Stephen Hawking Quotes

Except for a God who sits down after the universe begins, all other gods conflict with the assumptions of science.

I'd be perfectly happy with a mathematically precise description of how time began. I see science and religion as being two completely different things. I don't see science as relevant to the question of whether or not there's a God.

The universe is incredibly wondrous, incredibly beautiful, and it fills me with a sense that there is some underlying explanation that we have yet to fully understand. If someone wants to place the word 'God' on those collections of words, it's OK with me.

I believe in a kind of God. I think all scientists, in a way, believe in a certain God, in a certain order of nature.

The split between religion and science is relatively new. Isaac Newton, who first worked out the laws by which gravity held the planets and even the stars in their traces, was sufficiently impressed by the scale and regularity of the universe to ascribe it all to God.

My view is that science only has something to say about a very particular notion of God, which goes by the name of 'god of the gaps'.

I don't even really know what the big bang is, and so when people want to go through and say, 'Well, I believe that the universe started by God starting it,' that's fine by me.

For me, I've always believed that there was a God. I've always believed that God created the heavens and earth - so, for me it's not a huge leap from there to intelligent design.

I believe that God made this wonderful universe and all that exists.

Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe. But now science offers a more convincing explanation.

God created the world; the laws of nature were created by God. True science tries to find out what God put in the world. The trouble is where scientists speculate about theology and they don't know what they're talking about because they weren't there. They can't speculate about the origins of life because they weren't there.

The more thoroughly I conduct scientific research, the more I believe that science excludes atheism.

Why is it any more reasonable to believe that God has always been than it is to say that matter has always been?

If you can define what God is, I can tell you whether I believe in it.

I definitely believe in God.

I am not a creationist as the term is usually understood. I believe that the earth is billions of years old and the universe even older. I do believe that God is the creator, but that's a completely different thing. I've written in defense of evolution and made arguments that are based on evolution.

The burden of proof is on those who don't believe that "Genesis" was right, and there was a creation, and that Creator is still involved.

A universe with a God would look quite different from a universe without one. A physics, a biology where there is a God is bound to look different. So the most basic claims of religion are scientific. Religion is a scientific theory.

Although God believers don't need evolution to be false, atheists need evolution to be true.

I won't say that I'm an agnostic, since agnosticism maintains that one cannot know... but I'm not averse to the idea of some intelligence or some organizing force that set up the initial conditions of the universe in such a way that ultimately generated stars, planets and life.

Time is not eternal but was created by God at the beginning.

I know God is real.

It is impossible to imagine the universe run by a wise, just and omnipotent God, but it is quite easy to imagine it run by a board of gods.

The more I try to unravel the mysteries of the world in which we live, the more I come to the conception of a single overruling power - God.

Scientific views end in awe and mystery, lost at the edge in uncertainty, but they appear to be so deep and so impressive that the theory that it is all arranged as a stage for God to watch man's struggle for good and evil seems inadequate.