Howard Bloom Quotes

Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe.

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

God may exist, but science can explain the universe without the need for a creator.

Atheistic evolutionists believe that nothing created everything - a scientific impossibility. It couldn't happen. So they redefine the word 'nothing' to mean 'something,' so that in their unthinking minds, they can justify their foolishness.

Only an unscientific ignoramus would hold to the thought that nothing created everything.

Uh, do I believe in evolution? I embrace the view that God created the heavens and the earth, the seas and all that's in them. The means that he used to do that, I can't say, but I do believe in that fundamental truth.

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.

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.

We don't have a solid theory of how the universe originated, but that doesn't mean we have to invoke a deity.

The public schools tend to teach little kids from when they are very young about the whole universe without God and that God cannot be in science. They are indoctrinating children in an atheistic religious view of things.

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.

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

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.

According to the scientific naturalist version of cosmic history, nature is a permanently closed system of material effects that can never be influenced by something from outside - like God, for example.

There was no religion in my life growing up. Did God invent us or did we invent God?

My atheism, like that of Spinoza, is true piety towards the universe and denies only gods fashioned by men in their own image, to be servants of their human interests.

Scripture suggests that the elements in space were created for the benefit of earth, while evolution suggests that earth is an insignificant speck in vast space.

I don't think that the total creation took place in six days as we now measure time. If we can confirm, say, the Big Bang theory, that doesn't at all cause me to question my faith that God created the Big Bang.

Right thinking creationists do not impugn evolution. What we reject is a universe that made itself out of nothing.

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.

I don’t want to offend anyone of faith, but I think that science has some more compelling explanation than a divine creator

I'm a rationalist. And I can see no evidence for a benevolent and interventionist creator.

Christianity believes that God has created an external world that is really there; and because He is a reasonable God, one can expect to be able to find the order of the universe by reason.

There is no theory of a God, of an author of Nature, of an origin of the Universe, which is not utterly repugnant to my faculties. . .

It is impossible to account for the creation of the universe without the agency of a Supreme Being.