Ravi Zacharias Answers Stephen Hawking - Part 2

[StefanJato]

lets look at einsteins theory of relativity. According to einstein, time cannot exist without motion. motion of galaxies, planets, etc. lets look at the scientific explanation for the creation of time. the big bang. an event that takes TIME to occur can not create time. Hawkin really needs to get his act together, I'm a college student and I can understand this.

[brindow1]

The theist keeps going on about it being impossible for something to come out of nothing and adds, "The laws of science would have to be suspended for this to happen". Quite so, but the 4 main components of our universe are strong force,weak force,electromagnetism and gravity...but these forces were not existent at the birth ou the universe. When we find the UNIFYING FORCE, we will be well on our way to understanding how THAT came from nothing. Theists should give up their silly argument.

[TimotheosCauvin]

@brindow1 The problem in "something from nothing" is not with "what kind of something" but with the "from nothing". You would still have to explain how a unifying force can pop into existence from nothing.

Unravelling the phenomenological chain can never answer the ontological question.

[brindow1]

@TimotheosCauvin Its not necessary to go back to the birth of the universe to witness how it came into existence from nothing ! Take any area of space,a cubic metre in your computer room if you like-modern scientific technology shows us that virtual particles pop in and out of existence..from nothing !

[TimotheosCauvin]

@brindow1 This may be so. But that's exactly the point: It's not what Christians/Theists mean when they talk about creatio ex nihilo. It's not just about the (explicable or yet inexplicable) appearing and disappearing of natural phenomena, but about the ontological coming into being of everything, i.e. creation as a reality distinct from God. Creation thus is not necessarily equal with the BigBang-singularity.

[SukiCarton]

@brindow1 but don't these particles disappear as quick as they appear? also does it not need energy to exist as well to happen? I may be wrong (not hating, just curious)

[brindow1]

@SukiCarton Thats my understanding as well,that these virtual particles disappear real fast[but not all or we wouldn't be here]. You would think that energy would be req'd wouldn't you. The concept of "nothing" is not possible for the human brain..we can but try to grasp such things, but at least science has shown us that stuff seems to appear out of nothing. Where will science take us ? .. to a better plane than religion I hope !

[Syrus7sk]

I feel like an idiot.

[thenetrider7]

@Foroparapente

And what do you think he meant?

[foroparapente]

Pity to see very few people understood what Hawking said, what it means and how there two clever people are twisting it for their own means.

[Lenzo16]

The criticism here of Hawking is NOT a criticism of the discipline of science, but rather a criticism of the apparent atheistic, philosophical baggage that Hawking is bringing to the table when he presents us with 2 false choices: A) believe in the law of gravity or B) believe in the existence of God. The idea that God might have created the law of gravity is apparently not an option. The modern inventions wrought from scientific methodology are thus vastly different from Hawking's contention.

[SeanAvolio]

Like something out of Alice in Wonderland???? What does he think the Bible sounds like??? The idiocy in this video is overwhelming! If you want to reject science, fine, that's your prerogative, but I would suggest stop being a hypocrite and going to your doctor to heal your illnesses, and pray it off instead! The only reason why modern medicine, cars, planes, the internet, and etc exists is because of SCIENCE. If everything was based on faith, we would still be living in caves!

[myGodiseverything]

@SeanAvolio that comment in itself is illogical and demonstrates a lack of intelligence.....most Christians will not deny that science exists, but that some claims in science are ridiculous. In fact it makes more sense for a Christian to visit a doctor that for an atheist. We believe that God has given humans the knowledge and ability to help each other, while for an atheist, you shouldn't visit a doctor if you're ill, as it's simply nature taking its course, survival of the fittest.

[SeanAvolio]

@myGodiseverything It's incredibly asinine that you would accuse my comment of being illogical and lacking intelligence after your disaster of a response. Atheists believe in learning about the world and doing everything we can to better ourselves as a society without the belief in fantasies. We are aware of the possibility that upon death, there may be nothing further, so we take the life we have now and live it to the best degree that we possibly can. 

