Stephen Hawking: "God Did Not Create the Universe"

Dear Ronald Reagan: Thanks for Wrecking America

Bill Moyers Makes Newt Gingrich Look Like an Idiot

Right's Stupidity Spreads, Enabled by Too-Polite Left

FOCUS | Madonna, Like a Man, and Hated for It

FOCUS | Why Democrats Fracking Suck

"God did not create the universe and the 'Big Bang' was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics, the eminent British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking argues in a new book."

Stephen Hawking, pictured at the Centre for Mathematical Studies, Cambridge University, in October 2001. (photo: Martin Pope)

Comments

+25 # Guest 2010-09-02 09:26

Take THAT evangelical-right-wingers-who-strive-to-reconstruct-the-universe-in-their-own-image.

The beat goes on, as does the research. The more evidence the better. Human beings are capable of standing on their own without the over-reaching, guilt-ridden, manipulation of an omnipotent god. Oh, I forgot. Joel Osteen is telling us something different: God is good, you are good, be good, be happy, you will be rich if you pray and send me money.

-15 # Guest 2010-09-02 09:44

Thank you, Dr. Hawking. And now gravity, where did that come from?

+17 # Guest 2010-09-02 11:03

I believe gravity is also one of the laws of physics.

+5 # Guest 2010-09-03 00:05

Nonsense. Labeling gravity a "law" does not explain how it works, neither does it explain its origin. Such reification is semantic manipulation, not science.

+15 # Guest 2010-09-02 11:36

In Newtonian physics it is known as the Universal Law of Gravitation.

+13 # Guest 2010-09-03 04:24

Thank you, Mr. Mondor. And now God, where did he come from?

+3 # Guest 2010-09-04 10:10

Most individual smoke narcotics to see "God." However, most of these American born Christians smoke what is called "stupid!"

+3 # Guest 2010-09-03 09:24

Quoting

Thank you, Dr. Hawking. And now gravity, where did that come from?

Pay attention, Mr Mondor. Dr. Hawking.."wrote in A Brief History ... "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason -- for then we should know the mind of God." Having come to a complete understanding, Dr Hawking knows the mind of God. With that knowledge, he has the power of God. With that power, he is the creator of the universe. The creator of himself. All creation is caught in a time loop that endlessly creates and recreates itself and Dr. Hawking who is now the creator. Of gravity and all else. He fulfilled the prophecy quoted above.
Pay attention, I say. It's elementary

+5 # Guest 2010-09-03 10:07

If there is no end, there is no beginning, more like a circle, and if something is unknowable beyond that, we just say, "I don't know." But we don't have to continue to construct a god from the past to explain the world. That is what people did when they didn't have science.

-9 # Guest 2010-09-02 10:30

A tiny, short-lived intelligent being looked out from a satellite belonging to one of the ten-to-the-twenty-first-power stars in the universe and proclaimed, "We now know that the universe pulled itself out of its own * "

And this pronouncement is theologically significant because...?

+10 # Guest 2010-09-02 13:56

"Theological" and "significant" are mutually exclusive terms.

-1 # Guest 2010-09-04 10:12

......because it proves there is no God to speak of?

0 # Guest 2010-09-02 11:06

If we could understand or explain God, we would BE God. Paul Tillich said something like "God is a symbol for God." Sounds like doubletalk until you reflect on the trouble of trying to talk literalisticall y about the mystery behind the already mysterious enough universe which we inhabit for these brief lifetimes. If Hawking's great mind can destroy naive and fundamentalist beliefs about God, power to him. But greater minds have tried to destroy "God" without success. We are meaning-making creatures whether we like it or not.

+8 # Guest 2010-09-03 07:03

Rev. Dr. Pete, there is no way to destroy a belief. Like you say, we are meaning-making creatures. Many, though, require more than just believing something is so. They want to touch it, hear it, see it, smell it - in other words use their five senses and not just emotion or rationalization . We are tool makers. If we cannot travel into outer space, we will find a tool to study it. Has anyone seen the face of a god out there?

