Stephen Hawking's Universe

[Nathan Poe]

Do you tell them your not a christian, or do you just save that for us?

Hmmm... do you think it would make a difference?

 

[Cantuar]

So you do not understand anything about shadows and types?

What does that have to do with the fact that leprosy is a bacterial infection? Or are we going after germ theory as well as evolution now?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

What does that have to do with the fact that leprosy is a bacterial infection? Or are we going after germ theory as well as evolution now?

You need to remember that you are trying to have a rational conversation with someone who recently told us that people probably lived on the moon before the fall.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

 

[Nathan Poe]

You need to remember that you are trying to have a rational conversation with someone who recently told us that people probably lived on the moon before the fall.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

ROFL I must have missed that one. Can you send me a link?

 

[lucaspa]

Why? Why? Why? I should have qualifed that was my wife's church, the methodist church. Without getting into details I did join the methodist church, but I was going back and forth between my church and my wife's church. But I am no longer a part of the Methodist church.

NIICE backpeddle! So why did you say it was your church? This sounds waaay too convenient to get your church off the hook.

So, why did my friend die? Because He did not go to the man of God to receive what God had for him. He went to the man of science, and science told him he was going to die. So he prepared himself and he let the disease run it's course.

So why didn't YOU get him to Angley? Didn't you tell him of all the wonderful healing of Angley? Why didn't Angley heal him from a distance with the power of God? Didn't you ask Angley to do this?

What did Hawking's do? He decided that he was going to make the best use out of what time he had, and he is still alive 30 years later.

John, since there is nothing science can do to alter the course of the disease, isn't the fact that Hawking is around 30 years later evidence that God intervened and extended his life? Sounds to me like you just admitted that Hawking is under God's grace.

So why wasn't your churchgoing, believing friend also extended God's grace?

 

[lucaspa]

Since John by self-admission doesn't know enough of the physics to dispute Hawking's No Boundary Proposal, he has to find another way to get rid of it. The route he chose was to discredit Hawking the person, and to use his ALS to do so. John tried to link Hawking's ALS to his supposed denial of God and therefore to God punishing him for this denial.

That is a supposition on your part with no proof and no evidence. But by all means, put your proof together, show us your evidence. In the mean time what I said stands: You just don't get it.

I put forth the argument. John, you made no bones that you don't like Hawking's theories. You think that they somehow dishonor God. Do you dispute this? Let's face it, if Hawking's No Boundary Proposal is correct, God did not create the universe.

OK, so you have to get rid of the theories in order to stop the "dishonoring of God". How to do that? Can you argue that his physics is wrong? You have admitted several times that you don't understand science. So, how to discredit the theory without being able to discuss the theory? Show that Hawking is being punished by God because his theories are wrong!

Show me how the logic doesn't work.

Also your still avoiding the question as to why Hawking's is still alive 30 years after the doctors said he should have died.

How can I avoid it when you just brought it up? I would think the explanation is pretty obvious: by your reasoning Hawking must be under the grace of God to keep the disease at bay.

One way or the other this conversation is a topic who's time has come.

The topic of saying God goes around punishing people by giving them horrible diseases? That topic's time has NEVER come. The god you are talking about is not God.

This has a lot less to do with "Hawking the person" then it does Hawking the figure head of science. He agreed to be put out on PBS, and that makes him a public figure and he is now open for discussion.

John, Hawking's THEORIES are open for discussion because they have ALWAYS been public. What is not open for a Christian is to attack God the way you have.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/html/home.html

Let's see, the site starts with "Where do we come from? How did the universe begin? Why is the universe the way it is? How will it end?" Hmm. Questions everyone, Christians included, have asked. What's the big deal?

"I want you to share my excitement at the discoveries, past and present, which have revolutionized the way we think. From the Big Bang to black holes, from dark matter to a possible Big Crunch, our image of the universe today is full of strange sounding ideas, and remarkable truths. The story of how we arrived at this picture is the story of learning to understand what we see."

And what's wrong with this? Where is describing God's universe failing to give honor to God?

 

[lucaspa]

I never said that God hands out disease. People either bring it on themselves or satan puts it on them. If you read the book of Job what does it say? Satan was the cause, but God allowed it.

It is time people take a good hard look at the Bible. I am not out to win converts. But it is time to take a look at what the Bible says. Here is a good place to start:

Proverbs 23:7 For as he thinks in his heart, so is he.

So back to your friend: he brought on his own ALS? How? I hear Angley's wife died of cancer. Just how did she bring this on herself?

I am open for any suggestion as to what people here thinks that this verse means or is refering to.

For the Proverbs verse, it's easy if you go to Proverbs 23:1 "When thou sittest to eat with a ruler, consider diligently what is put before you:"

That seems pretty plain.

Of course, if you like that chapter, I seem to be laboring with what is stated in 23:9 "Speak not in the ears of a fool: for he will despise the wisdom of your words."

Luke 6:45b For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.

Yes, and I am worried about the evil that is being brought forth in the idea in the OP.

Matthew 12:37
For by your words you will be justified,
and by your words you will be condemned."

