Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35
  1. #11
    Senior Member Platinum Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    8,464

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    [QUOTE=Jamie Michelle;1842611]

    Christ is no socialist. Jesus preached complete pacifism, which excludes the possibility of government, i.e., a state. For the details on that, see my following article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable anarchism of Jesus Christ's teachings as recorded in the New Testament (in addition to analyzing their context in relation to his actions, to the Tanakh, and to his apostles). It is logically complete on this subject, in the sense of its apodixis.

    As usual, I cannot agree with this, and though we have probably exchanged views on this when I took your ideas apart a few years ago, again you simply ignore the close connections between Christianity and Socialism, not just in the UK but across Europe. When you described Jesus as an 'anarchist' you really mean 'Libertarian' because of your hostility to government and regulation, but that is irrelevant to the moral claims made by Christians for whom socialism was the expression of what it viewed as the 'Brotherhood of Man', and the rejection of key elements of capitalism such as greed, exploitation, and the opposite of what Christian Socialists believed in: 'fair shares', or the simple idea that the people that make wealth should profit from it through an equitable distribution of its benefits. The long tradition in the UK of the link between Christian faith and social justice was dealt with in the 1920s by RH Tawney in the now sadly neglected study Religion and The Rise of Capitalism, where he says:
    A society which reverences the attainment of riches as the supreme felicity will naturally be disposed to regard the poor as damned in the next world, if only to justify itself for making their life a hell in this
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._H._Tawney

    You can also read this brief overview of the links between Christianity and socialism in the UK
    http://www.victorianweb.org/victoria...socialism.html
    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/christian-socialism-in-british-politics/

    The Omega Point is omniscient, having an infinite amount of information and knowing all that is logically possible to be known; it is omnipotent, having an infinite amount of energy and power; and it is omnipresent, consisting of all that exists. These three properties are the traditional quidditative definitions (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God.

    There is no such thing as an Omega Point, no scientific proof of the existence of God, and you cannot claim that a 'quiddative definition' is the same as an 'haeccite' definition as the two are opposed to each other.

    The Omega Point final singularity is a different aspect of the Big Bang initial singularity, i.e., the first cause, a definition of God held by all the Abrahamic religions. As well, as Stephen Hawking proved, the singularity is not in spacetime, but rather is the boundary of space and time.

    Hawking did not prove, but asserted the initial singularity as a concept to compensate for the simple fact that science cannot explain what existed before the 'Big Bang'. There is no proof available that a singularity ever existed, or that it should be the 'logical end-point' of the process initiated by the Big Bang.

    So the Omega Point is transcendent to, yet immanent in, space and time. Because the cosmological singularity exists outside of space and time, it is eternal, as time has no application to it.

    Does this gobbledegook have any meaning? In one sentence to claim that something exists outside time and is 'eternal' as 'time has no application to it'??

    Miracles are allowed by the known laws of physics using baryon annihilation, and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling...

    There is no such thing as a miracle, what people regard as a miracle can always be explained by science as natural phenomena, or, as in the case of Jesus 'walking on water' either never happened or was a mirage, just as vinegar was not transformed into wine, if you can't see the symbolism in that then much of the Gospels will pass you by. Jesus was just a man, if his disciples declared him the Son of the God, well, I read once that Eric Clapton is God, but few people believed it, least of all Eric Clapton. And if Jesus said he was the Son of God, he meant: as are we all. It is not that hard to grasp the meaning in words.

    Additionally, the cosmological singularity consists of a three-aspect structure: the final singularity (i.e., the Omega Point), the all-presents singularity (which exists at the boundary of the multiverse), and the initial singularity (i.e., the beginning of the Big Bang). These three distinct aspects which perform different physical functions in bringing about and sustaining existence are actually one singularity which connects the entirety of the multiverse.
    Christian theology is therefore preferentially selected by the known laws of physics due to the fundamentally triune structure of the cosmological singularity (which, again, has all the haecceities claimed for God in the major religions), which is deselective of all other major religions.


