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.
prove itWe believe the universe and all that is within it was created in 6 literal days because of one thing. JESUS RAISING UP FROM THE DEAD.
Fin.
Since HE rose up from the dead, then Gen. 1:1 is correct and right. Then HE really did create the entire universe in 6 literal days.
Guess what? HE rose up from the dead! Now you are hosed!
SOLI DEO GLORIA.
believing the earth has existed for 6 thousand years makes you a YEC, despite your use of weasel wordsWho said I was a YEC?
Can I ask what you are, then?
(Also, are your pastor's degrees from Bible Colleges or normal ones?)
believing the earth has existed for 6 thousand years makes you a YEC, despite your use of weasel words
is that a joke?
embedded age is, your use of "existence" verses "age" are.No, it doesn't --- it could also make me Omphalos, Last Thursdayism, or Embedded Age.
[Now, DG, which of those fourteen words above is a weasel word?]
it must be a joke. no one could think someone asking for extra-biblical evidence means a youtube clip of someone singing a song about creation is evidence.What? You need me to invoke Poe's Law for ya?
No, it doesn't --- it could also make me Omphalos, Last Thursdayism, or Embedded Age.
[Now, DG, which of those fourteen words above is a weasel word?]
embedded age is, your use of "existence" verses "age" are.
you saying the earth has existed for 6 thousand years, but somehow its 4.5 billion...
...by changing what words mean.
i call it weasel words, because you alter the meaning...
... so you are never wrong and you can weasel out of being wrong by claiming the other person doesn't understand you.
mainly because you don't use words the way other people use them
as i've said, no one believes you subscribe to omphalos or last thursdayism.
they are the closest ideas we have to what you believe that make any sense though.
it must be a joke. no one could think someone asking for extra-biblical evidence means a youtube clip of someone singing a song about creation is evidence.
i guess you get the giggles from thinking you are tweaking the noses of evo posters eh?
it wasn't really amusing the first time, now its not funny at all
"Embedded age" is a weasel phrase, it attempts to hide the inherent contradiction...
... involved in believing that the earth has existed for 6000 years, that it looks 4.5 billion years old, but that God would not create a 6000 year old earth looking much older.
We all know this by now - the earth cannot be 4.5 billion years old but have existed only for 6000 years. That is a contradiction.
Yup --- make it sound like I have ulterior motives, and have to go around hiding things. You're just confusing yourself, not me.
I honestly don't know how many times I've said this --- it looks old because it is old. I would expect it to look old.
It is not a contradiction --- it is a paradox.
We believe the universe and all that is within it was created in 6 literal days because of one thing. JESUS RAISING UP FROM THE DEAD.
Fin.
Since HE rose up from the dead, then Gen. 1:1 is correct and right. Then HE really did create the entire universe in 6 literal days.
Guess what? HE rose up from the dead! Now you are hosed!
SOLI DEO GLORIA.
For lack of a better term --- I refer to myself as an Embedded-Age Creationist.
Wow... the first college doesn't exist, and the second has bestowed an honorary doctorate on lots of crazies...Don't quote me on this, but I think he has a Doctor of Theology from Greensboro [North Carolina] Baptist College; and a Doctor of Divinity honorary degree from Pensacola Christian College.
Every day you and your friend walk past the same apple tree. You see the buds, then the flowers, then the fruit develop in order. One day an apple falls off a tree, into your friend's hand. Your friend tells you it was created ex nihilo, and shows you a 3,000 year old book which says apples are created ex nihilo.
Who do you believe? Your friend's book, or your own senses?
It is hiding (or attempting to hide) the fact that you believe that the universe is simultaneously 6000 and 4.5 billion years old.
The only way you can try and hide this is by using English in a nonsensical fashion and saying that one of these ages is embedded.
Age doesn't get embedded.
Age is a property of an object that it acquires purely by virtue of existing.
Appearance of age is just appearance, actual age is the time for which the thing has existed - simple as that.
Why would you expect the earth to look old?
It is a contradiction. Firstly, we can agree that if something is X years old, it can't be Y years old, unless X = Y. Then, we can also agree that if something has existed for exactly X years, it can't have existed for exactly Y years, unless X = Y.
Now, everyone but you can agree that if something is X years old, then it has existed for X years. So saying that something is X years old but has existed for Y years is a contradiction because X does not equal Y.
Adam was one day old existentially --- 30 years old physically.It is a paradox. Firstly, we can agree that if something is X [physical] years old, it can't be Y [physical] years old, unless X [physical] = Y [existential]. Then, we can also agree that if something has existed for exactly X [physical] years, it can't have existed for exactly Y [physical] years, unless X [physical] = Y [existential].
