Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
...
I'm the one that calls it Embedded Age Creation, but that's because I can't think of a better name for it.
I can: Omphalos
Ow, now, that hurt. You know, I've often wondered if my choice of biology over physics is a result of these stupid sexist prejudices that quietly sneak into everyone's experience right from birth. I hope not, and I certainly don't consciously think biology is "girly" or "not a hard science" (or that "girly" = lame), but still.Of course, I regret many such decisions now. That is why I am so bad in biology. I was chasing physics and thought biology is only for girls.
Sit a hen on it and wait three weeks?So how can you tell if a egg has been fertilized and if that egg will produce a chicken or not?
QV please:Omphalos hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I had to look that up. Sums up AV's comments pretty well, and includes the comparison with Last Thursdayism.
Since embedded age is maturity without history, the best answer to this is that you have maturity without history.
Maturity with history is Omphalism.
So how do we know if someone is saved or not. If you can not tell from the outward appearance? Do we set a hen on them and see if they hatch?Sit a hen on it and wait three weeks?
WOW, Ti!Av1611VET- "Embedded age". I heard almost the same thing. You might find it under "Appearance of Age" theory. I think there are three different degrees of it, the most convincing of them, from "Total" appearance of age where everything is only 6 to 10,000 years old, but was created to look and test as if things had happened the way science believes it had.
He did good, until the very last line, where he says:This is because the world today is not as it was in creation. God's creative powers are at rest now, and He is maintaining the creation using present laws of physics. The original created world, perfect and non-decaying at first, was subsequently cursed and made subject to decay and death. Furthermore, even that world was destroyed by the Flood of Noah, so that the world we live in today is a relic of destructive processes, not creative processes. Any effort to apply present processes and process rates to creation is doomed to failure.
I disagree with this, as I do think the universe is old.On the other hand, if fallen scientists extrapolating present process are right and the universe is old, then God has lied to us, for He clearly said He created all things in six days, not too long ago.
Well, for starters I never said I did. I don't run to get blood tests every time I think I have a subjective experience. That said, there are increasingly sophisticated scientific ways of testing whether I actually experience the emotion I say I'm experiencing - or at least whether my body is doing the same things other human bodies do when their owners claim a certain emotion.
Your subjective experience is an internal feeling, not an external entity. Bear that in mind for later...
A prof should have read the job description before applying.
Of course. And given what you just said, you have no reason to expect anyone to believe you
You'll note that we were talking about the existence of God(s), while you kept referring to relationships. These are two different issues.
Remember, the "relationship" you speak of is made up of your subjective experiences. You experience emotions, you do not necessarily experience God. We could theoretically hook you up to an ECG or some manner of brain imaging machine and make some inferences about your emotional state. That is only evidence of your feelings, though.
I have an anxiety disorder. I know that experiencing a feeling doesn't necessarily mean that there's an objectively real, external cause for it. You may feel safe or happy or awed or feel a mysterious presence, and you may attribute those experiences to God, but it's no more evidence of God's existence than my permanent fight-or-flight response is evidence that I'm in danger.
What you fail to understand is that the Earth displays an incredibly long and complex history. Your ignorance of this does not validate your idea.AV said:Since embedded age is maturity without history, the best answer to this is that you have maturity without history.
Maturity with history is Omphalism.
Ok, so the theory has been around for a while. At least 150 years.Omphalos hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I had to look that up. Sums up AV's comments pretty well, and includes the comparison with Last Thursdayism.
AV1611VET- The "Total Appearance of Age theory" could explain all of the scientific problems with geology, evolution and the "Distant Starlight Problem". If God wanted to make the universe look extremely old, he could make it totally consistant with every test we can do. He could totally fool us. But that creates problems about God. It makes God into a deceptive God. Not an attribute most people want to believe of a good God. Plus, if God created a universe with a Total Appearance of age, why would he get mad at us believing the evidence that he put there to convince us of that. If it is actually 14 billion years old, or 6000, if he made it look 14 Billion, why would he object to us believing it was 14 billion years old? He put all of the evidence there that it was really that old.
What I do understand is that Davian is wrong.What you fail to understand is that the Earth displays an incredibly long and complex history.
I couldn't care less if "my idea" is validated or not.Your ignorance of this does not validate your idea.
It is both, timatter.If it is actually 14 billion years old, or 6000...
It wouldn't.Why would this make for a deceptive god?
Well, at least the wiki page is something to work with.What I do understand is that Davian is wrong.
I am not Omphalos, I am Embedded Age.
In contrast with how much you do go on about it.I couldn't care less if "my idea" is validated or not.
For whom do you speak again?As our motto says: God did it -- that settles it.
What do you mean, "What's the difference?"Well, at least the wiki page is something to work with.
What's the difference?
It wouldn't.
God gave us Genesis 1 to clarify the issue, not cloud it.
Here's a scenario you can butcher until you don't understand:
Suppose, in 1/10 of a second, God created the earth and one single star 30 billion light years from the earth.
That's all that's in the universe: the earth and one star.
Now, suppose for reasons known only to Him, He also created light from the star to the earth.
Now He documents what He did, what order He did it in, how long it took Him (1/10 second), why it took Him that long, and who the eyewitness were.
Question: Would it be right for someone to come along and conclude God was being deceptive?
What do you mean, "What's the difference?"
I told you what the difference is.
Once again:
- Embedded Age = maturity without history
- Omphalism = maturity with history
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?