Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
yeah i see what this guy is saying..u can pass off the creation of the universe to god if u want but then who created god.. and if no body created god then why not just state that nobody had to create the universe..? it goes in circles.. however science is logical and testable... the bible is not!!!
@doogiedog1234 well God is simply a first cause. God is existence itself (non-material, and completely self-explaining = "I AM WHO AM"). to say that God created the universe is to say that the universe has a first cause. otherwise, the universe has to have always existed or it somehow came to be without an initial force. everything started from somewhere, so where did existence come from? do things just start moving by themselves? God is the first cause, the first mover
@p4p4b34r1989 If God is simply the first cause why give it the name GOD? Why not say something started the universe but we dont know what. Alot of people think of God as a man in the sky... which of course is rediculous
"actually its more like GOD is in us and around us and also OUTSIDE of TIME."
- The Bible is not sufficient evidence for God, it's just a book written by men who claim to have been instructed by God. So aside from reading the Bible, is there ANY OTHER way for me to verify what you're claiming?
@ozpowermo OK look up the "Eucharist Miracle" Jesus said Bread and wine would become his body and blood. the eucharist miracle took place when a priest doubted the really presents of Jesus in the consecrated bread. Then in the middle of the bread it took form of actual flesh. Our athiest scientists were given the chance to test it and they dont know how it happened. The test results showed human flesh fusion of the bread! This one of the hundred miracles that scientists cant explain.
If you're referring to the Miracle of Lanciano, circa 700 CE, then all they have now is a chunk of meat in a jar and no bread infused in it. When tested it was determined that "the flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart". In particular: "the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium."
How hard is it to get a human heart and to claim it came from bread?
@ozpowermo Yes, I am but this one of thousand miracles are same. Yes the flesh is fused with the bread and the blood is fused with mine. I try to get the test results.
One more thing look up the "uncorruptible bodies of saints" here on youtube. There bodies that have been dead for more than a 1000 years, but look if they are asleep. The bodies have not rotted away or decoposed. They look just look they did when they died.
"Yes, I am but this one of thousand miracles are same."
-- Well, then I'm not impressed, because the Lanciano "miracle" is just a human heart. No miracle is needed to get a human heart.
The incorruptible bodies are nothing more than well preserved cadavers, mostly through embalming. Again, no miracles there... if you have a specific body in mind, then let's discuss the scientific findings on the body.
@ozpowermo I just looked at the image your talking about an that not the one. That is not the image I talking about when priest consecrates the bread the bread is not a loaf of bread its like a large round flat bread (almost like a thin/flat waffle) the image your talking about is not the really one. Ill send the pics of the one I talking about and several other recent pics.
Well, then it's not the "Lanciano Miracle," so on to the other "miracles": flesh from other parts of the body. None of the images you showed me have any trace of the "Host" and you haven't produced any scientific evidence that states it's anything other than just flesh. Again, there is no miracle in keeping human flesh around! If you find any scientific evidence that this is something more than just human flesh, then do let me know!
Google the images for "Lanciano Miracle" and you'll see that it's a jar-looking thingy that the flesh is displayed in. Furthermore, it's certainly not flat, which is quite evident in the picture.
The priest castigating Prof. Hawking in this video certainly is a strange and eunuch-like individual. Non-priestly persons seem better able to encounter the universe with an open mind rather than trying to force it to conform to their own rutted dogmas.
Existence is not a class, predicate, or property. Therefore when someone says "X exists" they are saying "X is." So god does exist. There is no doubt. The question is what does god exist as? What are its attributes? What classes does it belong to? Therefore everything exists and has always existed. Their properties however change. So the universe did exist but it must have differed in properties.
@AbstractUniversals sounds like you are just changing definitions and terms. seems like you don't have a set definition of what God is or what the universe is
@TheShinedownfan21 that's the point, what is spontaneous and what is not. in other words, what caused time, space, energy, etc to come into existence? do they just appear, poof, out of nowhere? or have they always existed in some form or another? or did something prior to them, that always existed, cause those things to then exist? does the cause-effect relationships of the universe have a start or not? these are philosophical questions that are not exclusive to physics alone
@p4p4b34r1989 Time, space, matter and energy are aspects of a larger reality that we can't presently describe. Time is a measuring technique, like inches, that is inadequate to describe the universe in relation to its larger context. Rather than deriving from something "prior" to its existence, the universe is a manifestation of a sort of parent reality where time and space don't operate the way it does on our local level. Call this "god" if you like, but it ain't Jehovah.
Well the universe violates no law such as thermodynamics. The total energy of the universe is nothing. At from that point E = mc2, solves the problem of matter from energy. Frankly throwing a god in there to "solve" the "problem" actually creates it's own problem. If everything needs to be created, then if there is a god, it would need to be created itself. Infinite regress. This guy really doesn't understand what he is talking about...
@sinatrabooth89 God has no creator, He is the beginning, the first cause. the question is did the universe always exist, or was there a point where it did not exist and then it came into being - the universe is all physical things, but God is not being part of the universe since He is not physical but spiritual. so, you either have to think the universe has always existed in some form, or if there is no God (no first cause) then it just randomly appeared without cause
@JohnAdamsHarvard1992 It's obvious if anything in science leads someone to believe there is no God then it must have something to do with their small penis.
@JohnAdamsHarvard1992 This was all done as a test of the new "Stupid-O-Meter" by RonCo. This is how you calibrate it. You need to have a religious person talk about science. When the needle hits "Bat-Shit-Crazy" you then can set it to "0".Simple.
@glennheston Don't ask me to support my claim because I'm only human. The best way to find out if what I say is true is to ask God to show you Himself,,,just ask Him "if what this person (me) says is true then show me. If what Jesus claims...that He is the son of God, that He can heal people etc. then show me!" But be sincere and really open up your mind & heart, and to paraphrase Annie Dillard, put on a crash helmet because you don't know what kind of power you're dealing with!
@glennheston What units are you using when 0 corresponds to presumably the highest level of the measured stuff? Can be done, but seems odd. You might as well think about the alternative and probably equivalent method of putting best-seller cosmologists talking about God, philosophy and theology.
@aaantunes You don't even understand that was a joke! It doesn't matter that you didn't even get it. You don't have the ability to see the humor in it.
@aaantunes One more thing about "god", and cosmologists. Cosmologists only talk about "god" when they tell us how religion got something all wrong. As for philosophy, it's like going to Sam's Club, anybody can be a philosopher. Another thing you don't need religion for.
@CatholicAmerican As someone said the other day (and I'm writing 1 year after your post), 100 years hence the new atheists (Dawkings, Harris, Hitchens, etc.) will be remembered as the leaders of a defunct sect, much like the sect of Renan and others in the XIXth century. But congratulations for showing the superiority of your postings here against these acolytes of the sect. As far as I'm concerned, I'm leaving to more productive threads.
Hmm, I think it's quite obvious the universe came from nothing, You just need to realign your thought with a different perspective on what that nothingness is. If it did come from some thing, doesn't that thing need to have a source in which it came from? and that goes on limitlessley, just as the principle to space itself -limitless. It's only space/nothingness that can achieve this.
How dare this nonsensical idiot has the audacity to question one of the greatest minds ever. If one isnt objective then truth/reason shall never be found bc you start to manipulate data to suit your philosophy. Despite conclusive evidence theres a consensus among scientist but rather the stupid sheep like people voice there opinion as if it has merit. Im perplexed to why the most uninformed people of history/science are the ones who demand credibility most, stupid fuckers.
Scientific credentials are required to seriously consider the criticisms of someone. Look for JR Spitzer in Google Academics ... and there's nothing even close to the science that he is puting down. Most cosmologists are atheists. Is that an accident?
If any of you ever have a chance to hear Fr. Spitzer speak, you should. He may not convert anybody into theists, but he'll provide compelling evidence through physics that will make non-believers question. Let's get real: no one will ever know for sure, but atheists can't play the irrational card anymore.
