at QV'ing.

A small concession to deny you the opportunity to reply that embedded age is real. So how do we distinguish passed age from embedded age?

I am not the one taking questions. I have to repeat myself. For opening a thread about "taking questions on embedded age creation", you deflect more than answer questions.

Indeed; That is what you claim - pretend, allege, state. But provide never any reason to consider it as true. I comprehend very well. Both vocabulary and grammar are within my mental capacity. What is failing so far is any reason to consider that claim as true. Indeed. For the simple reason...

Because that is the best we have had so far: empty claims and allegations. That was the best, beside that we got deflections.