    This is complete nonsense and does not resolve the trinity as Christians themselves express it, nothing to do with Omega Points or the 'Multiverse' but 'God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost'. If these are all in effect the same thing, there is no trinity.

    Muhammad was a warlord who converted people by force.

    This is simple ignorance. Muhammad for most of his life was an itinerant trader and agent for his first wife, the Merchant Khadija, before he turned to preaching. Muhammad resisted warfare until the last 10 years of his life, and even when waging war was a defence of the faith rather than the propagation of it-
    Permission to fight is given to those who are fought against because they have been wronged -truly Allah has the power to come to their support- those who were expelled from their homes without any right, merely for saying, 'Our Lord is Allah'.

    Muhammad was not a pacifist -his views on war, like his views on many things he took from Judaism- but sought in most cases to avoid violence not foment it. If his followers don't take Muhammad as their example, that is not news. Few people who claim to follow the teachings of Jesus practice do so, if like George W. Bush did regime change in Iraq would never have happened.

    -Because there can be no compulsion in religion. Muhammad believed that one could only become a Muslim as an act of sincere faith, to choose Islam out of force is to create the kind of hypocrite who spreads division within the faith.


    1 out of 1 members liked this post.
    Last edited by Stavros; 06-21-2018 at 09:11 AM.

  2. #12
    Veteran Poster Jamie Michelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    West-Coast Central Florida
    Posts
    715

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    Quote Originally Posted by buttslinger View Post
    I need a clarification, Jamie, would you say God existed before the big bang explosion exactly as He exists today?
    I suppose if we feel the gravity of the earth, the heat from the sun, and the phases of the moon, maybe whatever makes us up still senses that seed of the universe, the blueprint of everything contained in our blueprint.
    But I can't see God setting up shop sometime 60 billion years ago. How would you create a creator of all things?
    Hi, Buttslinger. Science in the form of physics has identified the First Cause, i.e., the Big Bang initial singularity. The First Cause is one of the ancient definitions of God. The Big Bang initial singularity is one aspect of God's eternal, infinite, triune structure. The other two aspects of said being the all-presents singularity, which exists at all times at the edge of the multiverse; and the Omega Point final singularity. Together these are the First Cause, the Sustaining Cause, and the Final Cause. Entropy (i.e., informational complexity) starts at zero at the Big Bang initial singularity and becomes infinite at the Omega Point final singularity.

    What this (as in, our entire existence) is all about is that existence is nothing more than pure mathematics playing itself out. And mathematics is infinite.

    The reason the universe exists is because everything comes from nothing, mathematically and logically speaking (which is to say, foundationally speaking, i.e., fundamentally speaking). Thus:

    0+0 = 0

    -1+1 = 0

    -2+2 = 0

    -3+3 = 0

    -4+4 = 0

    And so on, literally ad infinitum.

    That is to say, we exist within the nothingness. Or rather, that the nothingness is everythingness, mathematically and logically speaking.

    The above is actually just the traditional Christian theological doctrine of creatio ex nihilo, i.e., creation from nothing. That is to say, the traditional Christian theological position of creatio ex nihilo maintains that God did not create the universe from preexisting material, or from His own substance (i.e., the Divine Substance), but rather that the material which makes up the universe came into being with the universe, i.e., that it came into being literally from nothing. Hence: creatio ex nihilo, i.e., creation from nothing.

    For much more on this matter, see my following article, which details physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE) correctly describing and unifying all the forces in physics. The Omega Point cosmology demonstrates that the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point: the final cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity having all the unique properties traditionally claimed for God, and of which is a different aspect of the Big Bang initial singularity, i.e., the first cause. The Omega Point cosmology has been published and extensively peer-reviewed in leading physics journals.

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , http://sites.google.com/site/physico...ics-of-God.pdf .

    Additionally, in the below resource are different sections which contain some helpful notes and commentary by me pertaining to multimedia wherein Prof. Tipler explains the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE.

