"If Wash O'Hanley didn't cover it, it probably wasn't that important anyway."

Friday, September 3, 2010

Wheelchair-bound Stephen Hawking is Wrong Again (Surprise!)

Earlier this week an excerpt from Stephen Hawking's new book The Grand Design was published in The Times of London. Hawking's book, a smorgasbord of typical atheistic talking points and straw man arguments meant to make Christians look like a bunch of nit-wits, argues that the universe could have conceivably come from nothing; an assertion that stands in stark contrast to the beliefs of the Christian church.

Christians have long held the belief that in order for anything to exist there must have been a creator. The computer chair that I am currently sitting in did not materialize out of nothing: someone made all of the individual parts and assembled it, allowing me to sit on it right now. Using that logic we can ascertain that the Earth and the galaxy in which we reside did not spontaneously come into existence; someone had to have intelligently designed it.

For many years atheists have attempted (unsuccessfully) to debate that the Earth did not come from a creator, but when asked where, they mumble inaudibly and then attempt to move on to the next answer. Usually saying something like "I can't tell you where we came from, and neither can you, because no one was there to see it." Yet if we have learned nothing else, it is that the galaxy, the Earth, humanity and our ecosystem are all incredibly simplistic entities. Scientists would have you to believe that the human body or the Amazon Rain Forest are all infinitely complex organisms, so in-tune with their surroundings and ingrained with the earth that it is simply ridiculous to accept that they were created by one being, but were instead the product of millions of years of evolution. What atheists and evolutionists forget is that God is capable of anything a human mind can conceive.

Atheists and evolutionists will have you believe that the Earth is billions of years old. They will point to fossils and rock formations that can all be dated back millions of years ago. They will take you to the Grand Canyon and explain that there was no way it could exist if the Earth were only six thousand years old. The believer, filled with the capability to conceive of anything God could theoretically do, would point out that since God is infinitely powerful, he theoretically could have formed it six thousand years ago, but made it look like it was formed billions of years ago.

For you see, readers, God is greater than anything that can be conceived. The human mind is not limitless, but God is. God is greater than the greatest thing you can think of, otherwise he wouldn't be God. What is greater? The gradual erosion caused by a river over the course of millions of years to form a chasm thousands of feet deep, or God making a chasm that is thousands of feet deep that looks like it was made gradually over millions of years, but really only took a few days?

Even if Hawking is correct and the world and the universe did spontaneously come into existence that still doesn't disprove God. God, being greater than nothing coming into existence as the result of nothing, clearly would have greenlit and supervised the nothingness coming into somethingness as a result of nothingness.

"Spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper [fuse] and set the universe going."

Ultimately, though, my problem with Hawking comes from his callousness. Who does he think he is? What authority does he have to speak on an issue like this? As a physicist, Hawking is as qualified to talk about theological issues as I, a political pundit, am to perform amateur surgery. But just as I only perform minor operations on people during social get-togethers, Hawking should leave the religion-talk for the wine and cheese parties.

As an atheist, as someone who doesn't believe in God, Hawking has no place running his mouth on a subject like this. The creation of our Earth is inherently and wholly a religious and theoretically subject, not a scientific one. Only religious people who have dedicated their entire lives to objectively studying the Bible, earning post-graduate degrees in religious studies from Christian Universities are really qualified to speak on the subject of Earth's creation, and thus far not a single one of the leading Christian researchers in the world have come to the same conclusion as Hawkings. These are people that have far more religious training, who went to Biblical colleges to unbiasedly study religion with an open mind, and determined that the Bible and the word of God is the only true path.

Doctors speak on subjects of medicine, lawyers speak on subjects of the law, economists speak on subjects of the economy while used car salesmen from Arkansas, stay at home mothers of 9 from Kansas and right wing radio pundits from Iowa who at one time in the early 80s made a living writing robot lesbian erotica are qualified to speak on subjects of Religion. Frankly, who cares what Hawking has to say about religion anyway? You wouldn't go to a lawyer if you needed a tooth pulled, you wouldn't see a car mechanic if you needed legal council, why would you go to a physicist for answers to religious questions?


No comments:

Post a Comment