Stephen Hawkings vs. God

[Fez]

 

I don't think God is irrelevant to many scientists, even in assessment of evidence.  They are investigating the universe to discover mechanisms and explanations that are not supernatural, but that does not mean they are not cognizant of His reality and do not harbor a sense of awe.  You need look no further than the case of Francis Collins.

Preconceived notions are very deleterious to good science.  If God is everywhere, then think of it as a math equation where you reduce things to their least common denominator.  Like 2x * 5x = 10x. No matter what "x" is, it does not impact the equation...like supernatural does not impact the natural world.

 

Not your world perhaps. In mine God is everything.

[gray wolf]

I agree wholeheartedly.  And I think there is many a good scientist that would echo that sentiment.

[Guest]

I don't think God is irrelevant to many scientists, even in assessment of evidence.  They are investigating the universe to discover mechanisms and explanations that are not supernatural, but that does not mean they are not cognizant of His reality and do not harbor a sense of awe.  You need look no further than the case of Francis Collins.

 

Preconceived notions are very deleterious to good science.  If God is everywhere, then think of it as a math equation where you reduce things to their least common denominator.  Like 2x * 5x = 10x. No matter what "x" is, it does not impact the equation...like supernatural does not impact the natural world.

 

 

Think Of Everything (The Natural World) As 0

 

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Mark 8:36

 

And God As 1

 

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

The same was in the beginning with God.

 

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1:1-3

 

And When God Speaks 1 X 0 = ∞

 

By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host.

 

He gathers the waters of the sea as a heap; he puts the deeps in storehouses.

 

Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him!

 

For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm. Psalms 33:6-9 (ESV)

 

And When God Judges 1 ÷ ∞ = 0

 

And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. Revelation 20:11

 

So You See The Supernatural Is Both The Beginning

 

That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

 

He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

 

He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

 

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: John 1:9-12

 

And The End Of The Natural World

 

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

 

For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. Ecclesiastes 12:13-14

 

And Beloved, 

 

Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen. 1 John 5:21

 

Please Don't Sell Yourself Short

 

The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:

The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:

The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.

 

And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them. Numbers 6:24-27

 

Love, Your Brother Joe

[Scintillic_Atom_Marriage]

I don't think God is irrelevant to many scientists, even in assessment of evidence.  They are investigating the universe to discover mechanisms and explanations that are not supernatural, but that does not mean they are not cognizant of His reality and do not harbor a sense of awe.  You need look no further than the case of Francis Collins.

Preconceived notions are very deleterious to good science.  If God is everywhere, then think of it as a math equation where you reduce things to their least common denominator.  Like 2x * 5x = 10x. No matter what "x" is, it does not impact the equation...like supernatural does not impact the natural world.

Not your world perhaps. In mine God is everything.

Jerry just posited a senario where God is in everything without devaluing observations made that do not exclude it's existence. In what way do you read that to disagree with him?

[Guest]

Most Wise Guys It Seems

 

At that time Jesus prayed this prayer: "O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, thank you for hiding these things from those who think themselves wise and clever, and for revealing them to the childlike. Matthew 11:25 (NLT)

 

Are Seldom Known

 

Then he said, "I tell you the truth, unless you turn from your sins and become like little children, you will never get into the Kingdom of Heaven. Matthew 18:3 (NLT)

 

To Learn

 

So anyone who becomes as humble as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven. Matthew 18:4 (NLT)

 

~

 

I don't think God is irrelevant to many scientists, even in assessment of evidence.  They are investigating the universe to discover mechanisms and explanations that are not supernatural, but that does not mean they are not cognizant of His reality and do not harbor a sense of awe.  You need look no further than the case of Francis Collins.

Preconceived notions are very deleterious to good science.  If God is everywhere, then think of it as a math equation where you reduce things to their least common denominator.  Like 2x * 5x = 10x. No matter what "x" is, it does not impact the equation...like supernatural does not impact the natural world.

Not your world perhaps. In mine God is everything.

 

Jerry just posited a scenario where God is in everything without devaluing observations made that do not exclude it's existence. In what way do you read that to disagree with him?

 

~

 

His Math

 

For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. Colossians 1:16 (NIV)

 

Don't Add Up To Reality

 

He existed before anything else, and he holds all creation together. Colossians 1:17 (NIT)

 

Nor Can It's Mocking X Point Anyone

 

The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, and have done abominable iniquity. There is no one who does good. Psalms 53:1 (WEB)

 

To The Truth

 

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23 (WEB)

 

~

 

Beloved, Can You Hear Him

 

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life.

