Proof of an Intelligent Creator and His purpose

[Anders Branderud]

I hope you will find this text interesting.
According to science our universe (space-time) has a beginning (http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9403004).This paper is written by the cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin of the Tufts university and Arvind Bonde.)

It is a fundamental law of physics (causality) that every physical occurrence in the universe has a cause. Since space-time has a beginning there was a first physical occurrence. Causality requires that the first physical occurrence had a cause. Causality and the fact that space-time has a beginning implies that this Prime Cause is non-dimensional and independent of space-time, i.e. a Creator.

To conclude the above paragraphs:
Fact: No thing nor event in the known universe or laws of physics lacks a cause.
Assume: There is no Prime Cause (Creator).
Ergo: There is no universe.
Fact: There is a universe.
Therefore: the statement that was assumed is proven to be a false statement by reduction ad absurdum (proof by disproof).
(Since "There is no Creator" is proven false, the opposite is true: There is a Creator.)

Being logically consistent (orderly), our (to say perfectly-orderly would be a tautology) orderly universe must mirror its Prime Cause / Singularity-Creator—Who must be Orderly; i.e. Perfect. An orderly—"not capricious," as Einstein put it—Creator (also implying Just), therefore, necessarily had an Intelligent Purpose in creating this universe and us within it and, being Just and Orderly, necessarily placed an explanation, a "Life's Instruction Manual," within the reach of His subjects—humankind.

It defies the orderliness (logic / mathematics) of both the universe and Perfection of its Creator to assert that humanity was (contrary to His Torah, see below) without any means of rapproachment until millennia after the first couple in recorded history as well as millennia after Abraham, Moses and the prophets. Therefore, the Creator's "Life's Instruction Manual" has been available to man at least since the beginning of recorded history. The only enduring document of this kind is the Torah —which, interestingly, translates to "Instruction" (not "law" as popularly alleged). (Some of the text is a quote from www.netzarim.co.il)

The fact that the Creator is perfect implies that He isn’t self-contradictory. Therefore any religion, and all religions contradicts each other (otherwise they would be identical), that contradicts Torah is the antithesis to the Creator.

The most common counter arguments are answered here: http://bloganders.blogspot.com/search/label/counter%20arguments)

Anders Branderud

[Erika]

It is true that our Universe had a beginning. However, you assume that because there was a beginning, and that the universe is a physical object, that by causality, that there is a 'Creator'. This is a giant leap of assumption. One cannot assume that there is only one 'logical' explanation for the formation of the universe. One has to consider all of the possibilities. The theory of the Multiverse, gives possible explanations for a) the shape of the Universe, which b) leads into the creation of the Universe. While yes, this is a Wikipedia article, it does have accurate information. I encourage you to read it in full.

On another note, One cannot assume that they 'know' space/time began the moment that our universe began. Bear with me while I cite wikipedia once more: The subject focuses on a number of basic issues, including—but not limited to—whether or not time and space exist independently of the mind, whether they exist independently of one another, what accounts for time's apparently unidirectional flow, whether times other than the present moment exist, and questions about the nature of identity (particularly the nature of identity over time). (The Philosophy of Space and Time) This means that there are far too many ways to define space/time for the human mind to comprehend. Please keep this in mind.

I hope that this provided some new, interesting, information for you to read and analyze. I know I love this stuff. :D

-Erika

[Dan S.]

I quote from Dawkins (The God Delusion, p 101):
[Your] arguments make the entirely unwarranted assumption that God himself is immune to the regress. Even if we allow the dubious luxury of arbitrarily conjuring up a terminator to an infinite regress and giving it a name, simply because we need one, there is absolutely no reason to endow that terminator with any of the properties normally ascribed to God: omnipotence, omniscience, goodness, creativity of design, to say nothing of such human attributes as listening to prayers, forgiving sins and reading innermost thoughts. Incidentally, it has not escaped the notice of logicians that omniscience and omnipotence are mutually incompatible. If God is omniscient, he must already know how he is going to intervene to change the course of history using his omnipotence. But that means he cant' change his mind about his intervention, which means he is not omnipotent."

Putting that aside for the moment, your use of the Torah is interesting. Jews have accepted for millennia that Jews are God's chosen people, yet all are God's children. Jewish scholars also say that non-Jews only need to follow the 7 basic rules followed during the time of Noah and that non-Jews need not follow the rest of the Torah. Further, Jewish scholars also maintain that we must accept the stranger and act with kindness toward all, as "we were once strangers in a strange land" (Egypt). That would of course extend to other religions and viewpoints, particularly for non-Jews. More simply, the Torah is for Jews. The rest of the world may follow what they wish, as they are still God's children.

Furthermore, the Jewish sages have taught that the Torah is written in words man can understand, and while divinely inspired, is not literal. The Torah can be interpreted in 1,000's of ways, all of them valid. Lastly, the Torah also instructs people who are baffled with a problem not answered in the Torah to take their troubles to the judges of their day. The judges will then deliberate and give them the law. This not only allows the Torah to be a "living document," as alive and relevant today as it was one thousand years ago, but also allows Jewish law to evolve with the times.

And lastly, to extend the above, a quote from Rabbi Greenberg (Wrestling with God and Men, p143):

God is told that the Torah is no longer in his possession. He has given it to human beings, and it is now in their hands to debate and then to decide the law according to the majority opinion. God is held accountable to what is written in his Torah, overruled, in effect, by his own law "to incline according to the majority." The story takes on theological step further in the epilogue that follows.

