by punkofnice 544 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Caliber: the link you provided does not work... Whats the source of the quote? ~~Bohm
page 126 in Hawking’s A Brief History of Time (1996 edition)
"If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, they universe would have recollapsed before it ever reached its present size"
The" fine tuned universe" idea
The universe is not fine tuned for life. If it were, I suspect that more than one of the hundreds of rocky masses in our solar system alone would have life on it. Less than 1% success rate does not equal "fine tuned".
Apparently more than 99% of all creatures that ever lived are now extinct. I don’t know who was around to count them all, but if it’s true then it's a poor result for a perfect god. On the other hand it is a tremendous result if all creatures stumbled blindly from one challenge to another as they evolved.
There is a possibility that humans will continue to over-populate the planet, run out of resources, fresh water, space and also become extinct. Such is life on this hostile planet. Is there is a biblical God that will step in and stop that? Or would he lose his patience and destroy us all instead, as in the days of Noah? Ah there's the rub!
Ravens -
as far as science this just some,look at job 26:7, heb11:3, job 38:16, jon 2:5,6
Well, I used to think this way. However, there are lots of inaccurate statements in the bible but xtians get around it by only picking out those bits they think will support current views and say that those that don't are 'not to be taken literally'.
Sounds like a big get out clause as usual.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/186261/1/Is-the-Bible-Really-Scientifically-Accurate
Muslims will tell you the Quran is inspired for the same reasons.
Haven't had chance to look at the other scriptures.
That Hawking quote has to be taken in context. He also said....
The intelligent beings in these regions should therefore not be surprised if they observe that their locality in the universe satisfies the conditions that are necessary for their existence. It is a bit like a rich person living in a wealthy neighborhood not seeing any poverty. [Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), p. 124.]
The quantum theory of gravity has opened up a new possibility, in which there would be no boundary to space-time and so there would be no need to specify the behavior at the boundary. There would be no singularities at which the laws of science broke down and no edge of space-time at which one would have to appeal to God or some new law to set the boundary conditions for space-time. One could say: 'The boundary condition of the universe is that it has no boundary.' The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. It would neither be created nor destroyed. It would just BE. [Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), p. 136.]
The idea that space and time may form a closed surface without boundary also has profound implications for the role of God in the affairs of the universe. With the success of scientific theories in describing events, most people have come to believe that God allows the universe to evolve according to a set of laws and does not intervene in the universe to break these laws. However, the laws do not tell us what the universe should have looked like when it started -- it would still be up to God to wind up the clockwork and choose how to start it off. So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator? [Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), p. 140-41.]
What I have done is to show that it is possible for the way the universe began to be determined by the laws of science. In that case, it would not be necessary to appeal to God to decide how the universe began. This doesn't prove that there is no God, only that God is not necessary. [Stephen W. Hawking, Der Spiegel, 1989] One does not have to appeal to God to set the initial conditions for the creation of the universe, but if one does He would have to act through the laws of physics. [Stephen Hawking, Black Holes & Baby Universes]
Job 26:7
Inaccurate. If you take this literally, you have to take it ALL literally, and the north isn't stretched, the earth doesn't "hang", and space is not "nothing".
Heb11:3
Huh??? How is that scientific?
Job 38:16
Again taking it ir literally, the Oceans don't have springs. Springs occur when a porous rock and impervious rock or clay meet. At this juction srings form and subsequently form streams.
Jon 2:5&6
I take you are referring to Jonah - since when do mountains have roots?
If God is GOD and the creator and sustainer of this universe then science will help us to understand Him better.
PSac - But it doesn't - science helps us to understand the natural world better. It has never given any affirmation of the "supernatural".
Bloody hell Punky - Fancy digging up that old thread. I actually tried to make useful comments back in those days!
heb 11:3 -i think iwas in the 1800s they learned that visble particles are made up of invisible particles, but this verse says it long before. jon was just showing that mountaions are in th oceans.
PSac - But it doesn't - science helps us to understand the natural world better. It has never given any affirmation of the "supernatural".
And science probably never well make a comment on anything outside of nature and what is observable.
My point is that science can help us understand our world and universe and if they were created by God and sustained by God then in understanding them, we can understand at least that part of God.
