Oldest rock in the world 2 days after creation (embedded age)

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This is standard academic tactics.

Ask a question, then every answer generates two more questions, until the discussion goes to pot.

Then why am I repeatedly asking him the same question?

 

[dlamberth]

By expelling God from the picture, then, and using ONLY natural processes to date the rock and tell us how it was 'formed' that is nothing more than a statement of preferences and faith. The preference is to use only the natural to explain creation. Faith comes in because no one can prove there is no God or that there is, so using the one belief (only the natural) cannot arrive at the truth.

I don't know how to expel God out of the picture. What I do expel are certain religious beliefs. That's a very different thing. And especially one in this case that makes God out to be a deceiver.

 

[truthpls]

Your OP does it for me, and I cannot prove a negative.

Or a positive, either one. You cannot prove that we must use only the natural to be able to tell us how we got here.

Ancient people only knew what they knew at the time.

As do modern people.

They would have had no concept of millions or billions of years of age since such a thing was not considered back then when human existence was measured in generations of families. While, begrudgingly, the idea of the 'deception' is recent, the concept of embedded age is even more recent, being only created by AV on this website alone, and no-one else.

Ha. OK, I didn't know that. I thought it might have been some concept/doctrine of some churches or something. Congrats to AVI then.
Anyhow, I think the people in Adam's day and afterwards knew about eternity. So if they thought the world was always here or some such we would know it. No. That is a modern concept based on the 'naturalonlydunnit' modelling.

No, it's me wanting you to actually engage with the question and answer it. I'll even highlight the word that I actually want you to focus on in the question:

Why would God create a rock that existed for two days, yet have it so that the radioactive isotopes within show that it has appeared to have existed for billions of years?

Because He is God. He creates as He pleases. He knew that having stuff in rocks and elsewhere would happen. We cannot blame Him for unbelievers in the end of time strictly leaving Him out of the picture and concocting their alternate creation stories. That does not make Him the deceiver. IF they asked Him, He may have even revealed the reason. Who knows? Instead they insult Him by leaving Him out entirely. Then they blame Him for their confused minds and deception?

 

[truthpls]

I don't know how to expel God out of the picture.

It is easy. Just use only the physical in your conception of how we all got here. God is not physical. You use one part of the equation to get your result.

What I do expel are certain religious beliefs.

Did Jesus hold those beliefs? If so, who are you to expel them?

That's a very different thing. And especially one in this case that makes God out to be a deceiver.

Not to honest simple men who do not pretend to be god or know more than God, or religiously ignore God.

 

[truthpls]

This is standard academic tactics.

Ask a question, then every answer generates two more questions, until the discussion goes to pot.

A bit like censorship, they stink up a thread with parrot posts, while ignoring answers and hoping the whole thing goes away.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Or a positive, either one. You cannot prove that we must use only the natural to be able to tell us how we got here.

Oh, so you can factor God into an equation without relying on the Bible? That's damn impressive.

As do modern people.

True, but we also know a lot more than what people in history knew.

Ha. OK, I didn't know that. I thought it might have been some concept/doctrine of some churches or something. Congrats to AVI then.
Anyhow, I think the people in Adam's day and afterwards knew about eternity. So if they thought the world was always here or some such we would know it. No. That is a modern concept based on the 'naturalonlydunnit' modelling.

No, it was all AV, so credit needs to be given to him.

And eternity is one of those... it's a weird concept historically since each culture had their own view on what counted as eternity, but it usually refers to something that does not follow the singular flow of time.

As for the "'naturalonlydunnit' modelling" as you so eloquently put it (as I type it dripping with sarcasm).... how exactly do you factor God into an equation?

Because He is God. He creates as He pleases. He knew that having stuff in rocks and elsewhere would happen. We cannot blame Him for unbelievers in the end of time strictly leaving Him out of the picture and concocting their alternate creation stories. That does not make Him the deceiver. IF they asked Him, He may have even revealed the reason. Who knows? Instead they insult Him by leaving Him out entirely. Then they blame Him for their confused minds and deception?

So God being God explains everything. And since it explains everything it explains nothing.