R. Natan met Elijah and asked him: "What did the Holy One, Blessed by he, do in that moment?" He [God] laughed [with joy] and said, "My children have defeated me, my children have defeated me."

A laughing God who takes pleasure at his children's independence embodies a powerful new theology. The age of propecy is over. The Torah is not in heaven, but in the hands of the wise of ever generation whose responsibility it is to implement the law in their own moment by majority decision.


All of that is, of course, supposing there truly is a God.

[Übereil]

"Being logically consistent (orderly), our ... orderly universe must mirror its Prime Cause / Singularity-Creator—Who must be Orderly ... An orderly ... Creator (also implying Just), therefore, necessarily had an Intelligent Purpose in creating this universe and us within it and, being Just and Orderly, necessarily placed an explanation, a "Life's Instruction Manual," within the reach of His subjects—humankind."

But for that to be true humans have to be perfect. To see if we are we look at the world. And we see that we're not. Ergo, no such creator exists.

[President Clive-φ-Davidson]

@Übereil Hmmm... I used that same argument in another thread, how ironic.

@Anders Branderud As many of us have pointed out, this is not proof, nor is it even a valid point. Please try again.

[Anders Branderud]

Hello Erika!
Thanks for your reply!

You wrote:”It is true that our Universe had a beginning. However, you assume that because there was a beginning, and that the universe is a physical object, that by causality, that there is a 'Creator'. This is a giant leap of assumption. One cannot assume that there is only one 'logical' explanation for the formation of the universe. One has to consider all of the possibilities. The theory of the Multiverse, gives possible explanations for a) the shape of the Universe, which b) leads into the creation of the Universe. While yes, this is a Wikipedia article, it does have accurate information. I encourage you to read it in full.”

My reply: Arvind Borde and Alexander Vilenkin (in the report below) proves (based on a set of reasonable assumptions ) that the “eternal inflation” cannot be eternal to the past. According to their article space-time has a beginning (that is: not only our universe has a beginning (according to science our universe does not need to be the first universe), but space-time as a whole has a beginning).

The report of cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin of the Tufts university and Arvind Bonde is found here: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9403004

As I earlier wrote: It is a fundamental law of physics (causality) that every physical occurrence in the universe has a cause. Since space-time has a beginning there was a first physical occurrence. Causality requires that the first physical occurrence had a cause. Causality and the fact that space-time has a beginning implies that this Prime Cause is non-dimensional and independent of space-time.

All incidents of orderly patterns – for example a formal logical proof or a programming code – we know of has its origin in an orderly set of thoughts in a sentient being.

By induction an orderly pattern requires an orderly set of thoughts in a being (at least until monkeys produce and type into a computer a previously undiscovered mathematical proof).

The development of DNA occured because of the initial conditions (including the laws of physics) initiated by the Prime Cause. DNA is an orderly (non-random) pattern (governed by the laws of physics). Thus by deduction, the design of DNA must have its origin in an orderly set of thoughts in a sentient being – the Prime Cause; i.e. the Prime Cause is orderly.

A Sentient and Orderly Prime Cause is per definition a Creator.

Even if the hypothes of a multiverse is correct causality requires a Prime Casue and my post proves it to be a Sentient and Orderly Prime Cause, i.e. a Creator.

Furthermore you wrote: “On another note, One cannot assume that they 'know' space/time began the moment that our universe began. Bear with me while I cite wikipedia once more: The subject focuses on a number of basic issues, including—but not limited to—whether or not time and space exist independently of the mind, whether they exist independently of one another, what accounts for time's apparently unidirectional flow, whether times other than the present moment exist, and questions about the nature of identity (particularly the nature of identity over time). (The Philosophy of Space and Time) This means that there are far too many ways to define space/time for the human mind to comprehend. Please keep this in mind.

My reply:
According to science space-time has a beginning (see my first quote).

You wrote: ” This means that there are far too many ways to define space/time for the human mind to comprehend.”

My reply: There is one and only one scientific definition.

You wrote: “I hope that this provided some new, interesting, information for you to read and analyze. I know I love this stuff. :D”
“
My reply: I love science, but not philosophical definitions of space-time which contradicts science!

To you all: Have a nice weekend!
Anders Branderud

[danman]

Now, i have something to add.
I for example believe that universe is created in a big bang , and then collapses into the initial state again, just to repeat the process. This extends infinitely in both directions.
Now, such a series does not need a prime cause - each universe is the cause of the one before.
If you assert that i cannot extend the chain to infinity because you do not like it, i ask you what is the cause of the Creator? and whatever you reply is my cause of the universe (of course in analogy)


Also , you just bluntly assert many things, without bothering with a proof. Why would the creator need to be perfect? Humans create many orderly things yet they are not perfect at all.

[Conz]

Fact: religion is false and man-made
Assume: you are wrong
Ergo: I'm right
Fact: This is a bunch of crap with more wholes than I can shake a stick at
Therefor: This helps prove religion is false and man-made.

Don't worry, it's ok if you just now realize this. It's cool. Just don't try to fill the wholes with dirt, they won't hold.

[Kenny]

Ok, let's pretend for a moment that we understand how the laws of the universe work, in their entirety, and the cosmological argument is a completely legitimate argument (we don't and therefore it isn't). You say before time began there was god, I say before time began there was the cube the singularity that became the big-bang. How come god can exist outside of time but a singularity can not?