October 6th, 2010
The Big Bang and Stephen Hawking
Stephen Hawking announces: Our Universe came from the Big Bang, not from God.
Did you hear the momentous announcement earlier this month?
Famed cosmologist Stephen Hawking announced that the Universe was not created by God.
Instead, the Universe created itself, via the Big Bang.
Was this an unlikely event? No. This was actually an 'inevitable consequence' of the laws of physics, especially gravity.
As he explained:
"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."
Hawking is a respected scientist, and the author of several bestselling books. So this story got wide media coverage.
That's a shame, because it's easy to show that Hawking's idea is absurd.
Before talking about absurdity, let's talk about irony. Hawking first became prominent as a physicist by proving that the Universe must have had a beginning.
Since then, he's spent years trying to prove that it didn't.
Another irony: Hawking recently retired from the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics at Cambridge University. He shared that honor with (among others) Sir Isaac Newton.
The contrast between the two could hardly be stronger.
Newton is famous for formulating the law of universal gravity, among numerous other accomplishments.
Conversely, some of Hawking's peers today are denying gravity even exists. (example)
Newton is also famous for his devotion to the Bible. He wrote more about theology than he did about science.
Conversely, Hawking is disdainful of Christianity.
Newton believed that the Universe was clear evidence of the handiwork of God. He wrote:
"This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being... This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called 'Lord God'... or 'Universal Ruler'... The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, absolutely perfect."
Newton also wrote that atheism is "senseless and odious."
Conversely, Hawking is an atheist.
But enough about irony. Let's examine Hawking's claim that scientific laws produced the Universe.
One hundred years ago, atheists like Hawking wouldn't have bothered to make a statement like this. Back then, atheists thought the Universe was eternal.
Since an eternal Universe wouldn't have had a beginning, atheists didn't need to invent a cause for the Universe.
That all changed in the 1900s when Edwin Hubble discovered evidence that our Universe was expanding. This led to the invention of the Big Bang model and the discrediting of the eternal "steady state" models of the Universe.
Now the atheists had a problem. The Universe had a beginning. And that which had a beginning, also had a cause.
This has also led some Christians to view the Big Bang as evidence for Biblical creation. This is incorrect for several reasons, as I've explained in past newsletters.
Nevertheless, it still makes many atheists uncomfortable. Anything even remotely consistent with a Creator needs to be eliminated.
Thus the statement by Hawking: God didn't create the Universe, because it created itself.
This is rubbish, of course.
Hawking says that "the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing." But the Big Bang model itself says this idea is nonsense.
According to the Big Bang, the fundamental forces in physics -- gravity, electromagnetism, the weak nuclear force, and the strong nuclear force -- were created after the Big Bang occurred.
So if these forces didn't exist until after the Universe began, how could they have created the Universe?
Obviously, something can't create itself. Before something can do anything, it must exist.
Thus, for something to create itself, the something would need to exist before it existed. This is clearly absurd.
This brings up a bigger problem than just scientific laws. The Big Bang model requires the entire Universe to pop into existence from nothing.
According to this model, before the Big Bang there was nothing.
Then suddenly there was something.
But again, this is rubbish.
As philosophers have pointed out, nothing can't do anything.
Put another way, nothing can do nothing.
Nothing can cause nothing.
From nothing, nothing comes.
Every effect has a cause. But before the Big Bang, there was nothing that could be a cause. Therefore, the Big Bang could not have happened.
At its core, the Big Bang requires a miracle to have occurred. But nothing cannot perform any miracles.
Atheists sometimes retort that although the Big Bang was extremely improbable, if you wait long enough, even the extremely improbable will eventually occur.
But this too is rubbish. According to the secular model, time did not exist before the Big Bang. Thus, there was no time in which to wait for the near-impossible to occur. (And what would have waited?
Plus, it's also incorrect to say that the Big Bang was near-impossible. It's straightforward to show from science that the Big Bang idea is *fully* impossible.
That's why even a brilliant man like Hawking is reduced to using empty platitudes like "spontaneous creation" to explain where the Universe came from.
Since he rejects his Creator, that's the best he can do.
Hawking and his fellow atheists cannot explain the Universe. Many of them even realize this.
That's why so many of them are resorting to "multiverse" theories.
Details vary, but the basic idea is that there are an infinite number of Universes which are created and destroyed in an eternal cycle. The one we live in just happened to start 13.7 billion years ago, and will die eventually and be reborn in some other form.
This is usually presented as science, but it's anything but science. At best, it's irrational, self-contradictory philosophy.
By definition, the Universe is everything that exists. Except for the spiritual realm (the existence of which atheists deny), there can be nothing outside of the Universe.
Multiverse theory is just a weak attempt to sidestep the need for a beginning. Since more and more atheists are resorting to it, they're in effect admitting the bankruptcy of their worldview.
Conversely, the Bible stands firm and true. There was a definite beginning, when God created the heavens and earth (Gen. 1).
Atheists often try to refute the Creation model by saying that if every effect needs a cause, then what caused God?
But the question is nonsensical. God has no origin. He is eternal.
God is not an effect. Therefore He needs no cause.
He is the Ancient of Days -- the One who inhabits eternity.
If you find this topic interesting, then I highly recommend you watch this video.
It's a 60-minute presentation by Dr. Phil Fernandes called "The Existence of God." He goes through a list of reasons why the Bible is true, while also showing that atheism is both self-contradictory and, ultimately, hopeless.
The first couple of minutes are a little slow, but once he gets going, the presentation is excellent. I first saw it live, and I've watched it several times since then.
Here's the link again: Video.
Until next time,
By Spike Psarris as originally published in
CREATION ASTRONOMY NEWS - Sep/Oct, 2010
reprinted with permission from the author.
Please use the new Discover Creation search engine - at the top of each page - to look for more detailed articles on things discussed in our "Creation Nuggets."