Evidence for God from Science

cslewislover » Sat Oct 10, 2009 1:01 pm
“@ anders. So I assume you're saying that Christianity is wrong because you think it contradicts the Torah. Christians don't think so, obviously. The first Christians were Jews (and Samaritans, who only had the Pentateuch) and they didn't seem to have a problem with that either.”

Cslewislover, Hello and sorry for a late reply!

You say that the first Christians were Jews. So let's discuss and analyze this statement.

Reconstructing the teachings of the first century Ribi Yehoshua (the Messiah) from Nazareth, using logic to remove words a Torah-Ribi [a title for a prominent Jewish leader; see glossaries in the main page in the below link] impossible can have said, the logical conclusion is that he said the following:

"Don't think that I came to uproot the Torah or the Neviim [prophets], but rather I came to reconcile them with the Oral Law of emet (truth). Should the heavens and ha-aretz (the land, particularly referring to Israel) exchange places, still, not even one ' (yod) nor one ` (qeren) of the Oral Law of Mosheh shall so much as exchange places; until it shall become that it is all being fully ratified and performed non-selectively. For whoever deletes one Oral Law from the Torah, or shall teach others such, by those in the Realm of the heavens he shall be called "deleted." Both he who preserves and he who teaches them shall be called Ribi in the Realm of the heavens. For I tell you that unless your Tzedaqah (righteousness) is over and above that of the Sophrim, and of the [probably 'Herodian'] Rabbinic-Perushim (corrupted to "Pharisees"), there is no way you will enter into the Realm of the heavens! “
Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu 5:17-20.

It is written in Torah that any prophet who adds mitzwot (commandments) or removes mitzwot from Torah is a false prophet. (See Devarim (Deuteronomy) 13:1-6) (Link: http://www.mechon-mamre.org/)

So if Ribi Yehoshua or his followers contradicted Torah in their teachings, then according to Torah one shouldn't follow their teachings. But there is no historical fact that implies that Ribi Yehoshua or his followers taught anything in contradiction to Torah.

To claim that Ribi Yehoshua who was called Ribi —even in the earliest found MSS of “Matthew” (which according to Scholars are redacted; read more in our “NT”-page in http://www.netzarim.co.il) — breached Torah contradicts logic. From 4Q MMT — a Jewish document found in the Qumran scrolls — we know that all Perushim (“Pharisees”) highly esteemed and followed Torah. The burden of proof is on the person claiming that Ribi Yehoshua did anything different. The burden of proof is also on the person stating that his followers contradicted Torah and started a new religion — Christianity. The writings in historical documents implies that Netzarim — the followers of Ribi Yehoshua — was in good standing among the other Torah-practising yehudim (“Jews”). The premise (proved above) that the first century yehudim “highly esteemed and followed Torah” leads to the conclusion that Netzarim wouldn't have been in good standing if they would have observed an anti-Torah religion.

Thus the person stating any continuity between Christianity — which breaches Torah when it adds and removes mitzwot (“commandments”) from Torah — and Judaism have the burden of proof to himself/herself to prove that continuity, not merely assuming it.

Anders Branderud

andersbranderud wrote:I hope you will find this text interesting.
According to science our universe (space-time) has a beginning (Read page 660 — 661 in the book “The future of theoretical physics and cosmology: celebrating Stephen Hawking”. The specific section is written by the cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin of the Tufts university.)

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. The fact that space-time has a beginning implies that this Prime Cause is non-dimensional and independent of space-time.

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.)

Absolutely...

Now starting from that standpoint it follows as elementary logic that everything that exists today has it origin at the beginning of the Big Bang. The matter that followed that explosion was responsible for the existence of galaxies and stars and that the interactions of matter on the resulting planets particularly on earth was responsible for life arising without any purpose behind it. That life became for complex on it's own steam, and that life generated consciousness and intelligence by itself. To deny that this is the true story of the entire history of the cosmos is to suggest that something else entered at some point from outside, and to suggest that would be the case to repudiate science itself.

andersbranderud wrote:cslewislover » Sat Oct 10, 2009 1:01 pm
“@ anders. So I assume you're saying that Christianity is wrong because you think it contradicts the Torah. Christians don't think so, obviously. The first Christians were Jews (and Samaritans, who only had the Pentateuch) and they didn't seem to have a problem with that either.”

If a Christian doesn't believe in the Torah then we are going to have a problem. Jesus was a Jew. He was about as Jewish as they come.. In fact if he wasn't a Jew, we are going to have a problem.

Thanks for posting andersbranderud... Please stick around.

Shalom.

Looking back at your original post, andersbranderud, I do love the fact that you have taken the fairly innocuous statement of "The fact that space-time has a beginning implies that this Prime Cause is non-dimensional and independent of space-time." and then leapt to these huge assumptions about what a prime cause that is "non-dimensional and independent of spacetime" must be like with, as far as I can tell, no supporting evidence whatsoever.

touchingcloth wrote:Looking back at your original post, andersbranderud, I do love the fact that you have taken the fairly innocuous statement of "The fact that space-time has a beginning implies that this Prime Cause is non-dimensional and independent of space-time." and then leapt to these huge assumptions about what a prime cause that is "non-dimensional and independent of spacetime" must be like with, as far as I can tell, no supporting evidence whatsoever.

No leaps. Here I will give the line of reasoning.
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 occurred 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.

The line of reasoning for orderliness [in the last post] is:

“a. Orderliness in creating a creature implies an orderly purpose.

b. The conspicuous Intelligence of the Creator implies the orderly purpose be non-trivial.

c. A non-trivial, orderly purpose for creating a sentient and intelligent created-being with free will implies a non-trivial, free-will decision.

d. An intelligent and orderly purpose involving a non-trivial, free-will decision implies a means for the sentient and intelligent created-being to make an informed decision.

e. An informed decision implies access to an orderly formula that enables the sentient and intelligent created-being to discern the non-trivial purpose in order to make an intelligent and informed decision. (Ideally, the decision should be orderly but, alas, few humans seem to concern themselves beyond their hedonistic materialism.)” (Quote: Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben Dawid)

Thus logical deduction based on scientific premise implies an orderly, intelligent (almost the same reasoning as in my first paragraphs) sentinent non-dimensional Creator independent of time-space who have provided access to an orderly formula that enables the sentient and intelligent created-being to discern the non-trivial purpose in order to make an intelligent and informed decision.

To you all: Have a nice day!

Anders Branderud

andersbranderud wrote: No leaps. Here I will give the line of reasoning.
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).

andersbranderud wrote:a. Orderliness in creating a creature implies an orderly purpose.

Your logic falls apart with your first premise. You're making the assumption that order can never come from chaos, and always imples an orderly conscious behind it. Evidence for this? I'm guessing you have none, unless you are using a bastardised meaning of "order".

What I've observed is that when left alone, things naturally fall apart or go from order to chaos. Not the other way around.

I'd like to know andersbranderud's justification for his statement of "All incidents of orderly patterns" that we know of necessarily have a sentient cause. It's the "all" that is indefensible and causes his logic to break down after this point.