Stephen Hawking bashes religion, but what does new paper say about God?

Stephen Hawking

/ AP

(CBS) Physicist Stephen Hawking has given religion a cosmic thumbs-down, calling the idea of heaven "a fairy story" in a recent interview. But researchers say faith can have measurable psychological benefits.

Case in point: A paper published in the Journal of Clinical Psychology indicates that people who believe in a benevolent God are less bothered by the vagaries of life than those who believe in a deity that is indifferent or punitive.

The paper was based on two recent studies. The first, which involved 332 Christians and Jews, showed that those who trusted in God to look out for them worry less and are more tolerant of uncertainty than those who mistrusted God.

The second study involved 125 Jews who participated in a two-week audio-video program aimed at increasing their trust in God. It showed that those who participated reported significant decreases in worry and psychological stress.

"We found that the positive beliefs of trust in God were associated with less worry and that this relationship was partially mediated by lower levels of intolerance of uncertainty," the authors of the study - including Harvard-affiliated psychologist Dr. David Rosmarin - said in a written statement. "Conversely, the negative beliefs of mistrust in God correlated with higher worry and intolerance."

The paper noted that studies have shown that 93 percent of people believe in God or a higher power and that 50 percent say that religion is important to them. Hawking, whose long battle with a deadly neurological disease has left him withered and wheelchair-bound, certainly isn't one of them.

"I have lived with the prospect of an early death for the last 49 years," he told the Guardian, adding, "I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark."

What do you think?

[Afaunman]

I'm a big fan of Stephen Hawkings, but I also count myself as religious (I'm Muslim). To each his own, I'm not going to tell anyone what to think. But I think people suffer from their own concepts of what God is. In Islam, the conceppt is that God is just beyond the perception of humanity. You can't wrap your head around it, it's more than you could ever imagine. It's almost like it's dealing at another level or dimension that we just can't grasp.

It's interesting that Hawkings, through all his research, has taken things back to the Big Bang, talking about M-theory (multidimentional theory) talking about things just beyond the perception of humanity, things that we just can't wrap our heads around. To me they are the same thing. God created it, Hawkings (along with other scientists) are explaining it. If that is the case, where is the contradiction?

[MarkNS]

The difference between you and Hawking is that he develops hypotheses and then searches for evidence to back them up in the hope of developing a scientific theory that fits the evidence. He never just says "Here's the way it is." You, and all other religious people, develop highly detailed hypotheses about the your god including such things as what he wants you behave. You do all of this based upon absolutely NO evidence and you make no attempt to discover any. Unlike a scientist, like Hawking, you will also never change your beliefs when faced with evidence that contradicts them. That is the contradiction and why religion and science are incompatible.

[Brandonii22]

Markns, there is evidence. Unfortunately the search for evidence in any field is not completely objective. We are only kidding ourselves if we believe a piece of work was developed from true objectivity. Like any story, multiple interpretations can be derived. In the religious world in the past, I am sure there would be a greater consensus towards the amount of evidence proving the activities of God in this world, and this is likely because the people were rooted in a more theistic worldview. Today the world has grown much more secular, and now the mindset has unconsciously shifted to more readily accept evidence that disproves the existence of a divine being. On your second point about the ignorance of believers, and this overlaps with the first, I think this is a false assumption. If we never changed our beliefs then Christians would still think the world is flat. In fact, like scientists, theologians and scholars are always searching for new answers. I think figures like Martin Luther and C.S. Lewis are perfect examples of this. In some respects, but not all, you are right that science and religion are not compatible. If the core beliefs of the Abrahamic religions are, then God is not subject to empirical reasoning and cannot be reduced to human precepts. Science will probably never prove the existence of God, because it can only prove His work in our reality.

[slappy-mcjohnson]

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." Seneca (4BC-65AD)

[formrusmcsgt]

My and Hawking's religious views are parallel to those of most of our founding fathers.

