inescapable?

So what was there before there was time or before the creation of the world, God didn't need humans?

He needs humans at the point in time when they were created. You look at him point by point at any moment in time. But his 'needs' can be across the entire timeline. The whole function is to fulfill his need. And perhaps his need is for humans to be created from the point of explosion. This whole process is his need.

Okay, so there is a supreme being. How do we move from here towards the religious God, etc.? And it's certainly not a reality as bound as this being. By the way, the reason it's bound to always exist is because there is no eternal matter and the world is material and must have been created by something eternal?

I can't write a book here. See my book 'The First Place' which is all about this.

That the reality of the world requires according to the human mind [there may be a mind that is not human, where the requirements of reality are completely different]. A supreme being who has always been different would negate what was before. You can write in 2 lines. [As I wrote at the beginning of the thread] As for the religious God who requires an entire book, I don't know how many pages long. It reminds me of industrialized food, where you have to write a huge list of ingredients, for a single product, in order to explain what it is. In contrast to carrots, cucumbers, eggs, chicken, etc., which don't need to be explained and they speak for themselves. Everyone knows that it's an egg, etc. Don't you think that's a similar comparison?

So you write in two lines. I'm not smart enough for that. Good luck.

Okay. I'll read and see. But the fact that it (the book) gives an answer that there is a religious God. Who created the world for a specific purpose, such as the Torah and commandments and more. The choice of this long answer. Over the short explanation of a supreme being and not requiring that he only created the world. Doesn't it contradict the principle of the concept of the razor of Hokam? And I would also like an example from the Talmud, the Mishnah, the Halacha, or something. Which contains the principle of the razor of Hokam without its conceptualization of course. And is this similar to what Maimonides wrote: A man should never teach his student the short way?

I understand that according to Hokam's explanation. It is better for us to choose the short explanation, but not necessarily the correct one. The explanation of the industrialized product over the natural one. Shows us how far from nature this product is. Even though it is, egg salad or carrot salad, or chicken salad. All of these are as far from nature as the East and the West, even though they have a little bit of nature in them.