@thomasdantas 'No one will ever know for sure'? I can assure you with absolute certainty that Christ was born, Christ has died, Christ is risen and that he is alive in me and in all believers.Anyone who is fortunate to have been called by name or in some other unsought but VERY REAL experience with Him can never, ever doubt He lives.Alleluia! Also,I sincerely pity poor Dr. Hawkins, a bitter, cynical misanthrope. I've read his autobiography. Can be droll but mostly a troll!
@MrAqeelrocks Not to get into a discussion, really, but God, by definition, is not one who came to be, He is. God has no beginning or end, otherwise he is not God.
@MrAqeelrocks you're excused. I don't know much about physics either, but I believe we say matter is the principle of corruption, therefore, whatever is material cannot have existed forever (i.e. and infinite number of extension cords will not make a light turn on, it has to be plugged in somewhere). There must be something which has the power to create without having been created to make matter. This you could call "The Universe", some others call "God".
ok...hmm and im searching for where he talks about quantum mechanics here...or a counter argument for the black hole theory. hes just saying "everything cant come from nothing so i disproved it" well the same thing can be said for god right? how can he create everything from nothing then? atleast mr.hawking has a good explanation in his favor. wheres his?
Este pobre pendejo viejo religioso, tiene la mente como tiene la cara!
Habla por el trasero el muy pendejo, aferrado a seguir esparciendo sus creencias aberraticas de seres inviisibles creados por su amigo imaginario llamado dios.
If all design (complexity, the universe ect.) must have a creator, then it would be logical to assume that creator is at least as complex as the universe...which means God needs a creator. it's a logical fallacy. If a supreme God truly existed, this wouldn't even be a "debate". It would be known objectively by every human ever born on Earth. Evidence would include far more than a book from the Middle East written 2,000 years ago.
@TheDreamcatcher1265 Wow, you people (who seem to disagree with Fr. Spitzer) seem to be like little children who have learned how to type on the computer. God, by definition, is one who has no creator. And the proofs for the existence of God make His existence able to be known by every human ever born (truth is not automatically known by all men simply because it is the truth... as you seem to be implying).
@ryanhawn89 Okay so your 100% certain that the universe created itself out of nothing.Well guess what? Its not fact. So you go on and belive in your god NOTHING and I'll go down my route.
of course the universe created itself out of nothing. I created myself out of nothing and so did my Toyota Camry create itself out of nothing, perfectly scientifically ok.
You're an idiot, you obviously have absolutely no knowledge of quantum physics to have an educated contention on the subject. Quantum fluctuations can and does occur ALL THE TIME, ever heard of the Casimir Effect? In fact, the total energy density created by quantum fluctuations in the universe, is greater than 'regular' matter.
Science does not work like religion. Theories are created to accommodate fact and observation (while also making future predictions), not the other way around.
@glennheston a rational mind believes in the interpretation of these things. Fr. Spitzer and other Catholics do not have to believe in talking snakes or 900 year old people, or that the world was created in 7 24hour days. Those are stories which teach us lessons.
@brniccarvalho A rational mind doesn't believe in religion. What does the story of Jeptha teach you? Whatever it does teach, it isn't good. You only believe in the religion you believe in, because you were told to when you were little. I doubt you have the ability to even imagine a world without your "god".
@glennheston see, there you guys (against Fr. Spitzer) go again, making rash claims. A rational mind can very well believe in religion (or believe in God and practice a religion), as many in history have. The story of Jeptha can teach several useful and good lessons: not to make rash oaths, for one. And Glenn I didn't even say I believe in God. To me though, it makes more sense to believe in God, whose existence no one can disprove. Besides following religion has been the source of much good.
@brniccarvalho Maybe you should look up the word "rational". How can you claim to be rational when you believe in fairy tales? The story of Jeptha is nothing but a twisted tale about a guy who sets his daughter on fire because he made a deal with "god". No one can prove the existence of "god" either. That makes "god" a null point. Religion has done much more harm than good through out history. Mankind will be much better off when he dumps religion for good.
@glennheston I just looked up the word rational, seems I had the right idea... I don't necessarily believe in fairy-tales, but even if I did that wouldn't be irrational. You seem to be irrational, possibly blinded-mentally, by hatred, perhaps. Not being able to see the good in all things, even if they're twisted is pretty sad. I'm sorry for you. Religion has not done very much harm at all. People who have used religion as a cover for their crimes have done much evil. Try to see the difference.
@brniccarvalho If you believe in religion, you can't be rational. No one can disprove "god", but no one can prove "god" exists. Because "god" can't be proven either way does not mean that "god" exists. The Nazis followed "god". The islamists followed "god" right into the side of 2 buildings. Others bomb abortion clinics. I can't wait for the next faith head to do something for their "god". Anyone who believes in these nonsense fairy tales has something wrong with them.
@glennheston again, you make yourself the irrational one by making generalized and silly statements, such as you're opening sentence above. Maybe I can't prove God exists, but neither can science explain miracles. And I'm not saying to follow the "god" of the Nazi's or Muslims. I'm saying the God that says "love your neighbour as I have loved you" is definitely a better God to follow than no god.
@glennheston, to help prove my point about the good in religion (primarily Catholicism), is their prolife stance. Catholicism teaches all people to love and therefore not to murder preborn babies. Those who move away from religion seem to move towards the acceptance of killing these innocent children. Perhaps between 68 and 72 million people were killed in WW2, yet since 1973 more than 50 million innocent babies have been murdered in the USA alone, about 42 million worldwide every year... sad...
@brniccarvalho The Dark Ages, witch hunts, burnings at the stake, shuffling pedophiles around so they won't get caught, all brought to you by religion. Torturing people to death for challenging the status quo. In your own bible "god" kills by the millions, and yet you still say he loves everyone! Look at where your religion comes from! Arabia! The arabs have been killing each other since time started, and they won't stop. They only know violence, and all their religions are based on violence.
@brniccarvalho You fucking idiots, so sorry for abortions and doing nothing to prevent priests (thousands of them) from abusing children. "Catholicism good"? oh please, We are in the 21st century and this organized religion treats women as second-class workers, with no way to reach power positions. Very civilized. And the video here... please read seriously about modern physics and have an open mind. God is not dead, is just irrelevant.
@jaumesisa100 I'm sorry that you're so angry and disturbed. The Church and no Catholic supports abusing children. We are sorry that ever happened, it is so sad and wrong. However, one should be able to see the difference between bad men becoming priests to abuse children and the good work that the Church does. If you think that the Church treats women as 2nd class citizens then it shows how little you really know, the same goes if you think the priesthood is a "power position".
@glennheston Have you ever heard of the "genetic fallacy"? It's the fallacy of denying some assertion only because someone was led to it fortuitously. It goes like this: "You're, say, a Christian because you were born in a Christian family. Had you been born in India, for example, and you would be Hindu. Therefore Christianity (and Hinduism) is wrong." After all, one position should be true. Christianity at least has the Darwinian argument of being the most successful among all the others.
@glennheston No. But it helps that many people believe it, for if it were grossly wrong people had stopped believing it long ago. Instead, our Western Civilization was raised from the ashes of the Roman Empire, and Christianity is still spreading - now to China and Africa. This does not mean, however, that other visions are necessarily wrong. As a Catholic, I believe God has a salvation plan for everybody, independently of creed.
@aaantunes "But it helps that many people believe it, for if it were grossly wrong people had stopped believing it long ago." That's just plain stupid. Yes, people would still believe it. Just like people believed the world was flat for thousands of years before it was shown to be round. I'm sorry, but if you believe in your religion, by default, all other religions must be false. You cannot have it both ways. If you believe your "god" has a plan, then why worship him? It would be unnecessary.
@glennheston "If you believe your "god" has a plan, then why worship him?" I don't see why not. One can feel grateful - which is worshiping in some sense. When I was a practical atheist, one thing that was depressing was personal success (and I had a few). Being my own accomplishment and since I was not particularly interested in praise from other people, it seemed that gratitude was impossible. I still think that gratitude for your own existence somehow implies you're a theist.
