How Can You Say That God Does Not Exist

Download How Can You Say That God Does Not Exist

Post on 17-Dec-2015




1 download

Embed Size (px)


An unapologetic defence of God in the face of irrational atheism


  • 1 of 6

    First published: 17:47, 2nd October 2014

    How Can You Say That God Does Not Exist, Stephen


    There is no dichotomy between true religion and true science

    David Shayler the Christ argues that the leading quantum physicists longevity is a miracle while his faith that science will explain all remains misplaced

    As above, so below

    When I first red the Dan Brown novel, Angels and Demons, which takes as its

    theme the resolution of the conflict between God and Science, I was an atheist.

    When the hero's sexy companion Vittoria Vetra, a scientist working on particle physics at CERN claims there is no conflict between the two, I laughed. I laughed at the transparent desperate grasping of straws by religious types to

    justify their world-view in the face of the overwhelming scientific evidence.

    When I read the book again five years later as a man of faith, I remembered my

    previous scepticism as an atheist. For this time round, I wholly accepted the

    notion that science was only an attempt to understand the 'mind of God'. For no

    matter how far science explains the How, it virtually never touches on the Why,

    the Wherefore or the Where From.

    Indeed, when science is developed and used to understand God's Creation and

    the nature of God Himself, it aids our spiritual understanding and helps us to

    make enormous leaps on the journey, as I can personally testify from my own


    For example, the concept that the same electron can co-exist in two different

    parts of the Universe simultaneously mirrors (and resolves) the apparently

    conflicting concepts of God within and God without.

    The fact that electrons behave in a more orderly fashion when they 'know' they

    are being observed serves as a warning to those humans who misbehave that:

    'God is always watching'. 'As above, so below'.

    Hawking: his role in the Divine Plan

    I mention all this because Professor Stephen Hawking has reportedly told Spanish

    newspaper, El Mundo, that: There is no God, after headlining at the Starmus Festival on the Spanish island of Tenerife. In an exclusive interview, Hawking

    said he was an atheist because: 'Religion believes in miracles but these arent compatible with science'.

    Ironically, it is only by virtue of a miracle the will of God transcending the usual rules of our physical world that the author of bestseller, A Brief History of Time, is still alive. When Hawking was 21, he was diagnosed with motor neurone

    disease. Doctors gave him two years to live in line with the general life expectancy of those who contract this terrible and debilitating disease. So God

    has -- so far -- spared Hawking from the slow and painful death by asphyxiation as the muscles in the lungs and chest cease to work associated with it.

    Professor Hawking really should be very grateful to God, indeed.

  • 2 of 6

    I know though why God has kept the ungrateful Hawkins alive for all these years.

    It was so he could play a part and a vital part at that in the journey of the Messiah to realise his destiny. In late-2004, I was looking into the esoteric, the

    name given to the study of 'the secret' said to be encoded in ancient documents

    like the Bible and protected by societies like the Egyptian mystery schools; the

    Knights Templar; the Rosicrucians; and latterly the Freemasons in the higher 'red' degrees at least, which include titles like:

    the 'Royal Arch of Enoch'

    the 'Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret' (32nd)

    the 'Grand Sovereign Inspector General' (33rd).

    In this study, I kept coming across something called 'Qabalah' (sometimes

    transliterated from the Hebrew as 'Kabbalah' or 'Cabala'). At the time, I was as usual struggling to make ends meet. I couldn't afford to buy books so was reliant on the selection at Maldon Lending Library.

    Obviously, there wasn't much of a section on esoteric knowledge so I kept

    making a mental note to order a couple of interesting titles I had seen on the

    subject, the next time I was in the library. Unfortunately I kept forgetting to do

    so until the right moment came.

    A Brief History of Mine

    At the time, I had just read A Brief History of Time, which was then spending a

    record 237 weeks on the bestseller list. Having struggled to comprehend the

    work, I returned it to Maldon Library. It was on that visit that The Power of

    Kabbalah leapt out at me from the shelves.

    When I read it, I found the same core concepts of Creation in the Qabalah that I

    had found in Hawkings research:

    Quantum Physics Qabalah

    The physical universe begins with

    the explosion of a single atom,

    from which all energy comes

    Creation begins with the flash of

    Zion, leading to God in


    There are ten possibly eleven


    There are ten spheres attached

    to the Tree of Life and a disc,

    Darth, which sits below it

    The universe is one to five per cent

    observable. The rest is dark matter.

