|
stomper
3:19 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
'Didn't have gay back then'? The Greeks pretty much ran on gay and had an army made up of boyfriends.
|
Annony
2:16 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
After8, tbf probably never heard of gay back then and no one had come out before the 10 commandments were drawn up.
|
After8
2:10 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
iRon Jesus didnt say you couldnt be gay. It's not in the 10 commandments either. If God was so vexed about gay people it would be in the 10 commandments or Jesus would have delivered a sermon on it.
|
bondihammer
2:08 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
i am an atheist. i simply do not believe in any magical sky daddy/mummy. i believe that one day, science will be able to explain it all. however, if this god, jehovah, allah or flying spaghetti monster can give me just one shred of evidence of their existence, i will be the first of the new believers...
|
subcutaneous
1:23 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
Of course God exists. Who else could create the Big Bang?
|
cholo
1:00 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
H&P
Not me, although I've only skimmed over his theories it came across as a little too close to spiritual woo for my liking.
|
Hammer and Pickle
12:55 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
Thank fuck for that because my subconscious was poised to get all mediaeval on your logical arse if you'd turned out to be a Jung job cholo.
|
cholo
12:49 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
No, our unique personal subconscious. By the way I have no idea if what I suggested is correct, my subconscious just thought it would be a good idea if I put it out there!
|
Hammer and Pickle
12:47 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
But it's just still our unique subconscious or are you one of those Jungian nutters and are about to nurdle on about a "collective subconscious"?
|
cholo
12:43 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
H&P
There is also possibly a 'third way'.
Our subconscious makes our decisions and fools our conscious mind into thinking it made the decision. Rendering us no more in control than a duck using it's instincts.
|
Hammer and Pickle
12:39 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
We are determined by physics and society yet at the moment of choosing one course of action over another we stand utterly alone Hermit.
Just deal with it.
|
cholo
12:36 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
easthammer 12:02 Sun Oct
You're right, of course science can't absolutely disprove God (not that it needs to), science can't test something that isn't manifest. Scientifically, something that isn't manifest is the equivalent of something that doesn't exist.
To be fair Hawking isn't atheism's or science's official figure head and everything he says can be measured with the same scrutiny as anyone else.
|
peroni
12:23 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
I love these God threads. I never get tired of being amazed at how many seemingly normal people reserve a little enclave of their brain for infantile madness.
|
Hermit Road
12:18 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
i-Ron 5:54 Sat Oct 4
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
Where I'm going with is this. Earlier in the thread you said that everything in existence was the result of chemical reactions and chance. You also said that anyone who believes in God was either weak or seeking to control others.
What I'm saying is that if you are correct, and everything in existence is the result of chemical reactions and chance, then so are our so-called choices. Someone who believes in God cannot choose to do so because they are weak, they profess a belief in God simply because a chemical reaction and chance makes them do so. Likewise someone can't choose to be an atheist because they're rational/strong/intelligent, their atheism is a consequence of a chemical reaction that they have no control over.
|
easthammer
12:02 Sun Oct 5
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
Cholo
We seem to be reaching a point of understanding. But you still seem to think that I am looking to explain/justify the existence of God. Even I am not that stupid.
So as for a God of the gaps you have that wrong. You are right, however, I believe because I do. But it isn't without thought and it isn't without doubt but for some reason I always retain a mustard seed of faith. And that for me is greater than any scientific theorem or more correctly any series of partial explanations. So far I have found nothing in science to deny the existence of God and atheists have no right to claim that there is. Indeed science is not and cannot be the means to disprove the existence of God although sadly militant atheists think it is.
|
cholo
7:13 Sat Oct 4
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
Geoffpikey
How is the big bang theory flawed? Please explain.
Easthammer
What you appear to believe in is the god of the gaps. For example, if what caused the big bang was found by science, you would just go... "aha! But what caused the thing that caused the big bang? God of course!".
You could just as well say you don't know why you have faith but you do and it works for you, which would be fair enough.
But if you're basing it on the question of the origins of the universe and that alone it's pointless as you have to consider the fact that if you're honest, one day you might have to change your mind.
|
geoffpikey
6:53 Sat Oct 4
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
"Before we understood science, it was natural to believe that God created the universe, but now science offers a more convincing explanation,"
Scientists are great. But arrogant.They love to start with big bang theory, which is OK... but flawed. Science cannot explain the birth of the universe. JUst theory about planets.
BUT Before then, they / we have no clue. That's why SOME PEOPLE believe in a "god" We cannot explain our universe, much as scientists try.
|
i-Ron
5:58 Sat Oct 4
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
A8, that surprises me considering so many religions consider you a sinner and won't be accepted by him.
|
After8
5:55 Sat Oct 4
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
I believe in God.
|
i-Ron
5:54 Sat Oct 4
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
So if consciousness is the result of a chemical reaction, how can choice exist?
Because it's not the same thing?
I don't get where you are going with any of these questions. They make little sense.
However you didn't answer about the science of afterlife and how it works without separating existence from consciousness.
Where's it held?
|
easthammer
5:33 Sat Oct 4
Re: Stephen Hawkins reckons there is no such thing as God, only Science.
|
Cholo
I do not lay any claim before you to have any scientific proof for the existence of God.
I am merely giving some explanation to my belief. Which of course cannot be subjected to scientific rigour.
As Popper outlined the existence of God cannot be subjected to the standard falsification processes. Popper concluded that science has nothing to say on the subject. Yet when the likes of Hawkins pronounces that God does not exist we are expected to think that this view arises out of scientific rigour .- which of course it doesn't. I would suggest it probably arises out of vanity.
Whatever it is not my intention to attack science but to counter the view that those of us that believe in a creative God do so without reason. As for being a presuppositional apologist I rather thought what I was undertaking was simple inductive reasoning to support my hypothesis.
Sorry cannot continue the debate _ going out
|
|
|
|