@aaantunes I'm sorry, but no one goes from being an atheist to being a theist. You may not have had a belief in any one certain "god", but you weren't an atheist. Are you saying since you're happy for being alive therefore there is a "god"? No. You keep trying to say in one way or another, that there has to be a "god". There doesn't have to be a "god". There may be a "god". There may not be a "god". Arrogance says there's a "god", and this is what he says everyone should do. Keep it to yourself.
@glennheston "I'm sorry, but no one goes from being an atheist to being a theist." Says who? Absurd statements like this really make you look a bit narrow-minded.
@aaantunes You would know what narrow minded is, since you don't have the ability to even imagine a world without your "god". I know, you wouldn't want to imagine it. That's not what I'm saying. I said you don't have the ability to imagine it.
as soon as some one says the words 'the universe came from nothing' that the person saying them is talking out of his hat. do some thing good with with your faith and stop giving false witness, or is it another of the ten commandments, you know the one beginning with a L
This guy has very little understanding of physics and science in general. He keeps saying the word proof as if physicists are proving theories. This is entirely wrong! Science doesn't prove things in absolute terms, we just get better information and more evidence so that we can have a higher certainty in the ideas and theories.
'I do not like the reappearance of The Jesuits ... If ever there was a body of men who merited damnation on earth and in hell, it is this society of Loyola's. Nevertheless, we are compelled by our system of religous toleration to offer them an asylum.' John Adams, 2nd President of the U.S.A
Some people really get sore in their ass over the idea that there is no god. The burden of proof is on the individual claiming god exists. Unless you create a theory that predicts god's existence that can withstand rigorous attempts to falsify the theory the reasonable thing to do is to go on with our lives as if god does not exist. There isn't one "hypothesis" of god's existence that hasn't been falsified. Belief in god requires faith. Faith is only necessary to believe unreasonable things.
dont blabber which u dont understand.........we still dont have sophisticated technology to understand the origin of universe.......to which you dumba** give d name god.......
I have tired of this thread. you have offered nothing except "hawking is a great scientist!" and questioning the standing of everyone who disagreed with him, living or dead. But, since you can offer nothing else, and since Hawking has ventured into philosophy instead of science ( a subject he is absolutely not qualified to be discussing), I will move on to more productive discussions, however I wish you well.
@drhaljr So you never watched the video I linked in the first place? And you don't even understand Hawking's position?
"the universe is governed by the laws of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws." - Hawking from the Grand Design
They all disagree with Hawking that m-theory explains away God. they are easy enough to look up and a comment section does not allow enough space for in depth discussion.
I think there are a number of contenders, but one I like right now is Dr. Garrett Lisi whose "theory of everything" is seen by some prominent physicists as the 'holy grail of physics'. Hans Bethe was certainly great, but died last yr. But I don't think we have anyone up to Einstein, Planck, Heisenberg, Bohr, or Fermi.
You earlier said that hawking was the greatest scientific mind of our time, yet the Nobel Prize and the Crawford Prizes always go to other people. As for current physicists who disagree with hawking: Sir Roger Penrose(Prof Emeritis shared the Wolf Prize with Hawking in 88),Prof George Ellis (Em. Prof one of worlds leading theorists in cosmology), and Prof Michio Kaku all disagree with Hawking's conclusions.
@drhaljr1958 Didn't I ask you to show how they disagreed and not just post names saying they disagree. Anyone can post names and say they disagree, show me exactly what they are disagreeing about.
@drhaljr1958 So you have to win a Nobel to be the greatest scientific mind? Can I have your take on who the greatest scientific mind of our time is then?
I have moved away from Fr. Spitzer because you seem to be arguing his standing rather than his arguments, so Dr. Sandege and Sir Polkinghorn are just two very prominent scientists (among many) in Dr. Hawking's field that don't think much of Hawking's conclusions.
@drhaljr Oh we got a surprise here. Polkinghorn is an Anlican priest who has made an entire career out of trying to use science to prove religion and hasn't worked in the field for 20 years, I'm shocked.
@drhaljr Can I throw out a little challenge here for you? Can you name someone who isn't a devout Christian who says he is wrong and provide that proof here, not just list a name.
Infact, Dr. Polkinghorn (a professor emeritis in theoretical physics) says the notion of m-theory (upon which Hawking is basing all of this) is unknowable and cannot be demonstrated experimentally and therefore useless. The point here is that a great number of physicists who are very highly regarded ( not famous b/c their personal stories are not as compelling) disagree with hawking and that his conclusions are not based on the science.
Are you having trouble reading? He has a PhD in Philosophy 1983. His focus of study since has been the philosophy of Science regarding space-time theory and transcendent implications of contemporary big bang cosmology. Look, Alan Sandege the father of modern astronomy ( he discovered quasars) and won the Crawford Prize (the Nobel quiv. in physics) disagrees strongly with Hawking. The same can be said of prof sir John Polkinghorn who says Hawking has left science for metaphysics.
@drhaljr Or at least Allan Sandage is dead, that is how you actually spell his name btw. Can you back any of what you are saying up? Why do you just keep throwing out names and say they agree and give no proof. I find it hard to believe a dead man objected to Hawking.
The Old Lady’s TORTOISE (Hinduism) and DRAGON (Taoism) are symbols for WAVE (energy), both are analog with MAGEN DAVID (Judaism). "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" is the metaphor, and also similar with allegory of rituals Thawaf circling around the Ka'ba and Sa’i oscillating along “the sinus” Marwah-Shafa during the Hajj pilgrimage (Abraham). YIN-YANG: energy-particle . CROSS (Christian) and SWASTIKA (Buddhism) are symbols for “Balance of Nature.”
By the way, since the early 1980's Fr. Spitzer has specialized in the philosophy of Science, particularly space-time theory and transcendent implications of contemporary big bang cosmology, and metaphysics, particularly the theory of time and philosophy of God. So to say that He is completely ill equipped to comment on this subject is a bit unfair.
@drhaljr Hawking isn't saying it wasn't created anyway, just that it wasn't necessary to have created the universe. Hawking is agnostic not an atheist, he isn't really arguing theology.
Although in context my english was perfectly clear, let me clarify, I mean that you cannot prove or disprove the existence of God with mathematics. By God, I mean that as defined by the vast majority of theologians. Hawking redefines God as a finite entity in the universe as do many atheists. Dr. Kaku, who is the first physicist to postulate the equation for string theory (he is of equal stature to Dr. Hawking), has said that Hawking is reaching too far in this case, I agree with Dr. Kaku.
@drhaljr If you use Occam's razor, which says to not overcomplicate something, means if we find a natural answer for the process God should be out of the equation. Can I have where he said this? He is the first one to postulate it? Then why is his name not mentioned once in most articcles online about it?
@lessismore2020 Now that you mention Occam's razor, why has cosmology embarked in this ever burgeoning frenzy of different cosmologies? Currently, the most likely and experimentally corroborated cosmology is that of a very delicate universe with a finite age. The LHC has not corroborated string theory; maybe it never will. That being the case, Occam's razor suggests an entity outside space and time as the cause of the universe, aka God; not arbitrary cosmologies with infinite local universes.
I'm not arguing for or against either position by Fr. Spitzer or Dr. Hawking, but its a question that can't be argued or answered by the mathematics, and the name calling and vitriol shows the insecurity of most of the people on this comment stream. If you disagree, state your case, name calling is just juvenile.
A PhD in Philosophy is not "Jesusology", nor is Dr. Kaku's many degrees, nor are mine ( BS, MS, PhD, DDS). Your responses display a small mindedness and possibly a self esteem issue. Had you listened to Dr. Hawking carefully you would realize he had to redefine the Creator contrary to nearly all definitions in common use by theologians order for his thesis to stand. This was expressed by the commentators in the followup program, but maybe you didn't catch that.
@drhaljr He has one in Divinity. I'm just saying this guy is in no real position to doubt someone like Hawking unless you have put years of study into cosmology. Hawking's view on this is by far the most widely accepted account in science. This guy is doubting his scientific analysis not the meaning of creator.
If any of you had bothered to read any of Fr. Spitzer's books, you would realize that he understands physics at a level that most of you wish you could. Dr. Hawking's problem is that he took a few step too far, even Dr. Michio Kaku said as much as well as others...
@drhaljr Oh okay, well that's funny because the only thing I see him having a degree in is Jesus. I'm sorry but this guys understanding is nowhere near Hawking, don't even try to play that.
@drhaljr Greatest scientific mind of our generation or Dr. of Jesusology, who do I go with here. Man it's going to be a tough decision but I'm going to go ahead and say this guy with the Jesus degree probably outranks Hawking.
All of you who are making disparaging remarks about Fr. Spitzer should take a look at his resume before looking stupid again. National Honors Society, Magna Cum Laude or Summa Cum Laude graduate at every level of his education(BBA, MA, MDiv, ThM, PhD). A little introspection before speaking/posting would be good....just sayin
Did you wake up that morning and think to yourself, "I'm going to try to discredit one of the greatest thinkers and scientists of our time today with a seven minute Youtube video!"? You know there is actual science and mathematics behind his claims. He's not pulling this stuff out of thin air. You however....
@mokenshi you sure he's not pulling this stuff out of air?, after all, the universe woke up one morning & thought, i might become a universe today?.
Even Hawking knows there was/is a "Grand Design", simply people like him become fools in their desperation in trying to deny the obvious. There was nothing??? except the law of gravity...hmmm really, who made & designed gravity?. If he really is a wise man he would seek to make peace with his Maker... he wont be able to deny God on judgement day.
@zacqt Yea Hawking is just making it up out of thin air, that's his job. That's why he has about 30 of the most honored awards any scientists can get, for making stuff up. This is just sad to see anyone who knows nothing about cosmology to question Hawking like this, you and the guy in this video don't understand the first thing and he doesn't want you too.
Here's a very simplified beginner for you and anyone else who doubts this.
@zacqt Oh look there's actual science to back up what Hawking is saying, it isn't just some guy in a penguin suit going c'mon I know nothing about this but it has to be wrong because it sounds silly so you guys just keep on loving you some Jesus because even though I know virtually nothing about the topic I can tell you the top cosmologist on planet Earth doesn't know what he's talking about.
@lessismore2020 You must remember Hawking, Dawkins, Hitchens etc all make lots of money from book sales to a gullible majority of people desperate to deny God The Creator. Every piece of known science has to be thrown out the door to believe *something came from nothing* or perfect order happened *all by itself*.<Not even you believe that, nor do any of the 3 names above. Einstein said "God doesn't play dice with the universe", regardless of his actual beliefs it sure was an interesting quote.
@zacqt Einstein was dead wrong about how the universe worked in that area. He scoffed at the idea of the big bang, quoting Einstein isn't going to help anything because he was just plain wrong. Uhm wouldn't Hawking make more money being a theist if he was only doing it to make money, I mean there are a hell of a lot more theists, he would have made a lot more money backing religion. Your arguments are sad sir, please educate yourself.
@zacqt In fact that quote from Einstein directly relates to something he was incredibly wrong about. It was about Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which is now a cornerstone of science and what these new breakthroughs are based on if you watched that video I linked. That quote you gave is testament to how far off the mark Einstein really was. He didn't believe in quantum mechanics and that is the center of scientific advancement right now.
This has been flagged as spam show
Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
tigersforchrist 1 week ago
god exists, you are god
bj0lly 1 week ago
lol I've read up on this guy. He has no science degree whatsoever. no credentials, yet he's questioning one of America's leading physicists.
ChairmanDrek757 4 weeks ago
@ChairmanDrek757 LOL ya you can't question someone or challenge them unless you have a degree or your on youtube LOL
billyboy630 3 weeks ago
@ChairmanDrek757 well to get into the business of God and creation is to move from the realm of science into philosophy
p4p4b34r1989 4 days ago
yeah i see what this guy is saying..u can pass off the creation of the universe to god if u want but then who created god.. and if no body created god then why not just state that nobody had to create the universe..? it goes in circles.. however science is logical and testable... the bible is not!!!
doogiedog1234 1 month ago
@doogiedog1234 well God is simply a first cause. God is existence itself (non-material, and completely self-explaining = "I AM WHO AM"). to say that God created the universe is to say that the universe has a first cause. otherwise, the universe has to have always existed or it somehow came to be without an initial force. everything started from somewhere, so where did existence come from? do things just start moving by themselves? God is the first cause, the first mover
p4p4b34r1989 4 days ago
@p4p4b34r1989 If God is simply the first cause why give it the name GOD? Why not say something started the universe but we dont know what. Alot of people think of God as a man in the sky... which of course is rediculous
doogiedog1234 3 days ago
@doogiedog1234 actually its more like GOD is in us and around us and also OUTSIDE of TIME.
The Bible states that a second for God is like 10,000 years and 10,000 years like a one second.
stang46281 3 days ago in playlist Liked videos
@stang46281
"actually its more like GOD is in us and around us and also OUTSIDE of TIME."
- The Bible is not sufficient evidence for God, it's just a book written by men who claim to have been instructed by God. So aside from reading the Bible, is there ANY OTHER way for me to verify what you're claiming?
ozpowermo 2 days ago
@ozpowermo OK look up the "Eucharist Miracle" Jesus said Bread and wine would become his body and blood. the eucharist miracle took place when a priest doubted the really presents of Jesus in the consecrated bread. Then in the middle of the bread it took form of actual flesh. Our athiest scientists were given the chance to test it and they dont know how it happened. The test results showed human flesh fusion of the bread! This one of the hundred miracles that scientists cant explain.
stang46281 2 days ago
@stang46281
If you're referring to the Miracle of Lanciano, circa 700 CE, then all they have now is a chunk of meat in a jar and no bread infused in it. When tested it was determined that "the flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart". In particular: "the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium."
How hard is it to get a human heart and to claim it came from bread?
ozpowermo 2 days ago
@ozpowermo Yes, I am but this one of thousand miracles are same. Yes the flesh is fused with the bread and the blood is fused with mine. I try to get the test results.
One more thing look up the "uncorruptible bodies of saints" here on youtube. There bodies that have been dead for more than a 1000 years, but look if they are asleep. The bodies have not rotted away or decoposed. They look just look they did when they died.
stang46281 2 days ago
@stang46281
"Yes, I am but this one of thousand miracles are same."
-- Well, then I'm not impressed, because the Lanciano "miracle" is just a human heart. No miracle is needed to get a human heart.
The incorruptible bodies are nothing more than well preserved cadavers, mostly through embalming. Again, no miracles there... if you have a specific body in mind, then let's discuss the scientific findings on the body.
So far you've shown no miracles.
ozpowermo 2 days ago
@ozpowermo I just looked at the image your talking about an that not the one. That is not the image I talking about when priest consecrates the bread the bread is not a loaf of bread its like a large round flat bread (almost like a thin/flat waffle) the image your talking about is not the really one. Ill send the pics of the one I talking about and several other recent pics.
stang46281 2 days ago
@stang46281
Well, then it's not the "Lanciano Miracle," so on to the other "miracles": flesh from other parts of the body. None of the images you showed me have any trace of the "Host" and you haven't produced any scientific evidence that states it's anything other than just flesh. Again, there is no miracle in keeping human flesh around! If you find any scientific evidence that this is something more than just human flesh, then do let me know!
ozpowermo 2 days ago
@ozpowermo No they dont keep it on a jar because it is flat as the bread was when it was consecrated. They keep on display.
stang46281 2 days ago
@stang46281
Google the images for "Lanciano Miracle" and you'll see that it's a jar-looking thingy that the flesh is displayed in. Furthermore, it's certainly not flat, which is quite evident in the picture.
ozpowermo 2 days ago
The priest castigating Prof. Hawking in this video certainly is a strange and eunuch-like individual. Non-priestly persons seem better able to encounter the universe with an open mind rather than trying to force it to conform to their own rutted dogmas.
luvdomus 1 month ago
Existence is not a class, predicate, or property. Therefore when someone says "X exists" they are saying "X is." So god does exist. There is no doubt. The question is what does god exist as? What are its attributes? What classes does it belong to? Therefore everything exists and has always existed. Their properties however change. So the universe did exist but it must have differed in properties.
