PDA

View Full Version : Stephen Hawking, Einstein and Antony Flew



Churchwork
08-31-2009, 06:11 PM
Stephen Hawking wrote (http://www.ankerberg.org/Articles/science/creation-questions/SC-creation-questions.htm), "The actual point of creation lies outside the presently known laws of physics." In his book The Nature of Space and Time, Hawking said, "Almost everyone now believes that the universe and time itself had a beginning at the big bang."

His wife is a Christian. And Stephen, in his famous book that sold over 20 million copies, more than 20 times any other scientific book, said several times he believed in God and that science is quite meaningless without God's purposes.

His most famous student who lived with him for a time was Don Page said "I am a conservative Christian."

Hawking said, "It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us." ('A Brief History of Time', 1988, p.127)

Einstein and Hawking said there has to be a beginning according to General Relativity.

Hawking said, "we proved that time had a beginning".

Antony Flew, the most published and respected atheist scholar of the 20th century, renounced atheism and confessed that there is an uncreated Creator.

These prominent scientists and scholars can't deny the evidence.
Theoretical Physicist, Stephen Hawking said, "It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way except the act of a God who intended to create beings like us." ('A Brief History of Time', 1988, p.127)

Dr. Paul Davies (Professor of Natural Philosophy) has moved from atheism to conceding that, "The laws of physics seem themselves to be the product of exceedingly ingenious design." There are over 800 variables making life on another planet in the universe impossible. And he said, "[There] is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all. It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature's numbers to make the universe. The impression of design is overwhelming."

Professor of Astronomy, George Greenstein said, "As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency--or rather Agency--must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?"

Dr. Arnold Penzias, 1978 Nobel Prize winner in Physics, said, "Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing...one with a very delicate balance needed to provide exactly the conditions required to permit life and one which has an underlying (one might say 'supernatural') plan."

And in just a few hours on the cross on our planet in our solar system in our galaxy among 200 billion galaxies in the universe, Jesus died for our sins to give us eternal life whosoever is willing to receive it.

Science agrees with the 4 Step Perfect Proof for God (http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/perfectproof.htm) of the Bible. Agnostics and atheists do not agree with Einstein.

"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." (Albert Einstein)

You will seek Me and find Me when you seek Me with all your heart. (Jeremiah 29:13)

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

Famous Scientists Who Believed in God

Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.

Sir Fancis Bacon (1561-1627)
Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." (Of Atheism)

Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled!

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.

Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era.

Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being."

Robert Boyle (1791-1867)
One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era.

Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity.

Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)
Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution.

William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)
Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions." Lord Kelvin was an Old Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating).

Max Planck (1858-1947)
Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!"

Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

gondola
01-05-2010, 10:14 AM
When quantum physics developed along with it's principles of uncertainty of space and movement at a quantum (sub-atomic level), that is, quantum particles only have a probability (chance) of being in a certain position at any given time--Einstein rejected this wholeheartedly and tried to find away around it, but couldn't. He is quoted as saying something like, "God doesn't throw dice." But all physics since then seems to show that God does like to throw dice, and he does so at every chance he gets.

gondola
01-05-2010, 10:26 AM
from the 4 step proof of God.


b) mankind would have approximated into that alleged past eternity and not still be sinning to the extent it still does along the exponential progression of conscience we are clearly on.Exponential progression of conscience? This is very highly debatable. I just listed some of the most offensive gross human beings in history in another post about politics and murder, and most of them were from the 20th century. I would argue there has been, at best, a dubious stalemate as far as the "progression of conscience". Technology has facilitated civility to some degree, but it has also widened the gap between those who have power and those who don't. In caveman times a brute may try to steal your wife, sure, but all he had was a club. Nowadays, for those living under dictators or brutal military's the bad guy has an M-16 and there's no way you're probably better off dead.

and to paraphrase the other point, The universe needs to have a beginning, thus God--what's God's beginning? Isn't God like the universe then? I just don't like to hear about "proofs" of God or ways to disprove atheism. It's about faith, no?

another quote, from 4 steps


Christianity is the most personal because God reveals Himself in ChristI think this is unfair to other religions. For example, Hinduism is abound with stories about their Gods living on Earth in human form, usually as princes and such.

Churchwork
01-05-2010, 02:09 PM
gondola,

Your thinking is messed up. Since something can't come from nothing, just because you can't see what's going on in the quantum world, doesn't mean it happens all by itself. All dice thrown is just apparent, for as you know when you throw a dice it lands on a number based on the physics of how that dice rolled.

You actually think human sacrifices are better? There are evil men in all ages. That doesn't make your case. Nero was far more evil (http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Nero.htm) than any popular dictators today. When you start killing loved ones that is the most evil of all. Remember, you got to take this on a per capita basis. With 7 billion people on the planet, one bad guy on a per capita basis doesn't compare to the evilness of men in antiquity and their practice of human sacrifices. Humans if we lost our technology would not resort to human sacrifices; besides, we ain't going back to the stone ages. There are many measures of an exponential progression of conscience which are undeniable like the murder and crime rate per capita is measurably down through the ages. Women can vote now just this past century. There are more democracies than ever before. Polygamy and slavery are outlawed. Deaths due to war have dropped significantly. Wars in antiquity when they occurred wiped out half the population. Not so in wars today. And many more examples can be given.

The universe does need a beginning, I agree, but that points to the uncreated since the universe can't always have existed nor start up all by itself. So find out who or what He is. It is illogical to ask what created the uncreated. It is uncreated. That which is uncreated has no cause to it. You can take this on faith because it is proven. Your blind faith slips away into the realm of nonsense.

With regard to Hinduism, there can only be one uncreated Creator which they call Brahma, so to claim their gods came in human form is fanciful, because there is only one God. You can't have multiple uncreated Creators, otherwise, you have to ask the question where do these others come from? We only have evidence for one uncreated. Let us simply abide in the evidence. The gods, therefore, of Hinduism, which last I heard there are 330 million are actually evil spirits, because Hinduism is false. Hinduism is false because reincarnation is false and an amoral God is illogical since we are moral beings. How can that which is amoral create that which is moral? How can the lesser create the greater? How can God's standards be less than ours? Reincarnation is a lie, because it says you can come back as a chicken, but chickens don't have God-consciousness, so how can a chicken improve himself to become human again? That's silly. You get this one life now to decide if you want to spend eternity with God or be eternally separated in Hell. Your choice.

The reason for no reincarnation in large part is because God is not a cruel God. It would be cruel to those who love Him to always have to come up against the reincarnated who keep imprinting their evil on society, because they realize it doesn't matter, since they always get another chance. God is righteous, holy and true.

I should also add if you got stories of ethereal beings coming in human form in Hinduism then prove it, multiply corroborate it, rather than just assuming it. Care about proof and evidence.

Your account was removed because you claim in your profile you believe in the Trinity, but here you are argue for God not existing?

Churchwork
07-31-2010, 11:25 PM
"In the hot big bang model described above, there was not enough time in the early universe for heat to have flowed from one region to another. This means that the initial state of the universe would have to have had exactly the same temperature everywhere in order to account for the fact that the microwave back-ground has the same temperature in every direction we look. The initial rate of expansion also would have had to be chosen very precisely for the rate of expansion still to be so close to the critical rate needed to avoid recollapse. This means that the initial state of the universe must have been very carefully chosen indeed if the hot big bang model was correct right back to the beginning of time. It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us." Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, p. 127.