Verifiable evidence for creationism?

[Monk Of Reason]

It is from scripture and I see science theorize about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

The many world theory in QM wouldn't make things such as gods be Islamic or christian. At least not in the sense that it is theorized. But why do you think that Christianity is correct in this world?

 

[leibowde84]

Sure; But life evolves because the divine-pattern evolves. Nothing new under the sun said the wise man. Everything comes from a singularity of existence that cannot be recognised.

Why do you jump to that singularity being God?

 

[leibowde84]

This is what I wished to refer to: You have now agreed that 'God is everything'. So then God is either natural and supernatural (depending on your definition - which means he can split in some way) or he is natural.

I said "if God is all of those things". I don't agree.

 

[Robert.Evans]

The many world theory in QM wouldn't make things such as gods be Islamic or christian. At least not in the sense that it is theorized. But why do you think that Christianity is correct in this world?

I don't.
But I think they are all right in their own realm, their own reality. That might be difficult for me to explain, certainly to the kind of level you want. So you might just have to accept it/or not, as you choose. I think God is far more complex than we imagine and that no one institution of religion has the whole truth.
But the Son is the way to the Father, which might be the answer you are looking for.
We are given, ultimately, everything we have by God. Therefore you, and I, believe what we believe because of that. We create the pinnacle of Self and call it God before the world began, and then it releases us from what binds us and creates us. Thus atheists are even right when they sarcastically ask, Who created God. We did! Because they are right.

I'll stop now, I guess you're not that interested.

There are many things that work out through scripture. I see nothing else other than the theology I believe that answers it all. I have seen people stall on answers, theists and atheists alike. I don't have that problem now - least not for a while. it is nice to get one everynow and then to make me think of something new.

I will definitely stop now.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Why do you jump to that singularity being God?

Ultimately we call the energy or consciousness that we come from "God". You may call it what you like. But it comes from One, a Monadic existence of simplicity, a Singularity of Self, Insular, with no evidence and leaving no mark. The big bang replicates that in part.

The beginning must be One. A beginning must be - the first page, the first number.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I said "if God is all of those things". I don't agree.

Meaning what? Explain please

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I don't.
But I think they are all right in their own realm, their own reality. That might be difficult for me to explain, certainly to the kind of level you want. So you might just have to accept it/or not, as you choose. I think God is far more complex than we imagine and that no one institution of religion has the whole truth.
But the Son is the way to the Father, which might be the answer you are looking for.
We are given, ultimately, everything we have by God. Therefore you, and I, believe what we believe because of that. We create the pinnacle of Self and call it God before the world began, and then it releases us from what binds us and creates us. Thus atheists are even right when they sarcastically ask, Who created God. We did! Because they are right.

I'll stop now, I guess you're not that interested.

There are many things that work out through scripture. I see nothing else other than the theology I believe that answers it all. I have seen people stall on answers, theists and atheists alike. I don't have that problem now - least not for a while. it is nice to get one everynow and then to make me think of something new.

I will definitely stop now.

Just give me some examples of what it is that you have seen that has blown your mind.

 

[leibowde84]

Meaning what? Explain please

You claimed that I agreed with you, yet I clearly did not, as I used the clarifier "if". That's all.

 

[leibowde84]

why

I see God as an entity that creates, not as creation itself. God did not create himself, imho.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Just give me some examples of what it is that you have seen that has blown your mind.

It is run of the mill now. Everything for me is explained through
scripture. As I have no one really that interested in the specifics, I have
taken it no further. Perhaps then I am rusty.
Ican think of one, tell me what you think: Christ is said to be the mediator
between man and God. Now, everything follows a divine-print, it keeps
replicating what has gone before (much like cells). So all things are
represented many times over in one form or another. Christ is represented
by the moon (for one). It is the first planet we went to, it is the mediator
between us and the sun (God) it has had twelve men walk on it, (there
were twelve apostles) . Do you see?
If I had been born at the right time, I could have predicted that just as I could have predicted that we would be made out of stardust. A star is a replication of God. Would I have at the time? Probably not, as there would be no instigation to do such. Okay? Boring I guess, and I have not put it that well.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I see God as an entity that creates, not as creation itself. God did not create himself, imho.

