Stephen Hawking: God didn't create universe

[highangle]

Where's the faith?

[Kenny Satch]

If there is a God he/she/it did a great job with the planet and the universe.
When it comes to humans I think he/she/it did a tremble job. Humans are poorly designed health wise and we suffer from too many issues. Far too many if "God" made us. Therefore that God could not have made the universe. IMO

[highangle]

Toenails!


The universe couldn't come from nothing. Only God can come from nothing!

[wooley12]

Faith does not mean foolish. Seriously?

[SumJongGuy]

If there is a God he/she/it did a great job with the planet and the universe.
When it comes to humans I think he/she/it did a tremble job. Humans are poorly designed health wise and we suffer from too many issues. Far too many if "God" made us. Therefore that God could not have made the universe. IMO

Because we are "mortal".
And yes, horrible tragedies are certainly allowed to happen here. Because this might just be "hell". Faith allows folks to believe that children who endure horrible things go to a better place when they leave this world that was so unkind to them. Feel free to choose to believe that they don't.

[TNKen]

But, what about the 71 virgins??

[SumJongGuy]

But, what about the 71 virgins??

Would be hilarious if it were true and they turned out to be MEN..

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Faith allows folks to believe that children who endure horrible things go to a better place when they leave this world that was so unkind to them.

I'm not against folks being comforted, but this way of thinking has always struck me as a convenient form of denial. Is there a more destructive form of weakness than believing in something because it makes you feel better? How much human suffering has been born of this weakness?

I'm not a spiritual person, but "Existence is suffering" always seemed a little more honest to me.

[PNWbrit]

where the fuck is the "like" button?

He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy.

[SumJongGuy]

What you see as weakness, I see as strength, being able to believe based on anecdotal and circumstantial evidence. We've already covered "faith". How do you define "trust"?

[babybear]

Would be hilarious if it were true and they turned out to be MEN..

even for me that doesn’t sound that great

[Art Shirk]

What you see as weakness, I see as strength, being able to believe based on anecdotal and circumstantial evidence. We've already covered "faith". How do you define "trust"?

[Mazderati]

[Bobby Stainless]

even for me that doesn’t sound that great

Buncha first timers trying to find the right entrance?

Surely you jest.

[MontuckyFried]

Don't forget that at the end of the day, Stephen Hawking was a theoretical physicist. Don't misunderstand me. The man was absurdly brilliant and his works always fascinated me. I read A Brief History of Time when I was in middle school and it blew my adolescent mind. Still, as genius as he was, his works are ultimately theoretical. Absolutely plausible, yes, but still theory. I believe that even Hawking himself would never want us to take his works as absolute.

Another brilliant (and quite popular) theoretical physicist is Dr. Michio Kaku. I'm sure you're all familiar with String Theory? You've probably seen him in a ton of documentaries. He was quoted as saying "I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence. To me, it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance."

The two considered themselves colleagues, so while Kaku's definition of a "God" may not exactly fall in line with religious notions, he is certainly not ruling anything out as there is such a beautifully harmonious cosmic order to it all. Kaku's infinitely smarter than ALL of us idiots put together, so it might be worth giving his ideas a bit of weight too. Just food for thought.

[digitaldeath]

i clicked in this thread hoping bobby would be reborn as a christian

[XXX-er]

am I missing something or isn't all religion theoretical ?

western Canada has a very high % of atheiests so i am very likely to think this

[TNKen]

Would be hilarious if it were true and they turned out to be MEN..

More likely goats or camels.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

What you see as weakness, I see as strength, being able to believe based on anecdotal and circumstantial evidence.

Yes, this sort of statement has been an extraordinarily success rhetorical move, at least for those who find the idea of "faith" appealing. But "faith" is also glaring mechanism of control, a tool for tamping down critical dispositions and for unifying masses of people by inciting a fear tinged with a sense of moral superiority.

We've already covered "faith". How do you define "trust"?

Offering up the typical platitudes doesn't constitute "covering." We (yes, I include myself) ain't covered shit.

The thing about "trust" is that we tend to feel the word more neutrally. Trust can be good. It can also be deadly. I wish more Christians (or whoever else espouses unfounded belief as a source of moral strength) would view "faith" similarly. Distrust in one's own beliefs is at least as important as trust. Certainly there are many people of faith who would agree, albeit too few, I fear. Faith unchecked by doubt is willful ignorance. I would suggest that unquestioned faith is sign of moral inferiority.

Take Dostoyevsky, for example. That guy interrogated the heck out of his belief with 10 drafts of 1000 pages each for "The Brothers Karamazov" alone. He plunged into his doubts and laid them out for all to see, while teatering just barely on the side of God. This is the sort of faith I find respectable: faith that is agonized over, a faith that embraces suffering. Faith for the sake of comfort, however, is easy, empty, nice, submissive and dangerous.

[babybear]

Buncha first timers trying to find the right entrance?

Surely you jest.

then 15 seconds and pwoooyk
i’d prefer 71 of something else pls

[JimmyCarter]

then 15 seconds and pwoooyk

Can't say pwoooyk is one I've ever heard before.

[iceman]

I'm not even sure how to pronounce it.

[babybear]

it’s not that hard. you’ve all done it.
it’s an onomatopenis i mean onomatopoeia

[Marshall Tucker]

^ great turn to an utter trainwreck of a thread.

So what is the pronoucement?

[abraham]

Pwoo-eek ?
Maybe?