The Return of My Apple Challenge

[Tiberius]

AV, if you did create the apple ex nihilo just now, why did you create it so that it appears to be older?

 

[Tiberius]

Double post

 

[AV1611VET]

AV, if you did create the apple ex nihilo just now, why did you create it so that it appears to be older?

So it would be recognizable and functionable --- in short, so it would be an apple.

 

[faster_jackrabbit]

AV, if you did create the apple ex nihilo just now, why did you create it so that it appears to be older?

To be deceitful. Which is precisely why many christians reject the "embedded age" nonsense. A "perfect" god cannot be deceitful.

 

[AV1611VET]

A "perfect" god cannot be deceitful.

I think you guys are too paranoid and suspicious to understand anything.

 

[gaara4158]

I think you guys are too paranoid and suspicious to understand anything.

It's called a healthy skepticism, as opposed to your dangerous credulity.

To answer your OP, the premise causes some problems. To assume you have the ability to create things ex nihilo raises a few questions. To name a few: How are you doing it? Can you do it as many times as you like? What else can you do? Can you do it at will? In a world where a certain man can break the laws of conservation of matter and energy, what else is out of the ordinary?

I cannot answer your question until these questions are answered. It's not due to any shortcomings of my own, but rather yours for creating a question with so many problems. But hey, don't give up, you're doing a great job

 

[Nathan Poe]

So it would be recognizable and functionable --- in short, so it would be an apple.

But it's not an apple -- it's an ex nihio construct that you designed to be recognized and to function as an apple.

Applemania -- not the real thing, but an incredible simulation.

 

[AV1611VET]

These questions, Gaara, have nothing to do with the OP whatsoever.

Let's go through them --- I'll edit your post for ease of answering:

• 1. How are you doing it?
• 2. Can you do it as many times as you like?
• 3. What else can you do?
• 4. Can you do it at will?
• 5. In a world where a certain man can break the laws of conservation of matter and energy, what else is out of the ordinary?

Again, the answers (except for #1) shouldn't make any difference:

1. Ex nihilo.
2. Yes or no --- doesn't matter.
3. Suppose I dropped dead after creating the apple?
4. Whether I put the apple in your hand by choice, or was compelled to, doesn't matter.
5. Beats me --- it's just a hypothetical, scaled down so as not to be complicated.

I cannot answer your question until these questions are answered.

I don't buy that.

 

[AV1611VET]

But it's not an apple...

Excuse me, Nathan --- yes, it is an apple.

And if you don't have an answer, please feel free to keep your assessment to yourself --- I'm not interested; and if you do have an answer, I'm still not interested in your assessment.

I'm only interested in your answer to the OP --- not cheap rhetoric.

 

[gaara4158]

This is incredible.

Again, the answers (except for #1) shouldn't make any difference:

1. Ex nihilo.

That's not how. That's what. Pay attention. I'm asking for the mechanism you used to make this happen. Not the specifics of what happened.

Yes or no --- doesn't matter.

But it does. If you can do it again, I'd simply have you demonstrate for my friend what you did for me, and that would suffice.

Suppose I dropped dead after creating the apple?

I'd submit your body for an autopsy to see what exactly had just happened.

Whether I put the apple in your hand by choice, or was compelled to, doesn't matter.

Again, this determines whether I can have you demonstrate it for my friend.

Beats me --- it's just a hypothetical, scaled down so as not to be complicated.

Fair enough. I'm just trying to clear up any objections before the come up once I do give my answer.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by faster_jackrabbit A "perfect" god cannot be deceitful.

I think you guys are too paranoid and suspicious to understand anything.

Well, He can always cause one to be suspicous or paranoid.

2 Thess 2:11 and thru this, the God is sending them an in-working of-deception, into the to believe them to the Falsehood

Reve 20:8 and will go forth out to deceive the nations that are in the four corners of-the land, the Gog and the Magog to-be-together-assembling/sunagagein them into a-battle

 

[AV1611VET]

This is incredible.

Not it's not --- it's cheap rhetoric and diversion tactics on your part. I'd prefer you not say anything if you don't have an answer, or need more clarification.

That's not how. That's what. Pay attention. I'm asking for the mechanism you used to make this happen. Not the specifics of what happened.

The mechanism makes no difference --- whether it was omnipotence, or something else, has nothing to do with this challenge.

But it does. If you can do it again, I'd simply have you demonstrate for my friend what you did for me, and that would suffice.

And I've been down that road before, haven't I?

1. It's your job to try and convince your friend - not mine.
2. Even if I stood in front of your friend and ex nihiloed 100 zillion more apples, would that convince him I ex nihiloed the apple that is in your hand?

I'd submit your body for an autopsy to see what exactly had just happened.

Assuming you even had the authority to do so, and assuming you're friend would wait around, and assuming the apple would stay fresh, not get stolen in the meantime, not get accidentally eaten, etc. You're trying to complicate this on purpose, in my opinion.

