The purpose of the Creator

[andersbranderud]

(To all atheists and agnostics reading this, please first read the proof for the existence of a Creator at bloganders.blogspot.com (left menu)

Undoubtedly many people have religious experiences. An important question is if all (if any) religious experiences also indicate a communication with the Creator of the universe. Many devotees of all religions would answer that the religious experiences that the followers of the other religions have only are brain constructions, and that they are not indicators of a communication to the Creator. Or could it be that the followers of all religions originates from the Creator; which would imply that the contradictions and conflicts among all religions reflect an intrinsic and internal cognitive dissonance and dysfunction within a self-contradicting 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. Therefore, no intelligent person can ignore that our purpose and challenge in life is learning how we, as imperfect humans, may successfully relate to a Perfect Singularity-Creator without our co-mingling, which transcends the timespace of this dimensional physical universe, becoming an imperfection to the Perfect Singularity-Creator.

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). (Source and further reading of how to relate to the Creator: 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.

Anders Branderud

[Mantayo]

Anders, I am curious. What lead you to this forum, and why did you post this?

[Mike (Ekimks)]

As far as your blog, TLDR.

Seems the universe demands a creator, but does the creator have a creator?  Somehow this non self-contradictory creator made an orderly universe populated with imperfect humans.  And this non-self-contradiction proves the Torah is His Word?

Talk about leaps of logic.
 

[tony]

Leaps of faith... I always laugh when a friend of mine who believes in creationism tells me that humans and other species are so complex they had to be created by a creator but when i ask so who would have created something complex enough to create a complex organism and he says that question isn't important.

It is to me! :-)

[PurpleHymnal]

Awww if you guys hadn't dogpiled him, I could have pulled a Weinland! "Delete delete delete delete!" 

[andersbranderud]

Hello and thanks for your replies!

Mantayo wrote: “Anders, I am curious. What lead you to this forum, and why
did you post this?”

My reply: I found the website by google. I post my post to give logical reasons for the existence of a Creator and His purpose, so that truth searching people can read it and start relating to the Creator.

Mike wrote: “As far as your blog, TLDR.

Seems the universe demands a creator, but does the creator have a creator?  Somehow this non self-contradictory creator made an orderly universe populated with imperfect humans.  And this non-self-contradiction proves the Torah is His Word?

Talk about leaps of logic.”

I will answer your statement “does the creator have a creator”, but first I will discuss about causality and burden of proof. Burden of proof is a very important concept for this discussion.

None known scientific phenomena contradicts the scientific principle of causality. It is a scientific principle with is foundation on many observations. By induction causality is regarded to be true for all of time-space.

It is a law of formal logic that a person stating the unknown has to prove his/her departure from the known state. The known state is that everything in this physical universe follows the scientific law of causality. Some examples of a statements that is a unknown state: “The laws of causality are not applicable before one plank-second after Big Bang;" (or the statement “the laws of causality are not applicable on the first physical occurrence in space-time") Both of these examples contradicts science, i.e. it is a clear departure from the known state. The person who says there are scientific phenomena that contradicts causality has to prove his/her point (i.e. he/she has the burden of proof), not merely assume it.

The argument that the Creator also must have a cause is as nonsensical as to say that the Creator is bound by the gravitational theory.

The proof I have presented proves that the Prime Cause is the origin of all the laws of nature, including causality. To say that the Creator is bound by causality, is as nonsensical as to say that a computer programmer is dependent on (or becomes a part of) the laws and boundaries in his program that he/she has created.

According to the principle of burden of proof, and the fact that claiming "the Prime Cause needs a cause " is a departure from the known; the person arguing for this statement has the burden of proof. The known state is what I have proved: “There exists a non-dimensional Creator external to timespace, Who is the Prime Cause to the timespace.” To claim that there exists a cause to the Prime Cause is a clear departure from the known facts. There is not a single observable fact that indicates that there exists a cause to the Prime Cause and neither is it possible to derive that conclusion using deduction.

To y’all: Have a continued nice week!
Anders Branderud

[tony]

"The known state is what I have proved: “There exists a non-dimensional Creator external to timespace,"

That is an extraordinary claim.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.  It is your bullshit that is nonsensical.

[Mantayo]

I have perused your blog and followed some of the links you provide, and I have yet to read anything I have not read elsewhere - and found it all unpersuasive. I do wish that you would stop referring to "what I have proved" and "The proof I have presented" and call it what it is: "The Kalām cosmological argument is a variation of the cosmological argument taking its form from the Kalām tradition of Islamic discursive theology. It attempts to prove the existence of God by appealing to the principle of universal cause." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument)

I find it ironic that, despite your god's special relationship with the Hebrew/Jewish people, it apparently decided not to bring this irrefutable "proof" to mankind's attention via one of the chosen people - of whom there has been no shortage of brilliant members - but through a pagan philosopher (I'm sure you know who), then chose to have it popularised later by muslim philosophers and apologists and even later have it revived by a christian apologist and proponent of intellingent design (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lane_Craig).

You are aware that there are learned, educated people who debate strenuously, and disagree with, the particular interpretations of mathematics and physics that you cite in support of your conclusions. The same comment applies to your preferred theology. The same comment applies to the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA).

[tony]

Anders,  the burden of proof is on you for  your hypothesis.

This article states it very well: http://www.alternet.org/story/144199/

Atheism is a defense of reality.

[PurpleHymnal]

Looks like you guys chased him off. I'm locking the topic. /modliness