Re: Stephen Hawking: God NOT Needed For Creation
Peace queer
For something to be convenient (be it patronisingly or otherwise) is not proof against it, rather convenience or simplicity in scientific theories are grounds for stronger arguments. Convenience is a factor towards measuring the ‘truth’ of a matter. Accordingly complexity is quite the reverse.
None of the theories by scientists who claim to have cracked the big question are simple or pragmatic. However, one should not explain away such a gem of a statement that “God is Hidden” in a few words as you have done, because this simple, ‘convenient’ term is potent and loaded with insight beyond amazing. Firstly, you need to realise I’m only joining the dots, this term “Ghaib” or “hidden” was there from the beginning it appears in the Old Testament predating the Holy Qur’an.
People may have known what it meant to them, but to us we can see what it means in context to science and modern technology. Assocaited to the concept of “ghaib” is the concept of this world being created in “deception” that we believe that it is a cause-effect universe such that one cause will create the effect. We can ignore the idea of a Creator or Sustainer who REALLY makes things happen, because our existence makes it appear as though we make things move when we push them. We are unable to SEE - the real force behind the act - hence “hidden”. This comes from belief not science. Another concept of religion is the idea of CREATION and the Creator. We distinguish between Him and His Creation, we say that the only Being Who can Create anything real is God, whereas we have been given the ability to create unreal things such as ‘thoughts’ or ‘concepts’. But real things are created by God, that means by proxy they “come from nothing” It is fundamental belief in Islam that God made life and the universe from NOTHING.
Amazing how Hawkings deduces the same thing, i.e. that the universe came from nothing. It would certainly fail religion if he found God somehow attached to the equations at the beginning of the universe. That would infer the universe has been extracted from God, which infers everything simply changes form- the new lingo on the street of science is that the UNIVERSE WAS CREATED - read his book TLK might lend it to you - he uses the word ‘created’ because it comes literally from nothing.
For something to come from nothing - however, does not mean it does not NEED God. This is the fallacy of the scientific argument. We certainly hold that the universe came from nothing, but at the same time we never arrogate that nothingness to be the master of affairs.