Stephen Hawking Died (High Priest Of Evolution)
He was called a "celebrated scientist" by atheists.
His children said he was a great scientist and an extraordinary man whose work and legacy will live on for many years.
We are such insignificant creatures on a minor planet of a very average star in the outer suburb of one of a hundred billion galaxies. So it is difficult to believe in a God that would care about us or even notice our existence.
One factor that was central to their relationship—and eventual divorce—was religious conflicts. Jane notes that ‘Stephen had no hesitation in declaring himself an atheist despite the strongly Methodist background’ of his family (p. 46). She concluded that his reasoning was, ‘as a cosmologist examining the laws which governed the universe, he could not allow his calculations to be muddled by a confessed belief in the existence in a Creator God’ (p. 46). With candid insights into her private spiritual experiences, Jane draws her own conclusions regarding God’s role in the universe. Jane also discusses in detail the anthropic principle, which she calls ‘an important cosmological principle of the twentieth century’ (p. 153).
She observed that the strong version has a ‘close philosophical affinity to the medieval cosmos’ where humans were at the center of creation (p. 153). She then concluded that the anthropic principle places humans in a ‘special place at the centre of the universe’, just as did the Egyption system, and that, ‘for the medieval populace, this special position was a strong statement of the unique relationship between human beings and their Creator’ (p. 153). She adds that, as a direct result of the focus of modern cosmologists on mathematics, the concept of a personal God became irrelevant for these scientists because, in their mind, their calculations diminished ‘any possible scope for a Creator’, and
‘they could not envisage any other place or role for God in the physical universe. Concepts which could not be quantified in mathematical terms as a theoretical reflection of physical realities, whether or not the actual existence of those physical realities was proven, were meaningless’ (p. 155).Her major concern is that she perceives—and discusses extensively why, based on discussions with her husband and the leading physicists of the world—that the result of the goals of science would eventually result in the situation where(In other words Stephen Hawkings and other atheists cannot explain God in mathematical terms. Their "god" is mathematics. It demands concepts in mathematical terms via man's creation of himself through the millions of years concept of goo to you creation.
Their Mathematical equations are "cooked" via the millions of years factored into their meaningless concepts of creation based on math alone. Their empty theories try to explain man's existance but can't because all of man's wisdom is foolishness with God.)
‘Human reactions in all their complexities, emotional and psychological, would one day ... be reduced to scientific formulae because, in effect, these reactions were no more than the microscopic chemical interactions of molecules’ (p. 156).The result was that ‘in the face of such dogmatically rational arguments, there was no point in raising questions of spirituality and religious faith, of the soul and of a God who was prepared to suffer for the sake of humanity—questions which ran completely counter to the selfish reality of genetic theory’, evidently referring to the work of Richard Dawkins and others (p. 156). Jane notes,
‘at the end of the twentieth century, religion finds its revelationary truths threatened by scientific theory and discovery, and retreats into a defensive corner, while scientists go into the attack insisting that rational argument is the only valid criterion for an understanding of the workings of the universe’ (p. 200).As he got older, Stephen became more and more hardened in his atheism. As a result, Jane notes that although in the early days their arguments on religion ‘were playful and fairly light-hearted’, in later years they increasingly ‘became more personal, divisive and hurtful.
Stephen’s view of the world was a universe ‘which had neither beginning nor end, nor any role for a Creator-God’ (p. 389). And this was a universe in which Jane did not want to live, and which many people increasingly see as not only unreal, but one that avoids reality.
Jane summarized her concept of much of the research, of which her husband was in the forefront, as ‘theorizing on abstruse suppositions about imaginary particulars traveling in imaginary time in a looking-glass universe which did not exist except in the mind of the theorists.’ This she described as ‘the demon goddess of physics’ (p. 372).
Stephen Hawking's former wife Jane knew her husband and his mathematical creations as, "theorizing on abstruse suppositions about imaginary particulars traveling in imaginary time in a looking-glass universe which did not exist except in the mind of the theorists." Her summary of the combined efforts of her former husband and other atheists explains the black hole mind of Stephen Hawking and his fellow researchers who deny God as the Creator!
One of her strongly held opinions was that ‘reason and science alone could not furnish all of the answers to the imponderable mysteries of human existence’ (p. 536). Yet this ‘simple and fairly obvious’ truth was ‘most unpalatable to those people who had come to believe in Stephen’s immortality and infallibility’ (p. 537). The fact is, in the minds of many people, Stephen’s scientific theories became ‘the basis for a new religion’ (p. 537). Stephen Hawking (In A Nutshell) The book Music to Move the Stars by Jane Hawking McMillan, New York, 2004 is no longer in print. A revised watered down edition is available in print.
Stephen Hawking's former wife Jane knew her husband and his mathematical creations as, "theorizing on abstruse suppositions about imaginary particulars traveling in imaginary time in a looking-glass universe which did not exist except in the mind of the theorists."
Jane Hawkings's book about her husband is truly an eye opening look of Stephen Hawking's world view as seen through her eyes up close an personal. It is rebuking evidence of why the pseudo science of Stephen Hawking is "intellectual" nonsense.
This is the prime reason it is no longer in print. Jane's book about her husband exposed his flawed "intellectual" thinking, research, reflection and solution for creation.
Stephen hawking proposed creation via the big bang theory. Pparticles-to-people Evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture Stephen hawking as other atheists revised the big bang theory many times. He stated that the universe was composed of nothing. Hawkings and other atheists were always searching for the answer as to why their is much less anti matter than matter. According to the big bang theory anti matter and matter should be equal but this is not so. Hawkings and his fellow atheists came up with additional flawed theories to explain this to rescue the big bang theory of creation.
The multiverse theory is particles-to-people evolution that is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture. It is also and attempt to rescue the big bang theory. Real science can be tested and proven.
Stephen Hawking: the closed mind of a dogmatic atheist ( 2004)
Hawking on Heaven Hawking atheopathy
The mind of God and the ‘big bang’
(Particles-to-people Evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture) The founders and leaders of modern ‘creation science’ base their views on the Bible, believing it is God’s inspired account of history given to mankind. It is wrong to confuse this group with other, more recent advocates of ‘intelligent design’ who wish to avoid all appeals to biblical authority. Christians don’t advocate just any ‘designer’ who may or may not be capricious. Rather, they identify the Designer with the faithful triune God of the Bible.
Hawking’s extraordinary claim that the universe created itself from nothing by accident for no reason is "intellectual" nonsense. Particles-to-people Evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture The logical errors in this statement are almost too numerous to recount. Here are some:
Intellectual nonsense does not suddenly become factual because it is uttered by a famous savant.
Stephen Hawkings and other atheists cannot explain God in mathematical terms. Their "god" is mathematics. It demands concepts in mathematical terms via man's creation of himself through the millions of years concept of goo to you.
Their Mathematical equations are "cooked" via the millions of years factored into their meaningless concepts of creation based on math alone. Their empty theories try to explain man's existance but can't because all of man's wisdom is foolishness with God. Evolution = Millions Of Years + Your Imagination Evolution doesn't compute even when millions or billions of years are factored in various equations. GooToYou.comJane Hawkings first wife concludes that the complexity of the cosmologist’s calculations and the admiration their discoveries have caused some people
‘to fall into the trap of believing that science has become a substitute for religion and that, as its great high priests, they can claim to have all the answers to all the questions. However, because of their reluctance to admit spiritual and philosophical values, some of them do not appear to be aware of the nature of some of the questions’ (p. 200).
Stephen Hawkings was a high priest of evolution that denies God. He died in his sins and will spend an eternity in hell's torments.
The Eternity of Hell’s Torments (A sermon by Jonathan Edwards)
The Great White Throne Judgement Of The LOST GoodNewsPost ( Bible)
What Does It Mean To Be Born Again?