[myGodiseverything]

@SeanAvolio okay, first off, I am not attacking you, I didn't say that you were unintelligent, but that your response lacked intelligence.....as in Biblical intelligence, so there's no need to get snippy with me. Secondly, are you going to deny that atheists believe in survival of the fittest? Because I believe that term was coined by Darwin himself. In theory, if you die due to illness, that it is obviously because your immune system is not capable of supporting you, and therefore it would be

[myGodiseverything]

more advantageous for the world to allow the virus or bacteria to take over. I'm simply stating basic evolutionist philosophy, straight from my university textbook-because unlike you, I AM forced to have beliefs from other cultures forced upon me-even if those beliefs are wrong.

[myGodiseverything]

There are several instances in the Bible where God has told the people to construct buildings and forms of transportation. He was actually very specific about it, from the materials required for the Holy of Holies to the number of cubits required for the ark. By the way, everything does require faith. You actually have a lot of faith yourself. Every time you sit down, you have faith that your chair will support you. I'm sure you don't do a thorough inspection on your car to ensure that it

[myGodiseverything]

doesn't fall apart while you drive down the hallway, and that you don't check a buildings foundation and building plans before entering in, nor do you check for poisonous gases in the air before leaving. You have an incredible amount of faith, and you use it everyday, so be careful in attributing everything to science, because in believing in science, you're having faith in mankind to make accurate predictions.

[apearman2]

@SeanAvolio Ha Ha reject science? Did you even watch the video or listen to what they were saying in the video? No one is denying science! Maybe you didn't notice, but here WAS a scientist in the video. Science can only describe what is already there! The laws of physics CANNOT create anything but simply describe what is already there. And what do we know from science...that nothing cannot create something! Just so you know, it doesn't seem like you understood what they were talking about.

[GospelHouseKat]

@SeanAvolio Either religion or science? False dichotomy.

[Arlequin89]

In Spanish Please!

[MarkProffitt]

@goldlion30000 Or the understanding of the laws of thermodynamics are incorrect. That unfortunately doesn't make either argument better. It has been shown many times that mans understanding of the universe is flawed and we know that the current theory has problems so maybe we need to rethink the whole thing.

[GospelHouseKat]

If a guy as smart and knowledgeable as Hawking can't argue coherently for atheism, looks like that dead horse has been whipped long enough.

[RasheemH]

@GospelHouseKat Well said!

[stallion4life]

@GospelHouseKat There are many atheists I respect intellectually, but there are very, very few atheists I respect AS atheists. Hawking's contributions to the debate have been an embarrassment, not even reaching the level of Dawkins. Even his comments against religion ("fairy story for people afraid of the dark"!?!) sound like something from an illiterate teenage YouTuber.

I'll defer to his opinion on physics, but when he starts talking about religion or philosophy, he falls on his face,

[Mathenaut]

@stallion4life Hawking is being derided because he isn't taking the arguments made for the christian god very seriously?

Good. Far as the academic forum is concerned, there is no debate. Just as creationism isn't on the level of real science, neither are these lame arguments for the christian god.

[stallion4life]

@Mathenaut Taken seriously by whom? What you don't seem to understand is that Hawking made elementary errors of logic. Nobody should take *his* opinion seriously on any topic other than astrophysics.

That you think there's an academic consensus on religion is laughable. It just shows the depth of your ignorance.

[Mathenaut]

@stallion4life

Yet when christians make constant elementary errors in logic and science, it's okay? They should be taken seriously? What a joke.

The idea that there is a legitimate 'debate' on this issue as opposed to christians whining about being written off is, indeed, laughable.

[stallion4life]

@Mathenaut I never said logic errors on the part of Christians were okay, even though you haven't made any indication of what these errors might be. In this video, however, they point out very specific instances of Hawking's errors of logic. If you really wanted to impress me, you'd explain how Hawking is right, and how they're wrong, but you don't, because you can't.

And yes, there is debate on these issues, despite the imperious announcements of YouTube losers pretending to be intellectuals.

[Mathenaut]

@stallion4life

Christians heckling the scientific community isn't 'debate'. When peer reviewed material manages to substantiate anything remotely related to creationism and the christian god, then we can talk. Oh, and spare the conspiracy theory hilarity behind why creationists can't get published.