But if God is not (in some way) creation, then what is creation and where did he get it from? I have asked you these things before we went off on a tangent

 

[Robert.Evans]

You claimed that I agreed with you, yet I clearly did not, as I used the clarifier "if". That's all.

You agreed that God is everything. I am not going back to find the quote

 

[Robert.Evans]

I see God as an entity that creates, not as creation itself. God did not create himself, imho.

If he did not, are you saying that he has always been all powerful etc?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It is run of the mill now. Everything for me is explained through
scripture. As I have no one really that interested in the specifics, I have
taken it no further. Perhaps then I am rusty.
Ican think of one, tell me what you think: Christ is said to be the mediator
between man and God. Now, everything follows a divine-print, it keeps
replicating what has gone before (much like cells). So all things are
represented many times over in one form or another. Christ is represented
by the moon (for one). It is the first planet we went to, it is the mediator
between us and the sun (God) it has had twelve men walk on it, (there
were twelve apostles) . Do you see?
If I had been born at the right time, I could have predicted that just as I could have predicted that we would be made out of stardust. A star is a replication of God. Would I have at the time? Probably not, as there would be no instigation to do such. Okay? Boring I guess, and I have not put it that well.

Not boring. Just highly unconvincing. I will have you look into https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_correlation . I recommend this just for your own good rather than for the debate. And if everything checks out for you then fine. Just want you do read into it a little bit.

 

[leibowde84]

But if God is not (in some way) creation, then what is creation and where did he get it from? I have asked you these things before we went off on a tangent

I don't know how God created anything. I'm not sure that anyone does. But, this ignorance doesn't support your claim in any way.

 

[leibowde84]

You agreed that God is everything. I am not going back to find the quote

I did not agree wit you. I said "if God is everything ..." which is in no way agreeing with you. So, you are wrong. If you can't even find the quote, I have to assume you are just being stubborn.

 

[leibowde84]

If he did not, are you saying that he has always been all powerful etc?

That is what I believe.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

It is run of the mill now. Everything for me is explained through
scripture. As I have no one really that interested in the specifics, I have
taken it no further. Perhaps then I am rusty.
Ican think of one, tell me what you think: Christ is said to be the mediator
between man and God. Now, everything follows a divine-print, it keeps
replicating what has gone before (much like cells). So all things are
represented many times over in one form or another. Christ is represented
by the moon (for one). It is the first planet we went to, it is the mediator
between us and the sun (God) it has had twelve men walk on it, (there
were twelve apostles) . Do you see?
If I had been born at the right time, I could have predicted that just as I could have predicted that we would be made out of stardust. A star is a replication of God. Would I have at the time? Probably not, as there would be no instigation to do such. Okay? Boring I guess, and I have not put it that well.

A moon which perfectly masks the suns disc, allowing us to observe the corona, investigate the composition of a star, and hence much of the visible universe.. yet another staggering coincidence perhaps!?

Even many atheist cosmologists have remarked on how curious it is, that the universe so lends itself to our investigation. It's something that is so inherent to our world we take it for granted. Just as God himself, these answers are meant for the curious to find. They are not there to be proven to the uninterested.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I don't see how you can ignore science for evolution if you accept it for everything else. Please tell me you are not still riding on a mule.

You are misguided that to describe in terms of how things are chosen is not advanced science. And besides my interest for science is limited, but creation science is great, for example the dna world theory. But you have to be able to get the confidence and credibility of it right. Be able to evaluate the evidence.

 

[leibowde84]

A moon which perfectly masks the suns disc, allowing us to observe the corona, investigate the composition of a star, and hence much of the visible universe.. yet another staggering coincidence perhaps!?

Even many atheist cosmologists have remarked on how curious it is, that the universe so lends itself to our investigation. It's something that is so inherent to our world we take it for granted. Just as God himself, these answers are meant for the curious to find. They are not there to be proven to the uninterested.

Who isn't interested? Scientists? That is counter intuitive.