Exactly. I didn't want to go this way in the discussion with you. I wanted to keep it to the ideas you were saying, and not as personal as said in this verse.

What I am plainly saying, John, is that the words of the opening post condemn you. Sorry.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

ROFL I must have missed that one. Can you send me a link?

http://www.christianforums.com/t47145&page=2

Added in edit To be fair I see he only said that chances are there was life on the moon before the fall.

 

[lucaspa]

All I am saying is accept that. Don't try to say that his thinking represents science but his appearance does not represent science. If science was so wonderful, they would have found the cure for him. So accept it as a image of science today.

Ah, a new idea. John, does the word "non sequitor" mean anything to you? It is tying two unrelated things together and claiming that one follows from the other.

In your "if ... then" sentence, the "then ... " doesn't follow from the "if ..." BTW, non-sequitor means "does not follow" in Latin.

Because science has figured out some of the universe, it does not mean that it has to figure out ALL the universe. What's more, remember that Hawking is talking physics, and the supposed failing of science is in medicine.

On a deeper level, you seem to be trying to equate science with scientISM. Scientism is indeed flawed. Science is not an object of worship, and those who make it one are misunderstanding science.

Again, this goes back to a way to discredit science. Since science has come up with ideas -- evolution in particular -- that you can't dislodge thru the data, the new means of attack is to discredit science in general so that the theories you don't like will also get discredited. Otherwise, why have a supposed "failure" of science be the face of science?

Angley uses physics -- radio and TV -- to spread his ministry, right? So, the face of science is also Angley reaching thousands that his mere voice in his church could not reach alone.

As far as Job, yes the Bible says he was perfect and upright before God. But he was not without sin in that he did try to justify himself rather than to justify God. When he came to realize this, then he did repent and God did restore back to him more than what he had lost.

That's not the Job I read. Job's afflictions arose from a BET between sh'tan and God. In order to win a bet, God orders sh'tan to kill people (Job's servants and family), inflict disease on Job, etc. IOW, for a selfish reason of God -- to win a bet!

Job is an attempt to deal with the very difficult problem of why bad things happen to good people. I don't consider it a very good attempt. I think there are much better solutions to the problem, but the author of Job didn't think of them.

 

[lucaspa]

I"m really going to have to side with JohnyR7 on this one. If you take the bible to be the literal word of God, then people with disease are inflicted by God or Satan.

However, we've shown that the Bible is NOT to be read literally. So the antecedent is wrong.

The reason atheists like Biblical literalism is that it is the only way they can falsify Christianity. Another way that creationism and literalism are dangerous to Christianity.

 

[lucaspa]

If Adam and Eve had not sinned, there would be no sickness in the world today. So no matter how you slice it, sickness is the result of sin.

Where does it say that in Genesis 3?

But when Jesus was asked about the blind man: Who sinned, him or his parents. Jesus answered:

John 9:3
Jesus answered, "Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him.

Nice job, John!! Just destroyed your first argument. This sickness was NOT the result of sin, yet you just claimed that sickness was the result of sin! That's not a record for self-contradiction, but it is close.

Again when the news of the day was about a tower that fell and the people who were killed, Jesus commented.

Luke 13:4-5 Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem? [5] I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish."

But it doesn't say they died BECAUSE they were sinners! Or are you suggesting that people without sin never suffer from accidents?

I think, everyone, that we are going to have to wait until a tragedy stikes JohnR7 personally. Not until he gets a life-threatening disease or suffers a near-fatal accident will he question that these are caused by sin. As long as these do not happen to him, he can 1) keep up with this false doctrine and 2) pretend that he is without sin.

I am just suggesting, and notice the word I use: "suggest", that Stephen Hawking's represents science. He represents science in what they have accomplished and in also what they have not accomplished.

Changing the claims again, aren't you, John? Well, it's a weak admission that the original post is falsified, but an admission nonetheless.

IF that were the case, then you wouldn't have needed all the Biblical verses in the OP. Actually, all you had to do was pay attention to us when we were discussing the limitations of science. Sorry, John, but there aren't any subscribers to scientism here.

The origional post was an attack on the Rev. Earnest Angley and his people or the church he pastors. Rev. Angley has been used by God to help many people. To attack the people of God, is the same thing as attacking God, because it is God who is at work in them.

Oh, HO! This is a problem that is recurring. The Bible warns us of false prophets and those who would lead people astray. YOU say Angley is from God. We, for quite legitimate reasons, doubt it. I would say that equating questioning Angley with attacking God is a sure sign we are dealing with a false prophet. A real prophet knows he isn't God.

 

[lucaspa]

Living a perfect life is no protection from misfortune (indeed, in Job's case, it was the cause of his misfortune). And that takes John's whole argument about Stephed Hawking "bringing ALS upon himself for not glorifying God," and tosses it on the trash heap...

...Where it belongs.

Nicely done!

 

[lucaspa]

We know that lepersy is a type of sin. We also believe that cancer today is a type of sin. But no one suggests that a individual has lepersy or cancer because of personal sin. But we know that just as cancer and lepersy eats away at a person, so does sin.

