Skip to comments.Stephen Hawking: God was not needed to create the Universe
Posted on 09/02/2010 6:21:27 AM PDT by tlb
The Big Bang was the result of the inevitable laws of physics and did not need God to spark the creation of the Universe, Stephen Hawking has concluded.
In his latest book, The Grand Design, an extract of which is published in Eureka magazine in The Times, Hawking said: Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.
It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.
In June this year Prof Hawking told a Channel 4 series that he didn't believe that a "personal" God existed. He told Genius of Britain: "The question is: is the way the universe began chosen by God for reasons we can't understand, or was it determined by a law of science? I believe the second. If you like, you can call the laws of science 'God', but it wouldn't be a personal God that you could meet, and ask questions."
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
This is why I am not an atheist; it takes too much faith...
Humans, according to the left/atheists:
Because there is a law such as gravity..”
And WHO designed the law?
Like many intellectuals, Hawking can’t see the forest for the trees.
But given his horrific persoanl situation I am lothe to criticize him personally. He was bound to come out a True Believer or an Atheist.
Poor man. I feel sorry for him.
God is the “Intelligent Designer”.
Otherwise, you must believe that a box filled with watch parts can be shaken (not stirred) and when opened - a completed watch that works perfectly!
Because men love the darkness...
This dude needs to dump his bag.
Best Post so far!
He has descended into lunacy. I guess he has abandoned his earlier delusional “multiverse” theory which he manufactured out of this air deal with the fact (as he acknowledged) that the anthropic theory pointed unerringly to a creator. So now he going with the theory that something that didn’t exist created itself out of nothing. That this violates every law of logic, physics and common sense is immaterial to him. “Thinking themselves wise they became fools.”
I got this nifty self-winding watch. It’s beautiful and runs itself by the laws of physics. But that doesn’t mean there wasn’t a watchmaker, let alone a watch designer involved in making it self-sustaining.
The fear of death is strong but I think the fear of truth is stronger. Too many people don’t want to admit a personal God because it means they must examine their own personal lives in accordance with the words of that personal God. They prefer an impersonal God who doesn’t care about their choices in life, or a nonexistent God.
Stephen Hawking needs to stick to his day job. Speaking out on matters of theology, man-made global warming or other subject matters where he has no knowledge or understand makes as much sense as a celebrity shilling for a cause.
As smart as he is, he FAILS! There has to be an uncaused cause. Spontaneous creation is a far worse theory that undermines all science as we know it.
Stephen will find out soon enough that he is wrong. I pray he fill figure that out before he passes from this life.
I’ve never understood why so many people fawn over Hawking or think that he is so smart. My guess is that the guy who “interprets’ his grunts and groans is the “brains” and Hawking is the Charley McCarthy of the duo. If Hawking said this, then it proves that theory.
THE most insidious lie that Satan has put over on humans is that “people are basically good”.
Then everyone spends all their time and intellect trying to justify their own “goodness” instead of accepting their true sin nature.
This justification leads to people rejecting the authority of Scripture and ultimately rejecting the existance of God.
Or that an ink factory blew up into a bunch of dictionaries.
The statement is self-vitiating and assumes the very thing in question. Scientific laws, physical forces such as gravity, and the Universe are not "nothing". They are something. He is essential asserting that nothing will create something.
But it is irrational and incoherent to assert, as he does, "there is" when there is nothing.
He could assume that the universe has always existed, but then it is irrational and incoherent to assert, as he does, that the Universe created itself.