AbstractUniversals 1 month ago
@AbstractUniversals sounds like you are just changing definitions and terms. seems like you don't have a set definition of what God is or what the universe is
p4p4b34r1989 4 days ago
Great points, how did the likes of the Law of Gravity exist if there was nothing
aidanireland11 1 month ago
@aidanireland11 Time, space, energy and matter came into existence spontaneously and gravity resulted.
TheShinedownfan21 4 weeks ago
@TheShinedownfan21 that's the point, what is spontaneous and what is not. in other words, what caused time, space, energy, etc to come into existence? do they just appear, poof, out of nowhere? or have they always existed in some form or another? or did something prior to them, that always existed, cause those things to then exist? does the cause-effect relationships of the universe have a start or not? these are philosophical questions that are not exclusive to physics alone
p4p4b34r1989 4 days ago
@p4p4b34r1989 Time, space, matter and energy are aspects of a larger reality that we can't presently describe. Time is a measuring technique, like inches, that is inadequate to describe the universe in relation to its larger context. Rather than deriving from something "prior" to its existence, the universe is a manifestation of a sort of parent reality where time and space don't operate the way it does on our local level. Call this "god" if you like, but it ain't Jehovah.
TheShinedownfan21 3 days ago
Well the universe violates no law such as thermodynamics. The total energy of the universe is nothing. At from that point E = mc2, solves the problem of matter from energy. Frankly throwing a god in there to "solve" the "problem" actually creates it's own problem. If everything needs to be created, then if there is a god, it would need to be created itself. Infinite regress. This guy really doesn't understand what he is talking about...
sinatrabooth89 1 month ago
@sinatrabooth89 God has no creator, He is the beginning, the first cause. the question is did the universe always exist, or was there a point where it did not exist and then it came into being - the universe is all physical things, but God is not being part of the universe since He is not physical but spiritual. so, you either have to think the universe has always existed in some form, or if there is no God (no first cause) then it just randomly appeared without cause
p4p4b34r1989 4 days ago
Why is he psychoanalyzing Hawking......?
JohnAdamsHarvard1992 1 month ago
@JohnAdamsHarvard1992 It's obvious if anything in science leads someone to believe there is no God then it must have something to do with their small penis.
lessismore2020 1 month ago
@lessismore2020 Then women shouldn't believe at all.
glennheston 1 month ago
@JohnAdamsHarvard1992 This was all done as a test of the new "Stupid-O-Meter" by RonCo. This is how you calibrate it. You need to have a religious person talk about science. When the needle hits "Bat-Shit-Crazy" you then can set it to "0".Simple.
glennheston 1 month ago
@glennheston Don't ask me to support my claim because I'm only human. The best way to find out if what I say is true is to ask God to show you Himself,,,just ask Him "if what this person (me) says is true then show me. If what Jesus claims...that He is the son of God, that He can heal people etc. then show me!" But be sincere and really open up your mind & heart, and to paraphrase Annie Dillard, put on a crash helmet because you don't know what kind of power you're dealing with!
catholicmaxima 1 month ago
@catholicmaxima Thank you for playing the game, here's a nice parting gift.
glennheston 1 month ago
@glennheston What units are you using when 0 corresponds to presumably the highest level of the measured stuff? Can be done, but seems odd. You might as well think about the alternative and probably equivalent method of putting best-seller cosmologists talking about God, philosophy and theology.
aaantunes 1 month ago
@aaantunes You don't even understand that was a joke! It doesn't matter that you didn't even get it. You don't have the ability to see the humor in it.
glennheston 1 month ago
@glennheston I was also joking.
aaantunes 1 month ago
@aaantunes One more thing about "god", and cosmologists. Cosmologists only talk about "god" when they tell us how religion got something all wrong. As for philosophy, it's like going to Sam's Club, anybody can be a philosopher. Another thing you don't need religion for.
glennheston 1 month ago
@CatholicAmerican As someone said the other day (and I'm writing 1 year after your post), 100 years hence the new atheists (Dawkings, Harris, Hitchens, etc.) will be remembered as the leaders of a defunct sect, much like the sect of Renan and others in the XIXth century. But congratulations for showing the superiority of your postings here against these acolytes of the sect. As far as I'm concerned, I'm leaving to more productive threads.
aaantunes 2 months ago
Hmm, I think it's quite obvious the universe came from nothing, You just need to realign your thought with a different perspective on what that nothingness is. If it did come from some thing, doesn't that thing need to have a source in which it came from? and that goes on limitlessley, just as the principle to space itself -limitless. It's only space/nothingness that can achieve this.
6969SpAcE6969 2 months ago
i dont think he understands what he is talking about
he hasnt got what hawkins is writing
also the book of this priest is also questionable
because it is not based on scientific work and methods
the nonbeliever doesnt need to proof anything
the believer needs to proof
and he fails here because he is doing his proof with intent and so he must fail
take a look at anselm of canterburys monologion and you will see why he fails
TheLordZhufor 2 months ago
Your Confused
ihussain1011 2 months ago
this dude needs to position himself in the center of the camera shot . that's #1
DanielJMoore1991 2 months ago
is this dude looking at the camera
DanielJMoore1991 2 months ago
@thejewishagnostic EXACTLY! VERY WELL SAID!
jaumesisa100 2 months ago
he makes too much sense...except for those blinded by their own agenda
itubeyoublah 2 months ago
How dare this nonsensical idiot has the audacity to question one of the greatest minds ever. If one isnt objective then truth/reason shall never be found bc you start to manipulate data to suit your philosophy. Despite conclusive evidence theres a consensus among scientist but rather the stupid sheep like people voice there opinion as if it has merit. Im perplexed to why the most uninformed people of history/science are the ones who demand credibility most, stupid fuckers.
kinglbkiv 2 months ago
@kinglbkiv fuck you
mikalah12 2 months ago
@mikalah12 Bawww.
attirantmonsmusic 2 months ago
@kinglbkiv Fucking. Thank you.
attirantmonsmusic 2 months ago
Scientific credentials are required to seriously consider the criticisms of someone. Look for JR Spitzer in Google Academics ... and there's nothing even close to the science that he is puting down. Most cosmologists are atheists. Is that an accident?
jaumesisa100 2 months ago
If any of you ever have a chance to hear Fr. Spitzer speak, you should. He may not convert anybody into theists, but he'll provide compelling evidence through physics that will make non-believers question. Let's get real: no one will ever know for sure, but atheists can't play the irrational card anymore.
thomasdantas 2 months ago
@thomasdantas 'No one will ever know for sure'? I can assure you with absolute certainty that Christ was born, Christ has died, Christ is risen and that he is alive in me and in all believers.Anyone who is fortunate to have been called by name or in some other unsought but VERY REAL experience with Him can never, ever doubt He lives.Alleluia! Also,I sincerely pity poor Dr. Hawkins, a bitter, cynical misanthrope. I've read his autobiography. Can be droll but mostly a troll!
catholicmaxima 1 month ago
@catholicmaxima You made the claim. Now show your evidence to back up your claim. Why should we believe you?
glennheston 1 month ago
A priest questioning someone's opinion that God doesn't exist makes this whole video invalid because of the automatic personal bias. :)
attirantmonsmusic 3 months ago
alright then answer this sir how did god came to be???
MrAqeelrocks 3 months ago
@MrAqeelrocks Not to get into a discussion, really, but God, by definition, is not one who came to be, He is. God has no beginning or end, otherwise he is not God.
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
@brniccarvalho pls do excuse my lack of intelligence im still new with physics but why cant the same principal be applied to the universe??
MrAqeelrocks 3 months ago
@MrAqeelrocks you're excused. I don't know much about physics either, but I believe we say matter is the principle of corruption, therefore, whatever is material cannot have existed forever (i.e. and infinite number of extension cords will not make a light turn on, it has to be plugged in somewhere). There must be something which has the power to create without having been created to make matter. This you could call "The Universe", some others call "God".
