re: Stephen Hawking Dead - Hawking Radiation Proves Existence of God

quote:

---

Eternal torment is for the sake of justice.

---

There is no justice in eternally torturing a good man, who tried to treat others well, but fell short because he is a fallen being and never had a chance to repent because he didn't know of Jesus.

There is no justice is eternally torturing your creations that were made fallen and damaged because of choices made in that fallen state. People who intentionally hurt others or rebel from a point of great knowledge, sure, but not the masses that have lived and died in ignorance.

God should be better than the best version of us and something we should aspire to. I couldn't worship or even respect a God like you describe of my own free will. It would only be coerced out of fear.

quote:

---

Which is why you fail to appreciate the supremacy of My God

---

Context is important. If I know that a truth claim is actually made up simply to illustrate a point, I know the claim is false and doesn't require additional refutation. I'd suggest you use something like Islam, Hinduism, or Scientology in the future.

quote:

---

Big difference between told and taught, but I'll pass it along anyway.

---

You're right. "Told" is merely speaking while "taught" is speaking and illustrating with intent to pass along knowledge. I assume if you heard these things from school and church, you were being "taught", even if you didn't receive it as such. But, such a thing is immaterial to the discussion so I'm fine with ending that string.

quote:

---

Well, some things can be tested, replicated, explained, built upon and the rest can be assigned no more certainty than myth.

---

Not true. Many things--at least on an individual basis--can be observed but not purposefully replicated and the lack of replication doesn't make what was observed nothing more than a myth.

Perception of certainty has no bearing on truth. A claim is either true or it is not and just because you cannot test something in a lab doesn't mean it isn't true. If you only put stock in things that you can test in a lab, you'll be missing out on a lot of valuable things in life.

quote:

---

There is not a single shred of evidence for a deity in nature that cannot be better explained by science.

---

I'm glad you seem to be admitting that we have the same evidence but a different interpretation of it, which is why science and Christianity aren't incompatible. The issue is not the evidence but how the evidence is interpreted in light of the paradigm or worldview of the interpreter.

quote:

---

God of the gaps isn’t a strong argument, especially since the gap is shrinking day by day.

---

I don't think "god of the gaps" is a good way to do apologetics so it's unnecessary for you to argue that with me. I believe God uses means as the normal way He upholds the universe. I believe that the God of the Bible actually makes scientific understanding possible, actually.

What I disagree with is the paradigm used to interpret the evidence apart from the context of God.

quote:

---

There is no justice in eternally torturing a good man, who tried to treat others well, but fell short because he is a fallen being and never had a chance to repent because he didn't know of Jesus.

---

In our own justice system, it doesn't matter how "good" a person is or even if they knew they were breaking the law. If they break the law, they get punished for breaking the law. A lot of "good" people go to jail every day for breaking the law and many didn't even understand the ramifications of what they were doing.

God's standard of "good" is perfect obedience and holiness. If we sin even one time, it is an infinite offense against God and worthy of an infinite punishment. We have no analogy for this because we are not holy beings.

quote:

---

There is no justice is eternally torturing your creations that were made fallen and damaged because of choices made in that fallen state.

---

You don't see it as justice because you neither understand the law nor understand the law-giver, therefore you downplay the sins of humanity against God and as a result think it's unfair that God would punish people like He does.

God originally made mankind perfect and able to obey. The best possible version of mankind rebelled against God and disobeyed Him and God judged all mankind based on Adam's disobedience. Adam was our federal head or representative. If the best of us couldn't obey, why should we think we would do any better? We, then, are born in sin and disobey God as a matter of practice and give no thought to whether or not what we are doing offends God and then question God's justice for punishing us.

quote:

---

People who intentionally hurt others or rebel from a point of great knowledge, sure, but not the masses that have lived and died in ignorance.

---

When does ignorance of the law preclude punishment for its violation? Even those that know the law inside and out don't keep it perfectly. Should we expect more from the "ignorant masses"? Even those who have not had the special revelation of the law from God have the law written on their hearts and they still violate it. How, then, is anyone to say that they are innocent before God?

quote:

---

God should be better than the best version of us and something we should aspire to.

---

He is and it's what Christians live their lives for. We want to be conformed to the image of God in Jesus Christ so that we can be more holy as God is holy.

quote:

---

I couldn't worship or even respect a God like you describe of my own free will. It would only be coerced out of fear

---

I know you couldn't worship or respect God as He is and as you are today. The Bible speaks of a process called regeneration whereby God changes us to make us capable of trust and worshiping God by faith and eager to do so. The unregenerate person hates God (the God of the Bible) and wants nothing to do with Him, just like a criminal wants nothing to do with the police.

quote:

---

So this whole thread gained steam because some claimed, without anything other than personal belief, that Hawkins is frying in hell.
Is there a question still remaining that, if answered, would prove that this myth is true? If not, your side of the argument has failed.

---

I never addressed that argument at all. What the hell are you talking about?

quote:

---

My apologies, Moneyg. It appears you and the Buckeye were having a sidebar discussion on the influence of Christianity on legislation and or the daily lives of resident non-Christians, if I’m understanding what’s in the thread.

---

Whoops. Didn't read far enough.

quote:

---

Its actually evil. a god would punish someone for not believing in him...yeah free will...believe in me or suffer eternally. so fricking stupid

---

What's stupid, is the fact that you find yourself perfect. Your vanity is what is evil.

quote:

---

Then pinpoint for me, the origin of Good and Evil if there is no God.

If morality only hinges on our mortality, then nothing truly matters.

---

Without the possibility of an objective moral law-giver, morality defaults to relativism. Moral relativism offers no concrete support for condemning actions like genocide or rape and reduces all morality down to nothing more than preference, like a favorite color or flavor of chips.

quote:

---

That's not true. Things like personal worth and fulfillment are not dependent on morality. I can enjoy my family and my hobbies without a need for some objective morality that does not exist.

---

The point is that if there is no objective morality, then morality by default has to be subjective and dependent on each individual to determine their own standard, making it nothing more than a preference.

It's good that you value human life but there is no objective value to human life without an objective moral law that places value on it. If morality is subjective, one person can value it and another person can choose not to value it and both are technically equal perspectives, neither one better or worse than the other in an objective sense. This concept has a lot of practical applications, especially in terms of how we judge the actions of others.