God & Stephen Hawking Dispute the Existence of Heaven: Guess WHO Wins?


Stephen Hawking essentially thinks heaven is a comforting fairy tale for those afraid of death. God, of course, disagrees, as revealed in His Holy Word, the Bible.

In an interview published in The Guardian, the 69-year-old theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking claims says the human brain is like a computer that will stop working when its components fail. There’s no indication as to how he knows this, because of course he, well, doesn’t. His faith commitment in pure naturalism excludes the possibility of God and an afterlife; since he cannot even consider the possibility of the supernatural [i.e., anything beyond the natural], he presumes the supernatural doesn’t exist. The irony is that even if he saw evidence for the supernatural, his presuppositional bias would never allow him to consider this possibility so he would inevitably make up a naturalistic answer to satisfy his faith commitment in naturalism – and get the answer completely wrong as a result!

Nevertheless, according to Hawking: “There is no heaven or afterlife for broken-down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.”

I’ve already commented on his latest book, “The Grand Design,” published just last year, in which he claimed it was “not necessary to invoke God … to get the universe going.” Yet just because one can imagineer a naturalistic Just-So Story to explain the origin of the universe does not mean that the universe came about by the means outlined in that naturalistic Just-So-Story.

Hawking says he is not afraid of death, but adds: “I’m in no hurry to die. I have so much I want to do first.”OK, but when asked what is the value in the question, Why are we here? he responded:

“We need to use the effective theory of Darwinian natural selection of those societies most likely to survive. We assign them higher value.”

Wow. Hitler would be proud, Hawking. Who sets the standards for which societies are more likely to survive? Isn’t that just a restatement of might makes right? And why arbitrarily stop at societies? Why not individuals? You just invoked eugenics, Hawking. As the parent of special needs kids, I’m disgusted at this statement. Doesn’t he realize that the handicapped would be assigned a lower value by his arbitrary assessment? This, my friends, is an honest admission of the social implications of Darwinism.

When asked what we should do with our lives since we are here, he responded that “we should seek the greatest value of our actions.” But this is again arbitrary in an accidental universe in which we are but a meaningless vapor, destined to be replaced by something else. Why should that be the standard? Meaning makes sense in a universe made by a Creator because the intelligent design of the universe implies purpose and meaning, but the inhabitants of a chance universe, however inevitable Hawking claims it might be among myriad other undetectable just-so universes, cannot claim purpose or meaning that is not arbitrary. 

Here’s the rub: The Bible claims that fool says in his heart, There is no God [Psalm 14:1 and 53:1], precisely because this universe provides ample evidence that God does in fact exist [Romans 1:20]. As Blaise Pascal noted, He’s given us too little evidence to be sure, but too much to ignore. Faith is required [Hebrews 11:6]. Those who deny the existence of God know better, they’re simply suppressing the truth in unrighteousness [Romans 1:18, 21-25] In doing so, they’ve condemned themeselves because light has come into the world but they prefer darkness because their deeds are evil [John 3:17-19].

Jesus told the story of a man named Lazarus and a rich man [Luke 16:19-31]. Lazarus begged at the rich man’s gates, where he died of hunger and want. Lazarus went to “Abraham’s bosom,” or Heaven. The rich man died that night as well, but opened his eyes in a very real hell. He felt pain, thirst and remorse. And he could see Lazarus in Abraham’s bosom across a great divide separating Heaven from Hell.

I’d never thought about that element of the story [which doesn’t have the usual indicators of a parable], but it now occurs to me that if Stephen Hawking doesn’t repent of his intellectual pride and sin, he may well open his eyes in hell one day. At that moment, he will know that he was wrong about a great many things – that souls exist and we are not computers running down, that God exists despite his naturalistic Just-So Story, and that the Creator of the universe is immune to his wishful denials of His existence. Furthermore, this parable suggests that he will also know that Heaven exists.

But it will be too late [Hebrews 9:27].

Yet there is still hope! Now is the acceptable time [2 Corinthians 6:2]. If Hawking would but confess the Lord Jesus and believe in his heart that God has raised Him from the dead, he would be saved [Romans 10:9].

-Rev Tony Breeden, DefGen.org

Advertisements

8 Comments Add yours

  1. We cannot “Proove” that God exists, but ateists cannot proove that God doesn’t exists.
    We can only believe that God exists. And Atheists can only not believe that God exists.

    The arguments of Thomas Aquinas is satisfactory for creationists, but unsatisfactory for Atheists. It is satisfactory for me now. It is not satisfactory for Stephen Hawking.

    Stanley.

    1. Stanley, you’re absolutely correct. In fact, their best attempt at answering the charge of the nonfalsifiability of God is to posit that “equally impossible” things like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, invisible pink unicorns, sky fairies or undetectable cosmic teapots cannot be falsified either. However, their analogy fails precisely because the God of the Bible stepped into this world and made Himself tangible and reasonably verifiable. Thus their objection is a straw man.

      God bless and Stay in the Word!
      -revTony
      DefGen.org

      1. Anonymous says:

        Thank you for your respoonse Reverend Tony Breden. I put your name beside Dr John Whitcomb as a Young Earth Creationist theologian in my debate in evolutionversuscreation mailist. Can you help me with other names? I can give a list of Young Earth Creationist scientists. but not of YEC theologians.

        Stanley..

      2. Tony Breeden says:

        RC Sproul, JR [who once affirmed the opposite], Dr. Terry Mortenson, Charles Ware, Charles Ryrie, John MacArthur and Albert Mohler come to mind.

      3. Tony Breeden says:

        Also Tim Chaffey and Bodie Hodge

  2. Rayburne F. says:

    Christians aren’t denying anything, especially science. The word “revealed”, as apl;ied to God’s Word, doesn’t mean it is not true either. Historical (origins) science cannot be observed, tested, repeated, falsified in a labatory no more than creation can. Evidence doesn’t exist by itself, but must be interpreted according to one’s world view or paradigm which one brings to bear on it, whether it be biblical creation/young earth or evolution/old earth. Those who believe the former interpret the evidence for the human genome differently and do not have any problem tracing the human race back to Adam and Eve. Hawking’s findings and those of evolutionists connected with the human genome studies do not carry any weight with Bible-believing Christians for the simple reason that they believe the evidence clearly shows evolution is a fairy tale and humans did not evolve from an assumed ancestor in common with chimpanzees. Dr. James Allan, Ph.D. in genetics from the University of Edinburgh, Scotland concluded that 150 billion forerunners of “modern man” would be required by evolution in order for natural selection to have taken place in the development of humans from an assumed ancestor in common with the chimpanzee. Where are all these forerunners or “intermediates” of the so-called human ancestry of man. We have several highly disputed intermediates at best. Yes, we all know: “Evolution is a fact is a fact and Christians ignore the evidence, right? I hope I didn’t ignore the evidence.
    I ( and other Christians who quoted Psalms 14:1( didn’t call anyone a fool. I simply gave you God’s declaration of who is really a fool according to Psalms 14:1 (he/she who says “there is no God”). Wrong assumption: the natural world does not work differently than what the Bible claims. This unsupported assertion assumes the General Theory of Evolution (GTE) to be true. There is no contradiction between the Bible and true science. Scientists who believe in special (supernatural) creation have the same evidence as evolutionists. The problem is not the evidence. But the conclusions reached on the basis of the interpretation of the evidence will be different according to what paradigm or world view they bring to bear on the interpretation of same–whether of biblical creation or GTE (“from the goo, through the zoo, to you; molecules to man evolution. Again, scientists are not finding out things that contradict the Bible–rather they claim they are finding out things that contradict the Bible based on their faith in evolution (and please don’t tell me they don’t have faith in same). All the evidence does not point to them being correct-again you are concluding that GTE is true and therefore the interpretation of the evidence by evolutionary scientists must also be true–a belief that many Christians reject on the basis of their interpretation of the evidence. As I indicated, it takes far more faith to believe a “Big Bang” explosion (even an explosion superintended by aliens or a supernatural Creator God) created this infinitely beautiful, complex and ordered universe from extremely dense matter the size of an electron–approximately the size of a pin head (Who created it?) , especially when they were not there when this universe came into being and we have never seen an explosion produce order, beauty and complexity out of disorder and chaos than to believe that an infinitely WISE, ALL-KNOWING and ALL-Powerful and HOLY God spoke ithis universe and all that is in it into existence.

  3. DJ says:

    One problem I have with the religion is this: almost every god in every religion says “I am the only god” “there is no god before me” every religion claims to be the right one, but logically, they can’t all be right. Can you explain how to point out the lies and truths, to identify a correct religion?

    1. Well, let me ask you a question to get you started: If God wrote a Book, how would you recognize it?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s