Now, everyone but you can agree that if something is X years old, then it has existed for X years. So saying that something is X years old but has existed for Y years is a contradiction because X does not equal Y.
The only part you disagree on is the equivalence of age and existence. But that's just tough, because those words are already part of English, so you don't just get to redefine them.
Your attempts at using non-standard phrasing fails too, because when you attempt to define them ("history without maturity" or whatever nonsense it was) you again fall into the same trap.
Whichever way you turn, age is an inherent property of an object that is determined precisely by how long it has existed for.
God cannot meaningfully change the age without changing the length of existence, because the two are one and the same.
You can't get away from this fact, the only way to get out of the contradiction is to say God changed some other property of the world - its appearance, for example.
You've not made any reasonable attempt to show us how age is different from length of existence (because the bike made from old bike parts is still young, even though the parts are old) so you're still mired in contradiction.
And I'll point out again --- for the nth time --- that you guys have no problem whatsoever with embedded history (Omphalism); but for some reason can't understand embedded age.
Baloney --- look at Adam the day he was created --- 30 years old. If you disagree, then explain how a one-day-old "man" got married.
It acquires is the key phrase here. Acquiring something and having something embedded into it are two different processes.
Unless there's an exception --- and that's just what the Creation Week was --- one big week of one exception after another.
Because it is old.
I'm going to copy this, and insert the qualifiers, just so you can see the difference.
Adam was one day old existentially --- 30 years old physically.
Unless X and Y are two different types of age.
Then you explain how a one day old can have an embedded history (Omphalism).
You've got that "nonsense" backwards --- it's maturity without history.
Unless Someone makes an exception.
How did God change something that didn't even exist yet? What do you think "nihilo" means in "ex nihilo"?
I've discussed this until I'm blue in the tooth with you guys, and all you guys do is make jokes, then laugh at your own jokes.
Any further discussion on this topic from you, unless you have something new to add --- I'll consider trolling.
Either that, or you're just too dumb to understand.
And I'll point out again --- for the nth time --- that you guys have no problem whatsoever with embedded history (Omphalism); but for some reason can't understand embedded age.
Baloney --- look at Adam the day he was created --- 30 years old. If you disagree, then explain how a one-day-old "man" got married.
It acquires is the key phrase here. Acquiring something and having something embedded into it are two different processes.
Unless there's an exception --- and that's just what the Creation Week was --- one big week of one exception after another.
Because it is old.
I'm going to copy this, and insert the qualifiers, just so you can see the difference.
Adam was one day old existentially --- 30 years old physically.
Unless X and Y are two different types of age.
Then you explain how a one day old can have an embedded history (Omphalism).
You've got that "nonsense" backwards --- it's maturity without history.
Unless Someone makes an exception.
God "changed" nothing --- He brought it into existence without it having to be changed.
How did God change something that didn't even exist yet? What do you think "nihilo" means in "ex nihilo"?
I've discussed this until I'm blue in the tooth with you guys, and all you guys do is make jokes, then laugh at your own jokes.
Any further discussion on this topic from you, unless you have something new to add --- I'll consider trolling.
Either that, or you're just too dumb to understand.
how about you use the words everyone else usesThen I'll tell you what --- you come up with a better term, and I'll use it.
yes i am using somehow, because you use the term "embedded" and think its meaningful.Now right here tells me you are using "weasel words." Do you see what you're doing, DG? You're critiquing the term Embedded Age, then you're turning right around and saying "somehow." Like I'm the one that's confused.
what does embedded even mean? thats where the "somehow" comes from.Your sentence should read:I haven't changed the meaning of one word --- not one. You are the one denying the term, then acting like you don't know what I'm talking about.
- you saying the earth has existed for 6 thousand years, but has 4.5 billion years embedded...
how about you not use such nonsensical arguments insteadNo, I'm not --- and again --- if you can come up with a better term, I'll use it.
sorry you believe wrong, i find the idea of something being young but somehow old, since "embedded" is a meaningless term, at least when trying to decipher the logical twists you make, when it comes to your argumentsWell, I believe I've demonstrated that to be the case --- at least with you.
what the hell does that even mean?You are the one who critiques the term embedded age, then says "somehow."
oh please, you are the author of confusionKeep saying that enough times --- you just might end up believing it.
you think he says that, i don't believe he did flat out. you may think he implied it, just like you think everyone else doesBaloney --- I've been called both --- as well as YEC. Ask Frumious Bandersnatch what I am.
who?Do you ever wonder why RMWILLIAMS doesn't post here anymore? Go read his profile. He and I had one dosey of a fight, with admin stepping in to break it up.
I have a feeling you're not even trying to understand, and until I see someone show me they have some semblance of what I'm talking about, I'll be hanged if I'll let someone tell me I'm wrong.
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?