Creationists have never liked Stephen Hawking, and we’ve posted several times about their assaults on him. But we’ve only written once about his last book, titled Brief Answers to the Big Questions, compiled from his his essays, lectures, and speeches, and that was about a post from the Discoveroids — see The Designer Is a Lute Player.
Every day we see articles attacking Hawking’s well-known opinion, mentioned in his last book, that no deity was involved in the creation of the universe. We found a good one today in the Scottish Catholic Observer, published in Glasgow. They have a comments section. Their headline is Great minds falter on questions of Faith.
It was written by Gerald Warner, and this is probably his write-up in Wikipedia. Here are some excerpts from his column, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
After the death in March this year of Professor Stephen Hawking, the well-known physicist and cosmologist, his final book has just been published this month. Titled Brief Answers to Big Questions, it consists of 10 essays. Predictably, the one on which the media have focused is Hawking’s response to the question: is there a God? Since Hawking answers in the negative, it is convenient for the proponents of secular society to cite him as a kind of authority confirming the case for atheism.
Those “proponents of secular society” are probably people who understand science — like you, dear reader, so pay attention. Warner says:
One of the cleverest men in the world, who knew more about the universe than almost anybody else, says there is no God, so it must be so. Time to get rid of belief in a divinity and all that guilt about sin — time just to do your own thing. Man, creator of the world of high tech, is now God.
We doubt that Hawking ever said man is now god, but that’s Warner’s conclusion. He tells us:
Secularists are trying to conscript Hawking’s atheism as an authoritative endorsement of their views. The universe? He studied it, from Big Bang to the present day, and found no sign of God. Well, why on earth would he? [Huh?] Citing a physicist as arbiter of the existence of God is as logical as asking a plumber to rewire your electrical system. Since God is a pure spirit, the least likely person to encounter Him is a physicist. The term physics says it all: a discipline concerned with the physical world, however minute.
He’s right! When dealing with the supernatural, you need a mystic, not a physicist. Warner continues:
Hawking wrote: “I think the universe was spontaneously created out of nothing, according to the laws of science. If you accept, as I do, that the laws of nature are fixed, then it doesn’t take long to ask: what role is there for God?” Has anyone ever begged so massive a question in one brief comment as in that fine distillation of illogicality? [Huh?] Who established the laws of science? If the laws of nature are fixed, who fixed them? Fulfilling both those functions, as well as being prime mover of that creation out of nothing, is precisely the role of God.
Yes, it’s so obvious! How could Hawking have been so blind? Let’s read on:
It seems extraordinary that a man supposedly so intelligent as Hawking could, at the end of his days, respond to the primary question of existence in so confused and contradictory a manner. It is a typical instance of the decline of fine minds when they venture into disciplines that are not their own.
Poor Hawking. He lost his mind. Another excerpt:
Having stated that ‘there was no time before the Big Bang,’ he wrote: “We have finally found something that doesn’t have a cause, because there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in.” Since God exists outside of time, what does that argument amount to, other than that Hawking has eliminated any credible natural cause, accidentally making the case for the existence of God as the sole remaining agency that could have caused the Big Bang?
Right. When you can’t find a natural cause, the logical conclusion is goddidit. Here’s more:
Stephen Hawking believed the universe was once the size of a subatomic particle, a proton-sized, ultra-dense ‘singularity’ that exploded in the Big Bang. Fair enough; but where did that microscopic singularity come from? [The Cosmic Aardvark!] Hawking attempted to explain the creation of the universe by citing the laws of quantum mechanics, gravity, relativity, etc. But where did that whole coherent body of physical laws originate?
Yeah, who wrote the laws? And now we come to the end:
Hawking’s endorsement of atheism is being presented as the outcome of a life of scientific investigation. That is not the case: he was an aggressive atheist as a teenager and simply found no reason to change his views. Last year, in America, an 11-year-old boy prodigy, the son of a Greek Orthodox priest, challenged Hawking’s view: “It takes more faith to say the universe created itself than to say something other created the universe because that is more logical.” Out of the mouths of babes…
That was powerful stuff, dear reader. It’s too late for Hawking. He’s in the Lake of Fire now, and at last he knows The Truth™.
Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.