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...ro/KQWt4KcpMVo , http://archive.is/a04w9 .



    Boys will be girls.

    Author (under a nom de plume) of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Dec. 4, 2011, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 ; Theophysics, http://theophysics.host56.com .

  3. #13
    Veteran Poster Jamie Michelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    West-Coast Central Florida
    Posts
    715

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    Quote Originally Posted by Stavros View Post
    Christ is no socialist. Jesus preached complete pacifism, which excludes the possibility of government, i.e., a state. For the details on that, see my following article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable anarchism of Jesus Christ's teachings as recorded in the New Testament (in addition to analyzing their context in relation to his actions, to the Tanakh, and to his apostles). It is logically complete on this subject, in the sense of its apodixis.

    As usual, I cannot agree with this, and though we have probably exchanged views on this when I took your ideas apart a few years ago, again you simply ignore the close connections between Christianity and Socialism, not just in the UK but across Europe. When you described Jesus as an 'anarchist' you really mean 'Libertarian' because of your hostility to government and regulation, but that is irrelevant to the moral claims made by Christians for whom socialism was the expression of what it viewed as the 'Brotherhood of Man', and the rejection of key elements of capitalism such as greed, exploitation, and the opposite of what Christian Socialists believed in: 'fair shares', or the simple idea that the people that make wealth should profit from it through an equitable distribution of its benefits. The long tradition in the UK of the link between Christian faith and social justice was dealt with in the 1920s by RH Tawney in the now sadly neglected study Religion and The Rise of Capitalism, where he says:
    A society which reverences the attainment of riches as the supreme felicity will naturally be disposed to regard the poor as damned in the next world, if only to justify itself for making their life a hell in this
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._H._Tawney

    You can also read this brief overview of the links between Christianity and socialism in the UK
    http://www.victorianweb.org/victoria...socialism.html
    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpo...tish-politics/
    Socialism is defined as government ownership (whether de facto or de jure) over the means of production. Socialism is the most mass-murderous ideology to ever exist, both in its National Socialist (e.g., Nazi) and its International Socialist (i.e., Communist) varieties.

    Nor can this horror-show that is socialism be avoided, since the problem with socialism is government per se. Governments can only exist via the continual initiation of violence and threat thereof in order to maintain a coercive regional monopoly on ultimate control over the law (i.e., on the courts and police, etc.). This creates an unavoidable incentive-structure that rewards predation, since people are compelled by initiatory violence to be involved in the governmental system whether they want to be or not. That is, government is a species of rape: i.e., "The act of seizing and carrying away by force; violent seizure; robbery." (See Noah Porter [Ed.], Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language [Springfield, Mass.: G. & C. Merriam Company, 1913].)

    What makes socialism the most mass-murderous philosophy ever conceived is precisely because it puts all power into the most mass-murderous organization to ever exist, i.e., the state. The liberal solution is to disempower the state, rather than empowering it as the collectivists do.

    Below are vital articles concerning the nature of government, of liberty, and the free-market production of defense:

    * Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, "The Anatomy of the State", Rampart Journal of Individualist Thought, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Summer 1965), pp. 1-24, https://mises.org/system/tdf/rampart...&type=document , http://webcitation.org/6ZvAbaX8z , http://www.freezepage.com/1447053835DURFWXQOPM . Reprinted in a collection of some of Rothbard's articles, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays (Washington, DC: Libertarian Review Press, 1974), https://mises.org/sites/default/file...20Essays_2.pdf , http://webcitation.org/6XfwvbslB .

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Ch. 1: "Defense Services on the Free Market", pp. 1-9 in id., Power and Market: Government and the Economy (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; orig. pub. 1970), https://wayback.archive.org/web/2004...wer&market.pdf , http://webcitation.org/5ve3w5w9a , http://pdf-archive.com/2013/08/28/ro...and-market.pdf , http://www.freezepage.com/1447054194BCBULVTSAX .

    * Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, "The Private Production of Defense", Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Winter 1998-1999), pp. 27-52, https://mises.org/sites/default/files/14_1_2_0.pdf , http://webcitation.org/5ve41VasQ .

    * Hans-Hermann Hoppe, "Fallacies of the Public Goods Theory and the Production of Security", Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Winter 1989), pp. 27-46, https://mises.org/sites/default/files/9_1_2_0.pdf , http://webcitation.org/5ve485kNf .

    * Prof. David D. Friedman, Ch. 29: "Police, Courts, and Laws--on the Market", pp. 114-120 in id., The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism (La Salle, Ill.: Open Court Publishing Co., 1989; orig. pub. 1971), http://daviddfriedman.com/Libertaria...hapter_29.html , http://webcitation.org/5ve4A6KFZ , https://archive.is/I1mt4 .

    Concerning the ethics of human rights, the below book is the best book on the subject:

    * Murray N. Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty (New York, NY: New York University Press, 1998; orig. pub. 1982), https://wayback.archive.org/web/2013...ard/ethics.pdf , http://webcitation.org/5ve4GO9l5 , http://www.freezepage.com/1447054928ZHDVKQZWOU , http://megalodon.jp/2015-1109-1645-3...28ZHDVKQZWOU/0 .

    If one desires a solid grounding in economics then one can do no better than with the below texts:

    * Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Economic Science and the Austrian Method (Auburn, Ala.: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1995), https://mises.org/sites/default/file...20Method_3.pdf , https://wayback.archive.org/web/2014...books/esam.pdf , http://webcitation.org/63rQDYtj2 .

    The above small book by Prof. Hoppe doesn't delve into political theory, but only concerns the methodological basis of economics (i.e., the epistemology of economics). I would recommend that everyone read this short book *first* if they're at all interested in economics. There exists much confusion as to what economics is and what it is not. This book is truly great in elucidating the nature of economics and its epistemic basis. If one were to read no other texts on economics, then this ought to be the economic text that one reads. Plus it doesn't take all that long to read it.

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Ch. 17: "Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics", pp. 224-262 in Mary Sennholz (Ed.), On Freedom and Free Enterprise: Essays in Honor of Ludwig von Mises (Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1956), https://mises.org/sites/default/file...%20Mises_2.pdf , https://wayback.archive.org/web/2015...%20Mises_2.pdf , http://webcitation.org/6Xz9WebJ6 , http://www.freezepage.com/1447055623CLUDAZDSPR . Reprinted in Murray N. Rothbard, The Logic of Action One: Method, Money, and the Austrian School (London, UK: Edward Elgar, 1997), pp. 211-255.

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Man, Economy, and State (Auburn, Ala.: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2nd ed., 2004; orig. pub. 1962), https://mises.org/sites/default/file...20Market_2.pdf , http://webcitation.org/6Xfycj7zV .

    * Murray N. Rothbard, Power and Market: Government and the Economy (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; orig. pub. 1970), https://wayback.archive.org/web/2004...wer&market.pdf , http://webcitation.org/5ve3w5w9a , http://pdf-archive.com/2013/08/28/ro...and-market.pdf , http://www.freezepage.com/1447054194BCBULVTSAX .

    These texts ought to be read in the order listed above. I would also add to the above list the below book:

    * Murray N. Rothbard, America's Great Depression (Auburn, Ala.: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 5th ed., 2000; orig. pub. 1963), https://mises.org/sites/default/file...pression_3.pdf , http://webcitation.org/6Xfyn2oXY .

    The above book concerns how governments create depressions (i.e., panics; recessions) through credit expansion (i.e., fractional-reserve banking and/or fiat money).

    On the matter of politics in relation to God, see my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable anarchism of Jesus Christ's teachings as recorded in the New Testament (in addition to analyzing their context in relation to his actions, to the Tanakh, and to his apostles). It is logically complete on this subject, in the sense of its apodixis.

    * James Redford, "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 4, 2011 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2001), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 , https://archive.org/details/JesusIsAnAnarchist , http://theophysics.host56.com/anarchist-jesus.pdf , http://webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw .

    See also my below article, which demonstrates the logically unavoidable correctness of the anarcho-capitalist theory of human rights. It doesn't derive an "ought" from an "is"--rather, it derives an "ought" from an "ought": an "ought" everyone must necessarily presuppose in order to even begin to deny it.

    * James Redford, "Libertarian Anarchism Is Apodictically Correct", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Dec. 15, 2011, doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1972733 , https://archive.org/download/Liberta...rtarianism.pdf , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redfor...rtarianism.pdf , http://webcitation.org/63xyCLjLm .

    For how physics allows unlimited progress by civilizations--to literally infinite intelligence and power--see my following article on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof (i.e., mathematical theorem) of God's existence per the known laws of physics (viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE), which is also required by said known physical laws. The Omega Point cosmology has been published and extensively peer-reviewed in leading physics journals.

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redfor...ics-of-God.pdf , https://sites.google.com/site/physic...ics-of-God.pdf .

    Additionally, in the below resource are six sections which contain very informative videos of Prof. Tipler explaining the Omega Point cosmology and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model TOE. The seventh section therein contains an audio interview of Tipler. I also provide some helpful notes and commentary for some of these videos.

    * James Redford, "Video of Profs. Frank Tipler and Lawrence Krauss's Debate at Caltech: Can Physics Prove God and Christianity?", alt.sci.astro, Message-ID: jghev8tcbv02b6vn3uiq8jmelp7jijluqk@4ax.com , July 30, 2013, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...ro/KQWt4KcpMVo , https://archive.is/a04w9 , http://webcitation.org/6IUTAMEyS . The plain text of this post is available at: TXT, 42423 bytes, MD5: b199e867e42d54b2b8bf6adcb4127761, http://ge.tt/3lOTVbp , http://webcitation.org/6WGd90MBa , https://archive.is/cVRmc .

    The Omega Point is omniscient, having an infinite amount of information and knowing all that is logically possible to be known; it is omnipotent, having an infinite amount of energy and power; and it is omnipresent, consisting of all that exists. These three properties are the traditional quidditative definitions (i.e., haecceities) of God held by almost all of the world's leading religions. Hence, by definition, the Omega Point is God.

    There is no such thing as an Omega Point, no scientific proof of the existence of God, and you cannot claim that a 'quiddative definition' is the same as an 'haeccite' definition as the two are opposed to each other.
    If God does not exist, then we can just solve the poor-people's problems by eating the poor.

    As Noam Chomsky correctly observed, the so-called "New Atheists" are themselves quite religious. They worship a God, but their God is the state. (Not that Chomsky himself is guilty of state-worship in a number of areas, but nevertheless, despite his many faults, he does sometimes make penetrating observations.) Their objections to others' religions, such as Christianity, is simply nothing more than attempting to eliminate their competition. However, as Chomsky also astutely noted, the New Atheists' religion is by far the most bloody and murderous religion to ever exist. Eliminating God in the 20th century didn't make the governments more liberal; instead, it simply removed any higher notion of truth to which those governments were expected to abide. The state made itself God.

    The foregoing process which I describe is actually logically unavoidable. If God in the literal sense of the infinite sapient being does not exist, then all is permissible. Even if one can prove that, say, libertarianism is apodictically true in the same degree that 2+2 = 4 is true, so what? In the end, we're all dead anyway. The only thing that could give life any meaning beyond mere delusion is if God exists, since then an infinite computational state would exist, thereby allowing finite minds to endlessly grow in complexity toward infinite perfection (per the Quantum Recurrence Theorem). Only then would one's life-work avoid coming to naught. Only then would what one does now actually matter in the end.

    As it turns out, the universe is a machine that will diverge to infinite computing power.

