Atheist "scientist" Steven Hawkin says god didnt build the universe

[Marty Champions]

Through continual presence, and the awareness it provides, we can free ourselves from doing thingsthat we might later come to regret.

[HTexan]

Did your mother teach you how to do that, you steaming pile of dogshit? Hahahaha, you're a fuckin' turd. Bloody troll.

no, i didnt have your childhood.

[avxo]

If you want to know what 'God' means go check a dictionary.

"The one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe."

That tells me nothing. What measurable, falsifiable attributes does this "being" have? How can I verify those attributes independently?

If you want to find out who God is, then read the Bible.

I've read it, front to back, on multiple occasions. I've even read the New Testament in original Greek... can you say the same?

You're a godless degenerate who cannot accept the truth of God and the Bible.

You're right: I cannot accept the truth of the collected writings of sheep-herders. I cannot accept that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds but that it grows into the largest of trees. I cannot accept that bats are birds. I cannot accept that women are created from ribs. I cannot accept that snakes talk. If that's the "truth" of your God then no, I cannot accept it.

And everything was created except of course the Creator. You've got to take the word in the right context.

Of course!

[Jon Harridan]

You really need to learn about physics, space and time cannot exist apart from each other.  It s no point debating with you, you lack a fundamental awareness of scientific concepts!  infinity doesn't exist, it is a construct. 

Consider the following:

“Hilbert’s Hotel is a (hypothetical) hotel with an infinite number of rooms, each one of which is occupied. The hotel gives rise to a paradox: the hotel is full, and yet it has vacancies.

That the hotel is full is obvious. It has an infinite number of rooms, and an infinite of guests; every room is occupied. That the hotel has vacancies is a little more difficult to demonstrate.

Suppose that a new visitor arrives; can he be accommodated? At first it seems that he cannot, but then the hotel clerk has an idea: He moves the guest in Room 1 to Room 2, and the guest in Room 2 to Room 3, and so on. Every guest is moved to the next room along.

For every guest, in every room, there is another room into which they can be moved. This leaves Room 1 vacant for the new visitor. Although the hotel is full, then, the new guest can be accommodated in Room 1.

It is not only one new guest that can be accommodated; in fact, Hilbert’s Hotel has an infinite number of vacancies. By moving every guest to the room the number of which is double the number of their current room, all of the odd numbered rooms can be vacated for new guests. There are, of course, an infinite number of odd numbered rooms, and so an infinite number of new guests can be accommodated.”

If one understands this concept, the hotel can have an infinite number of rooms full, as well as an infinite number of rooms empty. It makes no sense and does not work in the real world. Infinity is a paradox. A paradox is a self-contradictory and false proposition of any person, thing, or situation exhibiting an apparently contradictory nature.

Hahahaha, that's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. How the fuck is space even related to time? They are 2 different things: one is a physical concept and the other is not. What you said is certainly not physics, and I'm talking not about physics but truth! Physics can only talk about the RECORDING Of space and time but cannot explain why and how these came to be. You moron, you lack a fundamental awareness of EVERYTHING! You don't even know to recognize and accept truth when you see it. It's really no point talking to an ass like you but I want to show your bullshit for what it is. You talk of science but there is no science in you for real science supports God and His word. Your hotel analogy is totally wrong because God is limitless. That's just who He is.

[Radical Plato]

Okay then, I'll feed the troll somemore. If you want to know what 'God' means go check a dictionary. If you want to find out who God is, then read the Bible. You're a godless degenerate who cannot accept the truth of God and the Bible. And everything was created except of course the Creator. You've got to take the word in the right context.

You really are struggling with your own circular reasoning aren't you.  Your argument is Everything needs a cause, things don’t just exist (say the universe for example) Therefore the universe must have a cause – that cause is God.  It is absurd to suggest that a Complexity (the universe) imples a designer, yet the complex being that created it does not.  To suggest that something complex implies design, but the complex designer does not is a contradiction.  Either complexity implies a designer, or it does not.  if your argument is complexity implies design, then the complexity that created it must also imply design.  You can't have it both ways, you need to make up your mind.  It is the equivalent of saying God created the Universe but he didn't create the Universe.  It makes no sense.

[avxo]

Hahahaha, that's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. How the fuck is space even related to time? They are 2 different things: one is a physical concept and the other is not. What you said is certainly not physics, and I'm talking not about physics but truth! Physics can only talk about the RECORDING Of space and time but cannot explain why and how these came to be. You moron, you lack a fundamental awareness of EVERYTHING! You don't even know to recognize and accept truth when you see it. It's really no point talking to an ass like you but I want to show your bullshit for what it is. You talk of science but there is no science in you for real science supports God and His word. Your hotel analogy is totally wrong because God is limitless. That's just who He is.

