Taking Questions on Embedded Age Creation

[Ophiolite]

We're the only ones who call ourselves animals, while at the same time making drugs to keep us from acting like animals.

You have a very low and seriously erroneous view of animals. The "Nature red in tooth and claw" perception is not the fault of a certain group of Christians, but they (which includes you) have certainly latched onto it and embraced it with an unseemly vigour. What permeates Life, from the level of biochemistry, up to the functioning of the biosphere, is cooperation. The competition side of Life just makes better press and so it tends to get the coverage. Arguably, much of the teaching of Jesus was to point out a preference for cooperation over competition.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have another question:

Why, on God's green earth and in the face of every single shred of evidence that is part of God's own creation, should we take the embedded age idea seriously? Why?

Because the Bible says it, that settles it.

Think about it.

It is a powerful, powerful demonstration of what God can do in the "wink of an eye."

Making all those stars come from absolutely nothing by merely speaking them into existence.

Then saying He did it with almost a mere afterthought.

Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Almost as if He's saying, "Oh, ya. And by the way, I made the stars too."

What a powerful God he is!

 

[BCP1928]

I have another question:

Why, on God's green earth and in the face of every single shred of evidence that is part of God's own creation, should we take the embedded age idea seriously? Why?

Otherwise AV's interpretation of an ancient religious text might be wrong, and that is not possible.

 

[AV1611VET]

In that specific example, I'd say it's an even tie.

I don't know what admin was thinking at the time, but they moved this thread to the Clean Christian Jokes section:

Cartoon Physics

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Because the Bible says it, that settles it.

Think about it.

It is a powerful, powerful demonstration of what God can do in the "wink of an eye."

Making all those stars come from absolutely nothing by merely speaking them into existence.

Then saying He did it with almost a mere afterthought.

Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Almost as if He's saying, "Oh, ya. And by the way, I made the stars too."

What a powerful God he is!

But the Bible says nothing about your embedded age claim, and it certainly is just your claim because... you've never once shown a single verse from the Bible to say "God made everything as it looks like today, just that it was made 6,000 years ago and was made to look billions of years old".

Your claim is extra-Biblical, you are adding to the Bible. Which is condemned in the Bible, and since the Bible is the word of God, it is condemned by God too:
Deuteronomy 4:2 - Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.
Proverbs 30:6 - Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar
Deuteronomy 12:32 - What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
Revelation 22:18 - For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

 

[driewerf]

What's to distinguish?

Passed age compared to embedded age (if such a thing is even real, you haven't demonstrated this yet). You know, the subject of this thread. A thread you opened with title "Taking questions on embedded age".
I need to repeat myself:
For opening a thread about "taking questions on embedded age creation", you deflect more than answer questions.

Can God embed color into His creation?

If so, would you ask, "How would one distinguish embedded green grass from real green grass?"

I don't know, and i don't care. Embedded colour is not the subject of this thread. You deflect again instead of answering.

 

[AV1611VET]

You have a very low and seriously erroneous view of animals.

Oh, really?

The "Nature red in tooth and claw" perception is not the fault of a certain group of Christians, but they (which includes you) have certainly latched onto it and embraced it with an unseemly vigour.

Maybe "they" are getting tired of being considered animals.

Especially by those who scratch their heads when they see people acting like one.

What do you think when someone goes into trans-species mode and acts like a turtle?

What permeates Life, from the level of biochemistry, up to the functioning of the biosphere, is cooperation.

Here we go with the "we're social animals" spiel.

Fine -- we're social animals in the eyes of academia.

But not everyone sees themselves as such.

And when they "go ape" over something, they're treated like criminals -- not ferals.

The competition side of Life just makes better press and so it tends to get the coverage.

Okay.

Arguably, much of the teaching of Jesus was to point out a preference for cooperation over competition.

Because of SIN.

Not because of our genes.

And certainly not because our DNA can be linked back through billions of years to a cesspool.

 

[AV1611VET]

Otherwise AV's interpretation of an ancient religious text might be wrong, and that is not possible.