 

Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,

 

and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die.

 

Do you believe this?” John 11:25-26 (ESV)

 

Yet

 

For it is written,

 

            “AS I LIVE, SAYS THE LORD, EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW TO ME,
            AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL GIVE PRAISE TO GOD.”

 

So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God. Romans 14:11-12 (NASB)

 

Love, Joe

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

 

I don't think God is irrelevant to many scientists, even in assessment of evidence.  They are investigating the universe to discover mechanisms and explanations that are not supernatural, but that does not mean they are not cognizant of His reality and do not harbor a sense of awe.  You need look no further than the case of Francis Collins.

Preconceived notions are very deleterious to good science.  If God is everywhere, then think of it as a math equation where you reduce things to their least common denominator.  Like 2x * 5x = 10x. No matter what "x" is, it does not impact the equation...like supernatural does not impact the natural world.

 

 

I'm not sure I understand your point - how does this example demonstrate that preconceived notions are deleterious to good science?

 

All science requires preconceived notions just in order to get started. Science hasn't proven that our memory is reliable, that reality is reliable, that we have the capacity to accurately understand nature, etc. Those are all presuppositions that are simply assumed, and yet are necessary for the reliability of the enterprise of science. Additionally these are all things that make perfect sense if there is an orderly Creator who created an orderly creation, within which are beings made in His image and are therefore able to sense and comprehend His creation, and yet naturalism has no explaination of why would could trust any of these things if we're all just matter in motion, physically projected by some mechanism of universal expansion.

 

Further, every hypothesis rests upon the shoulders of a world of previously confirmed hypotheses. You don't test everything every time you test something.

 

Could you clarify what you mean please?

[jerryR34]

 

 

I don't think God is irrelevant to many scientists, even in assessment of evidence.  They are investigating the universe to discover mechanisms and explanations that are not supernatural, but that does not mean they are not cognizant of His reality and do not harbor a sense of awe.  You need look no further than the case of Francis Collins.

Preconceived notions are very deleterious to good science.  If God is everywhere, then think of it as a math equation where you reduce things to their least common denominator.  Like 2x * 5x = 10x. No matter what "x" is, it does not impact the equation...like supernatural does not impact the natural world.

 

 

I'm not sure I understand your point - how does this example demonstrate that preconceived notions are deleterious to good science?

 

All science requires preconceived notions just in order to get started. Science hasn't proven that our memory is reliable, that reality is reliable, that we have the capacity to accurately understand nature, etc. Those are all presuppositions that are simply assumed, and yet are necessary for the reliability of the enterprise of science. Additionally these are all things that make perfect sense if there is an orderly Creator who created an orderly creation, within which are beings made in His image and are therefore able to sense and comprehend His creation, and yet naturalism has no explaination of why would could trust any of these things if we're all just matter in motion, physically projected by some mechanism of universal expansion.

 

Further, every hypothesis rests upon the shoulders of a world of previously confirmed hypotheses. You don't test everything every time you test something.

 

Could you clarify what you mean please?

 

There is a difference between preconceived notions and knowledge building on itself.  A simple example is Galileo.  There was a preconceived notion in Christianity that the Earth was the center of all creation.  Galileo pointed his telescope to the sky and noticed that there were some bodies that orbited a non-Earth object.  We built on Galileo's observations and did away with the preconceived notion.  Hope that clarifies it some for you.

[Enoch2021]

 

 

 

I don't think God is irrelevant to many scientists, even in assessment of evidence.  They are investigating the universe to discover mechanisms and explanations that are not supernatural, but that does not mean they are not cognizant of His reality and do not harbor a sense of awe.  You need look no further than the case of Francis Collins.

Preconceived notions are very deleterious to good science.  If God is everywhere, then think of it as a math equation where you reduce things to their least common denominator.  Like 2x * 5x = 10x. No matter what "x" is, it does not impact the equation...like supernatural does not impact the natural world.

 

 

I'm not sure I understand your point - how does this example demonstrate that preconceived notions are deleterious to good science?

 

All science requires preconceived notions just in order to get started. Science hasn't proven that our memory is reliable, that reality is reliable, that we have the capacity to accurately understand nature, etc. Those are all presuppositions that are simply assumed, and yet are necessary for the reliability of the enterprise of science. Additionally these are all things that make perfect sense if there is an orderly Creator who created an orderly creation, within which are beings made in His image and are therefore able to sense and comprehend His creation, and yet naturalism has no explaination of why would could trust any of these things if we're all just matter in motion, physically projected by some mechanism of universal expansion.

