There is no need for God..

[JamesAC]

I've just been churning my way through "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking. Then I hear on Radio 4's "Today" programme, that Hawking has written a new book ("The Grand Design" out on 9th Sept), in which he claims that the laws of Physics demonstrate that there is no need for a God to "light the blue touch paper".

I scarcely managed "A Brief History..". What chance do I have of understanding "The Grand Design", and will it have a profound affect on my beliefs (or lack of them)?

 

[Yellow Fang]

I almost understood The Brief History of Time, but got a bit lost towards the end. I seem to remember him discussing the weak and strong anthropogenic effect. Why is the universe so engineered that life is possible within it? Because if it wasn't, we wouldn't be around to wonder about it. But how probable is it that a universe would come into being with laws which allow life to evolve? If it's probable than God doesn't need to exist; otherwise He might.

 

[downfader]

The man is amazing. I once had a physics lecturer say to me "read it, even if you think you wont understand it" and that has stayed with me every since regarding Hawking. ABHOT had just been released in paperback at the time and I'd heard rave reviews from people.

Its a shame we as civilisation havent figured out how to cure his condition.

 

[numbnuts]

1988 Stephen Hawking writes a book

In his 1988 bestseller, A Brief History of Time, Prof Hawking appeared to accept the role of God in the creation of the Universe.

So in 1988 he pleased all the Christians and made a lot of money

2010 Stephen Hawking writes another book

There is no place for God in theories on the creation of the Universe, Professor Stephen Hawking has said

2010 he writes another book to please all the none believers to make some more money clever guy

 

[PaulB]

If god exists, WHICH god exists and list the ones who don't.

Most athiests just go one step further than the believers by choosing not to believe in an additional one. After all, the believers can only believe THEIRS exists and the god the others believe can't exist.

 

[Glow worm]

If god exists, WHICH god exists and list the ones who don't.

As a commited Pastafarian, there is obviously only one God- Flying Spaghetti Monster. Our God (for it is He) is clearly much smarter than all the others. In fact its about bloomin' time we we caught up with all the other religions and started killing anyone who doesn't share our beliefs. At the very least I demand complete respect from all heathen non Pastafarians and I will cry persecution should anyone dare to suggest my beliefs are bo**ocks!

 

[Over The Hill]

I've just been churning my way through "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking. Then I hear on Radio 4's "Today" programme, that Hawking has written a new book ("The Grand Design" out on 9th Sept), in which he claims that the laws of Physics demonstrate that there is no need for a God to "light the blue touch paper".

I scarcely managed "A Brief History..". What chance do I have of understanding "The Grand Design", and will it have a profound affect on my beliefs (or lack of them)?

Who with any authority has been saying that there needed to be a God to spark it all?

Purely from a non-expert positon I thought that there has not been any mention of God in any scientific claims of how it all began. Is it not that the God lot just tag God on at the beginning point of what is understood?

 

[Over The Hill]

As a commited Pastafarian, there is obviously only one God- Flying Spaghetti Monster. Our God (for it is He) is clearly much smarter than all the others. In fact its about bloomin' time we we caught up with all the other religions and started killing anyone who doesn't share our beliefs. At the very least I demand complete respect from all heathen non Pastafarians and I will cry persecution should anyone dare to suggest my beliefs are bo**ocks!

You will have the Noodleists after you with talk like that

 

[marinyork]

I've just been churning my way through "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking. Then I hear on Radio 4's "Today" programme, that Hawking has written a new book ("The Grand Design" out on 9th Sept), in which he claims that the laws of Physics demonstrate that there is no need for a God to "light the blue touch paper".

I scarcely managed "A Brief History..". What chance do I have of understanding "The Grand Design", and will it have a profound affect on my beliefs (or lack of them)?

If you're interested in this exact issue, I recommend Paul Davies and The Goldilocks Enigma. There are plenty of other books on fine tuning/whatever you want to call it.

1988 Stephen Hawking writes a book

So in 1988 he pleased all the Christians and made a lot of money

2010 Stephen Hawking writes another book

2010 he writes another book to please all the none believers to make some more money clever guy

Various people have said this but I think it is uncharitable even if there is something in it. It's an issue Hawking has thought about for a very long time. On the topic of books in the 00s the noughties has seen an explosion in popular science physics books (many of them fairly average-mediocre), Hawking has not really published much in this line of late. This is something on something he hasn't done a popular science book on, I don't think it's cashing in at all, I think it a fairly unreasonable thing to say.

 

[numbnuts]

Hawking has thought about for a very long time

yeah right how much money can I make

 

[TVC]

yeah right how much money can I make

Yep, his crazy indulgent lifestyle needs a lot of wonga to sustain.

 

[JamesAC]

Who with any authority has been saying that there needed to be a God to spark it all?

Purely from a non-expert positon I thought that there has not been any mention of God in any scientific claims of how it all began. Is it not that the God lot just tag God on at the beginning point of what is understood?

I don't think it unreasonable to ask "where did it all come from" or "what was here before the Big Bang". It's not unreasonable that people should ascribe creation to a Creator.

What I was wondering was how people who "believe" as in "I believe in God .. the Creator of Heaven and Earth", if it can be demonstrated (in a philosophical sort of way) that there is actually no place for a Creator per se because there is no actual "Creation"

 

[amnesia]

ABHoT is a cracking book.

 

[Over The Hill]

I don't think it unreasonable to ask "where did it all come from" or "what was here before the Big Bang". It's not unreasonable that people should ascribe creation to a Creator.

What I was wondering was how people who "believe" as in "I believe in God .. the Creator of Heaven and Earth", if it can be demonstrated (in a philosophical sort of way) that there is actually no place for a Creator per se because there is no actual "Creation"

I think it is simply a matter of looking at it from the scientific or religious perspective.

My local village raised lots of money and got a grant to do up the village/church hall. When it opened the vicar wrote a bit on it in the local parish mag entitled "look what God has done".
Now, like the village hall we can look at most things at one level and usually can explain it scientifically. Anyone can take that same event and say it was the had of God or the pixies or whatever they want.
Just because the event (creation) is at the limit of our scientific understanding or even if it still is not fully understood, it does not make it more likely to be down to God. Just more likely to be credited to God.

 

[John the Monkey]

AUTHORS: Don't ever change your mind about things. Seriously.