I was watching the first episode of Discovery Channel's new show "Curiosity". It featured reknowned astro-physicist Steven Hawkings. Hawkings is an outspoken atheist who in this espisode declared that God (if he exists and Hawkings doesn't believe so) isn't necessary for the creation or maintanance of the universe. He raises some interesting and imporant questions, but what he doesn't do is admit that he has presuppositions that he accepts by faith. His first presupposition is that the "laws of nature" never change. Though I would agree with this he never answers the question as to where these laws come from. He assumes that they are the natural by-product of the big bang and as such have always existed within the construct of time. This however is a faith statement. As Hawkings guides us backward to the inevidable big ban he is left with an unanswered question. Where does the super dense sigularity of the big ban and the subsequent "Laws of Nature" come from? His answer is that it came from nothing.
As an example he shifts from astrophysics to quantum physics. At the quantum level protons' behave in an unusual and unpredictable manner. They appear, disappear, and then reappear in a totally different place. Hawkings gives this as an example of something that appears out of nowhere. The problem is that just because the proton acts unpredictable doesn't mean its origin or destination is "nowhere" or out of "nothing". Hawkings in a feeble attempt tries to bridge the holy grail of physics; a unifying theory that bridges the gap between astro and quantum physics. His faith assumption is that before the big bang there was no time and out of this nothingness a sigularity appears and explodes into the known universe, creating both time and Natural Laws. In the end Hawking declares that there is no God and no afterlife. All that is left to him is to enjoy this life and marvel in the universes grand design.
I am not a mathmatician so I can't speak to Hawkings math, which I am sure is sound. But I do know a little about faith. I know when people take a set of facts, interpret them and then step out in faith to answer certain unexplained aspects of those facts. I enjoyed Hawkings science because it speaks, not to chance, but to design. And though there are those who reject intelligent design as a viable theory of our existence, they are the same ones who will dismiss they idea that when it comes to existence they have faith.
Most atheistic scientist will disclaim the existence of God based on their inability to reproduce any evidenc of Him in the laboratory. The existence of God, to them, is an unprovable axiom. So if God can not be proved scientifically how do we know that he exists? Good question. The bible says, "From the creation of the world, His invisible attributes, His eternal power divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made so that they are without excuse" Romans 1:20. I know for many the bible isn't a starting point for understanding the existence of God, but this verse succinctly illustrates my point. If the universe was created by a God who stands out of time and is big enough to create the grand expanse of our universe, then we as humans would be incapable of comprehending the complexity of his nature, just as an ant would have difficulty comprending us. But just because I can't comprehend His complexity doesn't mean I can't know something about Him by exploring what He has created. In the human experience nothing of complexity has ever come into existence (that we have observed) through chance. Everything has its genesis by an arbiter of what is known. Even when scientists try to recreate "evolution" in the laboratory by "creating" the ideal evniroment, if life could "evolve" it would only do so through the scientists manipulation of the enviroment.
So does God exist? That is the question. I cannot prove him scientifically, but neither can Hawkings prove his exnilo proto-proton. But I think Christians can make a stronger cased based on evedentiary evidence. So, as I look at the complexity of the universe's design, the intellegent curiosity of man, and man's inherent moral and spiritual proclevity I accept by Faith the existence of God. What I can't know from this is the personal nature of God. Because if God exists what is He like, can I get to know Him, whose God is the real God, and does it really matter anyway? That will be exploredin Part IV. I'm just saying....