This quote hangs on a wall in my office:

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology." -- Thomas Jefferson

[rennin1]

How about hanging this quote on your wall...
Jefferson's Jesus is kindhearted, contemplative, democratic in his sympathies, quietly dismissive of tradition and scornful of despots and priests.
From Twilight at Monticello: The Final Years of Thomas Jefferson page 186.

[annanko5]

The analogy drawn between the pronouncements of physicist Stephen hawking and the findings of the research group are not tenable, because, naturally belief in a benevolent overseer is bound to guarantee a satisfactory resolution to all adversities. Which, no doubt have the propensity to calm nerves and assuage grave worries? This, however, does not necessarily prove, in my opinion, the verity or existence of a supposed benevolent caretaker. There are many incidents in life involving persons who have dedicated their lives to doing great generosities, yet have faced some of the most horrendous adversities, including Prof. Hawking's own 49 years tussle with survival, as well as people who have lived most precarious lives, believing in an indifferent punitive deity, but have exercised their conscience and continue to do just fine. I believe the question the professor is addressing concerns the verity of a benevolent all endearing caretaker, and the realism of heaven. If indeed there is no benevolent overseeing caretaker as is widely believed.

[nfission]

Read the Old Testament, if there is a god he/she is anything but benevolent. Belief is purely through faith if a person wants to believe, there is no proof. Just don't mix it with politics or tell me that you're a "born again", I don't care, and I don't think you are a good person for telling me. People know what you are by your actions, not your words.

[Skepticrd]

Gee, religion makes people feel better. There's a shocker. How exactly does this counteract Hawking's claim that God and heaven are fairy tales? Seems to me it bolsters the point: God exists only in the minds of scared, fallible humans.

[john-27]

but what does a moron like you know? nothing. Although all the morons will sit there and think they know everything and open their mouths before they know 100%. lol

[slappy-mcjohnson]

very Christian of you, John-27!

[MarkNS]

This article is ridiculous. Whether or not a belief in benevolent god makes people happier than those who believe in a punitive god does not have anything to do with whether or not a god exists. The fact that a delusion makes one happy has no bearing on its veracity. Hawking merely states that there is no need of a god to explain the universe's existence.
In addition, the study dealt with believers in god...it didn't address how happy we atheists are in our freedom from nonsensical biblical strictures.

[ddcsarah]

Isn't this guy the longest living man with ALS? Maybe there's a reason God is keeping him alive.

[shameonbush]

I agree. :)

[quelady]

Hawking is a very lucky man indeed if "God is keeping him alive". I hope its for a very good reason, considering innocent children all over the world die every day whether through illness, starvation or at the hands of their evil caretakers, and god doesn't keep them alive! Its this kind of fantasy thinking that has completely turned me off religion and solidified my belief that there is no god, no heaven. We are all biological beings and when the body and mind stop working, there is nothingness. However we were before birth, so we will return to the same state at death. End of story.

[kgerton-2009]

I highly regard your opinion but your opinion is not my best bet nor is it yours. Your scientific evidence is strong, but you are human. What if your belief is incorrect due to some scientific evidence we are not aware of right now? If the God we believe in is an untruth then we lose nothing but, what if that same God is real and we don't believe, have we not crumbled our chance for eternity? I cannot believe that your intelligence is a fluke of nature nor can I believe that humans are able to figure out their existence without enlightened men of our time. If I put my beliefs in God, what may I ask, do I have to lose even though I have some compiled date otherwise. I stay awake to challenging changes.

[sistersai]

The relationship drawn between the study and Dr. Hawking's statement is not sound. The study focuses on trust vs. mistrust of God. It does not discuss belief vs. non-belief. It definitely follows that if one both believes in God and has negative feelings about it, one is likely to feel down about life in general. However, it does not follow that a non-believer is less happy or less tolerant of difficult experiences. Non-believers were not even included in the samples for either of the studies. A non-believer neither trusts nor mistrusts God - God is non-existent and therefore, a non-issue. Dr. Hawking's wouldn't have even qualified as a subject, so it's quite illogical to associate him and his thoughts, feelings, and experiences with the results of the study.

[liberalmike]

I am a non believer after being brought up in religion my whole life. I finally see the light.