Hi All, I have collected various discussion, comments regarding Stephen Hawking's Explanation in News and What is the opinion of people -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Hawking About GOD's Existence
Stephen Hawking is a brilliant scientist who is amongst a few who understand the conplexities of black hole behaviour. But, as a scientist, he would be the first to admit that he does not have the 'truth'; he is working from observation, hypothesis, theory building and further experimentation which may falsify or support his ideas.
What he is saying is that our universe can arise spontaneously from the laws of physics as we currently understand them, so there is no necessity to invoke a special creator which exists 'outside' those laws.
The domain of science can only work with ideas that are testable and falsifiable by experimentation. The idea of a special creator cannot be tested in that domain.
The concept of 'God' is a human construct that has emerged from our evolved ability to look out at the natural world and wonder about its construction and the mechanisms that drive natural events. Language has enabled us to share feelings of wonder about the world and speculate on the significance of human life and its origins. Some of these ideas have been formalised as religions which have spread as viral memes because they have conveyed survival value.
Science is the only way we can derive real knowledge about the natural world and our place in it. Religious faith simply confuses and divides.
The concept of 'God' is a human construct that has emerged from our evolved ability to look out at the natural world and wonder about its construction and the mechanisms that drive natural events. Language has enabled us to share feelings of wonder about the world and speculate on the significance of human life and its origins. Some of these ideas have been formalised as religions which have spread as viral memes because they have conveyed survival value.
Science is the only way we can derive real knowledge about the natural world and our place in it. Religious faith simply confuses and divides.
------------------------------
I always thought it was a a fundamental law of physics that matter could not be created or destroyed. So where did the stuff that made the big bang actually come from? Believing in God does people good - and is not as far fetched as believing human beings cause weather
-------------------------------
I would have to agree with Prof. Hawking on this. I'm an atheist, and scientist by training, and base my ideas about our place in the grand scheme of things on scientific process.
While faith (which is not the same as religion - no more than a tool for controlling the masses) can help people to live what they believe is a good life, it also hinders humanity's chance to discover what we really are. I'm of the mindset that were it not for religion we'd be leaps and bounds further in our understanding by now. If you live solely by faith you deprive yourself of finding out the origins of the universe and, consequently, the sentient race we belong to. Why is it better to say "I'm here because He decided I should be" rather than asking "Where did I come from and why am I here"?
The wonderful thing about science is that it's constantly evolving as new discoveries are made. It seems that the religious contingent is always reluctant to revise it's thinking, regardless of the evidence that presents itself. It's no wonder that atheists get frustrated with this way of thinking - I don't have anything against a person's right to belief, or to follow a religion, but I find it an afront that they are so arrogant as to ignore evidence and theories that can be tried and tested. Perhaps it's not the atheists who have closed minds; show us tangible and testable evidence of your own theory of the creation of the universe (your God) and like all good scientists we'll revise our ideas. Until you can do that please accept that your blind belief means nothing to us - we want facts not hearsay.
---------------------------------------------
While faith (which is not the same as religion - no more than a tool for controlling the masses) can help people to live what they believe is a good life, it also hinders humanity's chance to discover what we really are. I'm of the mindset that were it not for religion we'd be leaps and bounds further in our understanding by now. If you live solely by faith you deprive yourself of finding out the origins of the universe and, consequently, the sentient race we belong to. Why is it better to say "I'm here because He decided I should be" rather than asking "Where did I come from and why am I here"?
The wonderful thing about science is that it's constantly evolving as new discoveries are made. It seems that the religious contingent is always reluctant to revise it's thinking, regardless of the evidence that presents itself. It's no wonder that atheists get frustrated with this way of thinking - I don't have anything against a person's right to belief, or to follow a religion, but I find it an afront that they are so arrogant as to ignore evidence and theories that can be tried and tested. Perhaps it's not the atheists who have closed minds; show us tangible and testable evidence of your own theory of the creation of the universe (your God) and like all good scientists we'll revise our ideas. Until you can do that please accept that your blind belief means nothing to us - we want facts not hearsay.
---------------------------------------------
One thing that strikes me is that scientists have never provided a comprehensive or convincing theory about the origin of life or the Universe. Ask them what was before the "Big Bang" and they will tell you "nothing". So they expect us to believe that everything suddenly appeared out of nothing (magic?), but they ridicule people who prefer to believe in a supernatural being and a creative force. Evolution may have been part of that creation process but the questions about what life is go beyond the realms of biochemistry. Indeed, according to the laws of physics, chemistry, entropy, etc.. there seems no reason why life should exist at all. If we did come from random molecular collisions in the sea producing a mixture of successful and unsuccessful chemical concoctions, shouldn't we be seeing this process today?
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
If God did create the universe, who created God?
---------------------------------------------------
Stephen Hawking sells books for a living. He doesn't need God. Stephen thinks that God makes enough money by selling the Bible.
--------------------------------------------------
"And almost everyone when age,
Disease, or sorrows strike him,
Inclines to think there is a God,
Or something very like Him."