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@brniccarvalho AAAhahahahaaaaaa ha ha ha. "God, by definition, is not one who came to be" this would be funny if not so stupid and empty.
jaumesisa100 2 months ago
Go Fr. Robert!!!!!! You "spitz" some awesome points!
Praise God forever.
sirenaleizabeth 3 months ago
Religion is a fairy tale that gave us hope, that our suffering was for a purpose.
ConcedeFightGear 3 months ago
@ConcedeFightGear even IF that's all it was, would that be better than not having hope?
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
ok...hmm and im searching for where he talks about quantum mechanics here...or a counter argument for the black hole theory. hes just saying "everything cant come from nothing so i disproved it" well the same thing can be said for god right? how can he create everything from nothing then? atleast mr.hawking has a good explanation in his favor. wheres his?
chrisviolet13 3 months ago
this guy looks a lot like a ... I would rather not say. Anyway he is an idiot.
cozmin 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cozmin someone should have told you if you don't have anything good to say, not to say anything at all.
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
this Spitzer guy kicked the Butt of hawking in a debate.
shaithinshoe 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Este pobre pendejo viejo religioso, tiene la mente como tiene la cara!
Habla por el trasero el muy pendejo, aferrado a seguir esparciendo sus creencias aberraticas de seres inviisibles creados por su amigo imaginario llamado dios.
Patambo2000 3 months ago
Comment removed
Patambo2000 3 months ago
The only reason this vid has likes is because it gives atheists a good laugh;p problem?
Alex0Dial 3 months ago
If all design (complexity, the universe ect.) must have a creator, then it would be logical to assume that creator is at least as complex as the universe...which means God needs a creator. it's a logical fallacy. If a supreme God truly existed, this wouldn't even be a "debate". It would be known objectively by every human ever born on Earth. Evidence would include far more than a book from the Middle East written 2,000 years ago.
TheDreamcatcher1265 3 months ago
@TheDreamcatcher1265 You seem to be confusing the immaterial (no parts / simple ) with the material (parts / complex). Universe = parts.
Creator is not the creature, whether extant or otherwise.
Dawkins made the same assumption. That dog don't hunt, cuz it's daid.
Metaphysics and physics aren't the same. Applying the 'laws' of the physical to the otherwise... please show how that works.
m1chae15 3 months ago
@TheDreamcatcher1265 Wow, you people (who seem to disagree with Fr. Spitzer) seem to be like little children who have learned how to type on the computer. God, by definition, is one who has no creator. And the proofs for the existence of God make His existence able to be known by every human ever born (truth is not automatically known by all men simply because it is the truth... as you seem to be implying).
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
Go read Hume, then Bergson, then Deleuze, then remake this video. You might be arguing from a much more informed perspective.
Debordsbullet 3 months ago
ooh.. fat, cloth-wearing idiot uses big, confusing physics terms (with no fundamental understanding of their meaning.) it's settled! god must exist!
ryanhawn89 4 months ago
@ryanhawn89 Okay so your 100% certain that the universe created itself out of nothing.Well guess what? Its not fact. So you go on and belive in your god NOTHING and I'll go down my route.
MASTERZERO92 3 months ago
@ryanhawn89 those of you who disagree with Fr. Spitzer make your side look rather bad and come off as shabby by your uncharitable words.
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
this guy is right on target
klumpsam 4 months ago
There is no free lunch in the universe.
Snotra 4 months ago
of course the universe created itself out of nothing. I created myself out of nothing and so did my Toyota Camry create itself out of nothing, perfectly scientifically ok.
PInk77W1 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LOL at the angry atheists using ad hominem attacks! How sad.
V
CarlosMarti123 4 months ago
Comment removed
CarlosMarti123 4 months ago
derpa derpa
dittonamed 4 months ago
You're an idiot, you obviously have absolutely no knowledge of quantum physics to have an educated contention on the subject. Quantum fluctuations can and does occur ALL THE TIME, ever heard of the Casimir Effect? In fact, the total energy density created by quantum fluctuations in the universe, is greater than 'regular' matter.
Science does not work like religion. Theories are created to accommodate fact and observation (while also making future predictions), not the other way around.
baryon15 4 months ago
This guy should stop thinking, it's not something he's good at.
glennheston 5 months ago 2
@glennheston I agree
damppp 4 months ago
@glennheston Funny cause I was just thinking the same about you.
Slackjaw751 3 months ago
@Slackjaw751 Not Hawking. The numb nuts religious freak should stop thinking.
glennheston 3 months ago
@glennheston why do you think he's not good at thinking?
sirenaleizabeth 3 months ago
@sirenaleizabeth He thinks talking snakes and 900 year old people really did exist. Do you think that is the sign of a rational mind?
glennheston 3 months ago
@glennheston a rational mind believes in the interpretation of these things. Fr. Spitzer and other Catholics do not have to believe in talking snakes or 900 year old people, or that the world was created in 7 24hour days. Those are stories which teach us lessons.
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
@brniccarvalho A rational mind doesn't believe in religion. What does the story of Jeptha teach you? Whatever it does teach, it isn't good. You only believe in the religion you believe in, because you were told to when you were little. I doubt you have the ability to even imagine a world without your "god".
glennheston 3 months ago
@glennheston see, there you guys (against Fr. Spitzer) go again, making rash claims. A rational mind can very well believe in religion (or believe in God and practice a religion), as many in history have. The story of Jeptha can teach several useful and good lessons: not to make rash oaths, for one. And Glenn I didn't even say I believe in God. To me though, it makes more sense to believe in God, whose existence no one can disprove. Besides following religion has been the source of much good.
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
@brniccarvalho Maybe you should look up the word "rational". How can you claim to be rational when you believe in fairy tales? The story of Jeptha is nothing but a twisted tale about a guy who sets his daughter on fire because he made a deal with "god". No one can prove the existence of "god" either. That makes "god" a null point. Religion has done much more harm than good through out history. Mankind will be much better off when he dumps religion for good.
glennheston 3 months ago
@glennheston I just looked up the word rational, seems I had the right idea... I don't necessarily believe in fairy-tales, but even if I did that wouldn't be irrational. You seem to be irrational, possibly blinded-mentally, by hatred, perhaps. Not being able to see the good in all things, even if they're twisted is pretty sad. I'm sorry for you. Religion has not done very much harm at all. People who have used religion as a cover for their crimes have done much evil. Try to see the difference.
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
@brniccarvalho If you believe in religion, you can't be rational. No one can disprove "god", but no one can prove "god" exists. Because "god" can't be proven either way does not mean that "god" exists. The Nazis followed "god". The islamists followed "god" right into the side of 2 buildings. Others bomb abortion clinics. I can't wait for the next faith head to do something for their "god". Anyone who believes in these nonsense fairy tales has something wrong with them.
glennheston 3 months ago
@glennheston again, you make yourself the irrational one by making generalized and silly statements, such as you're opening sentence above. Maybe I can't prove God exists, but neither can science explain miracles. And I'm not saying to follow the "god" of the Nazi's or Muslims. I'm saying the God that says "love your neighbour as I have loved you" is definitely a better God to follow than no god.
