Following his latest book, Stephen Hawking faces many protests and event condemnation from religious groups. Basically he stated that the universe is created from nothing, not by any trancendental power as religious believe.
In my opinion these religious people are just too reactive. Sometimes it even worst, they challenge Hawking's knowledge with their ignorance and conspiracious statement. This kind of action will only makes people laugh due to its baseless supports and then raises doubtful feeling about religion, particularly among young thinker. This is definitely dangerous!
Therefore I suggest a proporsional and less reactive counter to Hawking's knowledge. A preacher who doesn't even know Newton law in physics, should not give any 'scientific' counter argument. Just revisit the foundation of faith, that there is some trancendental matter that cannot be reasoned.
But, is actually Hawking statement based on solid theory? I don't know, the reporter might be spun, or misinterpreted his intention.
Furthermore does the solid theory violates religious values? I don't think so, though it clearly againsts certain interpretation. For example in the holy Quran, God only said (yes, I'm a devout religious) that human was created from soil or universe were created by Him. There's no further explicit explanation on how it was done. Therefore any theory can emerge in between, including Hawking's one.
How about Hawking's theory? According to other theory there are still loopholes in his theory. Moreover even if it's correct, it won't negate the existence of God.
We should not think of being so important, so God created human in a way such as a child creates a clay statue. Instead it would like process where an engineer creates a CNC machine to shape the raw clay, but God must be better than that. Instead, He created an advanced mechanism to create human by creating the source of the caused of these entire creations. For example, for creating human, God merely creating this universe with its complete rules of interaction among its elements, where at certain point this interaction will create living element and so on and so forth so finally human is created. But the probability is so small! Don't be so naive, do you think just because we think the system is very complex so God cannot ensure a 100 percent accuracy?
What about the universe? I think similarly. Clearly, it is ridiculous to think that that the planets and sun are created in the way we make meat ball or dumpling. Since clearly I'm not smarter than Hawking, instead of proposing my own speculation, I think it is better to use his. The way God created the universe (or multiverse) might coincide with Hawking's theory. But instead of it started from the big-bang, God provided a sufficient condition to make it happened. Definitely He even created an earlier phase of all these thing, e.g. the cause of cause of the caused ... of the cause of the cause of big bang. With His 100 percent accuracy, voila here we are.
In my opinion these religious people are just too reactive. Sometimes it even worst, they challenge Hawking's knowledge with their ignorance and conspiracious statement. This kind of action will only makes people laugh due to its baseless supports and then raises doubtful feeling about religion, particularly among young thinker. This is definitely dangerous!
Therefore I suggest a proporsional and less reactive counter to Hawking's knowledge. A preacher who doesn't even know Newton law in physics, should not give any 'scientific' counter argument. Just revisit the foundation of faith, that there is some trancendental matter that cannot be reasoned.
But, is actually Hawking statement based on solid theory? I don't know, the reporter might be spun, or misinterpreted his intention.
Furthermore does the solid theory violates religious values? I don't think so, though it clearly againsts certain interpretation. For example in the holy Quran, God only said (yes, I'm a devout religious) that human was created from soil or universe were created by Him. There's no further explicit explanation on how it was done. Therefore any theory can emerge in between, including Hawking's one.
How about Hawking's theory? According to other theory there are still loopholes in his theory. Moreover even if it's correct, it won't negate the existence of God.
We should not think of being so important, so God created human in a way such as a child creates a clay statue. Instead it would like process where an engineer creates a CNC machine to shape the raw clay, but God must be better than that. Instead, He created an advanced mechanism to create human by creating the source of the caused of these entire creations. For example, for creating human, God merely creating this universe with its complete rules of interaction among its elements, where at certain point this interaction will create living element and so on and so forth so finally human is created. But the probability is so small! Don't be so naive, do you think just because we think the system is very complex so God cannot ensure a 100 percent accuracy?
What about the universe? I think similarly. Clearly, it is ridiculous to think that that the planets and sun are created in the way we make meat ball or dumpling. Since clearly I'm not smarter than Hawking, instead of proposing my own speculation, I think it is better to use his. The way God created the universe (or multiverse) might coincide with Hawking's theory. But instead of it started from the big-bang, God provided a sufficient condition to make it happened. Definitely He even created an earlier phase of all these thing, e.g. the cause of cause of the caused ... of the cause of the cause of big bang. With His 100 percent accuracy, voila here we are.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar