HOW is God "Eternal"?

[Hockeycowboy]

Data / facts as found in any scientific journal
are quite a different matter, where such as
flood, weird orogeny, water canopy, warn arctic
etc will find not one datum point in support.
To say otherwise goes beyond mere "facts not in evidence"

Facts are the same. The interpretations vary.
Some interpretations have more support than others. But saying "we can't explain", when other interpretations better fit the facts, borders on disingenuity.

I'm not talking only about biology and geology, I'm including all sciences..... anthropological, archaeological, physics, etc.....along with indecipherable phenomena, (yeah, more unexplained events), how they fit into the picture.

Listen, I'm aware of my ignorance regarding all of your views, which inhibits me from accusing you of 'giving the lie to any claim to a search for what is true.'

Reciprocation would be appreciated.

 

[Audie]

Facts are the same. The interpretations vary.
Some interpretations have more support than others. But saying "we can't explain", when other interpretations better fit the facts, borders on disingenuity.

I'm not talking only about biology and geology, I'm including all sciences..... anthropological, archaeological, physics, etc.....along with indecipherable phenomena, (yeah, more unexplained events), how they fit into the picture.

Listen, I'm aware of my ignorance regarding all of your views, which inhibits me from accusing you of 'giving the lie to any claim to a search for what is true.'

Reciprocation would be appreciated.

Easy- peze. My "views" are whar actual publishehed
research shows. Not the eccentric"interpretations"
of some religious cult.
Within science, or history, medicine, or
car mechanics talking it over,
interpretations often do vary, but,, generally
that is the case when inadequate data is available.

As a more complete data set becomes available, the range of interpretations narrows,
usually to one, because all other interpretations
are disqualified by contrary data.

You know? Unless some dufus wants to still
claim the rattling sound was an alligator in the
carburstor after they find rocks in the hubcaps.
And the gator has mysteriously vanished.

It's not enough just to say "its an interpret!tion"
to give it validity. As you and gator-man ought to know.


The " earth history " as, um, "interpreted" thro'
your religion-filter are uniformly without mert,
falsified a thousand times over.

Why speak of acccusing me of something?
I made no accusation against you, so if
"Disingenuous" is a thing with you, consider well your words.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The " earh history " as, um, "interpreted" thro'
your religion-filter are uniformly without mert,
falsified a thousand times over.

Just what do you think are some of my interpretations? Name two.

 

[Audie]

Just what do you think are some of my interpretations? Name two.

Not to try to get out of it but,
rather than us have you quibble over my phrasing, why you tell me in your words
how old you think the rocky mountains are
and whether you hold that erosion can only
create " smooth, roundod" features, or, if
instead it can create spires and knife ridges.

I edited my previous post to address your
notion about competing interpretations.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

......whether you hold that erosion can only
create " smooth, roundod" features, or, if
instead it can create spires and knife ridges.

effects of erosion on rock image - Google Search

What do you see?

Mostly smooth, rounded features.

Of course, it depends on the type of rock.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

The rocks are old. Could be billions. Many of the features they've formed, though, are new.

 

[Audie]

effects of erosion on rock image - Google Search

What do you see?

Mostly smooth, rounded features.

Of course, it depends on the type of rock.

That is a non answer though.
Can you address what I asked?

Apply it to the rocky mountains.

 

[rational experiences]

A human standing atop earth chooses by his human actions to study a stone planet body.

A choice.

A choice made right here right now.

Then you talk about what you believe happened before.

Yet the planet a natural body right now is its natural body right now

And we are standing atop if that natural as it's natural form right now

Talking about a mass body that is not our human body is in fact ludicrous.

 

[GardenLady]

Then you talk about what you believe happened before.

If you walk onto a beach and see footprints in the sand, do you not know that someone walked there before you?
If you observe a mountain and the top is missing and there are burned trees and lava on the slopes, do you not know a volcano erupted prior to your arrival?

The current state of the planet carries evidence of the past. Some is physical, for example, the effects of ancient glaciers on topography, or the results of volcanic eruption. Some is biological, evidenced by fossils of creatures that do not currently exist and changes in the genome.

