2 Thoughts on Stephen Hawking's "Did God create the universe?"
Last night on the Discovery Channel from 8PM-9PM the show "Curiosity" premiered, on which Stephen Hawking addressed the question, "Did God create the universe?" I live-blogged this show HERE. Hawking answered the question "NO" through an appeal to a zero-sum gain following the Big Bang (a balance in the universe between matter and anti-matter), timelessness before the Big Bang, and uncaused quantum events; Hawking argues that these accepted scientific ideas obviate the need for a God (and, in the case of atemporality previous to the Big Bang, leave no temporal place for God).
2 Thoughts on Hawking's argument:
1. It only works if one accepts materialism: the idea that matter is all that exists. But, as C.S. Lewis masterfully argues in his book Miracles, the very rational processes upon which Hawking depends in order to argue against God testify to the existence of something (i.e., thought or rationality) other than matter.
2. Hawking concluded his presentation with the following statement:
"We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the Universe, and for that, I am extremely grateful."
Notice how this statement is non-sensical from the viewpoint espoused by Hawking. Throughout the program, Hawking had carefully avoided using the term "creation" when referring to the universe, as "creation" obviously implies a Creator. But here Hawking speaks of "design;" does this not imply a designer? Also, Hawking speaks of being "extremely grateful" for having "this one life;" but to whom is Hawking grateful? Perhaps Hawking is using figures of speech, but I would challenge the reader to articulate Hawking's statement in such a way that it is both reasonably similar to the quote above and devoid of language that implies a Creator/Designer/One to whom we should be grateful. We were created to glorify God and enjoy Him forever, and when we begin to speak in depth about the most important issues of life, we cannot help but to utilize language that points to Him.
2 Thoughts on Hawking's argument:
1. It only works if one accepts materialism: the idea that matter is all that exists. But, as C.S. Lewis masterfully argues in his book Miracles, the very rational processes upon which Hawking depends in order to argue against God testify to the existence of something (i.e., thought or rationality) other than matter.
2. Hawking concluded his presentation with the following statement:
"We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the Universe, and for that, I am extremely grateful."
Notice how this statement is non-sensical from the viewpoint espoused by Hawking. Throughout the program, Hawking had carefully avoided using the term "creation" when referring to the universe, as "creation" obviously implies a Creator. But here Hawking speaks of "design;" does this not imply a designer? Also, Hawking speaks of being "extremely grateful" for having "this one life;" but to whom is Hawking grateful? Perhaps Hawking is using figures of speech, but I would challenge the reader to articulate Hawking's statement in such a way that it is both reasonably similar to the quote above and devoid of language that implies a Creator/Designer/One to whom we should be grateful. We were created to glorify God and enjoy Him forever, and when we begin to speak in depth about the most important issues of life, we cannot help but to utilize language that points to Him.
Labels: apologetics
posted by Andrew Lindsey | 11:06 PM
1 Comments:
PHILOSOPHIA PERENNIS.
The Old Lady’s TORTOISE (Hinduism) and DRAGON (Taoism) are symbols for WAVE (energy), both are analog with MAGEN DAVID (Judaism). "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" is the metaphor, and also similar with allegory of rituals Thawaf circling around the Ka'ba and Sa’i oscillating along “the sinus” Marwah-Shafa (seven times) during the Hajj pilgrimage (Abraham). CROSS (Christian) and SWASTIKA (Buddhism) are symbols for “Balance of Nature.”
"A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME - From the Big Bang to Black Hole" by Stephen W. Hawking is the best scientific interpretation of AL QUR'AN by a non believer. It is a “test case” and also a “genuine bridge stone” for comprehensive study of Theology. Surprise, this paradox is a miracle and blessing in disguise as well. It should be very wise and challenging for Moslem scholars and others to verify my discovery, for then we should know the Mind of GOD.
I am just “ordinary people,” so would you mind correcting my point of view. Thank you.
Please, see pictures: http://neosufi-tato.blogspot.com
Post a Comment
<< Home