That was real scholarly, wasn't it?

Your dean should be proud of you.

 

[driewerf]

driewerf said:
If god inserted age - as you pretend -

Why do you talk like this?

Because that is the best we have had so far: empty claims and allegations. That was the best, beside that we got deflections.

 

[AV1611VET]

But the Bible says nothing about your embedded age claim,

Here we go again.

... and it certainly is just your claim because... you've never once shown a single verse from the Bible ...

You mean like here?

Show me ONE passage, ONE chapter and verse that supports embedded age.

2 Peter 3:5a For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old,

Psalm 68:33 To him that rideth upon the heavens of heavens, which were of old; lo, he doth send out his voice, and that a mighty voice.

(Sorry. I can't count.)

... and it certainly is just your claim because ... you've never once shown a single verse from the Bible ...to say "God made everything as it looks like today, just that it was made 6,000 years ago and was made to look billions of years old".

Why would I show a verse like that?

"Everything as it looks like today?"

You mean with their scars, growth rings, etc?

Why would I show you a Bible verse about a snake that just molted the day it was created?

Isn't that what's called "Omphalism"?

Your claim is extra-Biblical, you are adding to the Bible.

Ya - ya.

And I'm Genghis Khan too.

Right?

 

[driewerf]

That's right.

Those require passages of time.

Indeed;

But God created what He created sans the passage of time REQUIRED for age to have come about.

He created fully-mature things in one day, that would take years and years to grow that old.

That is what you claim - pretend, allege, state. But provide never any reason to consider it as true.

And that's what you're failing to comprehend.

I comprehend very well. Both vocabulary and grammar are within my mental capacity. What is failing so far is any reason to consider that claim as true.

You're failing to comprehend how something can be old without GROWING OLD.

Indeed. For the simple reason that there is no reason given.

And the answer, of course, is that God did it.

Again, can God create a dress tomorrow so old that it falls apart with age?

I say He can.

What say you?

That you make unsubstantiated claims. Do god(s) even exist - for starters?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You mean like here?

And again, not a single verse to support your extra-Biblical claim of embedded age. Apart from showing that you so love to cherry pick Bible verses (Think I wouldn't miss the 'a' in the Peter verse?) and your inability to separate allegory from attempted historicity in the Bible.

 

[driewerf]

12. When discussing Creationism, why should one never let himself stray from Genesis 1 or 2?

I am not the one taking questions. I have to repeat myself.
For opening a thread about "taking questions on embedded age creation", you deflect more than answer questions.

 

[AV1611VET]

Passed age compared to embedded age (if such a thing is even real, you haven't demonstrated this yet).

Oh, so now it's "passed age"?

Do you remember calling it "real age" in Post 262?

 

[AV1611VET]

Because that is the best we have had so far: empty claims and allegations. That was the best, beside that we got deflections.

If that's all you're getting from my replies, perhaps you're wasting your time here?

 

[AV1611VET]

Do god(s) even exist - for starters?

Thank you.

For FINALLY getting to the real reason you're asking good questions, but unable to comprehend the answers.

 

[driewerf]

Oh, so now it's "passed age"?

Do you remember calling it "real age" in Post 262?

A small concession to deny you the opportunity to reply that embedded age is real.
So how do we distinguish passed age from embedded age?

 

[AV1611VET]

And again, not a single verse to support your extra-Biblical claim of embedded age. Apart from showing that you so love to cherry pick Bible verses (Think I wouldn't miss the 'a' in the Peter verse?) and your inability to separate allegory from attempted historicity in the Bible.

Suit yourself.

But when the Tailor shows up ...

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Suit yourself.

But when the Tailor shows up ...

You're just as liable to found on the wrong end of the scale as I am.

Either way, I am done now. I've got nothing else to ask or add so I shall bid you all a good night.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am not the one taking questions. I have to repeat myself.
For opening a thread about "taking questions on embedded age creation", you deflect more than answer questions.

Perhaps it's a matter of reading comprehension?