We can stand in the present and see the past.

 

[Yerda]

There are more kinds of beetles than of any other life form.

From this we rightly infer that god is inordinately fond of beetles.

If I invented ladybugs I'd be content I'd achieved perfection.

 

[rational experiences]

If you walk onto a beach and see footprints in the sand, do you not know that someone walked there before you?
If you observe a mountain and the top is missing and there are burned trees and lava on the slopes, do you not know a volcano erupted prior to your arrival?

The current state of the planet carries evidence of the past. Some is physical, for example, the effects of ancient glaciers on topography, or the results of volcanic eruption. Some is biological, evidenced by fossils of creatures that do not currently exist and changes in the genome.

We can stand in the present and see the past.

But you are not observing the past once owning a higher natural form.

Otherwise it would be your present.

 

[Bird123]

Many who consider the word "ETERNAL" in reference to God believe it applies not only to existence, but existence in a complex, self-aware state.... "I have always been here -I have always looked out from behind these eyes" as someone once wrote.

This would mean that God could not have been the initiator of himself. He would simply have been.

The best scientific explanation thus far for why anything at all exists is.... "It just was". However, "It" is seen to be something which changes and develops.

If God is essentially composed of everything which exists -if God is that is -and developed from simplicity to the point of being able to state "I AM THAT AM" -the beginning and end -that which was, is and is to come -God would be no less eternal.

Do we not say of ourselves "I was" when referring to a point before we were able to say "I am"?

If that is the case, God's self-realization and mastery of his own nature ("everything" becoming self-aware and master of its destiny) would essentially be an understanding of -and mastery of -evolution in its broadest sense.

Why would God not then employ that idea in creating? Would it even have been possible to ignore that basic aspect of his own nature? Creation and evolution are two different aspects of the same overall reality. The only possible question would be which was required at any point.
Would not any thing we discovered to be true about reality be indicative of God's nature?

Rom 1:19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Your quote:Would not any thing we discovered to be true about reality be indicative of God's nature?
MY Answer: Yes, I see the light bulb lighting up over your head. Very Good!!

One also must realize much more knowledge lives beyond the surface. God is working on multiple levels with multiple views.If you keep that view wide and stretch that intellect, you might just be surprised what you can Discover. Everything about God will add up!! This should be the base that prevents wandering from the truth.

God hides nothing. All the secrets of the universe stare us all in the face. Yes, you are starting to see.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Audie]

If I invented ladybugs I'd be content I'd achieved perfection.

Imagine the software to be sure
It can fly properly, knows where to
lay eggs etc- you build this lil thing and
sent it forth into the world, hoping it
is going to be able to manage on its own.

 

[alypius]

The best scientific explanation thus far for why anything at all exists is.... "It just was"

How is 'it just was' an explanation of why anything at all exists (doesn't the statement simply rephrase the fact that things exist)?

 

[rational experiences]

The scientist fake creator is just a human.

The same as any human.
What you think is falsified egotism by man male thinker.

Why you quote your God stories are God the man stories.

Your brother better thinker says an ape not God is closest form in nature as one less than human self.

Science O pi and Phi thought for abstraction of the power of God earth energy as minus one.

You compare the two reasons yet pi and Phi had not yet abstracted.

So pi and Phi own no human comparisons. A human imposed the measure by their own choice...human.

Why no man is God O was taught.
Minus one body

Brother said no man is God. Water oxygen is the same. Extra radiation causes minus one of the bio body.

What your agreement is in science.

Historic. Mother and father never were sperm ovary history human.... his life owned lived recorded records as father. Now our memories for a human baby to adult.

Given back memories. Not form.

Memory spirit atmospheric recording never evolved back into an adult bio life.

He refers and infers to that recording falsely.

Claims dimensional re growth forming. Yet he is bio growing himself back from a baby.
Form bio life evolved itself is not a science thesis.

Scientist themes science God O earth in space womb thesis.

Science human displaced natural thoughts about natural life. To space womb God. Natural human mother spirit human life memories first.

He compared space and space womb to being his human mother's life memory's as a human.

