Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation

[Split Rock]

Maturity without history is a working definition I came up with after taking it to God in prayer.

I needed something to differentiate the difference between Omphalos, Last Thursday, and Embedded Age.

I wanted to specifically avoid the terms "age" and "old" in my definition, not wanting to use a word in the definition that is in the term itself.

Like in grade school, when the teacher would say, "Define this word, without using that word in the definition itself."

Saying "maturity without age" is just plain wrong, as Adam is always depicted as a full-grown man.

Saying "created fully-mature" doesn't work, as it doesn't exclude Omphalos, which could say that he was fully-mature, had a navel, was skinned up, had tooth decay, 20/30 vision, etc.

And not only could have those, but could have those because Adam was aged (note: 'aged' --- a verb) to his current age.

In any event, I took it to God in prayer, and 'maturity without history' is the result.

You still haven't explained all the "scars" in the earth... a planet you claim was created ex nihilo with Embedded Age.

 

[AV1611VET]

You still haven't explained all the "scars" in the earth... a planet you claim was created ex nihilo with Embedded Age.

I shouldn't have to.

This thread deals with Earth's first six days of existence.

Scars in the earth fall under Omphalos, or Gap.

 

[Mike Elphick]

You keep answering questions I never asked. Let me repeat "how does suspending the laws of physics marry up with science AND the Bible?"

What law(s) was suspended during the creation week, Mike?

As one of embedded age's unique features, you told us, was the "laws of science [were] not in effect". Well, some of them must have been, because Genesis 1 mentions:-

...heavens, earth, waters, light, day, night, evening, morning, sky, dry ground, seas, vegetation, moon, sun (by implication), living creatures, flying birds, other living creatures, livestock, wild animals, man...

I think you'll agree, you need most physical laws for these things to exist. So it's actually your job to explain what "laws of science" were "not in effect" so God could implant age into things.

 

[AV1611VET]

As one of embedded age's unique features, you told us, was the "laws of science [were] not in effect". Well, some of them must have been, because Genesis 1 mentions:-

...heavens, earth, waters, light, day, night, evening, morning, sky, dry ground, seas, vegetation, moon, sun (by implication), living creatures, flying birds, other living creatures, livestock, wild animals, man...

I think you'll agree, you need most physical laws for these things to exist. So it's actually your job to explain what "laws of science" were "not in effect" so God could implant age into things.

In the beginning there was God --- period.

Nothing else.

Then, from nothing else, came the earth --- one huge mass of sea water, I call Terra Aqua.

What law was in existence, that God used to create this mass of sea water?

(Be specific please.)

 

[Mike Elphick]

So how come they've got DIFFERENT real ages, when you've only provided four and a half Billion years of embedded age?

God embedded 50 million years here, 400 million there, 1 billion here, 10 billion there.

He gave Adam 30 years, the earth 4.57, and Zircon 4.404 billion.

Ah! That was not clear from your previous posts. So now we have the ridiculous situation of everything having a different amount of embedded age.

With a thousand years here and a billion years there
Here a quark, there a quark
Everywhere a quark, quark...

How many months did he put into the mouse? How many days into the bumble bee? How many hours into E. coli? And how many billons of years was carefully added to each of those countless billions of stars for no other reason than they should exhibit different ages? This is getting crazy. Why? because it's pointless — there's no reason for God to have done this.

 

[brinny]

I'll take questions on Embedded Age Creation:

1. Definition = maturity without history
2. Method = creatio ex nihilo
3. Unique features:
   • requires omnipotence
   • laws of science not in effect
   • occurred BC4004 (according to Ussher's dating)
     
   • no evidence left behind
   • completed in 6 days (on purpose)
4. Described in detail in Genesis 1
5. Witnessed by the angels

i believe our omnipotent God DID and IS capable of such a thing. He's the CREATOR. He brought into being LIFE where there was NO previously.

No questions. Just had to comment.

Carry on, my friend, my brother in Christ, and son of the Most High God. May He spark your wisdom and discernment evermoreso, to carry on, in His name, and may His righteous right hand guide you in all you do and say, my friend.

 

[Mike Elphick]

you were asked where one would find any reference to embedded age?

And I quoted 2 Peter 3:5 and Psalm 39:5.

2 Peter 3:5 (NIV)
But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water.

Psalm 39:5
You have made my days a mere handbreadth; the span of my years is as nothing before you. Each man's life is but a breath.

No reference here about embedded age.

 

[Split Rock]

I shouldn't have to.

This thread deals with Earth's first six days of existence.

Scars in the earth fall under Omphalos, or Gap.

They are there now. Your Embedded Age model says they should not exist. Explain them or admit your model Fails.

 

[AV1611VET]

They are there now. Your Embedded Age model says they should not exist. Explain them or admit your model Fails.

There were no scars in the earth (or in the universe) in Genesis 1.

 

[Mike Elphick]

As one of embedded age's unique features, you told us, was the "laws of science [were] not in effect". Well, some of them must have been, because Genesis 1 mentions:-

...heavens, earth, waters, light, day, night, evening, morning, sky, dry ground, seas, vegetation, moon, sun (by implication), living creatures, flying birds, other living creatures, livestock, wild animals, man...

I think you'll agree, you need most physical laws for these things to exist. So it's actually your job to explain what "laws of science" were "not in effect" so God could implant age into things.

In the beginning there was God --- period.

Nothing else.

Then, from nothing else, came the earth --- one huge mass of sea water, I call Terra Aqua.

What law was in existence, that God used to create this mass of sea water?

(Be specific please.)

I've noticed a characteristic of creationists. Quite often, when they can't answer a tricky point, they issue a counter-question.

When I asked "what laws of science were not in effect (a unique characteristic of embedded age, according to AV) so God could implant age into things", AV's reply was not an answer but another question.

Ignoring the matter of how he knows the Earth consisted totally of sea water, or how the salt got into it, or why there was no solid portion, the point is that it does not accord with science. I went to some length to explain how stars and planets form, but he ignored all that. Why?

 

[Deadbolt]

I have only one question. How does an adult take this nonsense seriously?

 

[Mike Elphick]

i believe our omnipotent God DID and IS capable of such a thing. He's the CREATOR. He brought into being LIFE where there was NO previously.

Hello brinny. It's not just a question of whether he could or not — AV is trying to marry up the scientific results for the age of the Earth with what it says in the Bible. All I am doing, and I am sincere in this, is pointing out to him that it's impossible to compare his proposals with any science.

You see, in science you can't have a theory that is not falsifiable, so when you have a definition (which you quoted) that includes as a "unique feature" the statement that there is no evidence for it, it's no longer scientific and can only be faith or conjecture. You can't scientifically compare unfalsifiable faith or conjectural ages with measured scientific ones, which are falsifiable.

 

[Freodin]

The statement of "embedded age leaves no evidence" is only a cop-out to answer the question why there is no evidence.

It is in it´s simplicity as bad-thought as any of the conjectures of this idea.


There seems to be one fact that both sides agree on: there is no evidence NOW for us to check. But that could be explained simply by the notion that there is no evidence because there is simply nothing to evidence.

AV cannot have that: he needs a method that leaves no evidence - that´s what all his "apple" or "moon" challenges are for.

So we are to accept that this "embedded age by ex-nihilo creation" would also not give any evidence, even if we could scientifically test this new creation. In AV´s view, if there were scientists present at day 3 (or whatever) to test the newly-created Adam, they would find no hint that he was created with "embedded age".

And this is wrong.

I´ve said that before, a number of times: everything we see now is the way it is because of the way it became. A mature human is the way it is, the way we all know how it should be, the way even creationists accept it should be because it MATURED. It grew, got older, had a history.

The "scars" that Split Rock asked about. The scars that we see and can date - date to a time before the creation - and that AV denies were there. The scars that, if they weren´t there at the "beginning", must have come later... and had their old age "embedded". This is a problem in itself.

But a different problem would be - could scientists test the newly-created earth (or Adam) - the scars that ARE NOT THERE.

An example: scientists are quite good at establishing the age of a human by his teeth. What would Adams teeth have shown at his first day: the usual tear and wear of a 30 year old... or would they show that he had never eaten anything in his alledged 30 years of age?

Would his bones show signs of growth? Would the oceans, the coastlines - alledged millions of years old - show signs of erosion?

If yes, this would be the "history" that AV so vehemently denies.
If no, this would be the evidence for an "embedded age creation" that he also vehemently denies exists.

 

[Deadbolt]

This is why "Embedded age" is just plain nonsense that he somehow manages to get people to address as if it deserved any more consideration than a ridiculously childish concept such as, "does the world crease to exist when no one is looking at it?"

 

[Pete Harcoff]

I have only one question. How does an adult take this nonsense seriously?

They don't.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

If yes, this would be the "history" that AV so vehemently denies.
If no, this would be the evidence for an "embedded age creation" that he also vehemently denies exists.

The problem is you can't have age without history. Age implies a passage of time and a passage of time implies history. So this "maturity without history" stuff he keeps talking about is a logical impossibility. It doesn't exist.

 

[AV1611VET]

The problem is you can't have age without history. Age implies a passage of time and a passage of time implies history. So this "maturity without history" stuff he keeps talking about is a logical impossibility. It doesn't exist.

You can't have a man walking on water either, can you?

Man implies weight, weight implies gravity, water implies buoyancy --- get the picture?

 

[MoonLancer]

are you talking about Criss Angel?

 

[Pete Harcoff]

You can't have a man walking on water either, can you?

Red herring. We're talking about your use of words and how they don't mean things that you think they mean. You don't get to re-invent the dictionary.

 

[Split Rock]

There were no scars in the earth (or in the universe) in Genesis 1.

One more time. They are here now. Hundreds of millions of years of them. Explain that.