Wha... what's a "recording of space and time"?

[Marty Champions]

Rhythmic Balanced Interchange
, wherein whatever is given is always"regiven" in kind. To state it another way, by keeping all our interchanges with others orderly and balanced by constantly extending (or giving) the most constructive aspects of ourselves, it isreflected back to us (or "regiven" in return). We can choose to work together towards mutually beneficial goals, and thus create a civilization truly built upon civility.

[Marty Champions]

Wha... what's a "recording of space and time"?

the mind

[Jon Harridan]

no, i didnt have your childhood.

Don't deny it. And don't insinuate things about me; you wish you had my childhood.

[Mr Nobody]

trolls aggrivate they do not collaborate

collaboration is why i live , not to aggravate, i am the opposite of many of you.

this song is about collaborating not aggrivating like a troll does

Good upper cuts, they always work as if you are tall facing a short fighter. Astrology is real personality straits = spot on. Daily horoscopes too difficult to predict.

[Jon Harridan]

Wha... what's a "recording of space and time"?

Precisely what it is. A recording of space is a measure of how much space there is and a recording of time is a measurement of how much time has elapsed. That's all physicists can do really.

[Marty Champions]

Good upper cuts, they always work as if you are tall facing a short fighter. Astrology is real personality straits = spot on. Daily horoscopes too difficult to predict.

those were actually "non-violent" punches not meant to inflict harm since we are all brothers, why would we want to do that , only meant for exercise purposes in only bro

as for horoscopes you have to ask yourself , how do they come up with these conclusions based on the month and day, then you investigate for yourself how this is accomplished, the true process wich makes sense when you read it, not from the trolls who are after money and website hits

[Radical Plato]

Precisely what it is. A recording of space is a measure of how much space there is and a recording of time is a measurement of how much time has elapsed. That's all physicists can do really.

Please enlighten everyone with your definition of space and time, this could get interesting!

[Jon Harridan]

You really are struggling with your own circular reasoning aren't you.  Your argument is Everything needs a cause, things don’t just exist (say the universe for example) Therefore the universe must have a cause – that cause is God.  It is absurd to suggest that a Complexity (the universe) imples a designer, yet the complex being that created it does not.  To suggest that something complex implies design, but the complex designer does not is a contradiction.  Either complexity implies a designer, or it does not.  if your argument is complexity implies design, then the complexity that created it must also imply design.  You can't have it both ways, you need to make up your mind.  It is the equivalent of saying God created the Universe but he didn't create the Universe.  It makes no sense.

Oh brother, here we go again. I see you're not new to spinning bullshit, 'E-Kul'. ' It is the equivalent of saying God created the Universe but he didn't create the Universe'? No, it's not equivalent to that, not by a long shot. It's only what you SAY it's equivalent to! Who the fuck says that God created the universe and then denies it? Maybe an idiot like you but not me! As usual you're twisting what I said around to fit your fell agenda. Creation obviously doesn't just exist; it must have had a Creator and that is God. Either you create or you are created; that's the way it is. Since God's the Creator how could He have been created? Yes, complexity obviously implies design but that only applies to creations! God transcends all of creation and His complexity as you call it demonstrates His ability to CREATE. The ETERNAL God who has always been is not to be treated as a creation is.

[Jon Harridan]

Please enlighten everyone with your definition of space and time, this could get interesting!

Check a dictionary; that's where I get my definitions from.

[Radical Plato]

Oh brother, here we go again. I see you're not new to spinning bullshit, 'E-Kul'. ' It is the equivalent of saying God created the Universe but he didn't create the Universe'? No, it's not equivalent to that, not by a long shot. It's only what you SAY it's equivalent to! Who the fuck says that God created the universe and then denies it? Maybe an idiot like you but not me! As usual you're twisting what I said around to fit your fell agenda. Creation obviously doesn't just exist; it must have had a Creator and that is God. Either you create or you are created; that's the way it is. Since God's the Creator how could He have been created? Yes, complexity obviously implies design but that only applies to creations! God transcends all of creation and His complexity as you call it demonstrates His ability to CREATE. The ETERNAL God who has always been is not to be treated as a creation is.

Oh Brother, you are lost aren't you. you don't realise what you are suggesting, on the one hand you suggest that complexity implies design, but then on the other hand you say in the case of the complexity of the creator it doesn't.  if you so easily suggest that one complexity implies design and another doesn't, the argument can be carried forward to the design of the universe, if the complexity of the designer needs no cause, then the complexity of the universe needs no cause.  You either agree that their is cause and effect or you don't, you fail to see the limitations of your God is uncaused argument.  You can't have cause and effect and not have cause and effect.  You are using cause and effect to support a Universe being created, but the existence of no cause and effect when it comes to god.  Their can't be both cause and effect and no cause and effect.  It's a paradox and a contradiction in terms.