Why he lied in science thesis as God earth owns it's heavens itself in space.
We only live inside heavens.

No man is God the teaching.

So he began to believe he owned a story his stone as god invented a human life when it was converted by a sun.

Historic earth lost evolution went back to owning what it pre owned when it's own gas alight heavens had not yet evolved to non burning.

Why science said to science nuclear sun theories have no ownership in earth history

Why it was taught.
Womb space and earth is not controlled by any machine.

Machines never told earth what to do..spatial change forced God body to change.

No control versus machine control his self possessed belief today about owning all control of everything.a destroyer mentality.

 

[Etritonakin]

How is 'it just was' an explanation of why anything at all exists (doesn't the statement simply rephrase the fact that things exist)?

Yes.

Some (usually rightfully) have a problem with circular reasoning, but, overall, everything is based on -circles back to -the most basic/simple facts -the foundation of everything. At some point, things cannot be reduced or be less complex -and "It just was" expresses that idea.

It is not logical to say, for example, that there was absolute nothing -then there was something -or that nothing became something. Absolute nothing would only be so by not becoming or producing something else.

That which exists... just... does.
It literally can not be otherwise.

 

[rational experiences]

Yes.

Some (usually rightfully) have a problem with circular reasoning, but, overall, everything is based on -circles back to -the most basic/simple facts -the foundation of everything. At some point, things cannot be reduced or be less complex -and "It just was" expresses that idea.

It is not logical to say, for example, that there was absolute nothing -then there was something -or that nothing became something. Absolute nothing would only be so by not becoming or producing something else.

That which exists... just... does.
It literally can not be otherwise.

Science does his thesis thinking conscious inside heavens.

Said nothing is space.
Word use.
To state it cannot be used as information.

O zero space emptiness supports one heavens is massive.

Why it was given word space and nothing.

Science thought. Said if I abstract God planet mass then I can get similar reactive states as heavens.

Knowing Christ contained by nothing could not be copied. Even preached that reality

Knows conversion to be like us only taken from God earth.

Therefore knows to get a similar form such as electricity he had to change God mass by removing energy mass presence. As you cannot have what nothing owns.

Nothing is far less an energy presence than mass holding. Try to hold atmosphere in a reaction it's body disappears. The earth opens its plates and you all die for trying to hold Christ.

What you already knew as a man scientist.

 

[Etritonakin]

Science does his thesis thinking conscious inside heavens.

Said nothing is space.
Word use.
To state it cannot be used as information.

O zero space emptiness supports one heavens is massive.

Why it was given word space and nothing.

Science thought. Said if I abstract God planet mass then I can get similar reactive states as heavens.

Knowing Christ contained by nothing could not be copied. Even preached that reality

Knows conversion to be like us only taken from God earth.

Therefore knows to get a similar form such as electricity he had to change God mass by removing energy mass presence. As you cannot have what nothing owns.

Nothing is far less an energy presence than mass holding. Try to hold atmosphere in a reaction it's body disappears. The earth opens its plates and you all die for trying to hold Christ.

What you already knew as a man scientist.

A.I.'s first attempt at poetry?

 

[Etritonakin]

Anywho....

That which exists would in that way be eternal -having "always" existed because time would not apply -at least as we know it now -to such a state of simplicity.

.....The same way some believe time began with the big bang -and really did not apply before the singularity exploded, extracted, whatever ("universe time" did begin then, but that is not to say nothing preceded or is external to the universe)

In order to become that which is now, the one thing which exists -the completeness of that which exists -must have "always" had most basic characteristics.

For example......

1-We know that it is dynamic

2-It must have been as simple as possible while still being able to be made somehow more complex by the dynamic force. (therefore, somewhat complex)

3-Its ability to become more complex allowed for the development of things such as systems, processing, awareness, self-awareness, etc...

 

[Etritonakin]

The following would actually fit with "everything" being basically binary with some force driving increased complexity of the basic components. Such would travel to become aware, self-aware, self-determining .....understanding its own nature enough to do anything "logically" allowed at any point... the basic binary components acting as bits of data... the machine code which makes up everything....

New hypothesis argues the universe simulates itself into existence