Yeah, I'm still going to call embedded age a deception and since I do not believe that God is deceptive, I'm calling to call embedded age something worse than rubbish.

 

[AV1611VET]

Putting unnecessary AI Overview aside: why would God create a rock with billions of years of age when he can create a rock of any hardness or toughness WITHOUT putting in radioactive isotopes that can be dated to have existed for billions of years? What's the point of it?

God works in mysterious ways.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

A bit like censorship, they stink up a thread with parrot posts, while ignoring answers and hoping the whole thing goes away.

Asking questions is censorship now?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

God works in mysterious ways.

And yet you seem to think you have all the answers about His creation...

 

[AV1611VET]

Then why am I repeatedly asking him the same question?

Because you can't recognize the answer.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Because you can't recognize the answer.

Eventually he answered the question. I saw a lot of how's, but no why's.

 

[AV1611VET]

And yet you seem to think you have all the answers about His creation...

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Hey, you're the one who goes on and on about embedded age. You're the one who wanted people to ask you about it. You're the one who espouses it like it's your own personal tenet. This is all on you, buddy.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Congrats to AVI then.

For the love of Pete, get his name right.

 

[Bradskii]

Instead they insult Him by leaving Him out entirely. Then they blame Him for their confused minds and deception?

Nobody has left Him out of it. We can agree that He made everything. And that includes the intelligence to work out how old things are. If you have a tree then we can tell how old it is by counting the growth rings. We know it just didn't appear a couple of days ago. Similarly, we can date rocks. So we know when God created it.

Do you doubt the age of trees? Of course not. But you doubt the age of rocks. So you accept the science when it doesn't contradict Genesis, but you do when it does. That's the only difference. Nobody is arguing about whether God exists or not. The argument is that you are interpreting Genesis literally. And the evidence doesn't support that view.

Nothing anyone says is going to change your mind. And evidence that you are wrong will just be discounted by saying 'God made it that way'. It's called Last Thursdayism: Last Thursdayism.

Using your exact same argument I can say that everything was created by God last Thursday.

 

[truthpls]

Oh, so you can factor God into an equation without relying on the Bible? That's damn impressive.

Since we only know about creation through Scripture, what you say makes no sense

True, but we also know a lot more than what people in history knew.

He that thinks he knows something knows nothing but what he ought to know the bible says

No, it was all AV, so credit needs to be given to him.

OK

And eternity is one of those... it's a weird concept historically since each culture had their own view on what counted as eternity, but it usually refers to something that does not follow the singular flow of time.

A long time in other words. And they did not attach that concept to the age of the earth that I am aware.

As for the "'naturalonlydunnit' modelling" as you so eloquently put it (as I type it dripping with sarcasm).... how exactly do you factor God into an equation?

By flushing the natural only bit. Then we add God. Then we come up with a new result for the equation

So God being God explains everything. And since it explains everything it explains nothing.

It explains where man and the world came from. It could not explain how He did it precisely. Just like it does not explain how Jesus' body was risen from the dead.

Yeah, I'm still going to call embedded age a deception and since I do not believe that God is deceptive, I'm calling to call embedded age something worse than rubbish.

It would not be age in the rocks on the second day after they were created. Not at all.

 

[dlamberth]

It is easy. Just use only the physical in your conception of how we all got here. God is not physical. You use one part of the equation to get your result.

God's not physical, but this Creation is. Yes, I use only what God's own Creation, as Created by God is showing us.

Did Jesus hold those beliefs? If so, who are you to expel them?

I'm not a Christian.

Not to honest simple men who do not pretend to be god or know more than God, or religiously ignore God.

If your into having God as a deceiver?...that's not the God whom I pray to.

 

[truthpls]

For the love of Pete, get his name right.

AV1611VET. I guess AV1 is a better short name​

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

AV1611VET. I guess AV1 is a better short name​

No, we just call him AV for short. He's fine with that.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Since we only know about creation through Scripture, what you say makes no sense

Since you seem to have such a low opinion of science, I'll ask something I asked on the other thread to another poster: is God's creation, the Earth, worth studying then?