Please enlighten everyone with your definition of space and time, this could get interesting!

Check a dictionary; that's where I get my definitions from.

Oh Brother! It is all beginning to make sense now!  if I told you I learned what religion and Jesus was by looking in the dictionary, what would you think?

[Jon Harridan]

Oh Brother, you are lost aren't you. you don't realise what you are suggesting, on the one hand you suggest that complexity implies design, but then on the other hand you say in the case of the complexity of the creator it doesn't.  if you so easily suggest that one complexity implies design and another doesn't, the argument can be carried forward to the design of the universe, if the complexity of the designer needs no cause, then the complexity of the universe needs no cause.  You either agree that their is cause and effect or you don't, you fail to see the limitations of your God is uncaused argument.  You can't have cause and effect and not have cause and effect.  You are using cause and effect to support a Universe being created, but the existence of no cause and effect when it comes to god.  Their can't be both cause and effect and no cause and effect.  It's a paradox and a contradiction in terms.
Oh Brother! It is all beginning to make sense now!  if I told you I learned what religion and Jesus was by looking in the dictionary, what would you think>

We're not talking about religion and Jesus now but rather space and time; those are simple terms. I realized what you were suggesting but you, on the other hand, totally missed the meaning of my rebuttal. THe complexity of the DESIGNER needs no cause because HE is the DESIGNER and so He is an exception to the rule that complexity implies design. The complexity of the universe needs a cause, however, because complexity implies design, and it being a creation is no exception to the rule. Cause and effect don't apply to God for the exact same reason, that is an eternal Deity can have no origin. Rather He is the originator of all things! There's no paradox because the Creator and the creation are 2 separate things; you're trying to apply your concepts (like cause and effect) across the board to fit everything when the 2 are utterly dissimilar and cannot be examined in the same light. I hope you understand better now.

[Radical Plato]

We're not talking about religion and Jesus now but rather space and time; those are simple terms. I realized what you were suggesting but you, on the other hand, totally missed the meaning of my rebuttal. THe complexity of the DESIGNER needs no cause because HE is the DESIGNER and so He is an exception to the rule that complexity implies design. The complexity of the universe needs a cause, however, because complexity implies design, and it being a creation is no exception to the rule. Cause and effect don't apply to God for the exact same reason, that is an eternal Deity can have no origin. Rather He is the originator of all things! There's no paradox because the Creator and the creation are 2 separate things; you're trying to apply your concepts (like cause and effect) across the board to fit everything when the 2 are utterly dissimilar and cannot be examined in the same light. I hope you understand better now.

You fail to realise that you suggest only people who believe in God can use the cause and effect to suit their beliefs.  According to you, it is OK to suggest the creator has no cause , but the alternative to suggest that the universe has no cause is unthinkable.  The hypocrisy of Religious people is astounding.  I hope you understand better now.

[Jon Harridan]

You fail to realise that you suggest only people who believe in God can use the cause and effect to suit their beliefs.  According to you, it is OK to suggest the creator has no cause , but the alternative to suggest that the universe has no cause is unthinkable.  The hypocrisy of Religious people is astounding.  I hope you understand better now.

You sound like a stuckup young lass I know. I use 'cause and effect' as it should be used, that is to fit the truth! Of course it is fine to say that the Creator has no cause but gravely wrong to say the same of the universe because the 2 are OPPOSITES in a sense. One is the Creator who creates and the other is the creation that is created. Why can't you grasp something so simple? You're trying to tar all the feathers with the same brush. And where is the hypocrisy in trying to point out the reality to you here?

[avxo]

You sound like a stuckup young lass I know. I use 'cause and effect' as it should be used, that is to fit the truth! Of course it is fine to say that the Creator has no cause but gravely wrong to say the same of the universe because the 2 are OPPOSITES in a sense. One is the Creator who creates and the other is the creation that is created. Why can't you grasp something so simple? You're trying to tar all the feathers with the same brush. And where is the hypocrisy in trying to point out the reality to you here?

There you go waving your hand again like some kind of Jedi...

[Jon Harridan]

There you go waving your hand again like some kind of Jedi...

 

[Radical Plato]

You sound like a stuckup young lass I know. I use 'cause and effect' as it should be used, that is to fit the truth! Of course it is fine to say that the Creator has no cause but gravely wrong to say the same of the universe because the 2 are OPPOSITES in a sense. One is the Creator who creates and the other is the creation that is created. Why can't you grasp something so simple? You're trying to tar all the feathers with the same brush. And where is the hypocrisy in trying to point out the reality to you here?