 

Further, every hypothesis rests upon the shoulders of a world of previously confirmed hypotheses. You don't test everything every time you test something.

 

Could you clarify what you mean please?

 

There is a difference between preconceived notions and knowledge building on itself.  A simple example is Galileo.  There was a preconceived notion in Christianity that the Earth was the center of all creation.  Galileo pointed his telescope to the sky and noticed that there were some bodies that orbited a non-Earth object.  We built on Galileo's observations and did away with the preconceived notion.  Hope that clarifies it some for you.

 

 

 

 

================================================================================================

 

 

A simple example is Galileo.  There was a preconceived notion in Christianity that the Earth was the center of all creation.

 

 

Equivocation (Fallacy).  RCC doesn't = Christianity.

 

Where in Scripture does it say that the Earth is the Center?

 

Did you know, that as a result of the "Error" filled CMB (COBE/WMAP/Planck) that now they think that the Earth is @ the Center of the entire Universe.  It's called "The Axis of Evil".  What do you think about that?

[jerryR34]

 

 

 

 

I don't think God is irrelevant to many scientists, even in assessment of evidence.  They are investigating the universe to discover mechanisms and explanations that are not supernatural, but that does not mean they are not cognizant of His reality and do not harbor a sense of awe.  You need look no further than the case of Francis Collins.

Preconceived notions are very deleterious to good science.  If God is everywhere, then think of it as a math equation where you reduce things to their least common denominator.  Like 2x * 5x = 10x. No matter what "x" is, it does not impact the equation...like supernatural does not impact the natural world.

 

 

I'm not sure I understand your point - how does this example demonstrate that preconceived notions are deleterious to good science?

 

All science requires preconceived notions just in order to get started. Science hasn't proven that our memory is reliable, that reality is reliable, that we have the capacity to accurately understand nature, etc. Those are all presuppositions that are simply assumed, and yet are necessary for the reliability of the enterprise of science. Additionally these are all things that make perfect sense if there is an orderly Creator who created an orderly creation, within which are beings made in His image and are therefore able to sense and comprehend His creation, and yet naturalism has no explaination of why would could trust any of these things if we're all just matter in motion, physically projected by some mechanism of universal expansion.

 

Further, every hypothesis rests upon the shoulders of a world of previously confirmed hypotheses. You don't test everything every time you test something.

 

Could you clarify what you mean please?

 

There is a difference between preconceived notions and knowledge building on itself.  A simple example is Galileo.  There was a preconceived notion in Christianity that the Earth was the center of all creation.  Galileo pointed his telescope to the sky and noticed that there were some bodies that orbited a non-Earth object.  We built on Galileo's observations and did away with the preconceived notion.  Hope that clarifies it some for you.

 

 

 

 

================================================================================================

 

 

A simple example is Galileo.  There was a preconceived notion in Christianity that the Earth was the center of all creation.

 

 

Equivocation (Fallacy).  RCC doesn't = Christianity.

 

Where in Scripture does it say that the Earth is the Center?

 

Did you know, that as a result of the "Error" filled CMB (COBE/WMAP/Planck) that now they think that the Earth is @ the Center of the entire Universe.  It's called "The Axis of Evil".  What do you think about that?

 

What do i think of that?  I think you miss the point.

[Enoch2021]

Equivocation (Fallacy).  RCC doesn't = Christianity.

Where in Scripture does it say that the Earth is the Center?

Did you know, that as a result of the "Error" filled CMB (COBE/WMAP/Planck) that now they think that the Earth is @ the Center of the entire Universe.  It's called "The Axis of Evil". 

 

 

What do you think about that?What do i think of that?  I think you miss the point.

 

 

=======================================================================

 

What, that you're using an "fallacious" reference to make a point about Pre-Conceived Bias.  I think I got it.

 

I think this speaks to the issue a little more accurately...

 

‘Our ways of learning about the world are strongly influenced by the social preconceptions and biased modes of thinking that each scientist must apply to any problem. The stereotype of a fully rational and objective “scientific method”, with individual scientists as logical (and interchangeable) robots is self-serving mythology. {Emphasis Mine}

Stephen Jay Gould, 1994, Natural History103(2):14.