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

[truthpls]

Angels are spiritual.
Our soul is spirit

Right and all part of the creation.

God can affect the physical only if one believes God to be like a Greek/Roman pagan God who sit apart from Creation up in a cloud somewhere dishing out lightening bolts and judgments to those that do not meet their demands.

God affected the physical body of Jesus. He affected the water Jesus walked on. He affected the water made into wine. Etc. There is no question that God affects things.

That would be true.

There is a deception of age and history to those who experience God's Creation as Created by God devotees.

That depends if we think 'age and history' was natural only. If there was a creation it was not

 

[truthpls]

I like a good discussion. It's why I joined the forum. But you repeating exactly the same thing post after post is the very opposite of a discussion. So I'll leave you to it. There's a couple of people around who will agree with you so you'll have someone to talk to.

Hasta la vista.

You offered nothing else but leaning on just the physical to tell us about creation. I don't recall you even addressing the rock that was inspected 2 days after creation.

 

[AV1611VET]

You offered nothing else but leaning on just the physical to tell us about creation. I don't recall you even addressing the rock that was inspected 2 days after creation.

To quote a line from a famous movie:

I'm more interested in the Rock of Ages, than I am the age of rocks.

 

[truthpls]

To quote a line from a famous movie:

I'm more interested in the Rock of Ages, than I am the age of rocks.

Agreed

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

To a point. Solomon studied creation and birds and bugs, and it all pointed to the wisdom of God. To leave God out of creation is not studying the world it is working with half a deck of cards

So what about Christian scientists who are Christians but they also accept the evidence from His creation that say He created the world 4.5 billion years ago?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You offered nothing else but leaning on just the physical to tell us about creation. I don't recall you even addressing the rock that was inspected 2 days after creation.

How exactly can we study the non-physical? Please, give us the rundown on how it can be done.

 

[truthpls]

So what about Christian scientists who are Christians but they also accept the evidence from His creation that say He created the world 4.5 billion years ago?

1 Cor 2:14 says this
Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged

Those who rely solely on their natural minds and natural processes cannot comprehend creation or God. The evidence you refer to is strictly natural evidence. Using only the natural, the creation becomes foolishness to them. What they accept or not has nothing to do with whether God created and Scripture is true. So if they are saved believers in Christ, they will be corrected on the other side if they don't clue in here.

 

[truthpls]

How exactly can we study the non-physical? Please, give us the rundown on how it can be done.

Who said you have to know all the mind and workings of God now? How about you just admit what you don't know and deal with those things you do know?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

1 Cor 2:14 says this
Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged

Those who rely solely on their natural minds and natural processes cannot comprehend creation or God. The evidence you refer to is strictly natural evidence. Using only the natural, the creation becomes foolishness to them. What they accept or not has nothing to do with whether God created and Scripture is true. So if they are saved believers in Christ, they will be corrected on the other side if they don't clue in here.

But how can we study the supernatural, the unnatural, the non-physical? That's the rub! We can only study the physical because it's physical. To study that non-physical is beyond the ability of science since no-one knows how to study it.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Who said you have to know all the mind and workings of God now? How about you just admit what you don't know and deal with those things you do know?

Never said anything about studying the mind and workings of God, that's you putting words in my mouth again, and I kindly thank you to stop it. But amazingly, you hit the nail on the head: the physical is all ANYONE knows how to deal with. That's why I asked you exactly how anyone can study the non-physical, since you seem to act like you know how to. Or at least pretend to know how to.

 

[truthpls]

Never said anything about studying the mind and workings of God, that's you putting words in my mouth again, and I kindly thank you to stop it

Creation IS the work of God. If your study leads you to believe you know how we got here, then you would have to deal with the work of God

. But amazingly, you hit the nail on the head: the physical is all ANYONE knows how to deal with.

With that honest admission you admit that you cannot study creation or tell us about it. Creation involves much more.
You should realize that when speaking for the natural minded men and science you do not speak for believers. We know exactly how the world and man came to be. We have the mind of God on that. He spoke His mind in Scripture. He has called us friends. He went to the effort of making sure His friends have the real deal and truth about what went down

That's why I asked you exactly how anyone can study the non-physical, since you seem to act like you know how to. Or at least pretend to know how to.

The study of God and His work on earth does not extend to how He created the universe from nothing. Not all things are revealed to us now. We still see through a glass darkly on some things. One day we will know and meet the Almighty face to face. So then, the study of the spiritual and God does not now involve knowing it all! It is more about realizing and admitting we do not know it all.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Creation IS the work of God. If your study leads you to believe you know how we got here, then you would have to deal with the work of God

With that honest admission you admit that you cannot study creation or tell us about it. Creation involves much more.
You should realize that when speaking for the natural minded men and science you do not speak for believers. We know exactly how the world and man came to be. We have the mind of God on that. He spoke His mind in Scripture. He has called us friends. He went to the effort of making sure His friends have the real deal and truth about what went down

The study of God and His work on earth does not extend to how He created the universe from nothing. Not all things are revealed to us now. We still see through a glass darkly on some things. One day we will know and meet the Almighty face to face. So then, the study of the spiritual and God does not now involve knowing it all! It is more about realizing and admitting we do not know it all.

