In reference to God creating an earth made with apparent age,

[Hammster]

You are avoiding direct questions. That's a step in the wrong direction.

If we can't trust the creation to tell us the truth, why should we trust the Bible to tell the truth?

For the sake of this question you'll have to assume scripture is true. If it is, and God states that He created in six days, then that is what happened. In what state He chose to create it is not relevant.

 

[Hammster]

But Jesus said there was a Prodigal Son, didn't he?

He addressed the Pharisees with three parables.

 

[Loudmouth]

For the sake of this question you'll have to assume scripture is true.

I have to assume no such thing.

If it is, and God states that He created in six days, then that is what happened.

God is incapable of lying?

In what state He chose to create it is not relevant.

If God lied in the Bible, and the creation reveals the correct age of the Earth, then it is very relevant.

 

[Loudmouth]

He addressed the Pharisees with three parables.

But if it is a parable, then the Bible is false, right? That's what you keep saying.

 

[RickG]

For the sake of this question you'll have to assume scripture is true. If it is, and God states that He created in six days, then that is what happened. In what state He chose to create it is not relevant.

May I ask what you accept the age of the earth to be?

 

[Hammster]

I have to assume no such thing.



God is incapable of lying?



If God lied in the Bible, and the creation reveals the correct age of the Earth, then it is very relevant.

Or, He didn't lie and for reasons known to Him, He created in a way that leads some to believe in an old age. If you are going to engage in this line of discussion, you'll have to admit that this is a possibility.

 

[Hammster]

But if it is a parable, then the Bible is false, right? That's what you keep saying.

No, I've not said that. It hasn't even been implied.

 

[Hammster]

May I ask what you accept the age of the earth to be?

I really couldn't say.

 

[Loudmouth]

Or, He didn't lie and for reasons known to Him,

Or he did lie.

He created in a way that leads some to believe in an old age.

In what way is the creation not consistent with being 4.5 billion years old? How could we not come to that conclusion by looking at the creation?

It would take conscious and knowing effort to create this evidence. A deity would have to purposefully create in such a way as to make it look old. For example, a deity would have to place fake fossils in the ground to purposefully give the appearance of simple to complex advancement over time. The deity would also have to carefully balance the ratios of elements in rocks so that they all give the same date using completely different radioactive decay chains, and do so throughout the geologic record. The deity would have to purposefully create uranium radiohalos that we know should take millions of years to form, and also carefully arrange the rings around the center of decay so that they match the decay energies that we observe today.

It can't just be an accident. The fake age had to be a conscious effort. If you think God would lie in the creation, why wouldn't you also think that God would be incapable of lying in the Bible?

 

[Loudmouth]

No, I've not said that. It hasn't even been implied.

So you would have no problem with the creation story in Genesis being a parable?

 

[RickG]

I really couldn't say.

Thank you for your response, I respect it.

Oh! BTW, just a side note, turkeys can fly. The ones that can't are domesticated ones with their wings clipped.

 

[Hammster]

Or he did lie.



In what way is the creation not consistent with being 4.5 billion years old? How could we not come to that conclusion by looking at the creation?

It would take conscious and knowing effort to create this evidence. A deity would have to purposefully create in such a way as to make it look old. For example, a deity would have to place fake fossils in the ground to purposefully give the appearance of simple to complex advancement over time. The deity would also have to carefully balance the ratios of elements in rocks so that they all give the same date using completely different radioactive decay chains, and do so throughout the geologic record. The deity would have to purposefully create uranium radiohalos that we know should take millions of years to form, and also carefully arrange the rings around the center of decay so that they match the decay energies that we observe today.

It can't just be an accident. The fake age had to be a conscious effort. If you think God would lie in the creation, why wouldn't you also think that God would be incapable of lying in the Bible?

Since you aren't going to actually engage in the argument, but instead talk right past it, I see no reason to continue this line of conversation.

 

[AV1611VET]

I pointed out to you previously with a specific example utilizing ice cores which demonstrate seasons withing annual rings as well as specific events. How does that not show history?

God could have created raisin bread ex nihilo, and still be accused of deception under current scientific standards.

You guys would be saying, "Look! Raisins are aged grapes! Aged grapes show the passage of time, and the passage of time shows history!"

Is raisin bread created ex nihilo an example of maturity with history (Last Thursdayism)?

 

[Hammster]

So you would have no problem with the creation story in Genesis being a parable?

If it was presented as one, no. But I've already given reasons to believe that it's not. None have been refuted. Just dismissed.

 

[Hammster]

Thank you for your response, I respect it.

Oh! BTW, just a side note, turkeys can fly. The ones that can't are domesticated ones with their wings clipped.

Not the ones in WKRP.

 

[Loudmouth]

Since you aren't going to actually engage in the argument, but instead talk right past it, I see no reason to continue this line of conversation.

You are the one not engaging. You change my argument, and pretend that has addressed it.

 

[Hammster]

You are the one not engaging. You change my argument, and pretend that has addressed it.

If you say so.

 

[Loudmouth]

If it was presented as one, no.

Talking snakes, magical trees, angels with flaming swords . . . what more do you need to indicate a parable?

 

[Loudmouth]

If you say so.

So no response on all of the purposeful changes would need to be made in order to make the Earth look like it does? It is just our fault for thinking fossils came from once living organisms?

 

[RickG]

So no response on all of the purposeful changes would need to be made in order to make the Earth look like it does? It is just our fault for thinking fossils came from once living organisms?

It is really sad that the only responses we can get in a science forum is apologetics.