You simply fail to see the arrogance in suggesting that only you can use a particular argument, the one that states that their is cause and effect and yet no cause and effect, but no one else can.  It is arrogance in it's purest sense.  If it is ok for you to suggest that god has no cause, it is equally valid to say the universe has no cause.  period, you can poo poo it all you like, and as it stands, their is more scientific evidence for the latter and none for your argument.  Stephen Hawkings can actually use science to explain his ideas, thousands of years of scientific knowledge and wisdom all collated into an understandable theory (albeit by geniuses), unlike your argument that goes like this "Yep, their is a GOD because we want their to be one)  HHHMMM, I know who I'll be listening too,

[John]

You fail to realise that you suggest only people who believe in God can use the cause and effect to suit their beliefs.  According to you, it is OK to suggest the creator has no cause , but the alternative to suggest that the universe has no cause is unthinkable.  The hypocrisy of Religious people is astounding.  I hope you understand better now.

Totally agree...the church is full of them. People rarely come to Christ through bible bashing. Which is the exact reason why I will rarely speak about my personal beliefs to anyone unless they ask. It just gets into too many arguments.

[Jon Harridan]

You simply fail to see the arrogance in suggesting that only you can use a particular argument, the one that states that their is cause and effect and yet no cause and effect, but no one else can.  It is arrogance in it's purest sense.  If it is ok for you to suggest that god has no cause, it is equally valid to say the universe has no cause.  period, you can poo poo it all you like, and as it stands, their is more scientific evidence for the latter and none for your argument.  Stephen Hawkings can actually use science to explain his ideas, thousands of years of scientific knowledge and wisdom all collated into an understandable theory (albeit by geniuses), unlike your argument that goes like this "Yep, their is a GOD because we want their to be one)  HHHMMM, I know who I'll be listening too,

That's NOT my argument, you lying sack of shit. Don't go twisting my words and putting words into my mouth, you loathsome piece of dogshit. Hahahahaha, you're a disingenuous dogturd. What I'm saying is that yep, there is a God because He actually does exist. What arrogance is involved in speaking the truth? All the rest is just bullcrap; anybody can use my argument as it is predicated on fact. You fuckin' asswipe, do you want me to slap your fuckin' stupid buttface now, you fuckin' imbecile? How many times must I explain the same bloody thing to you? You can't tar all the feathers of the bird (so to speak) with the same brush because they are all DIFFERENT! Yes, there's cause and effect but this is only applicable in certain cases. While God has no cause it's not equally valid to suggest the same of the universe because obviously God CREATED the universe, for heaven's sakes. Is there something wrong with your brains, punk? All of science attests my ideas so I've no idea what garbage you're going on about. Your mouth is a shitter that relentlessly spews out turds/bullshit. Hahahahaha, you fuckin' loser you want to listen to atheist claptrap instead of God Himself, what a sad clown.

[Radical Plato]

That's NOT my argument, you lying sack of shit. Don't go twisting my words and putting words into my mouth, you loathsome piece of dogshit. Hahahahaha, you're a disingenuous dogturd. What I'm saying is that yep, there is a God because He actually does exist. What arrogance is involved in speaking the truth? All the rest is just bullcrap; anybody can use my argument as it is predicated on fact. You fuckin' asswipe, do you want me to slap your fuckin' stupid buttface now, you fuckin' imbecile? How many times must I explain the same bloody thing to you? You can't tar all the feathers of the bird (so to speak) with the same brush because they are all DIFFERENT! Yes, there's cause and effect but this is only applicable in certain cases. While God has no cause it's not equally valid to suggest the same of the universe because obviously God CREATED the universe, for heaven's sakes. Is there something wrong with your brains, punk? All of science attests my ideas so I've no idea what garbage you're going on about. Your mouth is a shitter that relentlessly spews out turds/bullshit. Hahahahaha, you fuckin' loser you want to listen to atheist claptrap instead of God Himself, what a sad clown.

I give up, trying to bring awareness to an idiot is tiring, I understand perfectly what you are saying, your argument is illogical, it defies logic, it's a contradictory and paradoxical, and yet you remain unaware of this, even when carefully explained to you.  Maybe one day in the future, you will experience the ah-hah moment, but for now, your closed mind won't allow that to happen.  You simply don't have the self awareness to see the conflict contained within your argument, you just simply don't!  It least the seed has been planted and your potential to become awakened is greater now than when we first started trying to help you.  My work here is done.