IN my hardscrabble voyage as a writer I have participated in gruelling religious debates with people of diverse minds on different aspects of religion and, as usual, religious narratives always evoke intense emotion. However, I have noticed that there is a tinge of hope in making headway when people debate having frames of reference that are convergent with the Bible unlike discussions where the Bible is ‘banned.’

I concur that it would be wrong for anyone to ram their beliefs – theistic or atheistic down other people’s throats; some won’t accept God or the Bible. Of course, even within Christendom, currently there are a lot of ‘demonic’ doctrines flying around yet there remains some who contend that religion in its entirety is a fallacy and a sheer waste of life. They actually put the existence of God into question.

Now, the debate assumes a completely different trajectory when God himself becomes the object of dispute and, worse, when the sceptics maintain that the Bible cannot be used as corroboration on the existence of God. “You can’t quote the Bible to support its claims,” so they say. And they have asked one question: “If God created all things, then tell us who created God?”

Well, by definition, God is the uncreated Creator of the universe. God cannot possibly have been created otherwise he ceases to be God and becomes unworthy of worship. A logical grasp of the widely acknowledged law of cause and effect is paramount in proving the existence of God. The law states that everything that has a beginning has a cause and therefore a resultant effect. So the following statement is critical in understanding this article: Everything which has a beginning has a cause. All things that begin have a cause.

It is unreasonable to believe something could begin to exist without a cause. This fundamental law applies to everything which has a beginning. For instance, the computer or cell phone before you right now certainly had a beginning, it did not originate in a cell phone dealer’s shop; there had to be a place where, piece by piece, it was assembled. Everything that had a beginning, including you the reader had a cause. Whether atheist or theist, we would all converge that everything that has a beginning had to have a cause.

Undeniably, the universe had to have a beginning, our only difference as atheists and theists being that theists believe in the God version of creation while atheists in their various factions as given at believe in various scientific or philosophical disproving theories. The universe cannot have been self-caused; nothing can create itself.

Quantum mechanics has never produced something out of nothing. The universe evidently had to have a beginning; the laws of thermodynamics dictate that and, more importantly, these are the most fundamental laws of the physical sciences. The first law being that the total amount of mass-energy in the universe is constant and the second law stating that the amount of energy available for work is running out; entropy, in other words, is increasing to the full.

It follows that if the whole amount of mass-energy is limited, and the amount of usable energy is declining, then certainly the universe cannot have existed forever. Otherwise it would already have exhausted all usable energy of the universe. So the observable outcome is that the universe began a finite time ago with a lot of usable energy, and is now running down. The universe therefore, having had a beginning, requires a cause, exactly as Romans 1:20 states. The universe is subject to the fundamental law of cause and effect because it had a beginning.

This brings us to the marrow, the heart of this piece of writing: how does this law of cause and effect defeat atheism. Well, the law of cause and effect as highlighted states that all things that begin need to have a cause. Now, the ‘thing’ which created the universe cannot possibly be subject to the same laws that govern the universe otherwise it would also be subject to the laws of thermodynamics; that ‘thing’ therefore is not natural but has to be Super-natural and that is God. He is outside the laws of thermodynamics.

A thing which creates something will naturally be superior to the created thing. The one who assembled the automobile obviously had to be above or smarter than the machine. More like what Albert Einstein said, “We can’t solve our problems at the same level of thinking we were when we created them”. That would be to concur with the logic that the solution of the problem is certainly higher and is governed not by the same logic that created the problem.

Likewise, God the creator of the universe does not have a beginning and is therefore not governed by the laws that govern things that have a beginning. He has no beginning; He is outside time; He existed before time. He has no origin and is therefore outside the law of cause and effect. He has always existed, so doesn’t need a cause. The Laws of Thermodynamics weaken the argument of God having had a beginning. He is outside the laws of decay that govern the universe.

A theistic conclusion is therefore inescapable and atheists would only be dishonest to deny the fact that the Creator of this universe is a supernatural entity not subject to the laws governing the universe. Therefore, He is not limited by the time dimension He created. God  has no beginning in time. Therefore, He doesn’t have a cause.