Who's spreading falsehoods?

[RealityCheck]

What exactly makes the rock 80,000 years old? Is it the materials it is made of? GOD created a mature man (chicken came first). GOD created a mature ecological system (it worked for the benifit of all living things from day one). GOD is not bound by your expectations (scientific or not). The piece of paper told me so and I choose to believe it, just as you choose not to. It is all about choice----true science has nothing to do with our expectations.... Sin does.

Wiat, you're putting your faith in a piece of paper now?

 

[LittleNipper]

Difference between what I said and what you said is that yours is just empty words.

The difference is that I do respect evolutionists ----- I simply do not accept their determinations and you disrespect anyone who disagrees with you...

 

[AV1611VET]

lol. And how would you know the guy that wrote the note really created the rock, AV?

Can we do any experiments to empirically verify this? The answer is no.

lol

Edx, this is a hypothetical. In other words, it WAS written by the guy that really created the rock.

Assume my hypothetical to be accurate as conveyed.

It's not a trick question.

 

[RealityCheck]

a) Almost any rock will do, I suppose.

b) Adam had to have been an adult.

c) So the universe could be fully-functional and mature enough to keep us alive.

When God launched this universe out from the palm of His hand, with Adam and Eve in it, it had better be running at 100% peak efficiency, don't you think?

a) Fails as evidence of "embedded age". Works as evidence of "actual age."

b) Not evidence of anything.

c) You're now making the case that it was necessary for the universe to have gone through billions of years of progress and *gasp* evolution before arriving at its state 6100 years ago. That's not something I disagree with, because that is exactly what we observe. But then you make the assertion that it was necessary for God to make this happen.

First, the universe's progression through billions of years of development works with or without a supernatural being making it happen.

Second, that puts a limit on God's capabilities. Why is it necessary for God to obey some time requirement? Why can't God simply poof the universe into existence, as most YEC believers believe?

Third, your claim is still extraneous to the Bible. Absolutely nowhere in the Bible is there any indication that the universe went through billions of years of development in a super-compressed time-frame. You can't even make the claim that "God said so" because the Bible doesn't say so.

 

[AV1611VET]

What exactly makes the rock 80,000 years old? Is it the materials it is made of? GOD created a mature man (chicken came first). GOD created a mature ecological system (it worked for the benifit of all living things from day one). GOD is not bound by your expectations (scientific or not). The piece of paper told me so and I choose to believe it, just as you choose not to. It is all about choice----true science has nothing to do with our expectations.... Sin does.

In my dealings with embedded age, I find that the only ones who have "trouble" with it are the ones who are purposely trying to make it look like "junk theology".

 

[RealityCheck]

The difference is that I do respect evolutionists ----- I simply do not accept their determinations and you disrespect anyone who disagrees with you...

Liar.

Look back earlier in this very thread:

Many Evolutionists are brainwashed, and all the professional evolutionists have to be bias....

The Bible clearly shows that evolutionists are ignorant. ALL believers are a part of the UNIVERSAL BODY OF CHRIST. That has not changed since Pentecost---though man made organizations and their "traditions" have.

 

[RealityCheck]

In my dealings with embedded age, I find that the only ones who have "trouble" with it are the ones who are purposely trying to make it look like "junk theology".

No one needs to try... it looks that way on its own merits, or lack thereof.

 

[AV1611VET]

Neither. You're making the assumption that the piece of paper is trustworthy in its authorship. How do you know that the creator of the rock wrote on that piece of paper?

WOW!

Do you guys know what a "hypothetical" is?

I know it because I am the one who thought it up.

If you had this exact same question on a final, would you refuse to answer it, based on "needing further input"?

Wait wait! Don't tell me! The paper says that the creator of the rock wrote it, and therefore it must be true!

Let's simplify this:

The creator of the rock is an XN-6100 MATERIALIZER (XN standing for "ex nihilo"). Does that help?

 

[RealityCheck]

WOW!

