Real time or evo time?

[TLK Valentine]

We'll answer to God ... not you ... for our beliefs.

And truth is irrelevant as long as you spent your life toeing the party line...

 

[AV1611VET]

Misrepresent -- he keeps saying you believe the Earth only looks 4.5 billion years old. See for yourself.

And how many others say I say that too?

But not to his own facts.

Price you pay for free will.

Truth is more important.

Unity over facts -- I see that clearly enough.

These little Statler & Waldorf quips you make, which look like good points as stand-alone remarks, fail in the light of the whole picture.

All they're doing is backfiring on you and and keeping you from understanding the whole picture.

 

[AV1611VET]

And truth is irrelevant as long as you spent your life toeing the party line...

I can tell which side of Paschal's Wager you're on.

 

[TLK Valentine]

And how many others say I say that too?

How many are Christians?

These little Statler & Waldorf quips you make, which look like good points as stand-alone remarks, fail in the light of the whole picture.

All they're doing is backfiring on you and and keeping you from understanding the whole picture.

The whole picture is that as long as you agree with one another about doctrine, truth is irrelevant.

You said it yourself -- Unity.

All that matters is that you're in agreement... whether or not what you're agreeing on is correct means nothing.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I can tell which side of Paschal's Wager you're on.

Pascal's Wager is a coward's bet. All you had to do was ask my opinion on it.

 

[AV1611VET]

... truth is irrelevant.

You say that enough, you might start believing it.

But I think it's too late.

I believe you believe it already.

Truth is important.

Both dad and I believe we are believing the truth.

And even though one of us is wrong, we still have THE Truth in our hearts: Jesus Christ.

 

[AV1611VET]

Pascal's Wager is a coward's bet.

In that case, I can tell which side of a coward's bet you're on.

 

[Loudmouth]

?? What a strange claim. How would you determine what was created?

I just told you. If it was created in a different state past then it wouldn't have the same ratios as those produced by a same state past.

Everything matches in a religious made up past.

It isn't made up. It is observed. We can directly measure the ratios of isotopes produced by the present state. We can directly measure the ratios of isotopes in rocks.

Where is that independent evidence (other than a belief decay existed at all due to our present laws back then) ??

The independent evidence is the measured ratios of isotopes in rocks.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Both dad and I believe we are believing the truth.

Even though your truths are mutually exclusive?

You say it's 4.5 billion years old, he says that you only think it looks 4.5 billion years old...

And even though one of us is wrong, we still have THE Truth in our hearts: Jesus Christ.

Sounds like you don't care what other misstatements, falsehoods, or outright lies you spread (as you've done about me), as long as you agree on that one truth.

One would think that a lover of "truth" would be a lover of all truth...

 

[AV1611VET]

Sounds like you don't care what other misstatements, falsehoods, or outright lies you spread (as you've done about me), as long as you agree on that one truth.

Show me.

And if I feel you're right, I'll retract it with an apology.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Show me.

And if I feel you're right, I'll retract it with an apology.

QV please.

Am I to believe you weren't deliberately trying to twist my words?

 

[AV1611VET]

QV please.

Am I to believe you weren't deliberately trying to twist my words?

You said truth is irrelevant.

I said you believe that.

And you expect me to retract?

 

[TLK Valentine]

You said truth is irrelevant.

I said you believe that.

And you expect me to retract?

I see I was right about you.

 

[AV1611VET]

I see I was right about you.

Miracles still occur today, don't they?

 

[AirPo]

Miracles still occur today, don't they?

That depends on your Truth, or "truth", or any of the other truths that get thrown this place.

 

[dad]

But you only had that issue because you believe it was a non-Christian who said it -- had it come from a fellow in Christ, you never would've gotten your knickers in a twist.



And if a Christian does likewise, it hardly matters.

Not really, I looked into it, and know that the dream dates are religion. It is a reasoned approach, that respects scripture, and looks at the truth of what man knows or not.

 

[dad]

I just told you. If it was created in a different state past then it wouldn't have the same ratios as those produced by a same state past.

Why not? How would you know what the former nature did and how it worked or what was here created by God before any nature?!

