Taking Questions on Embedded Age Creation

[chilehed]

Yes.

Prove that he didn't do it five seconds ago.

 

[AV1611VET]

Prove that he didn't do it five seconds ago.

He wouldn't go against His word, and his Word says He did it in six days.

Psalm 138:2b ... for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

 

[chilehed]

He wouldn't go against His word, and his Word says He did it in six days.

Psalm 138:2b ... for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Yeah, and the six days ended five seconds ago. All of the events in scripture were embedded, just like everything else. Prove me wrong.

 

[dlamberth]

I notice too that Merle is using the term "fossil record," which is keeping him confused.

The "fossil record" is an interpretation of the "fossil layers" -- written down on paper.

Merle should -- (but probably won't) -- us the term "fossil layers" to avoid confusing himself.

This is where I disagree. The fossil record is in the Earth itself. On the other hand, the 4000 year age of the Earth that you use IS written down on paper.

 

[doubtingmerle]

It's almost like "miracle" isn't even in your vocabulary.

Sorry, but no miracle will make 6000 equal 4.5 billion, It's impossible.

An Earth that was created in 4004 BC is not 4.5 billion years old.

I'm going to need to go back to my poem. Some say it is unnecessary to use this poem. After all, everybody knows basic mathematical truths cannot be changed by miracles. But sometimes one needs to explain this again.

2+2<>10
Two plus two, it is not ten.
It is not ten, no matter when.
It is not ten, not here or there.
It is not ten, not anywhere.

"It might be ten. Yes, it could be.
If God, this world, didn't oversee.
Maybe on an alien tree."

It would not, could not, in a tree.
"On Krypton?" No, you let me be.

It is not ten, not in a box.
It is not ten, not with a fox.
It is not ten, not in a house.
It is not ten, not with a mouse.
It is not ten, not here or there.
It is not ten, not anywhere.
I do not need to state again.
It is not ten. It is not ten.
--doubtingmerle

I vote for math.

 

[doubtingmerle]

I notice too that Merle is using the term "fossil record," which is keeping him confused.

The "fossil record" is an interpretation of the "fossil layers" -- written down on paper.

Merle should -- (but probably won't) -- us the term "fossil layers" to avoid confusing himself.

No sir, you got that backwards. The fossil layers you see drawn on paper are an interpretation of the fossil record that is down there.

Phillip Gosse at least had an explanation for how the fossils got there--they were implanted at Creation.

But it appears all you can do anymore is deny that they are there.

Is this what you say when you see fossils? I see nothing

 

[dlamberth]

It's called a "miracle" -- but you used "somehow," which shows me you're still in the dark about this.

Which I fully understand, since I'm sure "miracle" is on academia's list of taboo terminology.

I believe in miracles, but I sure do have issues when defaulting to the claim of "miracles" when confronted with something that does not align with ones perception of things. Case in point, a 4.5 Billion year old Earth.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yeah, and the six days ended five seconds ago. All of the events in scripture were embedded, just like everything else. Prove me wrong.

Do you believe that?* if not, mind if I don't either?

* Remember: You asked me in Post 79 if I believe embedded age? Now I'm asking you if you believe in embedded events?

 

[AV1611VET]

This is where I disagree.

Because you're letting Merle confuse you. His confusion is contagious to you.

And I mean no offense here.

The fossil record is in the Earth itself.

So are the fossil layers.

No layers = no record.

Don't confuse the two.

On the other hand, the 4000 year age of the Earth that you use IS written down on paper.

Where? show me.

 

[dlamberth]

Because you're letting Merle confuse you. His confusion is contagious to you.

And I mean no offense here.

I'm not confused.

Where? show me.

Genesis

 

[AV1611VET]

2+2<>10
Two plus two, it is not ten.
It is not ten, no matter when.
It is not ten, not here or there.
It is not ten, not anywhere.

Two plus two indeed are ten.
Unless you're confused as to exactly when.
For two plus two are ten and no more.
If you're adding two plus two in the base of four.

 

[AV1611VET]

No sir, you got that backwards. The fossil layers you see drawn on paper are an interpretation of the fossil record that is down there.

Thanks for the QED.

