For as the churning of milk produces butter, And wringing the nose produces blood, So the forcing of wrath produces strife.(Proverbs 30:33) NKJV
Understanding cause and effect, logic and reason, is critical in successfully deducing how the Bible can account for all of the physical evidence and empirical observations of the universe.
In the Big Bang narrative, for instance, the actual bang is an effect not the cause. Supposedly, fusing Hydrogen is the source of the light and energy, and the rapid expansion of the primal universe is the source of the bang. There’s no cause for any of it.
We all have the same evidence. Our choice of paradigm determines what we think it’s evidence of.– Matty’s Razor
We’ve deduced that God didn’t break the 1st law of thermodynamics. We’re now going to show that he didn’t break Newton’s third law of motion. God’s command, And God said, let there be light, was the cause. The effect was the appearance of light.
- CAUSE – And God said
- EFFECT – The Big Bang
Newton’s 3rd law tells us that for every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction. The command was a pulse or vibration in an amount sufficient to cause a body of water, equal to the mass of the universe, to undergo nucleosynthesis. Nucleosynthesis was the effect. Sadly, the so-called Big Bang Theory doesn’t have the relationship between cause and effect right.
This means that an equal amount of energy had to be available for God to use to cause this to happen. We can consider that the universe, creation, is a closed system. The energy used to cause fusion didn’t come from outside the system. By using deduction we can conclude that this energy is still in the system. Incidentally, this is part of the reason why people who believe in God believe that He is omnipotent, all powerful. This energy is still available.
Effect and Cause
We’ve found that a failure to acknowledge cause and effect, or a deliberate reversal of it, is systemic in the responses we get from nonbelievers. Here’s an example, one of our favorite illustrations of why atheism isn’t intellectually viable:
Atheism is Proof of God
- A[theism] can’t exist without -[theism].
- You can’t deny a God who doesn’t exist.
- Therefore, atheism is proof of God.
- Call upon the name of Jesus Christ,
- believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,
- confess your sin.
Atheist science trolls (ASTs) think that they’re being really clever by replying with a similar pattern:
- Nonunicornism can’t exist without unicorns.
- You can’t deny a unicorn who doesn’t exist.
- Therefore unicorns exist.
- You can’t deny unicorns if unicorns don’t exist,
- therefore that you don’t believe in unicorns is proof that unicorns exist.
- Your disbelief in invisible unicorns from Mars is proof of invisible unicorns from Mars.
And so on. And on, and on. Do you see the pattern? Apparently Unicorns are essential in both atheist philosophy and the scientific method. However there’s the flaw in this logic, which is due to a failure to acknowledge the relationship between cause and effect. Here’s how to understand how this applies:
How Atheism is Proof of God
- A– is a prefix to the word –theism, it modifies it to give the opposite meaning: Theism has to exist in order for A-theism to exist.
- Nonunicornism isn’t a thing.
- Denying a thing isn’t the cause of its existence.
- The existence of unicorns, or anything else, doesn’t depend on what we believe.
- The nonexistence of a thing is the reason why there’s no knowledge of it,
- therefore denying it’s impossible.
The “reprobate mind,” in Romans 1:28 is a consequence of rejecting the relationship between cause and effect. It manifests as a refusal to acknowledge the relationship between behavior and consequences.
We need your financial help but Mattymatica isn’t a religious organization, charity or new age cult.
If you need to belong somewhere, find a local church. If you’d like to help, please consider donating.