+1 # Guest 2010-09-04 06:51

You can't see the face of God by using your five senses, they are earthbound. We are a species in transition, evolving into higher, much more powerful beings. We are spiritual beings in physical, temporary bodies, and we are in the process of raising our consciousness to be prepared for higher levels of existence. Some are further along than others.

We can argue about God, but I think that nearly everyone believes in love. I know that God is love. If you deny God's existence, where does love come from? (I'm speaking of the unconditional kind, of course.)

-1 # Guest 2010-09-03 10:43

You yourself just put another nail in the "God coffin" by acknowledging that as meaning-making creatures, we have created God all by ourselves.

And about those "greater minds" that have failed to "destroy Godm," to whom were you referring? Greater minds than Dr. Hawkins' are hard to come by.

+3 # Guest 2010-09-03 22:34

I think you're kind of missing the point Texas Aggie. As a meaning making creature, even science itself is meaningless unless we make it, invent it, conjure it up as meaningful for any consideration. Not to put science down...in fact science is fantastic, but, it does not and cannot explain everything. Why anything at all should matter is something that science just can't handle. A belief that science answers everything is just as unreasonable as a religion claiming that their religious beliefs explain or justify everything. And for both science AND religion, certain matters of just plain old every day blind faith for the very sake of itself plays a big role in how we live. We don't really know the half of anything. We just think we do. That's what a life of scholarship has taught me so far.

+4 # Guest 2010-09-03 22:24

Well bravo to you Rev. Dr. Pete. I agree completely. I like Tillich and am sure you must also be aware of Victor Frankl by the words you have used in your post. The existential dilemma humanity faces is the need for a meaningful existence, or perhaps more simply, a need for meaning. This of course fails to prove or disprove God per se, but Hawking's brilliant theoretical constructs, no matter how ultimately provable, will never resolve the matter of meaning. What does all this mean? Ironically, it is an irresistible question and because it is not fully answerable, God will live forever. I say this without a clue as to God's identity or any understanding of his being or even his non-being. All I can sense is that meaningless existence is hellish and meaningful existence is heavenly and regardless of even reason itself, I must have meaning in order to even maintain a will to exist. I guess that is God...maybe? Who knows? Even Hawking does not.

0 # Guest 2010-09-04 04:04

"Greater minds" than Stephen Hawking? Pretty exclusive club, I daresay. A brief advisory to anyone considering subscribing to the latest religious rubbish, be it the Cosmic Muffin or Hairy Thunderer theory: recall carefully the cautionary lyric invoked by The Who - "Don't get fooled again."

0 # Guest 2010-09-16 00:52

Phrixus, I must take you to task on two things (at least!).

First of all, the terms Hairy Thunderer and Cosmic Muffin as satirical metaphors for a supposed theological debate were featured in the Deteriorata--National Lampoon's spoof on the Desiderata. Cite your sources, don't plagiarize!

Secondly, the Who's song, Don't Get Fooled Again is clearly a political commentary. It's a bit of a stretch (being generous, here) to suggest it applies to a theological disagreement.

Beyond that, in my experience, most atheists narrowly define theological questions (and narrowly define "god"--whatever that might be) to make the discussion moot. Such self-congratulatory smugness is...self-congratulatory smugness! It impresses only those who already play the same game.

+17 # Guest 2010-09-02 11:22

Objects in space create their own gravity. (5th grade science)

-15 # Guest 2010-09-02 11:37

If God didn't create the universe, Mr. Hawking, then who did?
And you shouldn't say nobody because if you do say nobody created the universe then we may just have to find out who
nobody isn't, and that might take a lifetime. Or more. Maybe instead of 'God does not play dice with the universe' Einstein should have said 'Nobody plays dice with the universe'. You certainly don't - which makes you a little like God. Or like nobody. Pete Edler, Stockholm.

+20 # Guest 2010-09-02 13:43

Interesting that you feel there needs to be a "creator" to the universe but no creator to your god. If you posit that one needs a creator then it has to fair to posit that everything does. Can't have it both ways. And for the record, Einstein was atheist.