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
@glennheston, to help prove my point about the good in religion (primarily Catholicism), is their prolife stance. Catholicism teaches all people to love and therefore not to murder preborn babies. Those who move away from religion seem to move towards the acceptance of killing these innocent children. Perhaps between 68 and 72 million people were killed in WW2, yet since 1973 more than 50 million innocent babies have been murdered in the USA alone, about 42 million worldwide every year... sad...
brniccarvalho 3 months ago
@brniccarvalho The Dark Ages, witch hunts, burnings at the stake, shuffling pedophiles around so they won't get caught, all brought to you by religion. Torturing people to death for challenging the status quo. In your own bible "god" kills by the millions, and yet you still say he loves everyone! Look at where your religion comes from! Arabia! The arabs have been killing each other since time started, and they won't stop. They only know violence, and all their religions are based on violence.
glennheston 3 months ago
@brniccarvalho You fucking idiots, so sorry for abortions and doing nothing to prevent priests (thousands of them) from abusing children. "Catholicism good"? oh please, We are in the 21st century and this organized religion treats women as second-class workers, with no way to reach power positions. Very civilized. And the video here... please read seriously about modern physics and have an open mind. God is not dead, is just irrelevant.
jaumesisa100 2 months ago
@jaumesisa100 I'm sorry that you're so angry and disturbed. The Church and no Catholic supports abusing children. We are sorry that ever happened, it is so sad and wrong. However, one should be able to see the difference between bad men becoming priests to abuse children and the good work that the Church does. If you think that the Church treats women as 2nd class citizens then it shows how little you really know, the same goes if you think the priesthood is a "power position".
brniccarvalho 2 months ago
@glennheston Have you ever heard of the "genetic fallacy"? It's the fallacy of denying some assertion only because someone was led to it fortuitously. It goes like this: "You're, say, a Christian because you were born in a Christian family. Had you been born in India, for example, and you would be Hindu. Therefore Christianity (and Hinduism) is wrong." After all, one position should be true. Christianity at least has the Darwinian argument of being the most successful among all the others.
aaantunes 2 months ago
@aaantunes So what you're saying is christianity is true because so many people believe it?
glennheston 2 months ago
@glennheston No. But it helps that many people believe it, for if it were grossly wrong people had stopped believing it long ago. Instead, our Western Civilization was raised from the ashes of the Roman Empire, and Christianity is still spreading - now to China and Africa. This does not mean, however, that other visions are necessarily wrong. As a Catholic, I believe God has a salvation plan for everybody, independently of creed.
aaantunes 2 months ago
@aaantunes "But it helps that many people believe it, for if it were grossly wrong people had stopped believing it long ago." That's just plain stupid. Yes, people would still believe it. Just like people believed the world was flat for thousands of years before it was shown to be round. I'm sorry, but if you believe in your religion, by default, all other religions must be false. You cannot have it both ways. If you believe your "god" has a plan, then why worship him? It would be unnecessary.
glennheston 2 months ago
@glennheston "If you believe your "god" has a plan, then why worship him?" I don't see why not. One can feel grateful - which is worshiping in some sense. When I was a practical atheist, one thing that was depressing was personal success (and I had a few). Being my own accomplishment and since I was not particularly interested in praise from other people, it seemed that gratitude was impossible. I still think that gratitude for your own existence somehow implies you're a theist.
aaantunes 1 month ago
@aaantunes I'm sorry, but no one goes from being an atheist to being a theist. You may not have had a belief in any one certain "god", but you weren't an atheist. Are you saying since you're happy for being alive therefore there is a "god"? No. You keep trying to say in one way or another, that there has to be a "god". There doesn't have to be a "god". There may be a "god". There may not be a "god". Arrogance says there's a "god", and this is what he says everyone should do. Keep it to yourself.
glennheston 1 month ago
@glennheston "I'm sorry, but no one goes from being an atheist to being a theist." Says who? Absurd statements like this really make you look a bit narrow-minded.
aaantunes 1 month ago
@aaantunes You would know what narrow minded is, since you don't have the ability to even imagine a world without your "god". I know, you wouldn't want to imagine it. That's not what I'm saying. I said you don't have the ability to imagine it.
glennheston 1 month ago
as soon as some one says the words 'the universe came from nothing' that the person saying them is talking out of his hat. do some thing good with with your faith and stop giving false witness, or is it another of the ten commandments, you know the one beginning with a L
333derick333 5 months ago
This guy has very little understanding of physics and science in general. He keeps saying the word proof as if physicists are proving theories. This is entirely wrong! Science doesn't prove things in absolute terms, we just get better information and more evidence so that we can have a higher certainty in the ideas and theories.
Fand421 5 months ago
religious extremists>god
GetAFuckinClue 5 months ago
fascist america>god
GetAFuckinClue 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
prostitutes>god
GetAFuckinClue 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
gays>god
GetAFuckinClue 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
'I do not like the reappearance of The Jesuits ... If ever there was a body of men who merited damnation on earth and in hell, it is this society of Loyola's. Nevertheless, we are compelled by our system of religous toleration to offer them an asylum.' John Adams, 2nd President of the U.S.A
countdumas 6 months ago
Some people really get sore in their ass over the idea that there is no god. The burden of proof is on the individual claiming god exists. Unless you create a theory that predicts god's existence that can withstand rigorous attempts to falsify the theory the reasonable thing to do is to go on with our lives as if god does not exist. There isn't one "hypothesis" of god's existence that hasn't been falsified. Belief in god requires faith. Faith is only necessary to believe unreasonable things.
beyonddeadstudio 6 months ago
If I told you that a unicorn ate your dinner you would demand proof before you believed me. How is God any different?
beyonddeadstudio 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@beyonddeadstudio unicorn>god
GetAFuckinClue 5 months ago
dont blabber which u dont understand.........we still dont have sophisticated technology to understand the origin of universe.......to which you dumba** give d name god.......
kailas3993 6 months ago
I have tired of this thread. you have offered nothing except "hawking is a great scientist!" and questioning the standing of everyone who disagreed with him, living or dead. But, since you can offer nothing else, and since Hawking has ventured into philosophy instead of science ( a subject he is absolutely not qualified to be discussing), I will move on to more productive discussions, however I wish you well.
drhaljr 6 months ago
@drhaljr So you never watched the video I linked in the first place? And you don't even understand Hawking's position?
"the universe is governed by the laws of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws." - Hawking from the Grand Design
lessismore2020 6 months ago
They all disagree with Hawking that m-theory explains away God. they are easy enough to look up and a comment section does not allow enough space for in depth discussion.
I think there are a number of contenders, but one I like right now is Dr. Garrett Lisi whose "theory of everything" is seen by some prominent physicists as the 'holy grail of physics'. Hans Bethe was certainly great, but died last yr. But I don't think we have anyone up to Einstein, Planck, Heisenberg, Bohr, or Fermi.
drhaljr 6 months ago
You earlier said that hawking was the greatest scientific mind of our time, yet the Nobel Prize and the Crawford Prizes always go to other people. As for current physicists who disagree with hawking: Sir Roger Penrose(Prof Emeritis shared the Wolf Prize with Hawking in 88),Prof George Ellis (Em. Prof one of worlds leading theorists in cosmology), and Prof Michio Kaku all disagree with Hawking's conclusions.
drhaljr1958 6 months ago
@drhaljr1958 Didn't I ask you to show how they disagreed and not just post names saying they disagree. Anyone can post names and say they disagree, show me exactly what they are disagreeing about.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr1958 So you have to win a Nobel to be the greatest scientific mind? Can I have your take on who the greatest scientific mind of our time is then?
lessismore2020 6 months ago
Enjoyed the interaction though.
drhaljr 6 months ago
I have moved away from Fr. Spitzer because you seem to be arguing his standing rather than his arguments, so Dr. Sandege and Sir Polkinghorn are just two very prominent scientists (among many) in Dr. Hawking's field that don't think much of Hawking's conclusions.
drhaljr 6 months ago
@drhaljr Oh we got a surprise here. Polkinghorn is an Anlican priest who has made an entire career out of trying to use science to prove religion and hasn't worked in the field for 20 years, I'm shocked.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr Can I throw out a little challenge here for you? Can you name someone who isn't a devout Christian who says he is wrong and provide that proof here, not just list a name.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr If it isn't too much to ask can you use someone that currently works in the field of study within at least the past 10 years.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
Infact, Dr. Polkinghorn (a professor emeritis in theoretical physics) says the notion of m-theory (upon which Hawking is basing all of this) is unknowable and cannot be demonstrated experimentally and therefore useless. The point here is that a great number of physicists who are very highly regarded ( not famous b/c their personal stories are not as compelling) disagree with hawking and that his conclusions are not based on the science.
drhaljr 6 months ago
Are you having trouble reading? He has a PhD in Philosophy 1983. His focus of study since has been the philosophy of Science regarding space-time theory and transcendent implications of contemporary big bang cosmology. Look, Alan Sandege the father of modern astronomy ( he discovered quasars) and won the Crawford Prize (the Nobel quiv. in physics) disagrees strongly with Hawking. The same can be said of prof sir John Polkinghorn who says Hawking has left science for metaphysics.
drhaljr 6 months ago
@drhaljr Alan Sandege is dead bro.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr Or at least Allan Sandage is dead, that is how you actually spell his name btw. Can you back any of what you are saying up? Why do you just keep throwing out names and say they agree and give no proof. I find it hard to believe a dead man objected to Hawking.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOD - Philosophia Perennis and Science.
The Old Lady’s TORTOISE (Hinduism) and DRAGON (Taoism) are symbols for WAVE (energy), both are analog with MAGEN DAVID (Judaism). "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" is the metaphor, and also similar with allegory of rituals Thawaf circling around the Ka'ba and Sa’i oscillating along “the sinus” Marwah-Shafa during the Hajj pilgrimage (Abraham). YIN-YANG: energy-particle . CROSS (Christian) and SWASTIKA (Buddhism) are symbols for “Balance of Nature.”
TatoSugiarto 6 months ago
By the way, since the early 1980's Fr. Spitzer has specialized in the philosophy of Science, particularly space-time theory and transcendent implications of contemporary big bang cosmology, and metaphysics, particularly the theory of time and philosophy of God. So to say that He is completely ill equipped to comment on this subject is a bit unfair.
drhaljr 6 months ago
@drhaljr Philosophy of science isn't really science, sorry.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr Where are you getting his degree is philosophy of science anyway? The only think I see is philosophy but not of science.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr Hawking isn't saying it wasn't created anyway, just that it wasn't necessary to have created the universe. Hawking is agnostic not an atheist, he isn't really arguing theology.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr Even if he does have a degree in philosophy of science I think this quote sums out how important that is to science.
"Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds,” - Feynman
lessismore2020 6 months ago
Although in context my english was perfectly clear, let me clarify, I mean that you cannot prove or disprove the existence of God with mathematics. By God, I mean that as defined by the vast majority of theologians. Hawking redefines God as a finite entity in the universe as do many atheists. Dr. Kaku, who is the first physicist to postulate the equation for string theory (he is of equal stature to Dr. Hawking), has said that Hawking is reaching too far in this case, I agree with Dr. Kaku.
drhaljr 6 months ago
@drhaljr If you use Occam's razor, which says to not overcomplicate something, means if we find a natural answer for the process God should be out of the equation. Can I have where he said this? He is the first one to postulate it? Then why is his name not mentioned once in most articcles online about it?
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@lessismore2020 Now that you mention Occam's razor, why has cosmology embarked in this ever burgeoning frenzy of different cosmologies? Currently, the most likely and experimentally corroborated cosmology is that of a very delicate universe with a finite age. The LHC has not corroborated string theory; maybe it never will. That being the case, Occam's razor suggests an entity outside space and time as the cause of the universe, aka God; not arbitrary cosmologies with infinite local universes.
aaantunes 2 months ago
Comment removed
drhaljr 6 months ago
I'm not arguing for or against either position by Fr. Spitzer or Dr. Hawking, but its a question that can't be argued or answered by the mathematics, and the name calling and vitriol shows the insecurity of most of the people on this comment stream. If you disagree, state your case, name calling is just juvenile.
drhaljr 6 months ago
@drhaljr I think that video shows that it is indeed most likely quite provable.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr You need to define your noun when you make a new entry because I'm not sure if you mean the science isn't provable or God.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
A PhD in Philosophy is not "Jesusology", nor is Dr. Kaku's many degrees, nor are mine ( BS, MS, PhD, DDS). Your responses display a small mindedness and possibly a self esteem issue. Had you listened to Dr. Hawking carefully you would realize he had to redefine the Creator contrary to nearly all definitions in common use by theologians order for his thesis to stand. This was expressed by the commentators in the followup program, but maybe you didn't catch that.
drhaljr 6 months ago
@drhaljr He has one in Divinity. I'm just saying this guy is in no real position to doubt someone like Hawking unless you have put years of study into cosmology. Hawking's view on this is by far the most widely accepted account in science. This guy is doubting his scientific analysis not the meaning of creator.
/watch?v=dJIWobQh9WI
lessismore2020 6 months ago
If any of you had bothered to read any of Fr. Spitzer's books, you would realize that he understands physics at a level that most of you wish you could. Dr. Hawking's problem is that he took a few step too far, even Dr. Michio Kaku said as much as well as others...
drhaljr 6 months ago
@drhaljr Oh okay, well that's funny because the only thing I see him having a degree in is Jesus. I'm sorry but this guys understanding is nowhere near Hawking, don't even try to play that.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@drhaljr Greatest scientific mind of our generation or Dr. of Jesusology, who do I go with here. Man it's going to be a tough decision but I'm going to go ahead and say this guy with the Jesus degree probably outranks Hawking.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
All of you who are making disparaging remarks about Fr. Spitzer should take a look at his resume before looking stupid again. National Honors Society, Magna Cum Laude or Summa Cum Laude graduate at every level of his education(BBA, MA, MDiv, ThM, PhD). A little introspection before speaking/posting would be good....just sayin
drhaljr 6 months ago
Comment removed
drhaljr 6 months ago
Whoops, that should be Argument From Incredulity. Different fallacy, same bullshit.
santrim 6 months ago
7 solid minutes of the Argument From Ignorance Fallacy: "I don't understand it, so it's not true."
santrim 6 months ago
"...in my new book..." Is the nothing more need to say.
beelsebuubi 6 months ago
Did you wake up that morning and think to yourself, "I'm going to try to discredit one of the greatest thinkers and scientists of our time today with a seven minute Youtube video!"? You know there is actual science and mathematics behind his claims. He's not pulling this stuff out of thin air. You however....
mokenshi 6 months ago
@mokenshi you sure he's not pulling this stuff out of air?, after all, the universe woke up one morning & thought, i might become a universe today?.
Even Hawking knows there was/is a "Grand Design", simply people like him become fools in their desperation in trying to deny the obvious. There was nothing??? except the law of gravity...hmmm really, who made & designed gravity?. If he really is a wise man he would seek to make peace with his Maker... he wont be able to deny God on judgement day.
zacqt 6 months ago
@zacqt Yea Hawking is just making it up out of thin air, that's his job. That's why he has about 30 of the most honored awards any scientists can get, for making stuff up. This is just sad to see anyone who knows nothing about cosmology to question Hawking like this, you and the guy in this video don't understand the first thing and he doesn't want you too.
Here's a very simplified beginner for you and anyone else who doubts this.
/watch?v=dJIWobQh9WI
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@zacqt Oh look there's actual science to back up what Hawking is saying, it isn't just some guy in a penguin suit going c'mon I know nothing about this but it has to be wrong because it sounds silly so you guys just keep on loving you some Jesus because even though I know virtually nothing about the topic I can tell you the top cosmologist on planet Earth doesn't know what he's talking about.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@lessismore2020 You must remember Hawking, Dawkins, Hitchens etc all make lots of money from book sales to a gullible majority of people desperate to deny God The Creator. Every piece of known science has to be thrown out the door to believe *something came from nothing* or perfect order happened *all by itself*.<Not even you believe that, nor do any of the 3 names above. Einstein said "God doesn't play dice with the universe", regardless of his actual beliefs it sure was an interesting quote.
zacqt 6 months ago
@zacqt Einstein was dead wrong about how the universe worked in that area. He scoffed at the idea of the big bang, quoting Einstein isn't going to help anything because he was just plain wrong. Uhm wouldn't Hawking make more money being a theist if he was only doing it to make money, I mean there are a hell of a lot more theists, he would have made a lot more money backing religion. Your arguments are sad sir, please educate yourself.
lessismore2020 6 months ago
@zacqt In fact that quote from Einstein directly relates to something he was incredibly wrong about. It was about Heisenberg's uncertainty principle which is now a cornerstone of science and what these new breakthroughs are based on if you watched that video I linked. That quote you gave is testament to how far off the mark Einstein really was. He didn't believe in quantum mechanics and that is the center of scientific advancement right now.
lessismore2020 6 months ago