God and Science

God and Science

by Nikmal Jmot, Ph.D

Stephen Hawkins, in his recent book, The Grand Design, states that because “there is such a law as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.” Wow, that is one packed statement full of flaws that seems to fly against everything I ever learned about formal logic or scientific reasoning. Let me explain. If the universe derived from nothing because there was gravity first then there was something before the universe and therefore his statement would be highly flawed – self-defeating. If gravity was present before nothing then that is just a plain silly statement. If on the other hand, there was nothing before the universe and the presence of gravity now somehow demonstrates the likelihood of deriving something from nothing then we can throw out the laws of energy and matter. I mean really, there is almost no point in debating such statements. If that is possible then maybe the beliefs of spontaneous creation from the middle ages are true too! Time for an alchemy class at Oxford just n time for our huge national debts!

However, there is something that is worth debating. The fact is that science has come full circle realizing science alone cannot explain our own existence and the community has come to an increasing consensus that we came from nothing. What is fascinating, what is really fascinating is that the scientific community would rather criticize Christians for believing in something that science cannot prove,. i.e., the existence of God, and that we did not come from nothing but rather from something -God. Yet, they are comfortable in choosing to believe that we came from nothing. We both make a choice here. Hawkins will never prove we came from nothing. That they will never prove this is a bet I am willing to take! Rather, scientists often believe they have faultless logic and that the rest of the world is unable to understand the great depths of their thought. Ask this, what is more reasonable of two beliefs that cannot be proven in the laboratory; 1) That we came from something named God or, 2) That we came from nothing? The fact is that the scientist that believes we came from nothing has an incredible faith that is much harder to comprehend than a faith in God. I think a person who prays to a stone has more reason to do so than to believe we came from nothing. Lastly, I have met several Nobel Prize winners (I don’t believe Hawkins has won one) and one thing has always been obvious to me, that once they win such a prize most anything they say is given an unrealistic level of belief and confidence. I guess it is just human nature to want to believe the so called experts and guru’s. I think people who do not want to believe in God would rather hang onto anything that someone like a famous Hawkins might say. It is much easier to support one’s own belief system if someone famously smart agrees with you. In such a case you get to brush up against fame without having to answer the ridiculous. It’s like that cult that believed that a spaceship was hiding behind the moon and would pick them up if they killed themselves. 100% conviction but wrong…..or were they?

Either we’re all wrong or at least one of us is right. I’ll hedge my bets and place faith in something rather than nothing but debating with someone who believes in nothing cannot believe in your something unless that something intervenes.

Advertisement