    Our realm is one per cent light,

    99 per cent darkness

    At the time, this was the most exciting hot new intelligence I had ever heard. For

    although I had been an atheist for around 40 years my 'forty days in the wilderness' I had always been looking for evidence of some kind of higher power because I was so scared of death. The trouble was, I found the accounts

    given by most religious types to be unconvincing and often self-righteous and

    condescending. When I asked them where Heaven was, they had no explanation.

    Now, quantum mechanics had answered my question: Heaven was clearly in the

    other dimensions which both quantum physics and Qabalah agree were collapsed shortly after the Big Bang/the Flash of Zion. (On closer study of the

  • 3 of 6

    Tree, I realised that the sphere transliterated as 'Hod' could be transliterated as

    'Heav-ed'. Some years later, when voyaging on Iboga, I went there and saw the


    I cannot describe the euphoric joy I felt on finally being able to have proved to

    me there was existence beyond the four dimensions we perceive with our senses.

    In Qabalistic terms, I had 'pierced the first veil'.

    I have since read quantum theories which state that space-time is a condition of

    the Universe (rather than the Universe being a condition of space-time). To me,

    that is the closest science will ever come to proclaiming: 'There is a God'. I have

    also read theories which aim to deal with the central question raised by the

    existence of the original atom from which all energy comes, which is: 'Where

    does that atom come from?'

    Before Creation: God without Form

    Of course, the Antients had an answer to this. It comes from a god without form.

    Since it lives 'outside' physical Creation, then it exists outside time in 'no-

    thing(ness)'. Because this god exists outside time, it has always been there and

    always will be. In recent years, physicists have begun to grapple with this

    concept of 'the void' known to the Greeks as 'Chaos' identifying different types of nothing, like the vacuum or the black hole.

    My immediate response to this new-found hope was to wonder how the Qabalists

    had known this for many thousands of years, when modern physicists had only

    just come across these concepts. As a result, I went on the journey: I made the

    decision to believe there was some kind of benevolent force guiding and shaping

    us all.

    Since then, I have never looked back.

    I have always believed in love and God, although over the years, I have obviously

    come to understand better the nature of the One True God, Jesus, and His and

    my place in Creation. Indeed, no true man of reason would ever say: 'There is no

    God' as Hawking has apparently done the mistake I made for many years as a ahem 'sworn atheist'.

    Of course, only the universal supreme arbiter of absolute truth would be in a

    position to say: 'There is no God' as opposed to the more rationally correct: 'I don't believe in God' or 'There is no evidence for the existence of God, I believe'.

    Since the absolute arbiter of truth would be the Supreme Being (aka God

    Almighty) then he is unlikely to say: 'There is no God'!

    Indeed, it is the very height of egotistical self-evaluation to claim that you can

    make such a statement, wrongly confusing observable fact and speculative


    On the other hand, the genuinely spiritual being is all to aware that he sees little

    of the totality of Creation and is therefore unlikely to develop the kind of rigid

    ideological mindset that bedevils so many scientific extremists like Richard

    Dawkin and now, Stephen Hawking.

    In his defence, Hawking does not actually say: 'There is no God', although that is

    the gist of his words. According to El Mundo, he said: Before we understood science, it was a natural belief that God created the Universe. But now science

    offers a more convincing explanation', before adding that he was therefore 'an


    As pointed out above, science has yet to convincingly explain where the

    original atom came from, which exploded in the Big Bang.

  • 4 of 6

    But then again, although popular and a household name to boot Hawking is not rated as one of the finest minds of the world of quantum mechanics. When

    his fellow physicists came to rate the great minds in their field of the twentieth

    century, Hawking did not even come in the top twenty.

    The No Evidence Fallacy and Intelligent Design

    In fact, Professor Stephen is 'hawking' the argument that I used to make 'There is no evidence for the existence of God, therefore he doesn't exist'. But as any

    wise man knows, this is a rational fallacy

    There is no evidence of the existence of my great-great-great-great-great-great-

    great grandfather but he must have existed because I exist now and human

    beings are only created through the normal methods of intercourse, fertilisation

    and birth (unless you wish to postulate that my great-great-great-great-great-

    great grandfather (his son) was born by immaculate conception!).

    So is there evidence for the existence of God and His role in Creation contrary to what Hawking claims?

    Although you can never prove His existence, scientists have found evidence of

    'intelligent design' or the 'invisible hand', as it was known before the 'Enlightenment' in Creation. Although an atheist, the former Astronomer Royal, Fred Hoyle whose school Hawking wished to join at Cambridge University for his PhD -- famously remarked that without panspermia:

    The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is

    comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard

    might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.

    Fred Hoyle, Hoyle on evolution, Nature, Vol. 294, No. 5837 (November 12, 1981), p. 105

    Life cannot have had a random beginning The trouble is that there are

    about two thousand enzymes, and the chance of obtaining them all in a

    random trial is only one part in 1040,000

    , an outrageously small probability

    that could not be faced even if the whole universe consisted of organic


    Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (London: J.M. Dent & Sons, 1981)

    To avoid using any phrase which might indicate the existence of God, scientists

    also call this concept 'the fine-tuned Universe'. It states that the conditions that

    allow the elements, matter and life to exist in the Universe can only happen with

    certain universal fundamental physical constants which themselves lie within an

    extremely narrow range.

    In his book, Just Six Numbers, current Astronomer Royal, Martin Rees, argues

    that six numbers constitute a recipe for the Creation of the Universe. If any one

    of the numbers were different 'even to the tiniest degree, there would be no

    stars, no complex elements, no life.'

    These parameters are so precise that they support the existence of an intelligent

    guiding hand, shepherding Creation as opposed to a load of random events which

    led to the Creation of elements, then galaxies, then stars, then planets, then

    somehow the evolution of life and above all us, self-consciously intelligent beings.

  • 5 of 6

    One of the 'six numbers' is 0.07 (Epsilon), the strength of the force binding subatomic particles into the nucleus. But:

    If it were 0.01 less, then only hydrogen could exist, meaning

    there would be no other elements to form galaxies, stars and


    If it were 0.01 higher, hydrogen wouldn't exist shortly after

    the Big Bang. Again, if there is no hydrogen, there can be no

    other physical elements, including carbon, of which we are


    When we combine all the odds together of these narrow parameters coming

    together, the fact we are here at all seems nothing short of a miracle! Or rather

    some guiding force must be making each stage of Creation fall within these

    narrow constraints so the next stage can happen.

    The Multiverse and misplaced faith

    Militant atheist scientists have of course come up with an answer to this: the

    'multi-verse'. Under this concept, we live in just one world of physical 'laws'.

    Other parts of the 'multi-verse' will exist under their own set of equally narrow

    but different parameters perhaps creating non-carbon-based life forms.

    Of course, there is not one scrap of evidence for this 'multi-verse'. As such, it

    requires a leap of faith as great if not greater than a belief in the One True God himself.

    That has not stopped the man who once starred in Star Trek and The

    Simpsons setting himself up as the prophet of this new popular science concept.

    Since 2010, Hawking has used his public profile to attack religion and philosophy

    and endorse the 'multi-verse'. In 2011, in an interview entitled: 'There is no

    Heaven', he responded to the Guardian's questions about this odd position with

    the following words:

    The universe is governed by science. But science tells us that we can't

    solve the equations, directly in the abstract. We need to use the effective

    theory of Darwinian natural selection of those Societies most likely to

    survive. We assign them a higher value.

    Without wishing to sound cruel and heartless, one wonders whether the machine

    which acts as his voice was on the blink that day. We might also wonder the

    same about his recent proclamation to the Daily Mail that researchers enquiring

    into the Higgs Boson or 'God particle' might stress it out, thus destroying the


    Certainly, other physicists have taken him to task for his 'revelation' regarding

    the multiverse because it is not based on sound scientific evidence or analysis.

    Twenty years ago, relevantly qualified climate scientists were challenging the

    myth of 'man-made global warming' but that didn't stop it taking off (although it

    has now been quietly replaced with 'climate change' as the former cannot be

    justified by the science).

    Once you understand the nature of the god without form, from which Creation

    comes endless and infinite, timeless and eternal -- you will realise there is no room for a 'mu...