Try calling it "fossil layers" for a better understanding.

Phillip Gosse at least had an explanation for how the fossils got there--they were implanted at Creation.

Phillip Gosse was wrong, wasn't he?

But it appears all you can do anymore is deny that they are there.

Show me thread and post where I have denied they are there please.

Is this what you say when you see fossils? I see nothing

No.

If my memory serves me correctly, I said God laid down the trilobites, then sprinkled dinosaur bones over them.

(Just as a crude example.)

 

[AV1611VET]

I believe in miracles, but I sure do have issues when defaulting to the claim of "miracles" when confronted with something that does not align with ones perception of things. Case in point, a 4.5 Billion year old Earth.

That's your problem, not mine.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Two plus two indeed are ten.
Unless you're confused as to exactly when.
For two plus two are ten and no more.
If you're adding two plus two in the base of four.

10 base 4 is not equal to the quantity we mean when we say ten. It is equal to the quantity we mean when we say four.

Again, my point is that math works. 2 + 2 always equal the number we call four. It never equals the number we call ten.

Likewise the number we call 6030 never equals 4,500,000,000. Thus, since you say the Earth was created about 6030 years ago, then it would be 6030 years old. You cannot simply make up a claim that it is 4.5 million years old and was created 6030 years ago. That is impossible.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm not confused.

Genesis

You two are starting to sound more and more ridiculous the more you misquote me.

 

[AV1611VET]

10 base 4 is not equal to the quantity we mean when we say ten. It is equal to the quantity we mean when we say four.

Again, my point is that math works. 2 + 2 always equal the number we call four. It never equals the number we call ten.

Are you aware that Oct 31 = Dec 25?

Likewise the number we call 6030 never equals 4,500,000,000. Thus, since you say the Earth was created about 6030 years ago, then it would be 6030 years old. You cannot simply make up a claim that it is 4.5 million years old and was created 6030 years ago. That is impossible.

Are you aware that I now prefer saying the earth is as old as God willed it?

So let's cut out the 4.5 million years old stuff that you think I'm saying now and quote me correctly?

Fair enough?

 

[doubtingmerle]

Show me thread and post where I have denied they are there please.

In post 78 you said:

The "fossil record" is an interpretation of the "fossil layers" -- written down on paper.​

​

That is a denial of the reality of the fossil record. The fossil record is real. There are trillions of fossils arranged in the Earth by the periods in which they lived. The fossil record is real. The fossil record is not simply an interpretation of lines on a piece of paper.

Rather, the lines on the paper are illustrations of what is there.

And when people show you evidence of the fossil record, all you can seem to say is, "I see nothing!"

​

 

[AV1611VET]

In post 78 you said:

The "fossil record" is an interpretation of the "fossil layers" -- written down on paper.​

​

That is a denial of the reality of the fossil record. The fossil record is real. There are trillions of fossils arranged in the Earth by the periods in which they lived. The fossil record is real. The fossil record is not simply an interpretation of lines on a piece of paper.

Rather, the lines on the paper are illustrations of what is there.

And when people show you evidence of the fossil record, all you can seem to say is, "I see nothing!"

​

Suit yourself, Merle.

You won't take my advice and use "fossil layers," so I'm just going to have to pray for you and let it go at that.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Are you aware that Oct 31 = Dec 25?



Are you aware that I now prefer saying the earth is as old as God willed it?

So let's cut out the 4.5 million years old stuff that you think I'm saying now and quote me correctly?

Fair enough?

Fun and games.

You have said that the physical age of the Earth is different from the years it has been in existence. Whether God claims that actual age is 4.5 billion years or any number he picks, if the number picked is different from the actual years of existence, that number is wrong.

The age of the Earth equals the number of years it has been in existence.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Suit yourself, Merle.

You won't take my advice and use "fossil layers," so I'm just going to have to pray for you and let it go at that.

Are you praying that I too will ignore the abundant evidence of all those fossils down there? See Amazon.com: The Grand Canyon, Monument to an Ancient Earth: Can Noah's Flood Explain the Grand Canyon?: 9780825444210: Hill, Carol, Davidson, Gregg, Ranney, Wayne, Helble, Tim: Books