World Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe
I’ve read two of his books:
The first I read while spending a peaceful week in a remote cabin near Bemidji, MN a few years ago. I read it through in one sitting; I simply couldn’t put it down. The second I more recently took out of my local public library.
Make no mistake: his atheism seemed apparent in these books. As I read though, I was rapt with the mind-blowing concepts that he described. What I was seeing, from an entirely different perspective, was the Hand of God all over time and space. I remember thinking while reading the first book, “How is it possible that an atheist is actually strengthening my faith?”
So if he has reached the conclusion that the universe has a Creator, I am amazed.
I eat up Michio Kaku’s books, and I’m always amazed that scientists like Kaku, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Greene, and Stephen Hawking could write the things they do and yet still be atheists.
When I saw this article I checked the website to see if it was a satire piece, like what you’d see in The Onion. I still feel a little incredulous, but what other conclusion could an intellectually honest physicist come to?
What does he mean by “God”?
I’m not sure this is a new revelation on Kaku’s part. I think he would still reject a personal God. In the link below he references Spinoza’s god, which is essentially deified nature. I would see him more as something of a pantheist who sees a mystical divine order to nature, but not a transcendent God. Still, it’s fascinating stuff.
The key phrase in the article that makes it sound like he believes in a personal God doesn’t actually occur in the video.
“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence”, Kaku says in a video produced by Big Think. “To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”
I’ve watched it three times and it’s not there. There are other articles out there with the same quote, but i can’t find any video of it, so it seems sketchy. Would love to see it if it’s out there and he really said it.
Seems like a theme and variation of the pagan “Unknown God” of Athens fame. Ben Stein’s “Expelled” and any number of other scientific and/or philosophical perspectives basically take the same view. Nothing new to see here.
I’m not sure this is a new revelation on Kaku’s part. I think he would still reject a personal God. In the link below he references Spinoza’s god, which is essentially nature (I think). I would see him more as something of a pantheist who sees a mystical divine order to nature, but not a transcendent God. Still, it’s fascinating stuff.
I don’t think Kaku is to the point (or even close) of being able to affirm these passages yet…..
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” (John 1:1-3 ESV)
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.” (Col. 1:15-17 ESV)
……but a refutation of random chance is a good first step–a step that I hope would one day lead him to acknowledge the true God of the universe.
He is not affirming God in the Christian sense. He is rejecting the “Many Worlds” hypothesis that some see in quantum mechanics. This is the idea that every outcome of every event is not only possible, they happen in an infinite amount of parallel existences. That is an old theory to avoid determinism in physics.
He is also rejecting the idea from cosmology and string theory that there are an infinite amount of universes where the fundamental constants like the value of the speed of light, charge of and electron, etc. take on every possible value. We happen to live in the universe with the values those constants have, but it is not anthropocentric, just coincidental. This avoids the idea of a fine-tuned universe.
Finally, he is rejecting the holographic principle of Leonard Susskind et al.
So, Kaku is saying he believes in ONE UNIVERSE where the values have been “chosen” to be what they are, and at every event only the one that happens is the real one. This forces Kaku into a form of determinism. As a result, he is accepting some “intelligence” and “design”.
He is not a Christian by any stretch of the imagination OR an INTELLIGENT DESIGN advocate. ID is something more than Kaku is saying. He is rejecting the 3 things above.
in his philosophy on this. When asked about the “Many Worlds” hypothesis (the other 2 did not exist when he was alive), he famously said, “shut up and calculate”.
that what is interesting about this is the refutation of random chance and the acknowledgment of intelligent design of some kind.
yes, sometimes it is necessary to *parse* a person’s words by contextualizing them from a close perspective. Thanks for the insight.
I believe the same could have been said about Einstein. He said something along the same line. Einstein clearly rejected the personal faith that Abraham had and relied upon his own understanding. We read in James that demons are quite orthodox in that they believe that God is One, yet they are lost. Orthodox faith without evidence (fruit) is dead.
"Our faith itself... is not our saviour. We have but one Saviour; and that one Saviour is Jesus Christ our Lord. B.B. Warfield