Again, this determines whether I can have you demonstrate it for my friend.

Again, no it doesn't.

Fair enough. I'm just trying to clear up any objections before the come up once I do give my answer.

At this point, Gaara, I'm not really interested in your replies anymore. You're questions are boring, have nothing to do with this thread, cheap rhetoric, and I'm getting the impression that you're just trying to make me suffer for asking this. I'm going to put you on what I call "virtual ignore" for the rest of this thread.

Have a nice day ---

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

At this point, Gaara, I'm not really interested in your replies anymore. You're questions are boring, have nothing to do with this thread, cheap rhetoric, and I'm getting the impression that you're just trying to make me suffer for asking this. I'm going to put you on what I call "virtual ignore" for the rest of this thread.

Have a nice day ---

Another words, shake the dust off your feet

Mark 6:11 And who soever should not be receiving ye, nor should be hearing of-ye, going out thence, shake off ye! the dust/coun <5522> the underneath thine feet into a testimony to-them. Amen I say unto ye, it shall be more tolerable to-Sodom or Gomorrha in a day of Judgment, then that city". [#5522 used in Revelation 18:19]

Revelation 18:19 And they cast dust/coun <5522> upon their heads, and cried-out, lamenting and mourning, saying, "Woe! Woe! the City, the Great, in which are-rich all those having ships in the sea out of her preciousness! that one hour was Desolated. [#5522 used only in Mark 6:11]

 

[Tomk80]

An accurate representation of this by monty python, starring Sir Robin in the role of AV1611VET

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVpoXw2JCBw

 

[Open]

Hi AV,

You have in the past indicated that the answer to your 'riddle' is that there is no proof of creationism. (I trust I have not misintrepreted the situation. Please correct me if I am wrong).
I am curious. What does a lack of evidence have to offer to the argument? An admission of this sort surely weakens your position.....
Apart from cluttering up a forum, what do you hope to achieve by such a post?
Just curious....I cannot se the benefit.....

 

[AV1611VET]

Hi AV,

Hello ---

You have in the past indicated that the answer to your 'riddle' is that there is no proof of creationism. (I trust I have not misintrepreted the situation. Please correct me if I am wrong).

A couple of minor points here:

1. I call them challenges, not riddles --- the challenge is to get an honest answer before someone: a) changes the wording, and b) starts with the insults.
2. It shows there is no physical proof of the Creation --- not Creationism.

I am curious. What does a lack of evidence have to offer to the argument?

A couple things:

1. It shows that the First Law of Thermodynamics was not in effect yet. Scientists here look for evidence of their Big Bang Theory, and think they've found it. Someone correct me, but I believe the theory goes that since matter and anti-matter annihilate one another at different rates of exchange, there is a surplus of matter left over (K-muons?) called the Cosmic Microwave Background. The Creation would leave no such background.
2. It forces the believer to take what God said on faith, not sight; and walking by faith (not sight) is what God requires for a believer to be Spirit-filled - (Romans 8, Hebrews 11).

An admission of this sort surely weakens your position.....

I disagree --- on the contrary, it strengthens it. Walking by sight requires evidence --- but walking by faith requires only belief. Therefore a child can walk by faith, w/o having to know all that mumbo-jumbo science beforehand; and God wants us to be child-like (not child-ish, but child-like).

Apart from cluttering up a forum, what do you hope to achieve by such a post?

Couldn't resist that?

Just curious....I cannot se the benefit.....

Then try walking by faith, instead.

 

[Split Rock]

Hi AV,

You have in the past indicated that the answer to your 'riddle' is that there is no proof of creationism. (I trust I have not misintrepreted the situation. Please correct me if I am wrong).
I am curious. What does a lack of evidence have to offer to the argument? An admission of this sort surely weakens your position.....
Apart from cluttering up a forum, what do you hope to achieve by such a post?
Just curious....I cannot se the benefit.....

Yes... the "correct" answer is that there is no possible evidence of Ex nihilo creation... unless you can measure the total energy and matter of the universe before and after the creation event. This proves that if creationism has no evidence, then that is in itself proof of its correctness. The only possible proof, would be an eye-witness account of the Ex nihilo creation event, and we have that... from the very hand of Almighty God. The KJV1611 Bible. Game, set and match... Creationism!!!!111111111

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes... the "correct" answer is that there is no possible evidence of Ex nihilo creation... unless you can measure the total energy and matter of the universe before and after the creation event.

You wouldn't have to measure the amount of mass/energy before the Creation Event --- it would be zero.

 

[Skaloop]

You wouldn't have to measure the amount of mass/energy before the Creation Event --- it would be zero.

And it still is zero, according to the latest physics.

 

[Split Rock]

You wouldn't have to measure the amount of mass/energy before the Creation Event --- it would be zero.

I thought we were referring to you creating an apple in your hand. Are you claiming there is no mass or energy in the universe today?