+11 # Guest 2010-09-02 14:44

Very good, Steve. It is always a bad idea to base reality in beliefs, or in the word of one book alone, with little research.

The brain is rather delicate, and the mind responds to that. Lying to a developing mind is never a good idea.

+2 # Guest 2010-09-03 08:03

IF "something" created the universe, no one knows what that "something" is, including every member of or subscriber to any religion.

-19 # Guest 2010-09-02 11:52

Really, sometimes these kind of scientists become so primitives, even basic knowledge they become difficult for them to understand.

As Christian M, said, the gravity, where did that come from?

I can help Hawking to find out: It's from someone else who is THE 1st and has all necessary attributes to create and handle such complex and perfect universe.

/Nadjib

+14 # Guest 2010-09-02 13:45

A "perfect job"?? Really? Have you seen what's out there in the universe. Why can't you theists get it through your skulls that the universe needs no creator?

+9 # Guest 2010-09-02 13:57

Quoting

Thank you, Dr. Hawking. And now gravity, where did that come from?

Quoting

Really, sometimes these kind of scientists become so primitives, even basic knowledge they become difficult for them to understand.

As Christian M, said, the gravity, where did that come from?

I can help Hawking to find out: It's from someone else who is THE 1st and has all necessary attributes to create and handle such complex and perfect universe.

/Nadjib

Sir,
Anything so complex as to be able to create all of existence, would surely need a creator as well. The god you speak of must have thought himself into existence.

-1 # Guest 2010-09-02 19:01

Nelson,
I agree, but you have to start somewhere.
That start point is the begining... who you'll be find there? Of course the 1st, God the creator of life and universes.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-03 22:49

Well said Nelson. Perhaps he did. Yep.

+8 # Guest 2010-09-02 15:11

Yes, because you know more about physics than one of the leading minds in the field. Gravity has been explained for 95 years--look up the theory of general relativity.

+10 # bobpomeroy 2010-09-02 12:51

Christian scholars believed for a thousand years that Earth was the center of the universe, and enforced their beliefs with violence. It is not inconsistent with Hawkings dicta to believe that Earth was prepared for man and for a temporary purpose. Those who insist on defining God, thereby limit the God of their understanding. However the universe is defined, we seem to live in a set of limitations, a multiply derived subset of reality. That the derivation occurred via evolution makes no difference.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-02 13:10

I think the best thought to try to understand is one from Joseph Campbell, “God is a thought. God is a name. God is an idea. But it references something that transcends all thinking. The best things can’t be told because they transcend thought. The second best are not understood because they refer to the things that can’t be told. The third best is what we talk about.

-23 # Guest 2010-09-02 14:24

He may be right and he maybe wrong. He obviously is not a man of faith. I believe that he is wrong and I will continue to believe that God created the world. I won't even bother to read his rationale because doing so won't change my beliefs in the least.

-13 # Guest 2010-09-02 15:47

Awesome Suzana!!! I'm glad to hear that you are a faith drivin beliver! Me too! :]

+11 # Guest 2010-09-02 17:25

Ig´no`rance
n. (Theol.) A willful neglect or refusal to acquire knowledge which one may acquire and it is his duty to have.

+4 # myungbluth 2010-09-02 19:21

Ah, the beauty of the open mind, waiting to be informed by reason and an unstoppable belief in fairies!

+4 # Guest 2010-09-02 20:25

Quoting

He may be right and he maybe wrong. He obviously is not a man of faith. I believe that he is wrong and I will continue to believe that God created the world. I won't even bother to read his rationale because doing so won't change my beliefs in the least.

Then why did you bother to post then to tell us about your belief in the invisble man.

-3 # myungbluth 2010-09-03 04:52

Ah, the beauty of the open mind - where reason is ignored, truth is shunned, and mythical fairies reign!

+6 # Guest 2010-09-04 04:10

"I won't even bother to read his rationale..." Of course not. And why would you? That whole "thinking" thing - so tedious, wouldn't you agree? It's much less tiring believing in Bronze Age myths.

+3 # Guest 2010-09-02 15:27

God doesn't have to create the Universe, God IS the Universe, at least in my lexicon.

+8 # Guest 2010-09-02 16:04

reading the comments makes me so very sad . The belief in faith over science truly means we are living in the dark ages. I actually cringe when i read some of the ignorant remarks and wonder "who/what is to blame for all the ignorance".

I am afraid that soon...scientific minds will be burned at the "stake" for heresy.
very scary!!!

+7 # Guest 2010-09-03 01:35

Hear, Hear, frandayan! I consider myself to be a well-read, intelligent person. Considering the history of 'religion' and the countless deaths and sacrifices made in the name of religious beliefs, I find it very difficult to believe in a so-called 'God' who is supposedly loving- or who in any way created our Earth and the beings who inhabit it. "We are made in the image of God"!? Heaven forbid!- should there be such a place. We humans, when it comes to religion, are nothing but savages- destroying each other in the name of religion and our various beliefs in whatever 'God' we superstitiously choose to follow.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-03 23:07

Quoting

Hear, Hear, frandayan! I consider myself to be a well-read, intelligent person. Considering the history of 'religion' and the countless deaths and sacrifices made in the name of religious beliefs, I find it very difficult to believe in a so-called 'God' who is supposedly loving- or who in any way created our Earth and the beings who inhabit it. "We are made in the image of God"!? Heaven forbid!- should there be such a place. We humans, when it comes to religion, are nothing but savages- destroying each other in the name of religion and our various beliefs in whatever 'God' we superstitiously choose to follow.

Too simplistic Neridah. I think that some of the abuses of humanity in the last 100 years, some aided and abetted through the applications of scientific knowledge, has resulted in plenty of inexcusable carnage. I also think that neither religion or science should be rejected because so many have abused either & both. Bad science/bad religion: both wrong.

0 # Guest 2010-09-03 23:01

Quoting

I am afraid that soon...scientific minds will be burned at the "stake" for heresy.
very scary!!!

Your fears could be entirely mistaken. I am an ardent fan of science. I believe that science explains the mechanics of nature, including its' coming into existence, quite well. But then there is the matter of why, and why does anything matter and what gives life meaning. For this I have my (admittedly non-traditional) religious faith. I don't confuse the two and I acknowledge that religious faith is the more vulnerable to illogic. But I don't think science is all powerful either. It contributes nothing to ethics, morality, a meaningful existence and it offers no existential explanation for anything. It can be as much a closed loop as religion can be.

Religion and ignorance are no more synonymous than science and religion must be incompatible with each other. I gladly embrace both. Truth is not an either/or proposition.

+7 # Guest 2010-09-02 16:19

From the above remarks, I am reminded that "since god so obviously limited our intelligence, it was unfair that he didn't limit our stupidity".

-1 # Guest 2010-09-03 06:39

Can't have it both ways Paul. One man's intelligence is another's stupidity.

+2 # Guest 2010-09-03 23:13

Quoting

Can't have it both ways Paul. One man's intelligence is another's stupidity.

I disagree. There's plenty of stupid to go around. There are proponents of stupidity on both sides of this issue, and intelligence in relatively equal degrees I suppose. Hard to say. I know some very intelligent atheists who I think highly of. As a person of faith, I know some brilliant believers who, by the way, include some highly educated scientific folks. Somehow it just seems to me that there are many conflicts between intelligent people with intelligent views but stupid is stupid. It always looks the same to me no matter what camp the afflicted occupy.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-05 04:11

Interesting point (and conundrum). The situation appears not unlike a form of intellectual oxymoron in that otherwise rational individuals should buy in to the religious sideshow. A "well-encapsulated delusion."

+4 # Guest 2010-09-02 16:41

What entity created the laws of physics and spontaneous creation? It's a mistake for human beings to place themselves ahead of all else whether they believe in a higher power or entity that has some connection with their existence or not. I respect both points of view. As a foolish man of faith and a child I follow one of many pathways to an ethical life. By emptying oneself and placing God or the larger forces of physics and the universe ahead of yourself you can avoid the arrogant idea that humans control or can control everything as if they were gods themselves in the traditional sense.

