Stephen Hawking vs God

This famous Phd. Math professor needs to take a freshman course on logic.

The universe {created itself}

just meditate on that phrase. Good grief!

Hawking’s method of banishing God is the unobserved and unproven theory that our universe (with its laws) is just one of an infinite number of universes. Coincidentally (or should I say providentially? ;-) ) in one of those universes something can come from nothing and it (or someone there) decided to begin our universe.

An example of “science” based on nothing more than extremely wishful thinking. And they call Christians “unscientific.”

Is that is what Hawking is planning on saying when he stands before God?

There is a very good article about this by C. Michael Patton on the “Parchment and Pen websited called http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2010/09/stephen-hawking-worships-… Stephen Hawking Worships the “Unknown God.”

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/09/03/hawking.god.universe.critici… Religious leaders hit back at Hawking

the head of the Church of England, the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams, told the Times that “physics on its own will not settle the question of why there is something rather than nothing.”

“Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing.”

But…but…but if there was no universe, there would be no law of gravity. That law refers to matter.

Dr. Hawking is one of the most famous examples of Romans 1:22 and II Corinthians 4:3-5

The idea that God, who is Being but not a being, created the very matter out of which the world was formed, was actually quite a revolutionary concept in the New Testament era. (Perhaps Ed Vasicek knows more accurately, but I believe pre-Christian Judaism was divided on the issue). Most ancient thought, and pre-eminently Greek thought, held to some sort of ontological continuity between the creator(s) and the creation. Both Plato and Aristotle, conceive the demiurge forming and actuating already present matter. Aristotle is the #1 figure in the history of logic, and he didn’t see the problem there, which leads me to think there isn’t one on a purely logical level.

So, is Hawking wrong, deluded, and terribly inconsistent his scientific pretensions? Absolutely. Is he illogical in the strict sense? Not that I can see. The problem isn’t that Hawking can’t follow an argument; it’s that he clings to false premises.

Charlie,

You may be right, because I’m not very familiar with Hawking’s views (I read this and other blurbs/articles about his new book).

However, Hawking would only be avoiding logical absurdity if, like Aristotle, say, he believed in the eternality of the universe. But if Hawking thinks there is a beginning to the space-time world, then some of his statements are absurd.

That said, I’m not a physicist and Hawking may believe in some kind of eternality (of matter and energy, perhaps).

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487042068045754679216090242… Why God Did Not Create the Universe

Jim, I found the last sentence of the excerpt to be very telling. According to Hawkins, in this universe we are “lords of creation.” At least he knows where these theories lead.

http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/09/07/no-need-for-god-stephen-hawking-… No Need for God? Stephen Hawking Defies Divine Creation

Excerpt:

[Hawking] seems to imagine God only in terms of a deistic deity and a “God of the gaps” who serves as a causal explanation only when all naturalistic theories run out of steam. If nothing else, Hawking’s writings should warn Christians from taking refuge in any “God of the gaps” form of theological argument. If we invoke God only when we run out of other explanations, we will find God disappearing into a cloud of theory and endless theological surrender.

The God of the Bible is not merely a First Cause — He is the sovereign Creator and Sustainer of all that is, who rules the universe by His Word. Christians must recognize the “God of the gaps” as a false idol of theological surrender. Furthermore, Christians must also understand that any scientific admission of God as a possible First Cause without continuing rule over creation is no cause for celebration. The triune God cannot be reduced to a First Cause among other causes.

Stephen Hawking’s worldview is based in positivistic scientism. He really believes that science holds all the answers. “Philosophy is dead,” he asserts in this newest book. Why? “Philosophy has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics.”