• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The God of the Universe ...

Iacchus

Unregistered
I
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
10,085
From this thread

The God of the Universe, if in fact there is one, must be pragmatic, in every single last detail or, this is what the Universe leads us to conclude. Perhaps this is why it's such a mystery, and we can't see Him, because His works are so practical and, "stand alone?" And yet, aren't these the very same attributes we would apply to the "Good Programmer?"
 
Hey, did you know that Stephen Hawking was a Pantheist?

Larry King: Do you believe in God?

Stephen Hawking: Yes, if by God is meant the embodiment of the laws of the universe.

Larry King Live, December 25, 1999
Click to expand...
 
Upchurch said:
What of it? It doesn't mean he believes in God as you seem to use the term.
Click to expand...
What, regarding the original post or, what I have said elsewhere? Indeed, I think Stephen Hawking would have to agree with me, that the God of the Universe -- i.e., if there is one -- would have to be very pragmatic.
 
Last edited:
Iacchus said:
What, regarding the original post or, what I have said elsewhere? Indeed, I think Stephen Hawking would have to agree with me, that the God of the Universe -- i.e., if there is one -- would have to be very pragmatic.
Click to expand...
"Being pragmatic" is an anthropomorphic term. I very much doubt that Stephen Hawking would view the laws of the universe as anthropomorphic.
 
This is an interesting article, Stephen Hawking, the Big Bang, and God by Dr. Fritz Schaefer III, Professor of Quantum Chemistry, University of Georgia. It also notes that Stephen Hawking's wife, Jane, is a Christian.

The most important event of his life occurred on December 31, 1962. He met his future wife, Jane Wilde, at a New Year's Eve party. One month later, he was diagnosed with a terrible disease, ALS, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. He was given two years to live at that time. That was 32 years ago. I have had three friends die of this disease. It's a horrible disease. They lasted two, three, and five years, respectively. By anyone's estimation, Stephen Hawking is a medical miracle.

At this point in his life, 1962, Stephen was by all accounts an average-performing graduate student at Cambridge University. Let me quote from his biographers, White and Gribbon, on this point:

There is little doubt that Jane Wilde's appearance on the scene was a major turning-point in Stephen Hawking's life. The two of them began to see a lot more of one another and a strong relationship developed. It was finding Jane that enabled him to break out of his depression and regenerate some belief in his life and work. For Hawking, his engagement to Jane was probably the most important thing that ever happened to him. It changed his life, gave him something to live for and made him determined to live. Without the help that Jane gave him, he would almost certainly not have been able to carry on or had the will to do so.​
They married in July of 1965. Hawking himself has said that "what really made a difference was that I got engaged to a woman named Jane Wilde. This gave me something to live for."

Jane Hawking is an interesting person in her own right. I think she decided early on to get into an academic discipline as far as possible from her husband. She has a doctorate in Medieval Portuguese Literature!

Jane Hawking is a Christian. She made the statement in 1986, "Without my faith in God, I wouldn't have been able to live in this situation;" namely, the deteriorating health of her husband. "I would not have been able to marry Stephen in the first place because I wouldn't have had the optimism to carry me through and I wouldn't have been able to carry on with it."
Click to expand...

http://globalwebpost.com/farooqm/study_res/hawking/schaefer.html

An article, Stephen Hawking and the Mind of God by Antony Flew:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/antony_flew/hawking.html
 
Last edited:
Iacchus said:
What, regarding the original post or, what I have said elsewhere? Indeed, I think Stephen Hawking would have to agree with me, that the God of the Universe -- i.e., if there is one -- would have to be very pragmatic.
Click to expand...

Did you even read the site to which you linked?


Do you find it impossible to believe in supernatural beings, and difficult to conceive of anything more worthy of reverence than the beauty of nature or the power of the universe?
Click to expand...

This was RIGHT THERE on the first page!!!!
 
Upchurch said:
"Being pragmatic" is an anthropomorphic term. I very much doubt that Stephen Hawking would view the laws of the universe as anthropomorphic.
Click to expand...
And by pragmatic, don't we essentially mean what is logical and practical? Maybe I've chosen the wrong use of words here? Anyway, I'm essentially in agreement with Hawking regarding the notion of God being the embodiment of the laws of the Universe ... if, in fact that's what he meant.
 
Iamme said:
Or perhaps I don't see you because YOU don't exist. :)
Click to expand...
Oh, there's lots of evidence for Mojo. He posts regularly and responds to questions and comments in a meaningful way. He can describe events that have happened and even his current situation. He has a reasonably consistant personality and morality. He can tell a joke.

These characteristics are not attributable to any concept of God that I have ever seen. (except for perhaps Loki, who loves jokes, but then he's just A god not The God.)

By the way, Iamme, it is unlikely that JFK is the originator of your sig quote. It seems to be widely attributed on the web.
 
Iacchus said:
And yet, aren't these the very same attributes we would apply to the "Good Programmer?"
Click to expand...
Let me see -

1. blames everything on the user
2. Insists that all problems will be set right in the next release (which never seems to eventuate).

Yep, those are the attributes of a programmer alright.

Attributes of a good programmer? Well perhaps not.
 
Robin said:
Let me see -

1. blames everything on the user
2. Insists that all problems will be set right in the next release (which never seems to eventuate).

Yep, those are the attributes of a programmer alright.

Attributes of a good programmer? Well perhaps not.
Click to expand...
LOL! :thumbsup:
How about
3. Writes in a code that no-one but himself understands.
4. His only relationship with the opposite sex is "virtual"
5. Wants his programs to be used, but apparently doesn't care how they are used.
 
Robin said:
Let me see -

1. blames everything on the user
2. Insists that all problems will be set right in the next release (which never seems to eventuate).

Yep, those are the attributes of a programmer alright.

Attributes of a good programmer? Well perhaps not.
Click to expand...
So, what would you cite as the difference between a good programmer and a bad programmer? Are you suggesting the two are one and the same? Or, maybe you actually have a point there, I don't know? :confused:
 
Iacchus said:
So, what would you cite as the difference between a good programmer and a bad programmer? Are you suggesting the two are one and the same? Or, maybe you actually have a point there, I don't know? :confused:
Click to expand...

I dunno, it seems that the point is quite clear. A "good" programmer wouldn't do those things; a bad one would.
 
kmortis said:
I dunno, it seems that the point is quite clear. A "good" programmer wouldn't do those things; a bad one would.
Click to expand...
You can't have your cake and eat it, at least in this world. Which, may be the point. Why would He design something temporal, and subject to decay?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom