Stephen Hawking claims Pope John Paul II once urged him not to dig too deep into the origins of the universe:
Hawking said the pope told the scientists, ''It's OK to study the universe and where it began. But we should not inquire into the beginning itself because that was the moment of creation and the work of God.''
The physicist, author of the best seller ''A Brief History of Time,'' added that John Paul believed ''God chose how the universe began for reasons we could not understand.''
Of course, Hawking has already ruled God out of the equation:
But Hawking questioned whether an almighty power was needed to create the universe.
''Does it require a creator to decree how the universe began? Or is the initial state of the universe determined by a law of science?'' he asked.
Hawking's groundbreaking research on black holes and the origins of the universe has made him one of the best-known theoretical physicists of his generation. He proposes that space and time have no beginning and no end.
And we're close to getting the whole thing figured out:
Hawking ended his lecture saying, ''We are getting closer to answering the age-old questions: Why are we here? Where did we come from?''
Well, I agree those are the questions on which to focus.
Limiting the scope of inquiry is ludicrous on its face, it seems to me. The problem arises from man's arrogance that he does not need God and that our existence is independent from Him. Hawking's 'law of science' will be universally binding and explanatory...until the next scientist comes along and overthrows it.
It is amazing how the scientists of the past had so much wrong, but today's scientists are always right.
UPDATE: A link to this quote was sent to me by Theosebes reader SLC:
Stephen Hawking has said, in his writings, "the actual point of creation lies outside the scope of presently known laws of physics," and a less well-known but very distinguished cosmologist, Professor Alan Guth from MIT, says the "instant of creation remains unexplained."Hmmmmm....So maybe it has nothing to do with 'scientific law' after all.