It isn't made up. It is observed. We can directly measure the ratios of isotopes produced by the present state. We can directly measure the ratios of isotopes in rocks.

What is made up is the meaning you put on it. Not the actual stuff.

The independent evidence is the measured ratios of isotopes in rocks.

Then you have none. The ratios in rocks have gotten there by you know not what. You have merely sought to impose the present state realities on the unknown former state past. Busted ye be.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
In other words, instead of adjusting the evidence by "God could just have created the world last (Tuesday, Year, Century, Whatever) and made it look like it was much older", why not just accept the evidence for what it is? After all, as you've been reminded numerous times, there's nothing in scripture to make us believe otherwise.

I think it looks old to those that judge what is old by a godless religious philosophy and methodology.

Evidence does seem to indicate that it's old. But the only "godless religion" I know of is Buddhism, and I'm not sure they have a doctrinal position. But why not just accept it the way He says He did it? What's so important about modifying Genesis to fit a young Earth position?

Take away the assumptions of a same state past on earth and we lose all

Reason. Since we can observe what things were like, billions of years ago, there's no evidence for you new miracles.

meaning relating to time when looking at isotopes. The looking old is 100% part of the religion. Nothing else.

There's that little problem of radioactive decay. If what the evidence shows to be billions of years, turns out to be thousands instead, the radiation from decaying elements one million times greater than today, would have fried everything living on Earth. So that's out.

The practice of pulling an unscriptural miracle out of one's hat as a way dealing with the evidence being incompatible with one's beliefs. Bad idea; avoid it.

The different nature in heaven and the future is not a zillion miracles, so much as the God created new state and nature we will have. Same idea for the past.

I know you want to believe that different physical laws were somehow in for Adam or whatever, but your major problem is that there is no scriptural or scientific evidence for your new belief.

 

[dad]

Barbarian observes:
In other words, instead of adjusting the evidence by "God could just have created the world last (Tuesday, Year, Century, Whatever) and made it look like it was much older", why not just accept the evidence for what it is? After all, as you've been reminded numerous times, there's nothing in scripture to make us believe otherwise.

Yes, Scripture does contain info on a future and past that is different in fundamental ways, naturally.

The evidence, for what it is, is religious nonsense. In all ways, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Evidence does seem to indicate that it's old.

None. Just the same state past religion. That same religion that predicts the sun and stars will go out and etc. It is nothing but a fanatical little godless fable collection. To say it looks old is nothing more than a tee shirt saying you are part of that religion.

But the only "godless religion" I know of is Buddhism, and I'm not sure they have a doctrinal position. But why not just accept it the way He says He did it?

Jesus is God, so all of them are without Him, and that includes tha sneaky insideus cowardly so called sciences that have pretended to be more than religion.

What's so important about modifying Genesis to fit a young Earth position?

Face it, it is creation itself..a real creation by Jesus of man and the earth and heavens that small 'b' believers do not believe! Name any nominal bible believing liberal anywhere that does?

There's that little problem of radioactive decay.

ot at all, that is something that happens in the present state. You assumed it represented all ages and caused all ratios...gong.

If what the evidence shows to be billions of years, turns out to be thousands instead, the radiation from decaying elements one million times greater than today, would have fried everything living on Earth. So that's out.

Ridiculous. You are talking about a present state on steroids that just still has decay, but at some faster ridiculous rate.

I know you want to believe that different physical laws were somehow in for Adam or whatever, but your major problem is that there is no scriptural or scientific evidence for your new belief.

No. I feel that the nature was different clear on past the flood, and that the millennium also will be different.

I should do a thread on millennium physics.

 

[Loudmouth]

Why not?

Because it is a different state past. Different physical laws produce different ratios of isotopes.

How would you know what the former nature did and how it worked or what was here created by God before any nature?!

Different laws means different ratios.

What is made up is the meaning you put on it. Not the actual stuff.

Then what do you mean by evidence? Even when all of the observed facts exactly match what a same state past would produce, you refuse to accept it as evidence. Why?

The ratios in rocks have gotten there by you know not what.

We know by the ratios themselves how they got there. Since they match what a same state past would produce, they are evidence for a same state past. That's how evidence works.