So there is no way to study the non-physical, the physical is the only thing we can study, and by that simple logic, there is no reason to assume that God made the world 6000 odd years ago and purposefully made it look 4.5 billion years old with all that entails as to deceive man.

That is wonderful news to know, that God is not deceptive.

 

[truthpls]

So there is no way to study the non-physical,

We can read what He says about it. But in your own wisdom, no. Especially when you limit all your knowledge and thinking to the natural only

the physical is the only thing we can study,

For science that is the sad reality. The natural man cannot take in the things of the spirit.

and by that simple logic, there is no reason to assume that God made the world 6000 odd years ago and purposefully made it look 4.5 billion years old with all that entails as to deceive man.

Your limits of ability and knowledge are no reason whatsoever to doubt God and His creation.

That is wonderful news to know, that God is not deceptive.

He told us how it was done and when more or less. Nothing deceptive about it. The muddiness and deception is not something born of simple faith in God and His word.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

We can read what He says about it. But in your own wisdom, no. Especially when you limit all your knowledge and thinking to the natural only


For science that is the sad reality. The natural man cannot take in the things of the spirit.

Your limits of ability and knowledge are no reason whatsoever to doubt God and His creation.

He told us how it was done and when more or less. Nothing deceptive about it. The muddiness and deception is not something born of simple faith in God and His word.

Except that God didn't tell us how it was done since God didn't personally write the Bible. The Bible is the work of man, inspired men for sure but still men with all the fallibility attached to that, especially men from a very early stage in human history.

Whereas God's own creation, the Earth, tells and entirely different story to the Bible in nearly every single way.

So, again, we come to a problem:

If embedded age is real, that the earth was created 6000-odd years ago not 4.5 billion years ago, then by simple logic, it's obvious that all of ancient history is false then. You cannot cram billions of years of history in 6000-odd years and make it all pan out. None of the dates and locations make sense in a 6000 year old earth. Migrations, civilizations, tectonic shifts, extinct flora and fauna. None of it would make sense in a 6000 year old earth.

Because the conclusions are either:

A) God did create the world 6000 years ago, and in doing so put in all the various bits and pieces and evidence of civilization and life existing for well beyond 6000 years than what is claimed, which would be false history and thus paint God as a deceiver,


or B) God created the world 4.5 billion years ago, which lines up with the evidence that we see from studying the Earth, and which sadly puts many literal creationists in a sore spot for the view on the Bible.

 

[AaronClaricus]

If embedded age is real, that the earth was created 6000-odd years ago not 4.5 billion years ago, then by simple logic, it's obvious that all of ancient history is false then. You cannot cram billions of years of history in 6000-odd years and make it all pan out. None of the dates and locations make sense in a 6000 year old earth. Migrations, civilizations, tectonic shifts, extinct flora and fauna. None of it would make sense in a 6000 year old earth.

It's even more absurd considering all of this would happen on a 4350 year time scale.

Gobekli tepe founded 2350BCE.
Ur founded 2350BCE.
Uruk 2350BCE
Eridu 2350BCE
All the paleolithic mounds from sedentary hunter gatherers 2350BCE
All the neolithic mudbrick settlements 2350BCE
All the cave finds at 2350BCE

Some of the sons of Noah would be eating megafauna and living in bone yurts. While others would be living in large palaces detailing false histories. All within tens of kilometers of each other. The paleolithic sites would have to all naturally accumulate more sediments than the bronze age sites and decay much quicker.

 

[dlamberth]

For science that is the sad reality. The natural man cannot take in the things of the spirit.

What I've been hearing thus for are religious beliefs, not things of the spirit.

 

[truthpls]

Except that God didn't tell us how it was done since God didn't personally write the Bible.

His Spirit is His person. Natural only eyes just can't see Him. I guess we could say Scripture is truly seen by eyes that are born of the spirit. Science is flesh, and for science it is natural 'eyes only'

The Bible is the work of man, inspired men for sure but still men with all the fallibility attached to that, especially men from a very early stage in human history.

That is who God uses. There were no sinless super saints in the bible. You obsess on the people used rather than the spirit that was with them.

Whereas God's own creation, the Earth, tells and entirely different story to the Bible in nearly every single way.

The world viewed by natural eyes only and with some other spirit than the one behind scripture would do that, naturally.

So, again, we come to a problem:

If embedded age is real, that the earth was created 6000-odd years ago not 4.5 billion years ago, then by simple logic, it's obvious that all of ancient history is false then.