I believe in the teachings of Jesus the Christ, a Nazarene Rabbi of two thousand years ago. I may have a soul that meets other souls in some place from all other faiths and thiecal views at some eternal life or I may fade into dust and spread out cosmically insignificant in our universe.

I am at peace with either.

+3 # Guest 2010-09-02 17:42

God *is* the universe (or universes, for those who believe there are multiple universes); where does that leaves the question of creation? Poof...

+4 # Guest 2010-09-02 21:55

Those who insist on a creator must be very careful not to dumb that creator down to their level of ignorance. Hawking carefully avoids such error. As for the Nazarene Rabbi Jesus (cited by one poster, and actually named Jehoshua), he did the best he could back in his era of relative unenlightenment ; his followers perpetuated those shortcomings. Galileo was punished for opposing their canonized errors. Another poster claimed that Einstein was an atheist -- actually he was a follower of Baruch Spinoza in an abstract theistic belief system in which the universe itself was the sole divine entity. Spinoza was tried and excommunicated from the Synagogue of his era for that heresy.

+2 # Guest 2010-09-03 07:13

I do believe Einstein stated that if he were inclined to have such a belief, he would probably adhere to that of Spinoza.

+6 # Uranus 2010-09-02 23:11

Gravity occupies a place on the electromagnetic spectrum. Gravity is electrodynamic; as such, it can be engineered.

Paul Dirac won the nobel prize in 1933 for his equation, his "theory of everything:" http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/213.web.stuff/scott%20kircher/antimatter.html The equation was immediately dismembered and classified in the United States, and Dirac was promised that if he spoke about it he would be killed.

But, it was retained in graduate level physics taught in Russia. For 30 years "Dirac sea pulsing" has been exploited in a handheld electronic device developed as a medical assistant for Russian astronauts to fight loss of bone mass, muscular atrophy and complaints common to prolonged life in space.
Hawking's condition is especially responsive to treatment with this device, "scenar cosmodic," and if treated can typically expect 90-100% recovery: http://www.scenar.ru/en/productions/.

+2 # Guest 2010-09-03 07:01

I agree. Two reasons: One, Occam's Razor. Two, God as a concept cannot be defined.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-03 07:20

Perhaps Dr. Hawking has come to a fulfillment of his prophesy.."If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason -- for then we should know the mind of God."

Assuming the laws of physics are the creation rather than the discovery of the mind of a man, Stephen Hawking is god. If he is not, then who created the laws of physics? Here we have a time loop. Time, a dimension of the physical universe loops back on itself and allows for its own creation at any and all points in time. The universe is not only self creating, its creator is Stephen Hawking. Thus Dr. Hawking is both discoverer and creator of everything. All hail!

+2 # Guest 2010-09-03 07:29

By saying God did not create the universe Hawking avoids
the issue. Who says the Big Bang wasn't God's voice in the
material realm? In any case, it's unscientific to state this
concept in the either/or form. This probably has to do with style. It would have been more scientifically correct of Hawking to say God may not have created the universe. Simply put: Hawking is overstating his case. Very much as he did when he said if there are extraterrestria ls they may look nothing like Marilyn Monroe. Let's hope he keeps up his patter. It makes good copy. Pete Edler, Stockholm

+2 # Guest 2010-09-03 22:23

If you reread the article you will note that Hawking wrote "it is not necessary to invoke God" as an agent of the Big Bang. He didn't present it as an either/or problem. My interpretation is that he is saying that the burden of proof lies on the theist side. Good luck with that.

-1 # Guest 2010-09-03 08:02

He says the universe was created from out of nothing and then he says it was formed from gravity. I respect his religious views but what a bunch of crap. Scientists think they know everything and they know very little.

+8 # Guest 2010-09-03 08:43

Now which God are we talking about here? The Jewish God? The Catholic God? The Hindu God? The Muslim God? Since all Gods were created by man as a way to control the ignorant masses, the real question is not who created the universe – but who created man? Especially, a species as stupid and as selfish and as greedy as those who are so mindlessly destroying this planet.