In all of this, Lennox states a single valid objection early in the video with the x=x comment; which is something argued against the usual copout for the christian god being self/uncreated.

[stallion4life]

@Mathenaut

• Nobody was hecking the "scientific community", they were criticizing the inane ideas of one scientist who overreached the area of his expertise.

• They're not discussing Creationism, they're not even discussing Christianity, they're discussing the existence of God. They never even touched upon the issue of Creationism. How is this relevant? Did you even watch the video?

• You still have not made any effort to prove that what Lennox and Zacharias said was incorrect.

[Mathenaut]

@stallion4life

Christians heckle the community at large constantly, from 'creation science' to 'intelligent design' to flat earth and beyond. One gap after another, always something unknown to squeeze 'god' into.

Christians don't accept any concept of diety outside of their own. It's their god they are discussing, nobody is fooled otherwise.

The only valid argument established was criticism of self-creation, which isn't something christians can properly address with their alternative.

[SanEverett]

@Mathenaut Its not the "Christian" God in particular that is the discussion.Thats a red herring. The point is scientific laws aren't capable or adequate to make the deterministic statements that Hawkins makes. Think about it..Do Physicists know a lot about God?

[Mathenaut]

@SanEverett

You're telling me that christians acknowledge the possibility of a god or gods that are not the ones they ascribe to? No. By definition, they are not so open minded.

Physicists don't know alot about things that aren't established or otherwise shown to even exist.

They /do/ know about the validity of claims that don't stand up to scrutiny.

[SanEverett]

@Mathenaut I'm not sure what Christians 'acknowledge' or if that's relevant to the existence of God.

All you have to say is.."Physicists don't know anything about God." And you have established yourself as a truth seeker not an atheist 'preacher.' But I'm beginning to get the message you're of the 'unbeliever' church..A sheep..

[Mathenaut]

@SanEverett

I'm saying that christian theism argues for the christian god. Their god. Not some vague, nebulous, nameless higher power. They are very specific on what they accept.

Nothing in science claims to know anything about god. Simply the lacking validity of claims pertaining to him.

Though, I like the irony of being a sheep for /not/ believing. Sorry, your lord is not my shepherd. I'm not the sheep here.

[SanEverett]

@Mathenaut :-) My Lord?? The Christian red herring is off topic. What about physics comments on God? Continuing to change the subject doesn't say much..

[leahshaner]

Have either of these guys read any of Stephen Hawking's other works?

[commenteh]

@leahshaner I see this is a month later but If you listen to RZ more you will see he has read alot of Hawkings work.

[kaloncar]

@leahshaner

--

As a distant student of Dr. Zacharias let me assure you he has read other works by Stephen Hawking. And, if you listen well to this presentation the other contributor Dr. John Lennox he is a contemporary to Stephen Hawking and travels in the same circles.

[jpbeale]

This is a little redundant with part 1, but an excellent refutation of Hawking's illogical, unsupportable statements.

[123columbo123]

@jpbeale my god your dumb

[maz59]

@jpbeale yes, I think at least the first 5 minutes [which is where i've got to], overlaps with part 1.

I see there is also a part 3 though, and am finding it interesting [and logical to me]

[mrfamous333]

<3 Scientific truth.

</3 Scientific theory.

[ReligionOfSacrifice]

Skinner was wrong philosophically; man is not a caged ape. Skinner was correct scientifically on his study on behavior in "Verbal Behavior" & "Science & Human Behavior." Today radical behaviorists write on Buddhism as similar even though they are completely at odds if studied under scientific principles. Those same radical behaviorists are atheists who write on Buddhism; like the scientist talking on Islam who believes not. Christianity fits within the science of radical behaviorism.

[ABAisSCIENCE]

I am a Radical Behaviorist & a Christian. On my other site, ReligionOfSacrifice, I have written & then spoken (verbal behavior) the story, "Nailed for Good" about the thief who reaches Psalm 51:17. God by stimuli within the man's life reached him for good. God also hardened Pharaoh's heart. God can work within science & transcend it for He causes all things to be according to the apostle John. Science never contradicts God even if Skinner when going beyond science into philosophy is wrong.