Do you guys know what a "hypothetical" is?

I know it because I am the one who thought it up.

If you had this exact same question on a final, would you refuse to answer it, based on "needing further input"?

Oh, well then. Let's apply that a little broader:

I know the Bible is true because I am the one who said so.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nice post!

Simple and straight to the point; hard to refute too!

Thank you, Vossler - please note I gave you reps earlier.

 

[RealityCheck]

WOW!

Do you guys know what a "hypothetical" is?

I know it because I am the one who thought it up.

If you had this exact same question on a final, would you refuse to answer it, based on "needing further input"?

Either that, or you're saying that YOU are the author of the paper, and therefore the creator of the rock.

 

[RealityCheck]

In any case, AV, your argument is based entirely on a set of assumptions, and it completely falls apart if those assumptions are invalid or without reason.

To hold the assumptions that you put forward as both completely true at the same time, we'd have to abandon reason, logic, and scientific principles altogether. Is that what you're suggesting is necessary to have faith?

 

[AV1611VET]

Either that, or you're saying that YOU are the author of the paper, and therefore the creator of the rock.

I'm gonna withdraw the question - I honestly find you people very hard to talk to.

Thanks, anyway.

 

[Molal]

a) Almost any rock will do, I suppose.

b) Adam had to have been an adult.

c) So the universe could be fully-functional and mature enough to keep us alive.

When God launched this universe out from the palm of His hand, with Adam and Eve in it, it had better be running at 100% peak efficiency, don't you think?

Can you prove this?

 

[RealityCheck]

I'm gonna withdraw the question - I honestly find you people very hard to talk to.

Thanks, anyway.

Why is that?

Is it because we don't make the same assumptions you do, and you cannot find a way to convince us to share your assumptions?

 

[AV1611VET]

In any case, AV, your argument is based entirely on a set of assumptions, and it completely falls apart if those assumptions are invalid or without reason.

To hold the assumptions that you put forward as both completely true at the same time, we'd have to abandon reason, logic, and scientific principles altogether. Is that what you're suggesting is necessary to have faith?

Never mind --- just skip it.

 

[RealityCheck]

Never mind --- just skip it.

Oh no, AV... you put it out there, it's your idea. Be prepared to defend it. Don't turtle away just because you find the defense too difficult.

 

[Dragar]

I'm somewhat confused by this 'embedded age' talk.

If a god were to create a universe that looked as if it were billions of years old and actually brand-new, we'd call it a deceiving god.

How, exactly, does the above differ from a god that 'embeds age' in his creation?

 

[Edx]

I'm somewhat confused by this 'embedded age' talk.

If a god were to create a universe that looked as if it were billions of years old and actually brand-new, we'd call it a deceiving god.

How, exactly, does the above differ from a god that 'embeds age' in his creation?

AV doesnt grasp the concept that for there to be age there must be time. So if something is literally millions of years old, as AV says, it cant at the same time only have been in existence for 6,000 years, which AV also says. But it shouldnt be too surprising, as just like all Creationists apparently, AV likes to use his own definitions of words.

Ed

 

[thaumaturgy]

Oh no, AV... you put it out there, it's your idea. Be prepared to defend it. Don't turtle away just because you find the defense too difficult.

Where have all the great defenders of the faith gone? Does AV think that the minute Guanillo came up against Anselm that Anselm just folded up his tent and wandered back home?

C'mon, AV, stand up and fight for it! Don't expect people to believe you by force of your personality! The internet has eliminated that aspect of debate...now your ideas have to hold water, and even get swung at from time to time!

Defensor fides!

KJV-Defenders, indeed! Not all battles are "David and Goliath". Sometimes you actually have to bring some firepower to the fight. Or at least good aim.

One thing I think biblical defenders fail to remember about the David vs Goliath story is that it wasn't just the stone that took down Goliath...it was a well-aimed stone.

Sorry but whining isn't a force multiplier!