There were some things I pointed out about what is know of the physical disease of ALS and I showed how this can help us to understand spiritual things. For example: Sclerosis: I equated to a hardening of the attitude. Or the idea that ALS is a disease where the muscles go without nurishment. In a spiritual sense we daily receive nurishment from God. He is the bread of life. He gives strength to our body. If we do not receive our daily bread, then we are going to be weak in a spiritual way.

The Physical then becomes what they call a shaddow and a type for what is going on in the spiritual realm.

Let's be clear: you are CLAIMING that the physical is a shadow and a type for what is going on in the spiritural realm. The claim is not fact. What's worse, it contradicts your second sentence. Unless, of course, that ALS is a product of personal sin. Which brings us back to your friend again. You haven't told us what his personal sin was to bring on ALS.

Now you are back to your original idea: that Hawking's disease is a manifestation of his inner spiritual condition. And, of course, since his spiritual condition is not with God, then his theories are not with God and we can dismiss them. Right? Or do we keep the theories no matter what Hawking's relationship with God?

John, I resubmit that this idea that the Physical is a shadow of the spiritual is going to last only so long as YOU and Angley enjoy good health. It is a product of pride, not of God.

 

[lucaspa]

Then you would know that God has no ego.

Then why was He willing to go to such lengths to avoid losing a bet in Job? Why make the bet to begin with?

As to those being saved having no ego, how can you possibly tell us that after telling us that an "attack" on Angley is an attack on God? Talk about ego!

 

[wblastyn]

Then why was He willing to go to such lengths to avoid losing a bet in Job? Why make the bet to begin with?

Why would God even care what Satan thought of Job, I mean if God knows everything He should know Job is faithful and shouldn't have to prove it to any one.

 

[JohnR7]

But it doesn't say they died BECAUSE they were sinners! Or are you suggesting that people without sin never suffer from accidents?

1) Every agrument you have, If you can establish that you have more then one arguement, is a arguement against faith. As soon as something meets the scientific criterion, then it is no longer faith.

Hebrews 11:6
But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

So, how can God be pleased with you, if you have no faith?

2) You say that people do not die because they are sinners, because there are people who are not sinners that die. As far as I know, Jesus was the only one who never sinned. So can you show me one person, who was not a sinner who died?

3) They say that Jesus took our place at calvery, yet people still die. So they say but they do not die spiritual dead? How do we know that? Did Jesus not die a physical death in our place?

John 8:51-52
Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. [52] Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.

Jesus said, if you keep His commandments you shall not see death. Do you keep the commandments? Do you think that you will die?

 

[JohnR7]

Then why was He willing to go to such lengths to avoid losing a bet in Job? Why make the bet to begin with?

Where does it say anything in the book of job about a "bet"? Just what do you think they were betting on and what would the "winner" get?

As to those being saved having no ego, how can you possibly tell us that after telling us that an "attack" on Angley is an attack on God? Talk about ego!

In theory, I suppose it would be possible to attack Rev. Angley, if you could find something in his life that God was not a part of. But I do not think that you would be able to do that. Because God is a part of every area and every aspect of his life. So an attack on Rev. Angley is pretty much an attack on God, because it is God who is at work in Him.

Also, if you could find an area in his life that God was not a part of, he would know it at the same time you became aware of it, and he would correct it right away. Been there, seen it, done it.

The only way you can know anything about a person is if the Holy Spirit of God were to search them out and reveil it to you. But God is not a gossip, He does not talk about people behind their back. So He would not reveil anything to you, that he would not reveil to Rev. Angley at the same time He were to reveil it to you.

But by all means, search him out and tell me if you can find an area in his life that God is not a part of. I know people make up all sorts of lies about him. But tell me something that is true.

You say this, that and the other about me. But what if I am the one that God has sent to you, then what does that say about you? Perhaps you could pray and God would send someone more to your liking, or someone you feel is more agreeable. If that is what your really looking for, someone who agrees with you. Talk about ego.

I am not looking for people who agree with me. I am looking for people who are in agreement with God. I do not want people who represent themself, or who represent man in any way. I want to associate with people who represent God in all they do.

 

[Cantuar]

It's interesting that Stephen Hawking and Stephen Jay Gould were both afflicted quite young with a disease that generally kills in a fairly short time and that both survived for decades. Sounds like God is sending mixed messages.

 

[JohnR7]

Let's be clear: you are CLAIMING that the physical is a shadow and a type for what is going on in the spiritural realm.

I am just trying to show you how to understand the Bible. If you do not grasp the concept, or if you do not want to grasp the concept, then your not qualified to comment on the Bible. Is that what you want? Do you want to disqualify yourself?

 

[JohnR7]

It's interesting that Stephen Hawking and Stephen Jay Gould were both afflicted quite young with a disease that generally kills in a fairly short time and that both survived for decades. Sounds like God is sending mixed messages.

Is that what it sounds like to you? I did ask the question why Stephen Hawking's is still alive long past the time the doctors said that he should be dead. But so far your the first to address that question.