It is a complex subject and Stephen is obviously a brilliant man but brilliant men are not immune from coming to bad conclusions. In an article about Stephen Hawking’s previous work Dr Schaefer describes why he doesn’t always agree with Stephen Hawking’s. You can read it here … (Part 2 is here…)

I found it interesting to note that Stephen Hawking’s mother was a  Communist – this is only significant in that Communism has a very anti-religion and atheist emphasis  – and his boyhood hero was Bertrand Russel (a very aggressive atheist philosopher). Like all of us Stephen Hawkings does not come from a neutral position and this can be clearly seen in his writings.

Let me just quote the description of the many other brilliant scientists who don’t agree with Stephen Hawking’s conclusions about creation and God.

Does everyone agree with Stephen Hawking’s opinion on these matters? The answer is no. Alan Lightman, a MIT professor, said in his book Origins: The Lives and Worlds of Modern Cosmologists (Harvard University Press, 1990), “Contrary to popular myths, scientists appear to have the same range of attitudes about religious matters as does the general public.”

This fact can be established either from anecdote or from statistical data. Sigma Xi, the scientific honorary society, ran a large poll a few years ago which showed that, on any given Sunday, around 46 percent of all Ph.D. scientists are in church; for the general population the figure is 47 percent. So, whatever influences people in their beliefs about God, it doesn’t appear to have much to do with having a Ph.D. in science.

There are many prominent counter-examples to Stephen Hawking. One is a colleague of mine at Berkeley for 18 years, Charlie Townes. Townes won the Nobel Prize for discovering the maser. One statement he made differs greatly from Hawking’s view; he said, “In my view, the question of origin seems to be left unanswered if we explore from a scientific view alone. Thus, I believe there is a need for some religious or metaphysical explanation. I believe in the concept of God and in His existence.”

Arthur Schawlow is another Nobel Prize winner, a professor at Stanford who identifies himself as a Christian. He states, “We are fortunate to have the Bible and especially the New Testament which tells us so much about God in widely accessible human terms.”

The other Cambridge professor of theoretical physics for much of Hawking’s career was John Polkinghorn, a nuclear physicist. He left his chair of theoretical physics at Cambridge in 1979 and went to seminary to become a minister. Upon completing that, he had a parish church for awhile and now has recently come back to be the President of Queen’s College at Cambridge. He states, “I take God very seriously indeed. I am a Christian believer and I believe that God exists and has made Himself known in human terms in Jesus Christ.”

Probably the world’s greatest observational cosmologist is Allan Sandage. Sandage works in Pasadena, California at the Carnegie Observatories. In 1991, he received a prize given by the Swedish academy that is given every six years in physics for cosmology and is worth the same amount of money as the Nobel prize (there is not a Nobel Prize given for cosmology). Sandage has even been called “the grand old man of cosmology” by the New York Times.

At the age of 50, Sandage became a Christian. He states in Lightman’s book, Origins: The Lives and Worlds of Modern Cosmologists, “The nature of God is not to be found within any part of the findings of science. For that, one must turn to the Scriptures.” When asked the famous question regarding whether it’s possible to be a scientist and a Christian, Sandage replies, “Yes. The world is too complicated in all its parts and interconnections to be due to chance alone. I am convinced that the existence of life with all its order in each of its organisms is simply too well put together.”

One of the persons closest to Stephen Hawking, whom you know if you’ve seen the movie about A Brief History of Time, is Donald Page. Page has had an excellent physics career in his own right, but he started to become famous as a post-doctoral fellow with Stephen Hawking. The Hawkings were not financially well-off in the years prior to his book and needed some help to keep going. So the post-doctoral fellows would come to live with the Hawkings. Donald Page did this for three years.

Page described these years in the book (the book about the film about the book!). He said, “I would usually get up around 7:15 or 7:30, take a shower, read in my Bible and pray. Then I would go down and get Stephen up. After breakfast, I would often tell him what I’d been reading in the Bible, hoping that this would eventually have some influence. I remember telling Stephen one story about how Jesus had seen the deranged man and how this man had these demons and the demons had been sent into a herd of swine. The swine then plunged over the edge of the cliff and into the sea. Stephen piped up and said, ‘Well, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals would not like that story, would they?’”

Page stated, “I am a conservative Christian in the sense of pretty much taking the Bible seriously for what it says. Of course I know that certain parts are not intended to be read literally, so I am not precisely a literalist but I try to believe in the meaning, I think, it is intended to have.”

And then from Stephen Hawking’s equally brilliant wife (herself a devout Christian):

Jane Hawking has commented on this aspect of her husband’s work. “Stephen has the feelings that because everything is reduced to a rational, mathematical formula, that must be the truth,” Jane explained. “He is delving into realms that really do matter to thinking people and, in a way, that can have a very disturbing effect on people-and he’s not competent.”

From what I have read so far (in the press) Hawking’s conclusions are still just personal opinion but because he writes in a very accessible and interesting way people will believe that his conclusions are based on hard evidence. Of course there is always the question  – that it seems to me Hawking’s likes to avoid with some clever mind games  – of what was before and where did these laws of physics come from?

But here was a young man who was living the kind of life that many young men live. However, things went wrong and he allowed alcohol to take over and run things. His life was a mess and getting worse.

It was then that he decided to go to church and there he encountered Jesus. He has now put his life on track. He has a part time job and has an active role in the church he goes to. He openly acknowledges that it has been Jesus working through the lives of Christians that has literally ‘saved his life’.

Perhaps it would be wise to try and define what sin is here. I think sin is when we do something that is wrong – intentional or unintentional. In particular sin is when we do something that is wrong in God’s eyes. I’m not going to enter the discussion about the existence of God or what law is here – my blog entries would get even longer if I tried to take every argument through it’s full range of discussion. I’m assuming God exists.

Now I could complain that God is wrong to think certain things are sin but ultimately it is up to God to decide what is right or wrong. If God is the ultimate being then I must concede that he knows better than I do.

So there are clever tricks of the mind that might let me off the hook (philosophically speaking) but somehow that doesn’t stop the fact that I know deep down that some things are just plain wrong and I shouldn’t do them. To deny this is just to deny the obvious and kid yourself that something is not wrong for the sake of trying to get a good nights sleep.

But Jesus wanted to talk more about forgiveness than sin. The message that Jesus brought was one of the loving forgiveness (Christians like to use the word grace here) of God.

The way to deal with sin is not to ignore it in the hopes somehow it will go away, or to deny it’s existence in an attempt to reason it away, or to make jokes about it in the hopes that laughing will somehow mean it doesn’t matter, but it’s to accept God’s solution in Jesus Christ.

“Your sins are forgiven” – Jesus

This year the play has been shaken by the Roman Catholics abuse scandal. Despite this the play will continue because it is not about the church but it is about Jesus Christ.

The church has, once again, shown itself to be a fallible human institution and despite not being Roman Catholic myself I still feel some of the shame of on organisation that is supposed to stand up for children and yet allowed such terrible things to go on. There is much that the church can be proud of in its service to those that others neglect but no amount of good works can nullify the pain that has been caused. I pray that God will forgive us all for this and we must ensure that this cannot happen again.

Anyway, the play goes on and the message of Jesus remains. The followers of Jesus make no pretense that they make a good job of following Christ (at least the honest ones don’t) but that won’t stop us trying.

You can read what he said here …

This is always something that is hard to get across to people without sounding like we are being arrogant and closed minded, but Christians are left little room to think anything but that Jesus is unique.

Claiming that Jesus is unique should never be a reason to put down other people’s ideas. This isn’t a rallying call it is a simple statement of something that we Christians believe. I think this uniqueness of Christ is a challenge to us all.  If Christians are right in saying that Jesus is unique then we have to take what Jesus says very seriously indeed. Jesus isn’t just another good teacher who you can take on board alongside everyone else but instead is someone with a unique message about himself that challenges us to think differently.

Now – I like a good joke as much as the next person and we all know how these things sometimes get out of hand at work but I think this does highlight a couple of problems.

1) Does this mean that the church is just seen as a bit of a joke by those who run the country?

2) Does this show that there is a general bias against the church among the UK’s civil servants?

I think the answer is probably yes to both, but that is just a feeling I get.

But then I wonder if the in fact the church has played it’s part in all this as much as anyone?

Christians haven’t always been good at practicing what they preach or at defending themselves when it was needed. The Catholic church has had a major issue with child abuse and it is hard to ask for moral respect in such circumstances. I’ve also recently heard of death threats made against a comedian who made jokes about Jesus Christ. I find such jokes very offensive but as far as I understand the teachings of Christ we should respond to this kind of thing by turning the other cheek.

Christians also are often very bad at explaining what they believe and end up resorting to churchy language that just sounds like Christians are creatures who have had their head in the sand for the last 200 years. There are very good defenses for the Christian faith that can be presented in a caring way and I am thankful for those who take the time to offer them. Sadly, when people are responded to with archaic Christian language they tend to see it as another reason for laughing at Christians rather than acknowledging a good response.

I also often hear Christians moaning about how people of other faiths get treated better – for instance if someone said the kinds of things about a Muslim leader that they did about the Pope there would be a public outcry – and I think that they are probably right in making this observation.

However, I wonder if Christians aren’t supposed to be treated differently. When we are insulted for what we believe we should be thankful for suffering like Jesus did, shouldn’t we? When we are struck on the cheek aren’t we supposed to offer the other one? When people make angry attacks at us aren’t we supposed to respond with love and forgiveness.

This isn’t the soft, easy option. This is the hard option. This doesn’t mean that we should just go around being happy that everyone is against us but that we don’t respond to things in the same way that everyone else does.

We are supposed to be different – aren’t we?

Easter is a great time for a break from the normal things of life and a chance to get your head right. It seems that finding time to think about life and what it is all about is getting harder and harder in the modern fast paced world. But I think there are some things that are worth spending time over.

If the events of holy week and Easter are true  – and I am convinced they are – then life can never be the same again. Ignoring God and Jesus isn’t really an option when you have grasped the enormous impact of Jesus dieing for you and then raising to life again. This isn’t something that happens every day (or even ever, save this one time). How can life be so focussed on trivial things when something so amazing has happened.

Jesus died and rose again – surely this should change your life forever.

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/817047-jesus-christ-appears-in-students-frying-pan

Just in case you get the impression that I get very excited about the places Jesus is appearing in I don’t – I just think they make interesting stories. Personally, I’m not convinced that God uses this method of getting his message through to people.

http://www.wapt.com/news/22814321/detail.html

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/03/08/1798495/billy-graham-grief-is-very-real.html

All religions say something about death and its consequences but Jesus is unique in that he has experienced the pain of loss for himself. One of the most moving moments of the Bible is to read the words “Jesus wept” when he hears that his friend Lazarus has died.

That is not the end, though, because Jesus then raises his friend from the dead, a reminder to us that God has control over life and death and that Jesus is going to do something amazing that will release us from the power of death. We still have to face the moment when our body dies but this is not the end of life.