Taking questions on Embedded Age Creation

[Tiberius]

Tiberius, I don't know how to answer that question.

I don't exactly understand it.

If you take two universes: one created ex nihilo w/embedded age, and the other created [however] --- can you tell them apart?

Is that the crux of your question?

If so, I don't know what you're looking for in an answer.

Here's a go at it, though:

Yes, if you're talking about one universe being sans God, they should be easy to tell apart.

Let's call the embedded age universe, Universe A, and the other one, Universe B.

• UA has angels in it, UB does not.
• UA has a supernatural Book, UB does not.
• UA has a nation that is indestructible, UB does not.
• UA has an empty tomb in it, UB does not.

Again, I don't know how to answer your question.

Okay, let me ask you a question...

Imagine two universes. Universe A and B, as you said.

Universe A has embedded age, angels, a god and a Bible in it, as well as any other things a universe would require for your religious beliefs.

Universe B has no God, no angels, is billions of years old and has a Bible that is identical to the Christian Bible you believe in, but it was written by people as a collection of myths.

How would you tell the difference between these universes?

 

[Tiberius]

Neat --- since the Bible disagrees with me, and you guys disagree with the Bible, then you guys must agree with me; but since you don't agree with me, then you must be wrong about the Bible disagreeing with me, which means the Bible agrees with me (or rather, I agree with the Bible).

Either way, you make me look right --- thank you.

This only works if your point of view and our point of view are the only two options. It is possible for a person to disagree wityh you AND disagree with the Bible and instead believe some third thing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Thank you, Tiberius --- this one is much easier to answer.

Okay, let me ask you a question...

Imagine two universes. Universe A and B, as you said.

Universe A has embedded age, angels, a god and a Bible in it, as well as any other things a universe would require for your religious beliefs.

Universe B has no God, no angels, is billions of years old and has a Bible that is identical to the Christian Bible you believe in, but it was written by people as a collection of myths.

How would you tell the difference between these universes?

The thing that came to my mind before I even finished reading your question, is the fact that in Universe B, where the Bible, even though it's a King James Bible, would never have been written.

But, if it was written, it would go the way of anything else written in that era.

One would have to look far and wide to find one; and 4 and 5 year olds in America would have never even heard of King James.

Put another way, the supernatural protection that God protects His Word with would not exist.

 

[AV1611VET]

This only works if your point of view and our point of view are the only two options.

It is possible for a person to disagree wityh you AND disagree with the Bible and instead believe some third thing.

But if the Bible and I agree, that's only one option.

You disagreeing with us is a second option, not a third.

It's a third opinion --- but not a third option.

As I see it, this is binary logic.

 

[MoonLancer]

Thank you, Tiberius --- this one is much easier to answer.The thing that came to my mind before I even finished reading your question, is the fact that in Universe B, where the Bible, even though it's a King James Bible, would never have been written.

But, if it was written, it would go the way of anything else written in that era.

One would have to look far and wide to find one; and 4 and 5 year olds in America would have never even heard of King James.

Put another way, the supernatural protection that God protects His Word with would not exist.

but one does not need to look far and wide for books like Beowulf or Gilgamesh or even the Euclid's elements. Are you saying that the bible is such a poor book it could not survive on its own merits like other books have done? Keep in mind other religions seem to have pretty successful religious books as well.

 

[Tiberius]

Thank you, Tiberius --- this one is much easier to answer.The thing that came to my mind before I even finished reading your question, is the fact that in Universe B, where the Bible, even though it's a King James Bible, would never have been written.

in Universe B, the Bible would be a ficticious story. And As Moonlancer stated, there's plenty of evidence that a ficticious story written back then could survive into the modern world.

But, if it was written, it would go the way of anything else written in that era.

Again, there's plenty from that era that is still around.

One would have to look far and wide to find one; and 4 and 5 year olds in America would have never even heard of King James.

Put another way, the supernatural protection that God protects His Word with would not exist.

What about those holy texts from other religions that have not had the benefit of God's supernatural protection? They've survived just fine.

But if the Bible and I agree, that's only one option.

You disagreeing with us is a second option, not a third.

It's a third opinion --- but not a third option.

As I see it, this is binary logic.

In the passage of yours that I quoted, you said that you disagreed with the Bible. I was responding to that.

So, to spell it out, if you disagree with the Bible, and others disagree with you, it does not mean that they must be agreeing with the Bible.

AV, let me ask you another question. Is it possible for a book like the Bible to have survived for more than 2000 years if it did not have the protection of a god?

 

[Nathan Poe]

But if the Bible and I agree, that's only one option.

You disagreeing with us is a second option, not a third.

It's a third opinion --- but not a third option.

As I see it, this is binary logic.

What about the option of "The Bible is referring to something else, and you're missing it?"

 

[MoonLancer]

But if the Bible and I agree, that's only one option.

You disagreeing with us is a second option, not a third.

It's a third opinion --- but not a third option.

As I see it, this is binary logic.

or simply a fallacy of false dichotomy.

I can disagree the bible is the word of god but still understand what the bible is saying

You just got smacked down with the bible, that must be pretty embarrassing.

let me re-post it again

The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.

Its very clear that by saying the sky proclaims the work of god is referencing unlocking knowledge about his creation through observing celestial bodies.

In other words god has shown where to look for when trying to find the age of universe and other questions about how god created the universe.

 

[Nathan Poe]

One would have to look far and wide to find one; and 4 and 5 year olds in America would have never even heard of King James.

Put another way, the supernatural protection that God protects His Word with would not exist.

So -- no difference whatsoever, then.

 

[Freodin]

Perhaps AV can answer this questions regarding Embedded Age:

How do you know how much age was embedded into something?

 

[TheReasoner]

Don't know if this has been asked, but how would this hypothesis be testable? Is it falsifiable, and does it have any backing in evidence - the bible excluded of course.

 

[Wedjat]

He did answer that one. It's dated age - 6000 = embedded age. So some things were apparently arbitrarily embedded with more or less age than others.

 

[AV1611VET]

Perhaps AV can answer this questions regarding Embedded Age:

How do you know how much age was embedded into something?

10

 

[AV1611VET]

Don't know if this has been asked, but how would this hypothesis be testable? Is it falsifiable, and does it have any backing in evidence - the bible excluded of course.

1

 

[TheReasoner]

He did answer that one. It's dated age - 6000 = embedded age. So some things were apparently arbitrarily embedded with more or less age than others.

So it's all just.... Errrr... Okay, so if I understand this the whole issue is quite simply that:

AV and his 'comrades' start off with the assumption that the world is 6000 years old.

They then see the evidence against their position simply as irrelevant and therefore dismiss any and all evidence against their hypothesis.

It is believed by these people - as I understand it - that because their hypothesis MUST be correct then the universe was just created to LOOK old.
This is of course impossible to test as any and all evidence will simply be ignored as 'the age is real, just embedded and hence not real'.
Embedded age is therefore about as scientific as astrology, santa claus or the easter bunny.

I'll file this under 'featherbrained nonsense'.

 

[Freodin]

10

You missunderstood the question.

I know how to establish the "physical" age of something... more or less. And I have read your formula.

But creationists - you included - discard "scientific dating methods" whenever it suits them.

So how do you know how much age was embedded, say, into Adam?

I have heard you name "30 years"... roughly, the "mature" human, or perhaps 20.


But how would you know that? Humans - for our experience - have a lifespan of 80, 90 years on the avarage. A 30-year-old is a "mature adult" human. An 80-year-old has "hair white with age"... usually.

But Adam was said to live almost a millenium. Was he "old" when he was 80? Venerable old age? What kind of old geezer was he with 400? Or was he also a "mature adult" at the age of, say, 300... translating roughly to 30 on "our" scale?

How do you know that Adam had "embedded" 30 years of age... and not 100, or 200, or 600?

 

[AV1611VET]

I like how you're seeking understanding and clarification, yet end your post in the way you did.

You'll never understand with that attitude.

So it's all just.... Errrr... Okay, so if I understand this the whole issue is quite simply that:

AV and his 'comrades' start off with the assumption that the world is 6000 years old.

No.

 

[TheReasoner]

I like how you're seeking understanding and clarification, yet end your post in the way you did.

You'll never understand with that attitude.No.

Alright AV, if you did not start off with that, what lead you to deduce that's the age of the universe?

 

[AV1611VET]

How do you know that Adam had "embedded" 30 years of age... and not 100, or 200, or 600?

Adam's physical age the day he was created was important.

I used to say he was 20, until someone once mentioned they thought he was 30, so I go by that now.

But you do bring up a good point.

Let's say God embedded 1000 years into Adam when He created him.

When the Fall occurred, and Adam lost his glorified state, his advanced age would have killed him.

 

[TheReasoner]

1

Humbug!
With these criteria you could just as well say the world was created yesterday for all the sense it makes.

Furthermore, it does not require omnipotence it merely requires a huge whopping computer way beyond our current capablity. What you're suggesting could also explain a virtual existence. One which we cannot disprove because we're IN it.

That is of course possible, but so's an army of dragons materializing out of nowhere due to quantum effects. It's possible, but it's not going to happen anyway.

If it WAS created by God with 'embedded age', why would He have done it that way AV? In order to deceive His own creation? Did He put laws of physics in place and an entire huge universe billions of lightyears across (the visible bit) in order to fool us? Why else would He have done it if that is what He did?