The Return of My Apple Challenge

[KomissarSteve]

That metaphor got Moses banned from the Promised Land.

[bible]Numbers 20:11-12[/bible]

Yet Paul wasn't referring to a literal rock.

That's why you receive an F in "Metaphors 101."

 

[FishFace]

You know, I'm not entirely convinced that Eve was intelligent. Surprised? Well, you see she wasn't on the planet more than 10 minutes before before she screwed up and cursed us all for eternity.

Not very bright.

I'd call it lack of foresight, actually.

On God's part too. Which is odd, really... God being supposedly all-knowing and all.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am not talking about Genesis. I am taking your Apple Challenge where you create an apple from nothing in the palm of my hand. The only reason that an apple, created from nothing, would have a stem, calyx, and vasculature is to give the apple a fake history of development. Apples are not aged by the presence of a stem, calyx, or vasculature. The only reason they are there is for the development of the apple from a flower and to give the apple sustinence as it grows. An apple created from nothing never went through these phases and therefore should not have these features for the same reason that Adam should not have had a bellybutton. You have just stated that God would not give Adam a bellybutton because this would be giving Adam a fake history. Would you give your apple created from nothing a fake history?

F

 

[AV1611VET]

Yo, AV, the rock can't have been 3 billion years old. It had only been in existence for a week.

Now you're thinking like a YEC --- good job!

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet Paul wasn't referring to a literal rock.

He wasn't???

 

[MrGoodBytes]

F

Perhaps you want to look up the meaning of some words, in particular "discussion" and "debate".

On second thought, don't. I see no reason in preventing you from ruining what's left of your questionable reputation.

 

[AV1611VET]

Perhaps you want to look up the meaning of some words, in particular "discussion" and "debate".

If you can't answer my OP as I wrote it (in other words, with respect), you deserve what you get.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

If you can't answer my OP as I wrote it (in other words, with respect), you deserve what you get.

Your OP as you wrote it didn't make any sense, therefore it is necessary to be clear about the details. Loudmouth is asking a perfectly reasonable question you didn't include in the OP but is required to make the analogy work.

Does your ex-nihilo apple have a stem or not?

 

[Tomk80]

If you can't answer my OP as I wrote it (in other words, with respect), you deserve what you get.

Loudmouth did answer your OP as you wrote it, even though it was flawed from the outset.

 

[UnknownUsername]

AV, I really want to know how you get off grading these posts. I want to know how you justify dismissing a valid question and debate by simply posting "F"

Because that's the most arrogant way of doing this that I can think of. You're completely denying any debate, and disregarding anything that may spark some thought. And not only that, but you're telling anyone who does so that you find them to be utterly worthless, and are giving them the worst grade possible. I don't know about the rest of us, but to me, an F is hardly desirable, and I'd like a little bit of explanation as to why it's being handed out.

Is it just because they're not creationists?

 

[consol]

AV1611VET can work you guys like puppets,
keep it up.

 

[Loudmouth]

F

Please show your reasoning.

Would your ex nihilo apple have a stem?

Would your ex nihilo apple have a calyx completely with left over flower petals?

Would your ex nihilo apple have a scar where the stem enters the apple, just like a bellybutton is a scar leftover from the umbilical cord?

Would your ex nihilo have vasculature needed to transport nutrients from the non-existent tree to the outer reaches of the apple?

Since you disagree with the omphalos argument it would seem to me that the answer to all of these questions is "no". Therefore, your apple would look quite different from a naturally occuring, naturally grown apple.

Until you step up and at least address my post you have lost your challenge.

 

[thaumaturgy]

F

Behold the Defensor Fides

 

[tanzanos]

What's wrong with you people? Don't you realise that F stands for FANTASTIC!. Whoever got an F from AV1 should be happy as his post must have impressed AV1 to the point of giving them a FANTASTIC post rating.

ALL HAIL AV1

 

[FishFace]

Now you're thinking like a YEC --- good job!

Great. Nice discussion you had there.

F.

Why haven't you responded to my challenge directly to you by the way? (No need to answer that, it was a rhetorical question. We know the true answer is that you had no way of answering it sensibly.)

 

[FishFace]

If you can't answer my OP as I wrote it (in other words, with respect), you deserve what you get.

If you can't create an OP that makes any sense, than you should expect people to make fun of the ridiculous conclusions it entails, or to give you an alternative.

 

[FishFace]

How old is the apple, five seconds after its creation, AV?

 

[KomissarSteve]

He wasn't???

No. Obviously he wasn't. He was referring to Christ as a rock metaphorically.

 

[AV1611VET]

Please show your reasoning.

Fair enough.

Would your ex nihilo apple have a stem?

Yes.

Would your ex nihilo apple have a calyx completely with left over flower petals?

No --- I'll leave that off.

Would your ex nihilo apple have a scar where the stem enters the apple, just like a bellybutton is a scar leftover from the umbilical cord?

Yes --- I'll give it one.

Would your ex nihilo have vasculature needed to transport nutrients from the non-existent tree to the outer reaches of the apple?

Yes --- might as well give it one of those, too -- NO --- nevermind --- it doesn't.

Well, okay, yes it does. (I hope you're getting my point.)

Since you disagree with the omphalos argument it would seem to me that the answer to all of these questions is "no".

My apple is just what it is --- an apple. It was created in 2007, not Genesis 1.

Therefore, your apple would look quite different from a naturally occuring, naturally grown apple.

Only if I created it differently --- I could have made it purple, if I so choose.

As I formulated the challenge in my mind, it was just an apple as you would buy it from the store, or pick it off the tree --- nothing more.

People are trying to make this harder than it is, and it's confusing them --- not me.

Until you step up and at least address my post you have lost your challenge.

I promise you --- that doesn't bother me one bit.

 

[AV1611VET]

AV, I really want to know how you get off grading these posts. I want to know how you justify dismissing a valid question and debate by simply posting "F"

Because that's the most arrogant way of doing this that I can think of. You're completely denying any debate, and disregarding anything that may spark some thought. And not only that, but you're telling anyone who does so that you find them to be utterly worthless, and are giving them the worst grade possible. I don't know about the rest of us, but to me, an F is hardly desirable, and I'd like a little bit of explanation as to why it's being handed out.

Is it just because they're not creationists?

UUN, if you want to link me back to your post, I'll be glad to justify my grade.

I went back to Page 26, and can't find it, and I really don't have time to search, as I'm on a very limited time budget here.