Thursday, September 2, 2010

God says He didn't make Hawking

Humor Alert: the following post is intended to be humorous. If you fail to find the post funny it is probably my fault; however, if you fail to recognize that the post is intended to be humorous and angrily denounce me for writing it, you need to reread this Humor Alert. Thank you.

(Heaven) God, via His usual spokesman, St. Peter, today issued a press release clarifying that He didn't actually make Stephen Hawking.

"From what I understand," St. Peter said, addressing members of the press from the Rising Garden, "God admits to being the Author of Creation and the personal creator of all human beings ever conceived on Planet Earth...except for Steve. He simply won't confirm that He created Stephen Hawking. Something about turnabout and fair play, I understand."

Asked exactly how Steven Hawking came to be without God's assistance, St. Peter dodged the questions. "I can tell you that Steve wasn't some kind of accident. He didn't come about through random chance, either. I mean, the guy's brilliant. You think that occurs as the natural and inevitable result of random chemicals cavorting around for a few billion years? You should see some of the planets where the random chemicals are still cavorting without any further Divine orders--no intelligence. What does that tell you?"

When pressed to explain just why God was denying the creation of Stephen Hawking, St. Peter became agitated. "Whoa. Whoa, now. He didn't deny creating Steve, either. He just said He won't confirm it. You media types are always putting words in people's mouths."

St. Peter was then asked whether this whole press release was actually some kind of cosmic joke. "No. No, although God does have a terrific sense of humor, of course. The cosmic joke would be if it were actually possible for a matter-less void to become a material universe which contains sentient beings without any sort of catalyst. I think what God is offering, here, is a chance for Steve's contemporaries to be as agnostic about the creation of Steve as Steve is about the creation of everybody and everything else."

As St. Peter's cloud in the Rising Garden began to ascend back to Heaven, several reporters shouted questions about God's creation of other people and things, particularly wasps, thunderstorms, and Nancy Pelosi--but St. Peter merely smiled and waved, disappearing without answering any further questions.


Alisha De Freitas said...

ROTFL! Tweeted & posted on Facebook!

Red Cardigan said...

Thanks, Alisha! :)

EMS said...

When I saw the comment from Hawking, I laughed out loud - rare for me :-). Kind of proves that having brain smarts doesn't mean one has common sense.

Rebecca in CA said...

very funny!!!

sad though too. These Hawking/Asimov types always break my heart. Asimov was so, so bright in many ways, and yet so dull in others. Hawking's statements indicate that any thoughts he had of God were Deist in nature, as though the only thing needing explaining was someone to create the first matter and set the ball rolling, but everything from then on took care of itself. That is such a faulty and impoverished notion that of course it is bound to fall.

Anonymous said...

I was waiting, waiting, for someone in the Catholic blogosphere to respond to Hawking's comment. Erin, you didn't fail me. Thanks for the laugh.

WillyJ said...

it's called the immutable law of "tit-for-tat"

Amy said...

Brilliant - SO funny!

Christopher said...

GREAT stuff! I'm following Alisha's lead and putting this out on my Twitter and Facebook. Well done!

Anonymous said...

Since Hawking says that "given gravity" the creation of everything from nothing is inevitable, maybe he meant to say "Gravity is God???"


Red Cardigan said...

Thanks, Christopher and Amy!

Anonymous at 11:49, the whole problem seems to be that Hawking thinks some impersonal force (such as gravity) might have gotten everything started, but that this somehow proves there's no need for a personal creator. Seems illogical from here, too!

Siarlys Jenkins said...

Maybe he meant one should approach God with considerable gravity. This is funny. I also enjoy your reference to God as a catalyst, which in some sense he is. Of course catalysts don't usually set the cosmic forces which create the material they catalyze.

The part about planets where little molecules haven't achieved intelligence reminds me of Mark Twain's "Excerpt from Captain Stormfield's Visit to Heaven." Stormfield arrives at the wrong gate, and a large purple creature with three eyes, the clerk for that gate, sternly asks him which world he is from. Eventually he replies "It's the one the Savior saved!" At mention of the sacred name, the clerk's head immediately bowed. He then said, in a hushed voice "The number of worlds he has saved is like to the gates of heaven, none can count them."

Anonymous said...

Somehow, if I were Stephen Hawking and had his disease, I think that I might doubt the existence of God too.

Wild Bill said...

@Anonymous at 6:25:

Stephen Hawking has been living on borrowed breath for years. Most people with ALS die within 10 years. And a lot of people life with devastating injuries and find reasons to love God for it. Joni Erickson Tada is one:

Anonymous said...

The reason that Red's column is so interesting this time is that usually her readers are Catholics striving to find out and think more about their faith and beliefs. This 'curious' situation delves into the depth of infringement on others' rights in the US with regard to personal and cultural beliefs.

On the one hand, we have a group that might be considered a bit too far off the deep end in toleration, yet to dispel or contradict the significance of what is going on would be to protest against a religion in a way that the members would counter with the epithet 'you're anti-semite' which is off-putting to say the least in the US even though our country formally condemned the genocide.

On the other hand, we ourselves believe in protecting our freedom to go to war, despite others here in the US whose religious view prohibit engaging in war-like activities such as the Quakers and Amish. However, many of those in the trenches during the American wars were Catholic to the hilt, and more so probably during the time spent in a foxhole. But, this is a bit silly in saying one is a Catholic and doesn't believe in fighting in a war, or not, or is more of a Catholic actively engaged in the act of killing another human being. Surely, no one would say that our Catholic Church should encourage battles, but in our history, we as a body have been involved in that type of nefarious business. Does that fact make me any less a believer in Jesus' entreaty to Peter?

Then, on another hand, someone of a non-Islamic tradition brings up their interpretation of how the Muslims' religious beliefs are intertwined with a code of jihad or struggle to do and defend what is right that seems to be a call to violence religious wars as interpreted by others outside the religion.

So, there is deliberate misunderstanding by Catholics about Muslim beliefs, and there is deliberate obfuscation by Hasidic Jewish community about becoming a particularly unamerican enclave in New York, not unlike the Mormon zealots earlier foisting sexually enslaving behavior on young girls and boys in a religious enclave in the US. Even my elementary school principal brought condemnation on his religious community when I was a child by not bringing his sick child to the doctor in a timely manner and relying on 'faith-healing' as tenet of his faith.

The real question is what kind of behaviors are acceptable in the US whether or not one is a member of a religious group.


Siarlys Jenkins said...

Anyone who claims to love God FOR their devastating illness or injury is a little sick. Thanking God for helping you find and fulfill a purpose living WITH a devastating illness is something else again.