There are numerous people who believe that absolutely nothing has ever occurred except by natural causes. The law of causality is fully understood and explains that. In so doing, it also blocks any effort the evolutionist uses to explain the origin of anything. Of the universe or anything in it. And they have been stymied for many years in their efforts to prove the origin of matter, space, the massive universe, inanimate life, animate life, gravity, reproduction and many other items. The natural law of cause and effect requires that ‘everything must have had an adequate precedent cause’. This applies to anything which exists, changes or occurs. In a little more understandable sentence, anything which exists or anything which happens, must have had an adequate cause for it to become a reality.
Now, with that in mind, evolutionists have striven for years to destroy that law or to come up with an adequate cause for everything. And it cannot be done with our natural laws which have been in effect since all matter was created. You may try as hard as you wish, but when you trace the effects backward far enough (and incidentally each cause is an effect from another cause) and you eventually arrive at the universe itself. And no, it was not started by a tiny singularity the size of a pencil dot which became so compacted that it exploded and produced all of this massive universe. First of all, that is not an ‘adequate’ cause and even if it was, it had to have a beginning so what was the adequate cause for it?
Everyone knows that all matter is temporal. It had to have a beginning. So, what caused the beginning of matter? There is no scientific answer for that question. All scientists know that. All atheists know that, or should. Yet they continue to try to come up with an answer. The recently discovered Higgs boson, a tiny subatomic particle which is thought to have been the factor which has created all matter. Just as the tiny singularity, the Higgs boson is also too tiny to be an adequate cause of all this. But again, even if it is, the Higgs boson is also an effect so what was the adequate cause to have created it?
The evolutionists flatly deny that there is such a thing as a miracle, yet they continue to hope for one and also attempt to find one which can live within the natural laws. They cannot do it. So what is the answer to all this? It would be totally impossible for any human to come up with a reasonably adequate cause for this incomprehensibly gigantic universe. Yet some 4,500 years ago, before there was virtually any method of formal education in science and physics, a man named Moses was given by inspiration of God, the ability to write a source of creation. Remember, that none of the present day monumental accumulation of scientific discoveries had been made. Yet Moses account, along with a number of other later inspired men, managed to write a book explaining the creation and various other things in a way that cannot be discredited, even though strong attempts have been made to do so. This one amazing fact should be adequate to prove the accuracy of the Holy Bible, even though it does not meet the requirements of ’empirical’ proof. No one has been able to write any book which compares to the Bible in the least. No one has been able to disprove any claim that it has made.
Scientists and atheists have struggled for centuries to put forth some proof of errancy in the Holy Bible but have failed to do so. One of their greatest efforts has been that of attempting to prove that all things evolved from nothing, or at least from a tiny singularity or from a sub atomic particle. But there are literally hundreds of statements by these men which show that they, themselves have encountered blockages from almost every turn. Here are only a few. If you are
unfamiliar with the names of these men, just look them up on a Google search engine. You will see their stand .
“An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that, in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle. So many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going. But this should not be taken to imply that there are good reasons to believe that it could not have started on the earth by a perfectly reasonable sequence of fairly ordinary chemical reactions. The plain fact is that
the time available was too long, the many microenvironments on the earth’s surface too diverse, the various chemical possibilities too numerous and our own knowledge and imagination too feeble to allow us to be able to unravel exactly how it might or might not have happened such a long time ago, especially as we have no experimental evidence from that era to check our ideas against.” (Francis Crick, Life Itself, Its Origin and Nature, 1981, p. 88)
[Note; Crick was a brilliant scientist who, with James Watson and the work of many others, discovered the structure and function of DNA. And even though the statement above may appear somewhat differently, he was strongly opposed to creation as described in the Bible]
“The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.” (Darwin, Charles, Origin of Species, 6th edition, 1902 p. 341-342)
“…we have proffered a collective tacit acceptance of the story of gradual adaptive change, a story that strengthened and became even more entrenched as the synthesis took hold. We paleontologists have said that the history of life supports that interpretation, all the while really knowing that it does not.” (Eldredge, Niles “Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the Theory of Punctuated Equilibria,” Simon & Schuster: New York NY, 1985, p.
Eventhough atheists and many scientists believe that everything has a natural cause, is explainable by natural causes. Yet, their own belief in certain natural laws contradict their beliefs of how things were created or how they came into effect. When actually the creation of anything physical, had to begin by circumvention of some natural laws. For instance, there is no natural law which would allow this inconceivably massive universe to be created from a singularity the size of a pencil dot, or worse yet, the size of a sub-atomical particle.
Since all matter is limited in its existence, it had to have a beginning and will have an ending. Yet our natural laws do not provide for a beginning, in fact, it requires something supernatural had to occur to create it. These very laws were unknown in the time of the writing of the Holy Bible books concerning the creation, yet it provides a logical source of supernatural action which has withstood any and all denials and ridicule
There is one thing all of us have to agree upon. The universe in its entirety, which includes the earth, life and all other matter does exist. So where did it come from? We have already shown that natural laws will not permit the present wild ideas that a tiny dot exploded and created it all. That is far more silly and inconceivable than the Biblical account of an everlasting spirit which is not subject to our natural laws, but rather, created them.
Other natural laws of conservation again also beg for an answer. These basic laws in physics state which processes can or cannot occur in nature. Each law maintains the total value of the quantity of matter and energy remains unchanged during physical processes. Conservation laws have the broadest application of all laws in physics and are considered to be the most fundamental laws in nature. In 1905, the theory of relativity showed mass was a form of energy and the two laws governing these quantities were combined into a single law conserving the total amount of mass and energy. This law says neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed. Now consider that for a moment. Although they deteriorate and become unusable, how then were they created in the beginning? There had to have been a beginning because all these things would now be totally useless due to entropy, if they were eternal. There we are again faced with the necessity of some creator who could create anything, including those natural laws. In other words, a supernatural being.
The writer of the gospel letter to the Hebrews had this to say about the creation, which covers the subject we are discussing here. Read it carefully and then consider how he would have made such a statement. It solves the dilemma of God’s creating things of a material nature from something not of such nature.
“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good report. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” (Hebrews 11:1-3 KJV)
All scientists and atheists know that this entire universe will eventually be depleted to total uselessness. Knowing this, they should also know that there had to have been a beginning of it or it would already have been depleted. And these tiny dots cannot be given credit for the creation. Much wasted effort and monies could be saved if scientists would simply work with their fantastic knowledge they have accrued, rather than trying to eliminate the true creator.