God - a liar?

Hi everyone. I’m new here to the forum. Been looking around for a bit recently, and thought it was time to get in on the action. I must say, the level of knowledge in this forum is very commendable — much higher than my own, but hopefully I’ll be able to bring something to the table that will make some of you think.I’ve seen it posted more than a few times (though I’ve not seen a complete thread dedicated to the idea — if I’m wrong and there is a thread to this effect, please point me to it, and accept my apologies) that something like apparent age, for example, would mean that God is a liar. I’m curious as to how this follows. It seems to me that there could be some very reasonable explanations, but everyone seems to fall back on (pardon the paraphrase) Well, I don’t know or I can’t understand it, so God must be lying. This is not a good argument. How can you start an argument with the phrase why would God, not receive any proof as to why He would, not give any valid reasons (on the basis of what is contextually said in the Bible, not on what you think) as to why He wouldn’t, and then conclude that He is a liar? Similarly, is God a liar simply because we don’t always understand how He works?

OK here's a response. God is supposedly infinitely powerful and knowledgable. If the universe looks exactly as if it is old it is either because it *is* old or because God wants it to look exactly as if it is old. It is not possible that the appearance of age would be an accidental or incidental side effect because the first would mean that God had made a mistake and the second would mean that God's power was limited.And let us be very clear - when we say that the universe looks old, we aren't just saying that this star looks about this old. What we see is an appearance of *history*. Astronomers see events that - if the universe is young - never happened. Geologists find the remains of volcanic eruptions that could not have happened and can reconstruct landscapes that never existed from the rocks. The magnetic stripes on the sea floor show magnetic reversals that never happened. Ancient rocks have been deliberately manufactured to appear to be ancient rocks when the radioisotopes are examined. If, that is, we assume that the Universe is young.And if we assume that the universe is young, how can we explain all these - and more - excpet by a monumental act of deception ?

I use it occasionally (as an arguement against YEC rather than God) the way I structure it is this... Most YEC's exhibit a bizzare form of cognitive dissonance where they feel that lyings wrong but their perfectly good God is allowed to pull the wool over our eyes at will...However those who don't just retreat into lala lulu land and actually think about it will hopefully decide that they would rather acknowlede b) than accept a) at which point they are OEC's which while not being ideal I can deal with....

But does HE actually say it is as old as YOU say it is?I also find this argument ridiculous. Geology = uniformatarianism makes YOU convince yourself of an older universe/earth not God. If you can show me how God invented the theory and not those Scottish blokes, then I'll agree with you.So the deception is happening to the thinker - not God. Even if we do what are we looking at?
We are looking at the here and now, and what teaches us that the present is the key to the past? - Uniformatarianism. Let's pretend that the past was different to the present, then what would you make of the data?Remember The YEC's position is that when the earth was made it "was good", he/she also believes in a degrading earth which was never the same since sin, are you considering this viewpoint instead of looking through your glasses? Because if you do you will realise that there is no deception by God, according to this explanation.

Take the sun for example. I understand that physicists figure it took about 30 million years for it to graduate from being a protostar. Then from there I assume it would take considerable time for it to adjust to the temperature suitable to serve the earth and sustain life. So if God created it suddenly thousands of years ago secularist earth scientists would figure it to be what their calculations determine for a sun looking like it to be. kThus the sun created thousands of years ago must needs have the apppearance of a much older age. I understand it is considered to be about as old as the earth by secularists, which is about 4.5 billion years old. Im not wanting to get in to a numbers debate here. My point is that to exist it must have the appearance of age much older than what it actually is if it were created thousands of years ago suddenly by a creator. Where am I mistaken?

I believe that the argument went that yes, it would need AN appearance of age...but no where near the age that it DOES appear.

---

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"

So if the sun had the appearance of age when created so would about everything else on the same basis, that it exists and time would be involved to bring anything to exist according to secularist calculations. Things like precious stones, common stones, minerals, etc.

Buz, we went over all this before. It is not the appearance of age that is the problem. It is the appearance of unnecessary age and the appearance of a history that is the problem.

But Ned, my point is re-establishing for this thread that God is not a liar in creating things with appearance of age.

and,Buz the point is that He can be taken as a liar if he creates things with the appearance of unnecessary age. It is NOT the appearance of age per se. Why is this so hard?

Ned, as I said, I'm not getting into dates. I don't think that we know everything about elements in the atmosphere and on earth hundreds of millions to billions of years ago, regardless of how scientific you try to be. Suffice to say things created would show appearance of age. That's as far as I will go with it, but that much is a fact.

Of course that's has far as you want to go. As soon as you make the next step, which has to be answered, you get into theological trouble.Fact? I don't see that. God didn't have to make Adam and Eve all grown up. He could easily care for them till they did. And the same can be said for anything at all. He could set the sun up with no age and keep everything warm with something else untill the sun was ready. He could do anything at all.But we have agreed to give you the necessity for the appearance of some age. What we really don't see is all the age and history that is there.And you don't want to touch it.

I didn't say that God had said anything about the age of the universe.Your answer says that God isn't a liar because it is all our fault for believing the lies that He created. That contradicts itself.There is a huige amount of self-consistent data thaty points to the antiquite of the universe. If the "Apparent Age" argument is right that is God's deliberate choice. An act of intentional deception. You don't answer that. You can't answer that.You ask if I consider the YEC viewpoint - but you don't show how it addresses the points I raised. It doesn't. How can it ? I don't talk about "degradation" I talk about indpendant lines of evidence all of which have to be false if the "Appearance of age" argument is true - none of them based on "degradation". If the YEC view was relevant you could show how it DID address my points. You don't. So you really don't have any reason to think that it is relevant do you ?I ask if you have actually considered the points I raised. Because you don't answer them.

No, again - God hasn't said that the universe is a specific age, that includes young aswell as old, how can he be lying if he has not stated an age?
Don't forget, I am only saying how a YEC would cover this, that doesn't mean God is a YEC paul, therefore - humans, either convincing themselves of an older place - or convincing themselves of a younger place, are deceptive to themselves. A premature evaluation of such things when we cannot know for sure the actual age is what causes the problems - not God, for he hasn't even mentioned a figure. But appearance of age is only instigated by uniformatarianism thinking. Even if there is an appearance of age - the figures are only relevant to humans.Does it not say " A day to the LORD is as a thousand years "
It is not God who is concerned with what conclusions we come to concerning his universe, nor what WE say is an "appearance of age".I officially state that this is a strawman of God's position. [This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 04-03-2004]

If God doesn't specify an age, then what leads YEC's to the conclusion that it's all only 6k years old?