Hawking's New Book Does Not Dismiss The Real God From Creation, Jesuit Scholars Say

[cara1]

Thumbs up on that one! I have four years of a Jesuit high school (Regis, in NYC) and four years at a Jesuit university (Fordham, in The Bronx, NY). I don’t think they come any finer as teachers and scholars than the Jebbies. .

Here, here for the Jesuits, also. I think that this is the premier order for someone interested in evangelizing through teaching or preaching and not focused so much on the Office or community prayer.

I think that Hawking is not so much arguing *against *the existence of God as saying that God’s existence is not essential to the existence of the universe. More reassurance for the atheists, who when asked who created the universe, can counter that it doesn’t need a creator.

 

[cara1]

As an aside, I think that it would be daunting to debate Hawking because of his extreme disability. He has an electronic voice, for example. Nevertheless, it should be interesting. (I don’t have cable anyway).

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

7-September-2010 – Catholic News Agency Share |

Hawking’s New Book Does Not Dismiss The Real God From Creation, Jesuit Scholars Say
ROME, ITALY, September 3 (CNA/EWTN News) - Dr. Stephen Hawking’s new book, “The Grand Design,” makes the bold claim that the universe “created itself from nothing” based on physical laws such as gravity, making God unnecessary for a self-created and self-unfolding model of the universe. However, two Catholic scholars trained in physics say his remarks misconstrue the real relationship between God and creation.

A Jesuit priest and scholar, former president of Gongaza University Fr. Robert Spitzer, says that Hawking’s dismissal of God in favor of physics reflects fundamental confusions about the Christian concept of God, as the creator of all that exists-- both the physical universe, and the laws of physics which apply to it.

When this is understood, Fr. Spitzer said, Hawking’s basic confusion becomes clear. Although Hawking talks about the universe “creating itself from nothing,” he is presupposing that this “nothing” somehow involved gravity and other fundamental laws of physics, Fr. Spitzer explained.

ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=105368

 

[Soutane]

I haven’t read the book yet but I probably will. I can come to reasonable conclusions regarding what Hawking meant by that limited statement plucked by the media based on his other writings and statements. He is not an atheist; never has been and he has never postulated that a God does not exist. He is most likely arguing that the metaphysical speculation that there would be an impossibly infinite chain of causation without a God has been successfully refuted by M-theory but he would not argue that this completely refutes the existence of a God.

Examples?

In this book he denies the possibility of God,in other words POOF something out of nothing-no original push to the billiard balls.In his previous works he acknowledged the possibility if not probability of God or an uninvolved(where does he get the evidence for that except his own personal prejudices)God Source who basically ignited the firecracker.

You really have a lot of THEORIES and MOST LIKELIES for someone who hasn’t even read the book.Why don’t you do so and get back to us.

 

[Soutane]

Here, here for the Jesuits, also. I think that this is the premier order for someone interested in evangelizing through teaching or preaching and not focused so much on the Office or community prayer.

I think that Hawking is not so much arguing *against *the existence of God as saying that God’s existence is not essential to the existence of the universe. More reassurance for the atheists, who when asked who created the universe, can counter that it doesn’t need a creator.

How incisive."Because Stephen Hawking said so"It solves the Athiests biggest riddle doesn’t it?Just wait to see this justification begin popping up on these fora.You are one smart cookie Cara.

 

[unafraid]

The timing of the release of this book from a British physicist with the publicity-generating notoriety of Hawking seems curiously coincidental when considering the imminent Papal vist; a visit which has spawned organized and malicious opposition from the “New Atheists”( and their like ) in Great Britain. Somewhere, in the background, I hear the wheezing, hyperventilatory breathing of Christopher Hitchens (or another of his ilk), flushed with vitriol, shrieking in some sort of ghastly ecstasy.

This Papal visit will be unlike any other we have witnessed, in my opinion . We will be shocked by the unbridled disrespect and hatred which will be unleashed against the Pope and the Church (I hope I’m wrong). In the end, it might get uncomfortable for the Papal entourage, but it will be the largely wonderful people of Britain who will be embarassed by all of the poor taste and low form.

I believe the timing of this book is not an accident, as I feel that the enemies of God are well organized, and are in the midst of a global campaign of blasphemy. As for the book, I will not read it. The laws of physics have always impressed me as being obviously and beautifully of divine origin. To the true believers, these things are annoying, but never threatening. I always come back to when they asked Jung, “Do you believe there is a God?”, and he answered, “I do not believe there is a God…I KNOW that there is.” That sums it up for me, as well.

 

[1234]

The timing of the release of this book from a British physicist with the publicity-generating notoriety of Hawking seems curiously coincidental when considering the imminent Papal vist; a visit which has spawned organized and malicious opposition from the “New Atheists”( and their like ) in Great Britain. Somewhere, in the background, I hear the wheezing, hyperventilatory breathing of Christopher Hitchens (or another of his ilk), flushed with vitriol, shrieking in some sort of ghastly ecstasy.

This Papal visit will be unlike any other we have witnessed, in my opinion . We will be shocked by the unbridled disrespect and hatred which will be unleashed against the Pope and the Church (I hope I’m wrong). In the end, it might get uncomfortable for the Papal entourage, but it will be the largely wonderful people of Britain who will be embarassed by all of the poor taste and low form.

I believe the timing of this book is not an accident, as I feel that the enemies of God are well organized, and are in the midst of a global campaign of blasphemy. As for the book, I will not read it. The laws of physics have always impressed me as being obviously and beautifully of divine origin. To the true believers, these things are annoying, but never threatening. I always come back to when they asked Jung, “Do you believe there is a God?”, and he answered, “I do not believe there is a God…I KNOW that there is.” That sums it up for me, as well.

The point is that Hawking appears to be saying that the laws of physics and what they imply is that the universe is not necessarily of divine origin. You can believe in their divine origin if you wish, but you don’t have to. His view of the creation of the universe does not require a divine being. Atheists will like this. He doesn’t say whether he’s an atheist or not.

England is marked by poor taste and low form–look at their tabloids. Nothing new about this. I worry about the Irish reception–lots of Irish in the UK. In any case, I don’t think that it will rattle BXVI one iota.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

The point is that Hawking appears to be saying that the laws of physics and what they imply is that the universe is not necessarily of divine origin. You can believe in their divine origin if you wish, but you don’t have to. His view of the creation of the universe does not require a divine being. Atheists will like this. He doesn’t say whether he’s an atheist or not.

England is marked by poor taste and low form–look at their tabloids. Nothing new about this. I worry about the Irish reception–lots of Irish in the UK. In any case, I don’t think that it will rattle BXVI one iota.

This is my viewpoint as well.

To be perfectly cynical, I would also say that Hawking is trying to keep himself “well liked” by the British Intelligentsia, who would not take kindly to a statement of Belief in a Higher Power/First Creator from its most visible scientist.

So, IN A WAY, it IS about publicity.