He went public about his atheism in 2014, so to suggest:

I believe Hawking's devotion to evolution and denying God IS the thing that made him famous.

Is clearly incorrect. And this is my main problem with what you have said. The thing that made him famous was his remarkable contribution to science. To suggest he is "devoted" to evolution is just bizarre. He, like nearly every person who understands the scientific process, accepts evolution as a fact, which it indisputably is (from any reasonable perspective).

As a zealot, you have decided that Hawking's rejection of god is what made famous, but that simply isn't the case, and is deeply disrespectful and mean spirited.

Scientist/doctors truly have no idea, even with a ventilator, how he was able to live so long.

Proof of this, please. I am fully aware that he lived longer than expected, but doctors have "no idea" how this happened? Proof, please.

As far as the bedside confessions, yes, I am making that up, which is why I stated it as "I am sure, one day

You actually said that "ALL" famous atheists do this:

Now I am sure, as is with ALL famous atheist, we will one day hear of his bedside acceptance of Yashua

But it is clear that you completely invented that. It isn't true. It is a self-serving lie, to give a false impression.

it is love to speak truth

Is it? It's love to write an article about a man who has just died full of insinuation and self-serving assumptions? You can't just re-define love to suit yourself. It can be a loving thing to tell the truth (whatever that means), but it doesn't follow that it necessarily is. It is position of arrogance to say it's okay, I am a purveyor of the truth, so it follows that I can say what I want.

I find them sad that so many newspapers seemed to focus so much of their writings after his death on the fact he claimed there is no god

Maybe the papers you read. In nearly everything I read and saw, his atheism was no more than a footnote. I live in a continent that doesn't discriminate and judge atheists, though. I realise you don't.

And as far as the Bible being a religion of acceptance, you will not find that anywhere in scripture. There is acceptance by the Almighty, but not of those who are unrepentant.

Good to know. It sounds to me like you know the mind of god there. This is a big reason why I rejected the notion of god - the arbitrary, easy to misinterpret rules. The idea that a soul will be sent to hellfire for eternity for not "repenting" sufficiently is just revolting, as is your pious declaration about it. You see, devotion under the threat of punishment isn't actually devotion; it's fear.

I do not believe someone like Newton would be widely accepted in todays anti-god academia. This was simply my point.

Why? To start with, academia is not "anti-god". God is irrelevent to many people of science, but they are not "anti-god". And why would Newton be rejected? Because he believed in god? You are assuming that a man born 500 years later would grow up with exactly the same belief system. Your point is confused and poorly made.

I did not say anything disparaging of Mr. Hawking

Yes you did:

Why would the most well known physicist today, a man that is put on the same level as Albert Einstein and Sir Isaac Newton, be so widely accepted in both academia and entertainment? I believe it is only because he constantly spoke against, even the possibility, of a Creator of all things.

According to you, his science, his brave fight against adversity, his personality, his philosophising...none of this is the reason he is famous and well-liked. No the "only" reason for this is that he doesn't believe in god. And that's not disparaging?

if we do not see His Son as our example of how to live them, and see His Son as our Redeemer, then nothing else matters.

...because of what will happen to our immortal souls? Is that your point, that Stephen Hawking is now in hell? That's what you believe, isn't it? Is this what you are alluding to here, that the dead scientist is burning in hell?

but unfortunately for him, and for most of his adoring fans who believe him, his great legacy will be that he led so many away from any understanding or even acknowledgment of our great Creator, YHVH.

Absolute nonsense! You think that his legacy isn't his remarkable contribution to science, and that isn't disparaging? And now you want to paint a picture that he is responsible for turning people from god? Where is the evidence that he did this?

Your article is mean-spirited. It's a very American version of Christianity - judgmental and aggressive. Jesus would be appalled at the things Conservative Christianity does in his name.