CrazyHorse said:
If the God of the Abrahamic faiths is a creator who is ultimately responsible for why there is something and not nothing how does the the lack of need for such a creator not impact on the supposed necessity of his existance? Also, how has Hawkings 'missed the point'? I thought his only point was to try to explain the origin of the universe as best he can without forming any personal bias as all good scientists do? |
I'm guessing it's not that Hawking missed the point, but the people like Manus and reporters who are representing the work are missing the point, but regardless the point has been clearly missed... which i'm guessing is a point you are missign as well.
The point being a very simple and basic one...
One could say that putting extremely flammable liquids in an area can cause a fire without man's intereference because of the nature of the liquid it would catch fire spontaniously on it's own.
Such a question ignores how the liquid was created and how it got there in the first place.
Or even by saying an electric cucu clock doesn't need people because the bird will pop out without human interaction. God didn't force the bird to pop out, the bird popped out via a mechanism nobody really asked though, what created the clock.
Due to gravity there is no need for god to cause the big bang out of the compression that first caused it... but what does that really mean?
The mistake people make is... universe doesn't = reality.
It still changes nothing to scientific people of faith, simply "If god created the world, he doesn't mess with it's own laws."
