Stephen Hawking Says God Did Not Create the Universe: What Do You Think?
We need to be very careful in how we respond to things like this, particularly as Christians. One thing we must not do is make personal attacks on Stephen Hawking. To do so is not logical and I believe is a sinful response also.
What we must do is allow all ideas to be tested and follow what survives the tests. If the claims of Christianity pass the tests, then we should be Christians. If ideas exclusive to Christianity pass the tests, such as what Hawking is claiming, then we should follow those. We should always follow the truth and not be afraid to allow our ideas to be tested.
I read the following at http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=11542128 . . .
“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing,” writes Hawking. “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists why we exist.”
Let’s critique Hawking’s statement rather than critique Hawking, the man. Assuming the quote is taken in context, Hawking claims “the universe can and will create itself from nothing.” In order for something to be created, it must not exist. In order to create, something must exist to do the creating. Therefore, for the universe to create itself, the universe must both exist and not exist at the same time. This is a violation of the law of non-contradiction, a basic foundational concept. So it is safe to dismiss the idea from Hawking.
 |
Joe stopped trusting in the idea that he was going to Heaven because he was a good person and turned his trust towards the completed work of Jesus at the age of 15. He is a high school graduate with only 14 college credits under his belt from a long time ago. So if Joe can learn theology, philosophy and apologetics, then so can you. |
Posted in 3 Responses to “Stephen Hawking Says God Did Not Create the Universe: What Do You Think?”
Leave a Reply
I believe you are taking a piece, of what you believe to be a false statement by Hawking, and using it to create a false statement of your own, without taking into account enough of the already given information. I am not stating that your finding is wrong or right, or that Hawking is wrong or right. I am simply stating, that in the short paragraph above written as to how he came to his finding, and the single paragraph as to why it should be dismissed, are not enough.
Using the very small phrase “the universe can and will create itself from nothing.” to decide whether or not to see truth or falsity in the claim is beyond unfair.
Speaking solely on your premature conclusion, I find it should only be fair to use the entire quote. Before the phrase you used to come to your conclusion, he states “Because there is a law such as gravity..” You also stated that “In order to create, something must exist to do the creating.” By Hawking stating that “because there is a law such as gravity..” he is coming to the conclusion that laws of science, such as gravity, which can not be denied, were here before us, and that is the precursor to our creation. Concluding that scientific laws were here way before we were, and they are the “something” that is missing from your final conclusion.
But, I do not believe that a finality can be made on his concept, without actually reading the book that he has written in its entirety, as well as any other data he has published on his finding. Drawing such a quick conclusion to a new idea, that you have not fully studied, and making such a deep-fixed affirmation on such a potent subject matter is highly irresponsible and insufficient. I am extremely agape as to whether or not your premature disputation on this incredibly crucial and controversial subject matter, by a world renowned mind, is final.
Thanks for your reply Natalie.
I think you’re swinging the philosophical pendulum too far in the opposite direction. The statement, “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing,” is a complete statement that does not demand we pursue further inquiry into the ideas that led to the conclusion, save for curiosity’s sake.
What Joe said was that his conclusion (regardless of how he came to it) was self-contradictory – something that no freshman philosophy student could fail to recognize without also failing the class. =) Something cannot be true and untrue at the same time. If something exists, i.e. laws like gravity, than that defies the idea that nothing exists. If nothing exists than there are no laws to do the creating…to say nothing of a complete shortage of matter with which to do the creating.
Certainly you are correct in contesting that no one can know the whole story without studying a matter further than a single one or two sentence quotation, but that’s a far cry from reading everything the man’s ever published. When I conclude that I disagree with the foundation of an idea, I look no further. No one buys a house knowing the foundation is bad…and I don’t buy an idea that is self-contradictory…no matter how many books the guy has written.
Once again, thanks for the time you took to respond. As you already recognized, I was not the author of the blog, so I’m sure Joe would like to answer himself when he gets a chance and I in no way pretend to be representing what he will say when he does. Take care, Natalie.
Natalie, I think if you read Hawking’s quote carefully, and think about it for a bit, you will see that this quote is self contradictory on several levels.
He says, “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.”
1) If there is the law of gravity, then there is not nothing. Something can’t cause the universe if the universe is going to create itself from nothing.
2) How can something cause itself before it exists? It would have to exist before it existed! Simply saying something causes itself is incoherent.
3) How would gravity exist if the universe didn’t exist?
Fact is, the theories Hawking espouses show that the universe, all physical space, time, and matter, came into being out of non-being a finite time in the past. That means the cause couldn’t be any of those things (physical space, time, or matter).