Stephen Hawking, the famed British theoretical physicist and cosmologist from the University of Cambridge, is considered to be a very bright person. If that's the case, why would Hawking make the terrible error of seeking to explain away the existence of God? Hawking apparently forgot that believing in God is an act of faith. In fact, not believing in God is also an act of faith.
 |
| Prof. Stephen Hawking |
In his new book The Grand Design, Hawking is said to have established an idea called "m-theory," which basically explains that the universe sprang from nothing. That's a very neat place to start if one wants to say God doesn't exist. This blogger doesn't believe it.
There's no reason to write a long tome of an explanation for something I already figured out at 15 years old and while arguing Evolution versus Creation with my good, long time friend Craig Pryor while we were at Bret Harte Junior High in Oakland. That is, what you believe is what you chose to believe, and over time, you shape your intellect to fit your belief system.
Stephen Hawking apparently forgot that, because The Grand Design does not in detail lay out what his psychological reasons are for what he choses to believe and how those reasons evolved over his life.
Indeed, one paragraph does give an indication of something I suspected when this news of Hawking's claim was first brought to my attention: that Stephen Hawking has a God Complex. Hawking writes:
Thus our presence selects out from this vast array only those universes that are compatible with our existence. Although we are puny and insignificant on the scale of the cosmos, this makes us in a sense the lords of creation.
See? In other words, it's vitally important to Hawking that we have some kind of look of a God. Being God is not a role I prize one bit. To have faith that I'm the center of all things is narcissistic. I believe in God.
I chose to believe in God and that rather than nothing, it was God who created the universe. What's nothing for Hawking is God for me.
There's nothing to argue about.
Which leads to my next point.
It's really stupid for people to argue about the existence of God. It's all about faith and choice. The proponents of Hawking's m-theory are no different than the religious zealots they claim to fear. The old saw holds: be careful who you chose as your enemy, for you may look just like them.
I Believe In Santa Claus
In closing, long ago I elected to continue to believe in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and Unicorns. I believe in God and in the existence of The Devil. In fact, that Hawking forgets or perhaps elects to avoid any mention of The Devil indicates that The Grand Design just may be the work of The Devil.
I hope this blog posts causes Hawking believers to get angry and pissed, pound their fists, cry and whine, yell and scream, and just plain bust a gut, because in so doing, they will look just like the religious crazies they make fun of. And they will have made my point in the process. You can't win.
I chose to have faith in God. God Bless you, Stephen Hawking.
I agree. Hawking's "grand announcement" had absolutely no effect on me. Christianity is a personal choice built on faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Faith isn't something you're going to be able to scientifically study because our righteousness is in the hands of God and not men.
ReplyDeleteGod, also, is not going to bow to the whims of whining men throwing temper tantrums because they can't see or hear God physically and in the natural. They want the glory of God without doing the work of God, and yet God remains silent in their faces because they do not want to accept Him.
I choose to have faith in God. God Bless you, Stephen Hawking.
NJel
Interesting post you have chosen to write. I too tried to write a brief post on Stephen Hawking's latest theory of Godless creation, but my post became more of a defense of my own faith. Thanks for provoking some thoughts.
ReplyDeleteReligious fundamentalists are a very scary bunch. We have a rude, hateful religious leader burning korans in Florida in order to commemorate the 9th anniversary of 9/11. We have Jerry Falwell telling the world that Aids is a gift from God to rid the world of homosexuals. We have Pat Robertson telling the world that Haitians deserve the earthquake they got for making a pact with the devil. We got Jim Jones feeding an entire congregation Hawaiian punch spiked with arsenic. We got Dave Koresh burning up in Waco. We got Assemblies of God's frontman Rick Warren endorsing the Uganda regime's strategy of homosexual genocide. We got Focus on the Family's ex-gay ministries that bring misery to people all over the country.
ReplyDeleteReligious fundamentalists are scary and anti-science. Thank God for Stephen Hawking. And I do mean that. God will rest easy knowing that at least one high profile author is not using HIS name to hurt others. As far as I can tell, Mr. Hawking is laying the blame for all this on us humans and not God. That is a nice change for the better.
Dude!! Stephen Hawking says in his book that the existence of God cannot be proved or dispoved. But what he says in no uncertain terms is that the Universe does not need a creator. He is not saying that God didn't create it. Nor is he saying that God created it. He is saying that God need not bother creating the universe as the law of Gravity makes something from nothing.
ReplyDeleteAccording to empirical data (the cosmic background microwave radiation), the universe has a flat geometry. And if you add the positive energy of all matter (dark and otherwise as well) with the negative energy of gravity (real negative energy that has been created in the labs all over the world), you end up with a total energy of zero. ZERO. Which means that the universe came from nothing. This is not just conjecture. We have lived in the age of empiricism since the Renaissance, so here we have empirical evidence that shows that the net energy of the universe is zero. It came from nothing. God need not have created it.
And that's what Stephen Hawking is saying.
"the grand design" the work of the devil? Are you serious? This is unadulterated science, borned out of the equations of M-Theory. Really, I used to think that the old cliche of religion and science being enemies was left behind with the Salem Witch trials, but no. It is still alive and kicking here in America.
ReplyDeleteStephen Hawking did not need to mention the devil because his book is an essay on scientific discovery, not a theological treatise. The devil is irrelevant in science, because the purpose for which science is used, whether for good or evil, lies at the hands of humans, not the devil.
I thought this blogger had more sense than this. Jeez....
The author chooses to believe in God.
ReplyDeleteHe also chooses to use the applied science of quantum mechanics (the internet, the dissemination of information through electromagnetism, the very computer where he typed his blog, are all the result of scientific progress at the chagrin of religion)....
I would like to see an evolution-denier, anti-science religious zealot live his life based on the christian principles that he so loudly espouses... that means living without electricity, phone, antibiotics, etc...
I believe the word you were searching for was tome.
ReplyDeleteAnna, you stepped right into my trap. You can't have it both ways. When you talk about God, you automatically step into a discussion of theology. Thus, you must then deal with the existence of The Devil. Again, you read just like the religious zealots you make fun of.
ReplyDeleteMr. Zennie Abraham
ReplyDeleteStephen Hawking is NOT talking about God. He mentions God in passing which is not the same thing as discussing God's role in the universe. Know the diff dude... And btw, a trap? What are you, six years old? And furthermore, the devil is not a standard feature in all theologies... dude, you gotta get a grip... or at least grow up... Christianity is not the only religion out there... Jesus, please save me from your followers.
Ana. Your last comment was completely illogical. Period. Moreover, you do fall into my trap and show that you did not comprehend my post and that you have faith in ...drum roll...Hawking!
ReplyDeleteEven then, saying that God did not create the universe..IS discussing God's role in it. Massive intellectual error you made.
You expressed anger, as I predicted in the blog post. Then you reached for insults, rather than reasoned commentary, which I didn't expect you would do anyway.
I'm delighted to see the Devil at work within you. I just had to push the right buttons.
Oh, The Devil is a cross-religious concept. Ah. Just so you know.
I came across this randomly, and it's all pretty funny. I suppose I must be a work of the devil for being a scientist :( Looks like I'm going to hell. My hands tremble with fear as I type because even though I am a good person who helps others, I don't worship God. It's a good thing that rapists and killers will go to heaven though, as long as they apologize to God before they die and ask for forgiveness.
ReplyDeleteAll I can say is that I really did try the whole God thing, but it honestly makes no sense to me. It is really hard to continue being faithful to something that may or may not (most likely not) exist.
Good and evil come from within our consciousness. You can call it God and the Devil at work if you want, but we were born with choice, and I choose good.
Something just made me think... If the universe was made from nothing... then how would mocrowaves, or physical matter, be allowed to be involved in that theory? Those are THINGS... not nothing. Noting could be...well... what does qualify as nothing... The dark? That is about it.
ReplyDeleteI would have to dispute your claim that either believing or not believing is something are equivalent "acts of faith." For every true fact, there are literally an infinite number on untrue facts and it is up to select only things that are supported by evidence for our beliefs, otherwise we end up believing in a collection of random things are essentially assured to be incorrect.
ReplyDeleteIf I understand the scientific principle correctly (and I think it is basically the
principle of rational society and our legal system), it says we only pick things
to believe on based on evidence. Anything else might be true, but unproven
things need to be reserved as "maybe's" until the evidence is in. It's a form
of "innocent until proven guilty"; non-belief is the more harmless
position, like like assuming innocence.
The reason I find religious beliefs worrisome is not only that they cause such strife in the world, but also that they encourage people to believe things just because they feel like it, rather than on rational principles.