Periodically on this blog I make note of theoretical physics and its implications for theism (better, it’s support for theism). In that light, I want to draw your attention to two recent posts responding to a recent case made for how current views of cosmology purportedly rule out a need for a creator-God. The most recent example was that of Stephen Hawking, critiques of which (by physicists and mathematicians) I’ve posted here before. Today, though, I want to highlight some responses to a 2006 piece that is apparently getting new attention on the web.
The 2006 essay was by Keith Parsons, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Houston-Clear-Lake. Parsons outlined his reasons for rejecting the case for a Divine Creator in an essay entitled, No Creator Need Apply: A Reply to Roy Abraham Varghese. The essay was rebutted recently by Paul Herrick in his piece, Job Opening: Creator of the Universe A Reply to Keith Parsons (2009). Even more recently, two posts over at Uncommon Descent caught my interest. You can read them here and here.
This discussion over cosmology and theism illustrates why arguments for and against ET life are *not* the same as arguments for and against God. Apples and oranges. That’s something I’ll come back to.