Apparent Age

According to the Biblical acount, when God created Adam, Adam could speak. Did God then create him as a speaking infant? Probably not. Due to the discussions held, and the immediate need for a woman (boy, some things never change), I would deduce his apparent age to be that of a young man, even if he was truely less then a day old. Adam and then Eve were able to to eat off of trees less then a week old. Where am I going with this? God created things with apparent age, even if the real age were less. So much of the "dating evidence" that "proves" evolution/big bang/Godless universe...could quite easily be explained by this. Light from stars that are more then 6,000 light years away? Apparent age. Look, it doesn't answer all of your "proofs" of evolution, but it does answer most of them. What do the masses of evolutionists/big bangers think of this?[This message has been edited by Navy10E, 03-13-2004]

I think there are already threads on this subject(?)Basically, if the universe was created with apparent age, it hasn't been detected and is irrelevant to science. The universe could have been created ten minutes ago (including our memories), we wouldn't know about it and it wouldn't change what we observe of said universe.

All of those were dry and boring. Being the exciting guy I am, I decided to start anew! Be excited! Ok, to answer your answer. There are two main models of how the Universe came into exsistance. The one most of you dandies out there believe is the big bang/evolutionary model and the other is the Creationism model. Now you have to understand. Niether of them is science!! Science is repeatable. When you repeat the big bang, then I'll give it some consideration as science. Till then, it isn't. Same goes for creation, but we don't mind admiting it.

There is a fundamental problem with your argument. Creating Adam as an adult might have had practical benefits - but would Adam have been created with evidence of a past above and beyond his existence as an adult ? Is it reasonable to suppose that, say, God would create Adam with a scar from an accident that never happened ?The Earth and the universe are full of such thinngs - fossils, light from stars that exploded tens of thousands of years ago - and more - ancient meteorite craters, the burned out remains of stars the lava from ancient volcanic eruptions (check out the Siberian and Deccan Traps). The Earth and the Universe are not just "adults" they have the evidence of a long history. Is that evidence a deception ?

This is called the "Omphalos Argument" - that God created the universe with the appearance of age for some reason.Sure, some things make sense - rivers need to flow in river beds, so river beds needed to be created already "cut" into the ground.But why radiometric dating? Why create rocks where the relative abundances of isotopes give consistent ages for rocks and strata? Why do lower strata have older radiometric ages than higher strata?Simple thermodynamic considerations can produce models of how a star evolves with age over billions of years, and sure enough, we can see the very types of stars predicted. Why not create just one type of star?Why do we need to see stars so far away? Surely the stars that are only a few dozen light years away were sufficient for whatever purpose the creator had in mind. In fact, if we could only see stars 6000 light years away, and if new stars could be seen as enough time passed since creation for the light to arrive, this would be dramatic proof of a young, instantly created universe.The problem with the Omphalos Argument is that most of the signs of age make no sense unless you want to either give your creator secret, unknown purposes, or you assume the God is deliberately trying to trick us into believing something not true.

If God exists, he does so on the basis of Faith.If God exists on the basis of Faith, there must always be doubt.Anything which shows undeniable signs of being created removes all doubt.Hence, everything MUST be created with an appearant age which is impossible to discern from true age in order for God to exists on a basis of Faith.

Do you think this deception is something that the God of Truth would do?I never believed that argument when I was a Christian, because it doesn't work theologically. Why worship a God who lies to his creation?

If there is a God (and I strongly believe that there is), what makes you think that you would understand his thought? Just because you would make only one kind of star, doesn't mean he would. All throughout Creation, we see basic patterns, but there is a unique quality about each pattern. Snowflakes for example. Look at humans, we all (unless deformed) have a basic pattern that we follow, (two arms, two legs, etc) but there are unique characteristics. So to say that because there are different kind of stars means it's a result of random chance, not design is absurd. What artist paints all of his pictures the exact same way? Not very many.
Do we have a need to see stars very far away? No. But does it make the night skys more beautiful to behold? Yes. What trouble would it be, for an all powerful being, to make a nice touch for us to enjoy? Does that mean that there isn't a Creator? No.
And then you presume to know what an all powerful, perfect Being would have in mind while doing something? Ok, this is just dumb. Married men, how many of you don't know what is going on in the minds of your wives every day? And they are far from all powerful. Sorry dude, just doesn't work. If God exists as the Bible says, then he is all-powerful, and doesn't mind about making the original creation a lil more wonderful for us.
Now some are going to ask, 'What about now? Why does he let it deteriorate? Thats a Theological question, and what he does is up to Him...but if you want me to answer that, I will, only it doesn't fit into the context of this thread.