Noting becomes false just because you interpreted it all wrong. That oldest rock on earth in the OP is not 'false' you could go look at it today. The only falseness about it is in the minds of the natural only dreamers of science

You cannot cram billions of years of history in 6000-odd years and make it all pan out.

No, one cannot cram imaginary monsters in the rock either. The rock is fine, thank you very much. It would have been fine and very much the same on day 2 of creation as well.

None of the dates and locations make sense in a 6000 year old earth.

I agree. The naturalonlydunnit dates make no sense whatsoever.

Migrations, civilizations, tectonic shifts, extinct flora and fauna. None of it would make sense in a 6000 year old earth.

Not to those with minds made up and furiously interpreting with their little natural only minds accordingly. All earth movements, plants new or long gone, and civilizations are perfectly fine for those who start history from Adam and Eve. WE do not share your natural only mental hang ups.

Because the conclusions are either:

A) God did create the world 6000 years ago, and in doing so put in all the various bits and pieces and evidence of civilization and life existing for well beyond 6000 years than what is claimed, which would be false history and thus paint God as a deceiver,

The same natural only methods were used to date civilizations as were used to misstate the rock that was 2 days old but dated billions of years old. As we see then the only problem comes when people believe the naturalonlydunnit dream dates. They lead to total confusion.

or B) God created the world 4.5 billion years ago, which lines up with the evidence that we see from studying the Earth, and which sadly puts many literal creationists in a sore spot for the view on the Bible.

No, that would make Adam and Eve a lie. The natural only based package deal leads to unending doubt. In creation, in the reality of God, the truthfulness of God, in the flood, the garden, in the fall, etc. No accident, that. It was designed that way by that same serpent in the garden that lied to Eve. IT is a battle of world views, a battle of spirits, a battle for the hearts and minds of men to affect their eternal destiny. That is what science is really about. That is really what life is about. That is really what it is all about. So do the hokey pokey and toss the natural only thinking out

 

[truthpls]

What I've been hearing thus for are religious beliefs, not things of the spirit.

So in accepting that God is a spirit and that He created the world as Scripture says, that registers to you as 'not things of the spirit'. Let me get this straight then, are you suggesting that using the physical and natural ONLY gives us things of the spirit?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

His Spirit is His person. Natural only eyes just can't see Him. I guess we could say Scripture is truly seen by eyes that are born of the spirit. Science is flesh, and for science it is natural 'eyes only'

That is who God uses. There were no sinless super saints in the bible. You obsess on the people used rather than the spirit that was with them.

The world viewed by natural eyes only and with some other spirit than the one behind scripture would do that, naturally.

Noting becomes false just because you interpreted it all wrong. That oldest rock on earth in the OP is not 'false' you could go look at it today. The only falseness about it is in the minds of the natural only dreamers of science

No, one cannot cram imaginary monsters in the rock either. The rock is fine, thank you very much. It would have been fine and very much the same on day 2 of creation as well.

I agree. The naturalonlydunnit dates make no sense whatsoever.

Not to those with minds made up and furiously interpreting with their little natural only minds accordingly. All earth movements, plants new or long gone, and civilizations are perfectly fine for those who start history from Adam and Eve. WE do not share your natural only mental hang ups.

The same natural only methods were used to date civilizations as were used to misstate the rock that was 2 days old but dated billions of years old. As we see then the only problem comes when people believe the naturalonlydunnit dream dates. They lead to total confusion.

No, that would make Adam and Eve a lie. The natural only based package deal leads to unending doubt. In creation, in the reality of God, the truthfulness of God, in the flood, the garden, in the fall, etc. No accident, that. It was designed that way by that same serpent in the garden that lied to Eve. IT is a battle of world views, a battle of spirits, a battle for the hearts and minds of men to affect their eternal destiny. That is what science is really about. That is really what life is about. That is really what it is all about. So do the hokey pokey and toss the natural only thinking out

Hey, you and AV are the one's making God out to be deceptive, not anyone else. Just you two.

 

[truthpls]

Hey, you and AV are the one's making God out to be deceptive, not anyone else. Just you two.

If the rock that was created the day before would look old to modern science if inspected back in that time, who is deceived? Adam? No. He would not entertain the notion that the rock on the ground was billions of years old or that it was not created! Why insult God by calling Him the deceiver? The only ones tricked are the deceived.
They called Jesus a deceiver as well.
Mat 27:
62 .. the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,

63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again

Here is a direct quote from God

Job 38:4 -- "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding.

Do you think He was lying and deceiving? Do you think (as the natural only minded think) that this world really originated in some mystery cosmic crash derby or particle cloud debris from a big bang or whatever?

Those who say such things (that God is a deceiver if His word is true) insult a lot more than Genesis

Psalms 33:6 -- By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth