Matty’s Razor
Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.
(Matthew 13:52) KJV
The idea that evidence is neutral and we all have access to it is known as Matty’s Razor. Evidence doesn’t lead to a conclusion, it just is. How we interpret evidence is determined by what we believe. It’s called cognitive bias.
We all have the same evidence. Our choice of paradigm determines what we think it’s evidence of.
– Matty’s Razor
The intellectual tragedy of our generation is a failure to understand what evidence is and how it’s used, and the resulting misconception about what constitutes knowledge. The theory of knowledge is called epistemology.
Epistemology
Epistemology is the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Epistemology is the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion.
– Epistemology, definition
Epistemology is the theory of knowledge. It’s a way to test information. We have to evaluate whether or not a piece of information qualifies as a fact. Here’s an idea: a fact has to be true regardless of what you believe about science or the Bible.
A fact is a : something that has actual existence, b : an actual occurrence.
– Fact, definition (Merriam-Webster)
We have two competing paradigms: SciPop and Matty’s Paradigm. If a piece of information is only true in one of the paradigms then it’s not a fact. Once we establish what the facts are, then we can deduce a conclusion. We can then consider this to be knowledge. This is our epistemological razor.
We have to start with primary sources of evidence, we can’t use a narrative that’s only true in one paradigm as the starting point of our reasoning. This is the mistake that all Christian theologians and apologists have made: they all start within the SciPop paradigm. We’re not going to make that mistake.
The problem is embodied by the phrase “scientific evidence.” There’s an intellectual hierarchy in which people with a “science” background consider themselves to be superior to people who come from a “faith” background. “Science” people who like to argue use the phrase “scientific knowledge” like a club and beat people with it.
The thing is that “scientific evidence” isn’t actually evidence, it’s an interpretation of evidence based on believing the atheist human origins narrative (SciPop). We’re going to use epistemology to substantiate the following definition of “scientific evidence”:
Scientific evidence is a secondary interpretation of evidence (not the evidence itself) which has been approved by peer review to ensure compliance with the atheist human origins narrative (SciPop). It’s the distilled essence of circular reasoning; a major deity in the atheist pantheon, the subject of a lot of special pleading.
– Scientific Evidence, definition
Can we be sufficiently lowly to see the wisdom here? Scientific evidence is what we call a secondary source. What we have to do is examine primary sources of evidence. In this sense evidence is neutral, it doesn’t point to a conclusion. Any conclusion that we may be able to deduce from evidence is wholly dependent on our choice of paradigm.
This gives us the understanding we need to be able to define our own epistemological razor: Matty’s Razor.
Epistemology – Navigation
| Section | Title | Scripture |
| 1 | Matty’s razor | Matthew 13:52 |
| 2 | Faith | Hebrews 11:1 |
| 3 | Evidence | Acts 11:23 |
| Salvation | Romans 10:9-10 |
Read through the Bible in a year
| Reading plan | July 25 | |
| Linear | Isaiah 1-3 | |
| Chronological | Isaiah 37-39 Psalms 76 |
Salvation
- Call upon the name of Jesus Christ,
- believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,
- confess your sin.