What kind of circular mumbo-jumbo is this? God would be just fine if we did, or didn't think he was there. I think you're on my side and I appreciate this...but this really doesn't make sense.

How on Earth does the presences of stars too far away to see make the night sky "more beautiful"? What use are stars that we can't see? I don't know about you, dude, but I married a woman that makes sense. I don't understand how the presence of stars invisible to us makes creation "more wonderful for us."If all of this is just for us, it doesn't make any sense. Especially when you factor in God's tendancy for inactivity. Why would God care so much to construct an enormous universe for our viewing pleasure and then not even have so much as the common decency to stop the Holocaust or prevent two planes from snuffing 3,000 lives?Honestly the things some people ascribe to God... it's like listening to battered wives talk about their husbands. "God only allows us to visit horrible obcenities on each other because he loves us."

Hey man, the light from those stars are beautiful. I mean, God is more then a scientist. He appreciates beauty too. I like rap, hip-hop and Rock...but turn on the Midnight Sonnota, and I'm loving the sheer beauty of it. A scientist can enjoy a painting right? So why can't God, create something beautiful, not to mention lanced with incredible power (super-novas), and then share it with us?
I do believe that fossils would be easily explained by the flood. Where did the water go? In Psalms it says that "God Raised up the mountains and sank the valleys" which would give the water a place to go...and if you want more info, I'll be happy to talk to you about it. And trust me, run water over something long enough...it'll look older. Heck, I take a half hour shower, and I get wrinkles (kidding kidding, doesn't really apply, I know). Rocks wear away faster under water and valcanoes will look older.Joe

Frogman,
"I married a woman that makes sense."
Dude...now I know you're delusional. In either case, you don't always know why she does things, right? My point is that you wouldn't always do things the same way God would.
According to the Bible God created everything for us, and also as a trophy of his power and abilities. We were given dominion over all creation. Sort of like caretakers, and we were put in charge. Adam's sin tainted creation, made what was perfect, imperfect. Since then, God has allowed us to "stew in our own juices", but did offer a way out of imperfection. All of this is covered in the Bible. But that is why God is not activly messing around with us. He's letting us make our own choices.
It's not like it's his job to babysit us now. Why would he make so much effort in Creation, and just sit there now? We, as a whole have rejected him. Theologically speaking, we are all guilty of evil, to varying degrees, and therefore have rejected him. But again, you asked a Theological question, doesn't really fit here. But if you insist, a fuller explaination will be forthcoming.
As far as stars that are "invisible" to us: Our bodies have had the effects of sin on them, and are not as good as the bodies of people thousands of years ago. Examples you ask? Hundreds of skeletons of giants, measuring up to 14 feet tall have been found in places all over the world. Who knows how good thier eyesight was. Also, it has been bounced around that because of extended lifespans before the flood (800-900 yrs) population growth would have forced humankind to search space for planets to live on. Just a theory. But it is clear that we can see stars with the naked eye now more then 6,000 light yrs away, and that would be effected by apparent age.

Not immediately, but when I ask her, it usually makes sense. Or it's explainable by simple error.But God doesn't make errors. Therefore everything that He does, He should be doing for reasons that make sense. And one of the features of intelligence is that an intelligent plan is recognizable as such, no matter your intelligence. After all I'm sure you must have, at one point, had somebody more intelligent that you come up with a really great plan, right?What was your reaction? Incomprehension? Or rather, something like "oh, yeah - that is a really smart plan!"Smart plans, by definition, are recognizable. Ergo if God exists, and he's got a smart plan, it should be something we can understand. Yeah, that's real responsible parenting on God's part. Hrm, are you sure about that? According to the fossil evidence we're living healthier, longer lives than ever before. Hrm, first I've heard of it - maybe you could hit me with the evidence? I'm afraid I find that hard to believe. ...making God a liar.

"Yeah, that's real responsible parenting on God's part."Who made him your daddy? Do you expect him to wipe your butt too?

You have misunderstood what repeatable means: if it is possible to measure something lots of times in lots of ways and get answers that mesh together then the science of it is repeatable and so corresponds to something which is not just random or imaginary.Measurements of the age of the universe are repeatable.I also want to know about 14 foot giants, and also about any ancient human skeletons that show signs of great age.