Stephen Hawking Takes on Isaac Newton; Christians Respond

The Christian Post ^ | September 5, 2010 | Eric Young

[blasater1960]

The whole point is that atheists are at heart a-nihilists who cannot admit the concept of absolute nothingness prior to the universe's coming-to-be.

Exactly. Whether a Brane collision or a Quantum Fluctuation (I have heard that one too), there is still a "something" there that is then acting....

In case you havent seen this...this describes Branes: Elegant Universe Video

And here are a couple of other thought provoking items: Theory of Everything

And this paper:10(11) D Superstring Theory And The 10(11) Sefirot

[Zionist Conspirator]

The whole point is that atheists are at heart a-nihilists who cannot admit the concept of absolute nothingness prior to the universe's coming-to-be.

Exactly. Whether a Brane collision or a Quantum Fluctuation (I have heard that one too), there is still a "something" there that is then acting....

Then they had might as well drop all this talk of "creation" and just admit that they believe that the universe is eternal. Whatever existed before the universe as we know it was still "the universe."

[wmfights]

Then they had might as well drop all this talk of "creation" and just admit that they believe that the universe is eternal.

Then they fall back to the steady state theory that the big bang theory was supposed to replace. The problem with the steady state theory is the universe is expanding.

Btw blaster thanks for the links.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Then they fall back to the steady state theory that the big bang theory was supposed to replace. The problem with the steady state theory is the universe is expanding.

But what of it? If they posit physical existence prior to the "big bang," then they believe in an eternal universe. What else would you call pre-big bang physicality?

Perhaps the atheists have a different definition of "universe." Perhaps for them it only refers to this particular shape or suspension of physical reality. For me "universe" means "everything" (or perhaps more correctly "everything phyisical"). If there were physical phenomena prior to the "big bang" and thus no creation from nothing, the universe is eternal. If they're satisfied to just see "how it got to be so pretty" that's their problem. How did the physicality come to be in the first place? That's my question.

[wideawake]

Correct. The question is: how is there any universe? and not: how did the universe come to take its current shape?

More succinctly and even less eloquently: how is there not nothing?

Assume that the physical universe is self-organizing for argument's sake - that still doesn't mean that it is self-generating.

[mad_as_he$$]

I know many string theory and other physicists that believe in God. They see no reason why their work denies God or creation. They see it as the works of the machine, no different than the things we are just beginning to understand about DNA. Science is not evil. Christian posturing about it rarely moves the discussion forward.

Hawking is just trying to point out that under the current understand of how things work it may not be necessary for God to point a finger and make statements. He may well have built it into the machine of the universe.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Correct. The question is: how is there any universe? and not: how did the universe come to take its current shape?

More succinctly and even less eloquently: how is there not nothing?

Assume that the physical universe is self-organizing for argument's sake - that still doesn't mean that it is self-generating.

So then, as I understand it, scientists have never at any time claimed to tell us why anything exists at all, but only how it took its current shape. Most disappointing. This isn't cosmogony at all. Do they not understand our frustration with them?

I think their response to our "where did the raw material come from?" is to answer back "where did G-d come from?", but G-d is not raw material, or even physical.

Why don't they just admit that they believe that physicality is eternal and non-created? Who gives a flip how it took its current shape?

[ROTB]

ROTB is one of those “bodies without a soul” . . . and a particularly annoying one, at that.

***********************

:)

I hope all is well for you ZC.

[Zionist Conspirator]

:)

To see just how annoying, just peruse his posting history. He thinks that after two thousand years of arguing, he's finally the great intellect who has definitively "proven" the claims of chr*stianity (by which he means Fundamentalist Protestantism, since his reasoning doesn't apply to more ancient forms of chr*stianity).

Of course you're all too busy right now, but check it out some time.

[InternetTuffGuy]

Hawking, however, says “the universe can and will create itself from nothing” because there is a law such as gravity.

It's especially funny because nobody knows what gravity is.

[jjotto]

Almost every Christian in the Religion Forum believes he’s proven Christianity. What really happens is that each Christian conclusively disproves what every other kind of Christian believes, and none of them see the irony!

[Zionist Conspirator]

Almost every Christian in the Religion Forum believes he’s proven Christianity. What really happens is that each Christian conclusively disproves what every other kind of Christian believes, and none of them see the irony!

LOL! You are so right!!!

[ROTB]

May the LORD, give you every good thing ZC.

I love you, and wish you all the best.