-------------------------------------------------
Disease, or sorrows strike him,
Inclines to think there is a God,
Or something very like Him."
-------------------------------------------------
Personally i don't care for any religious views on God or creation. They are just out of date.
However, i believe in the logic that one thing causes another and therefore something must have caused the first event in history. What that cause is I have no idea.
However, i believe in the logic that one thing causes another and therefore something must have caused the first event in history. What that cause is I have no idea.
----------------------------------------------------
Reasons why I think Hawkins et al are just plain wrong, the following would have to occured by chance rather than design. The life cycle, the rock cycle, the orbit of the earth which sustains life, the elements of life all being in the same place at the same time in the right environment to create life. Then we have the proximity of the moon which provides the tides, the plants which provide our food and oxygen. The proximity of the sun, not too close not too far.
Did your intelligent designer occur by chance? If you believe the world is to complex to come about by chance, then the entity that was capable of making it must be pretty complex too.
Did your intelligent designer occur by chance? If you believe the world is to complex to come about by chance, then the entity that was capable of making it must be pretty complex too.
----------------------------------------------------
Nope, Hawkings is absolutely right when he says a godlike entity is not necessary to explain the universe. It goes like this: if you say god created the universe then the question "who or what created" god will always pop up, this goes on perpetually until you say "god is eternal", which would mean the laws of physics can also be eternal, making god redundant, or until you admit the universe doesn't need a specific "beginning" since time can be bend, even without divine intervention. So god is not just a useless explanation, it's not even a valid explanation to begin with.
Of course the real answer, if we're ever gonna find it, will have something to do with the fact that time isn't strictly linear and has no fixed rate of change. This will again be fully consistent without god in it
Nope, Hawkings is absolutely right when he says a godlike entity is not necessary to explain the universe. It goes like this: if you say god created the universe then the question "who or what created" god will always pop up, this goes on perpetually until you say "god is eternal", which would mean the laws of physics can also be eternal, making god redundant, or until you admit the universe doesn't need a specific "beginning" since time can be bend, even without divine intervention. So god is not just a useless explanation, it's not even a valid explanation to begin with.
Of course the real answer, if we're ever gonna find it, will have something to do with the fact that time isn't strictly linear and has no fixed rate of change. This will again be fully consistent without god in it
------------------------------------------------------
What a pointless topic. Christians believe in God because they have faith in God, not because there is any scientific evidence for the existence of God.
A scientist pointing out that there is no God will make precisely zero difference to anyone.
A scientist pointing out that there is no God will make precisely zero difference to anyone.
------------------------------------------------------
Scientists are people.
Some time ago they were a sperm and an egg. But it now speaks with great authority. IE The vessel that is made says - the potter did not create me.
If we believe in that theory then there is little else to discuss.
However the main reason most eminent people (They get air time and reviews plus they are the most heard by the media) decry creation it is because they wish to divorce themselves from God the creator.
Hence they have no need of creation and can completely justify any theory that fits their thoughts or mind set because without a creator you can be what ever you think.
Of course as soon as the word BIBLE is mentioned you are thought of as "behind the times of modern thinking mankind".
I wonder how many people reading this article allow the possibility that God has a purpose? Ask any J.W what Gods Kingdom is and how they can prove it to be true.
Sadly people want something more than listening to the creators view.
But if a man speaks gobble-de-gook. Then they think that is worth discussing.
True today's church and religion in general is found wanting.
But dare we stop and think - if all this we see and experience in our daily lives is just by chance and not design are we missing out on the real reason of the earth and all its beauty.
Remove man from this planet and it is perfect.
-----------------------------------------------------------
We should be less focused on the creation of the universe (whatever that is) and more focussed on the end of it! What comes around goes around and there's no anti-matter holiday homes to hide in.
Some time ago they were a sperm and an egg. But it now speaks with great authority. IE The vessel that is made says - the potter did not create me.
If we believe in that theory then there is little else to discuss.
However the main reason most eminent people (They get air time and reviews plus they are the most heard by the media) decry creation it is because they wish to divorce themselves from God the creator.
Hence they have no need of creation and can completely justify any theory that fits their thoughts or mind set because without a creator you can be what ever you think.
Of course as soon as the word BIBLE is mentioned you are thought of as "behind the times of modern thinking mankind".
I wonder how many people reading this article allow the possibility that God has a purpose? Ask any J.W what Gods Kingdom is and how they can prove it to be true.
Sadly people want something more than listening to the creators view.
But if a man speaks gobble-de-gook. Then they think that is worth discussing.
True today's church and religion in general is found wanting.
But dare we stop and think - if all this we see and experience in our daily lives is just by chance and not design are we missing out on the real reason of the earth and all its beauty.
Remove man from this planet and it is perfect.
-----------------------------------------------------------
We should be less focused on the creation of the universe (whatever that is) and more focussed on the end of it! What comes around goes around and there's no anti-matter holiday homes to hide in.
--------------------------------------------------------
If the universe did create itself and there is no God, then there is no purpose to life so I could go out tommorow and kill someone, then kill myself and get away with it scott free? And i know thats wrong because there is a sense of justice in the world.