+3 # Guest 2010-09-03 09:14

Quoting

Now which God are we talking about here? The Jewish God? The Catholic God? The Hindu God? The Muslim God? Since all Gods were created by man as a way to control the ignorant masses, the real question is not who created the universe – but who created man? Especially, a species as stupid and as selfish and as greedy as those who are so mindlessly destroying this planet.

Yeah! But the god Steven Hawking doesn't believe in is superior to the god you don't believe in.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-03 23:19

Quoting

Now which God are we talking about here? The Jewish God? The Catholic God? The Hindu God? The Muslim God? Since all Gods were created by man as a way to control the ignorant masses, the real question is not who created the universe – but who created man? Especially, a species as stupid and as selfish and as greedy as those who are so mindlessly destroying this planet.

Do tell...but do we have to blame God for human stupidity? I mean, if he gave us free will then it's our behavior that is its own punishment, not even remotely God's.

+3 # Guest 2010-09-04 06:13

The Christain religion has made God obsolete by using his name in vain. Why doesn't he punish them for that instead of us who don't worship blind fundamentalist hypocrisy in churches!

Christians are notorious famous for using their God for just about everything from torture to murder!

Just look at the record during the past 2000 years.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-05 11:16

"Man is a god in ruins." Ralph Waldo Emerson

+2 # Guest 2010-09-03 09:16

It takes just as much faith to believe in Hawking's Big Bang as it does to believe in God. They are both simply idiotic dreamed up human terminations of an explanatory regress -- i.e., moving backwards in causes to the first cause. It is a stupid weakness in the human intellect to crave such a termination as Big Bang, God, Gravity, etc. Let's face it, there is no termination. Causal regressions are infinite as far as we will ever know. Let's just forget them and get down to something useful -- like stopping the insane Israelis and their spokespersons Goldberg and Hitchens from starting a war against Iran. For this, we do know the causes.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-03 23:21

Quoting

It takes just as much faith to believe in Hawking's Big Bang as it does to believe in God. They are both simply idiotic dreamed up human terminations of an explanatory regress -- i.e., moving backwards in causes to the first cause. It is a stupid weakness in the human intellect to crave such a termination as Big Bang, God, Gravity, etc. Let's face it, there is no termination. Causal regressions are infinite as far as we will ever know. Let's just forget them and get down to something useful -- like stopping the insane Israelis and their spokespersons Goldberg and Hitchens from starting a war against Iran. For this, we do know the causes.

Gasp! What a remarkably intelligent statement!

+2 # Guest 2010-09-03 09:24

Stephen Hawking is a man of great faith -- in the "universal laws of science." He is enough to make the most devout religious mystic bow in admiration. But the one thing we know about science is that over time all its so-called universal laws prove to be wrong and are replaced with more-true laws. I'm just as tired of the religion of science as I am of the religion of God. Both are banal and narrow minded.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-03 11:50

Ah, but there are advantages to science that religions and gods cannot offer: continued learning experiences, tools for learning, methods of proof to go beyond theories, re-hashing the theories, discovering more and admitting there are truths that dis-place original theories, etc. Ever see a true believer in a god claiming to learn more except in their acceptance of a god.

As I stated above, we can actually see more and more in our galaxy with our tools. Can we prove and re-prove and use tools and observation to realize a god? How about a goddess?

Ever wonder why there is no talk of a goddess, especially a partner for the god folks are commenting on?

+3 # Guest 2010-09-03 11:30

We know very little about our own universe and absolutely nothing about what lies beyond it. We have exactly as much information to claim the existence as non-existence of higher form(s) of intelligence within or beyond this universe - zero. We don't know what form they would take or how to define them. Science is the key, and we have to show humility, patience, and discipline not to make pronouncements until we do have sufficient knowledge - if we ever do. Anything less is unworthy of a scientific mind.

+3 # Guest 2010-09-03 14:18

Can any "one," or any "thing" create an end? Probably not. For example, there is no end, and will never be an end, to this debate.

+5 # Guest 2010-09-03 23:38

Many brilliant posts here. I'll add my simple comments just because it is a subject that often irks me. I'm comfortable not believing in God because that also saves me from believing in Satan or even ghosts. Believing in God does not answer for me, who created God, or who does he/she answer to. It is freeing and I don't fear death for myself. Religiosity is not a prerequisite to being a decent and honest human being. Mother nature is probably the true God in my opinion, which in a way is aligned with what Hawking has synthesized.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-04 10:18

Agreed. The right wing Christians in America has only one use for "God." That is "God" serving them, not them serving God!" Hawking is right, God does not exist. It exist only in weak undeveloped minds. And there are many who prey on these weak minds. Especially in the USA...where stupidity is an acceptable virtue.

-1 # Guest 2010-09-04 00:24

'''God is only in stories. Every things are natural'''

+2 # Guest 2010-09-04 13:58

Mr. Hawking, brilliant as he is, has tackled a subject for which he is not qualified. Nutty Creationists aside, it's perfectly acceptable to believe that the creation of the universe is the first act of will, bringing into existence all the laws of the universe, etc. We run into all kinds of trouble when we make God separate from the Universe. Is there a need for God to be separate from the universe?

+2 # Guest 2010-09-04 15:48

Why do we imagine the universe "was" created. Our universe may be as a flea on the toe nail of an elephant, and this is mere metaphor. What does infinity mean? It is beyond us, except in the haziest way. If we must go in for gods, why do we imagine there is only one? Maybe there is an infinity of them. One speculation is no more preposterous than the next. What most disturbs me is that atheism is thought to face one with meaninglessness -- just the opposite.

0 # Guest 2010-09-04 17:42

First: Hawkings does not say "God did not create the universe". He did not say "God could not..." He did not say there is no God. He said "God is not necessary for the universe to exist". That's a different statement.

Third: Most great scientists and intellectuals have a very restricted window for producing constructive new insights. Usually, abilities begin to deteriorate around the mid 30's.

Hawkins speculations are just that, speculations and beliefs. Whether one considers those beliefs informed by his career, or deformed by his career, is the question.

He also warns us regarding aliens, and further suggests that we start seeding other planets as our only hope of survival.

I'll stick with God while Hawking and fans build the mother ship. It makes as much sense as a universe spontaneously generated from gravity and creating matter on its own. It also takes a lot less faith, unless you believe Hawking himself to be a God.

0 # Guest 2010-09-04 21:06

In my congregation, we most often make reference to a higher power as Spirit of Life. As we are creedless, it covers all contingencies. I might deny God completely but for life experiences such as once living in a home that seemed to be haunted; being close to multiple ESP experiences. I also learned about the power of prayer as Jesus taught it with astounding results. No argument with science or any who find no proof of gods, goddesses, angels and such. I have no reluctance to read Hawking's views. But ignoring what appear to be supernatural experiences is no more rational than believing that I have all the answers. If Hawking or anybody else hasn't had my experiences, perhaps he feels that he is on safe ground. The Spirit of Life, whether God, the Force, some common connection between living things and beings, perhaps what we call love, or whatever keeps many of us leaving doors open to further investigation.

+1 # Guest 2010-09-05 14:41

Never thought of an "infinity of them" (gods). Thanks Roger. One infinite god or an infinite number of (lesser?) gods. Infinity is a word for a concept that we cannot possibly understand. Our lack of understanding, bolstered by fear of death (which I haven't seen mentioned here) causes us to invent imaginary beings to fill the gap and make us feel more secure. It also is a channel for our aggressive instincts, thus the brutality of religion through the ages. We are the only animals intelligent enough to know we're going to die and dumb enough to deny it--and kill each other over it. Oh, help us infinity of Flying Spaghetti Monsters!

0 # Guest 2010-09-05 22:48

Mr. Hawking is 100% correct when he stated that the universe was not created by God.

Everyone knows that Elmer Fudd created the universe!

0 # Guest 2010-09-22 22:23

The funny thing is that in the first partof this article it mentions this book "The Grand Design", But excuse me if im wrong but The statement the grand design implies that there had to have been a designer GOD? Maybe?

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

rsn

Name:	*
Username:	*
E-mail:	*
Password:	*
Confirm password:	*
Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.