----------------------------------
I'm sorry but I had to write a responce to this, the bit I do not understand about some religious people (not all, my Mum is religious and does not hold the above view) is that you need a God to be a good person. Why? I see God as palusible but there is meaning to my life and I am perfectally capable of distinquishing right from wrong, in fact in general I think I am a very good person who goes out of my way to help and be nice to people. As far as I can see it, if you say that there is no purpose to life if there is no God, then are you saying the point of your life on Earth is so you can die and go to heaven? If you do not believe in an afterlife then you have to make the most of this one.
As to the original question, by the theory of Occum's razor, it seems most likely that there is no God, anything that could create something as complex as the universe would have to itself be infinatly complex. At a stretch I could believe that the universe is the result of some superior race mastering how to create a big bang and setting our universe into motion, but from then on they would have no control. Sounds far fetch, but no more so than a God, we ourselves are getting a better and better understanding of quantum physics and it is not completely implausible that one day we would be able to create a singularity
----------------------------------
I'm sorry but I had to write a responce to this, the bit I do not understand about some religious people (not all, my Mum is religious and does not hold the above view) is that you need a God to be a good person. Why? I see God as palusible but there is meaning to my life and I am perfectally capable of distinquishing right from wrong, in fact in general I think I am a very good person who goes out of my way to help and be nice to people. As far as I can see it, if you say that there is no purpose to life if there is no God, then are you saying the point of your life on Earth is so you can die and go to heaven? If you do not believe in an afterlife then you have to make the most of this one.
As to the original question, by the theory of Occum's razor, it seems most likely that there is no God, anything that could create something as complex as the universe would have to itself be infinatly complex. At a stretch I could believe that the universe is the result of some superior race mastering how to create a big bang and setting our universe into motion, but from then on they would have no control. Sounds far fetch, but no more so than a God, we ourselves are getting a better and better understanding of quantum physics and it is not completely implausible that one day we would be able to create a singularity
------------------------------------------------
If GOD is not there, then Why and How ReIncarnation comes.
See Prof. Ian Stevenson 's evidence for Swarnlata Mishra Story, put her on lie detector test etc. She is alive And We should not to be too late.
How these story pops-up
-------------------------------------------------------
You cannot create something out of nothing. Something ignited the big bang.
Hawkings is saying there is no God, so therefore, as Hawkings is generally accepted as one of the most intelligent humans of modern times, he then assuming that he is one of the most intelligent beings in the known universe! This cannot be right, though he is of course very intelligent by our own standards.
I beleive there is a God, because otherwise, what is the point of our existence apart from a 9-to-5 job and then retiring and death?
Science only explains HOW things work. Religion explains the WHY things are the way they are.
Genesis describes evolution albeit very roughly (life in sea before land mammals) which at the time it was written could not have been known.
Hawkings is saying there is no God, so therefore, as Hawkings is generally accepted as one of the most intelligent humans of modern times, he then assuming that he is one of the most intelligent beings in the known universe! This cannot be right, though he is of course very intelligent by our own standards.
I beleive there is a God, because otherwise, what is the point of our existence apart from a 9-to-5 job and then retiring and death?
Science only explains HOW things work. Religion explains the WHY things are the way they are.
Genesis describes evolution albeit very roughly (life in sea before land mammals) which at the time it was written could not have been known.
---------------------------------------------------
Professor Hawking clearly rejects the idea that there is a personalized, interested and involved, being, named "God", from the standpoint of physical cosmology, adding to Freud's rejection of the same concept as being a psychological projection of human experience onto the cosmos. While both are correct, they fail to recognize that a fundamental quality of the universe is intelligence, and that the evolution of intelligence parallels the cosmological, physical, processes in a manner that cannot be considered pure chance. It defies any reckoning as pure chance, and Professor Hawking would do well to attempt to calculate the odds pertaining to the existence of the fundamental processes necessary for the evolution of intelligence, along with the progression of that evolution. It defies the odds and if we understand God as impersonal, uninterested, cosmic intelligence, discernable in both the quanta of the micro-cosm and in its expressions as meaning in the macrocosm, we advance the understanding of God from a childish dependence towards a more philosophical maturity, recognizing that that probability as to the existence of evolving intelligences, more powerful than our own, does not make those intelligences into gods, and unlike our predecessors physical cosmology, psychology and philosophy have contributed to a maturity that is not so easily deceived and has a chance of species survival due to that very fact. (Please do share this with Professor Hawking. Thank you.)
---------------------------------------------------------------
It may be possible that an advanced civilization works on the name of GOD, And playing with us.
There concept may lie in BlackHole/ parallel Universe etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry but I have always thought Hawkins is a bit of an oddity and unlike other points of view I am firmly of the belief that a higher body/being had a hand in the creation of the universe. It is far too complex and diverse to have been an accident or evolvement. Still I guess God loves Hawkin even if I find him somewhat odd. Does he cry out to God if he hurts or is frightened? I wonder