    Further, God's existence is a mathematical theorem within standard physics. Standard physics is the known laws of physics, viz., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics. These aforestated known physical laws have been confirmed by every experiment conducted to date. Hence, the only way to avoid Prof. Tipler's Omega Point Theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

    Prof. Tipler's said Omega Point cosmology has been extensively peer-reviewed and published in a number of the world's leading physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional organization for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), the International Journal of Theoretical Physics (a journal that Nobel Prize in Physics winner Richard Feynman also published in), and Physics Letters, among other journals.

    For much more on Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology and the details on how it uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .

    The Omega Point final singularity is a different aspect of the Big Bang initial singularity, i.e., the first cause, a definition of God held by all the Abrahamic religions. As well, as Stephen Hawking proved, the singularity is not in spacetime, but rather is the boundary of space and time.

    Hawking did not prove, but asserted the initial singularity as a concept to compensate for the simple fact that science cannot explain what existed before the 'Big Bang'. There is no proof available that a singularity ever existed, or that it should be the 'logical end-point' of the process initiated by the Big Bang.
    Mathematical theorems (i.e., proofs) do exist within the field of physics, such as with the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems which proved that the Big Bang initial singularity necessarily exists per General Relativity and given attractive gravity. Likewise, the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory is a mathematical theorem if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are correct. General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have been confirmed by every experiment to date, and so the only way to avoid the Omega Point theory of quantum gravity is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

    Within the Omega Point Theorem, God's existence isn't an assumption, but rather a mathematically-unavoidable conclusion given the standard physics that have been empirically confirmed by every experiment conducted to date.

    For details on the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems, see Sec. 5: "The Big Bang", pp. 28 ff. of my following article:

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god , https://sites.google.com/site/physic...ics-of-God.pdf .

    So the Omega Point is transcendent to, yet immanent in, space and time. Because the cosmological singularity exists outside of space and time, it is eternal, as time has no application to it.

    Does this gobbledegook have any meaning? In one sentence to claim that something exists outside time and is 'eternal' as 'time has no application to it'??
    Apparently what you yourself are writing makes no sense to yourself, as you just said it: yes, "outside [of] time". Hence, time has no application to the Cosmological Singularity.

    Miracles are allowed by the known laws of physics using baryon annihilation, and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling...

    There is no such thing as a miracle, ...
    You're making an assumption which has never been proven. You're behaving extremely unscientifically.

    Yet on the contrary, miracles are perfectly allowed within standard physics. That is, via using baryon annihilation, and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling (which is allowed in the Standard Model of particle physics, as baryon number minus lepton number, B - L, is conserved) caused via the Principle of Least Action by the physical requirement that the Omega Point final cosmological singularity exists. If the miracles of Jesus Christ were necessary in order for the universe to evolve into the Omega Point, and if the known laws of physics are correct, then the probability of those miracles occurring is certain.

    ... what people regard as a miracle can always be explained by science as natural phenomena, or, as in the case of Jesus 'walking on water' either never happened or was a mirage, just as vinegar was not transformed into wine, if you can't see the symbolism in that then much of the Gospels will pass you by. Jesus was just a man, if his disciples declared him the Son of the God, well, I read once that Eric Clapton is God, but few people believed it, least of all Eric Clapton. And if Jesus said he was the Son of God, he meant: as are we all. It is not that hard to grasp the meaning in words.

    Additionally, the cosmological singularity consists of a three-aspect structure: the final singularity (i.e., the Omega Point), the all-presents singularity (which exists at the boundary of the multiverse), and the initial singularity (i.e., the beginning of the Big Bang). These three distinct aspects which perform different physical functions in bringing about and sustaining existence are actually one singularity which connects the entirety of the multiverse.
    Christian theology is therefore preferentially selected by the known laws of physics due to the fundamentally triune structure of the cosmological singularity (which, again, has all the haecceities claimed for God in the major religions), which is deselective of all other major religions.

    This is complete nonsense and does not resolve the trinity as Christians themselves express it, nothing to do with Omega Points or the 'Multiverse' but 'God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost'. If these are all in effect the same thing, there is no trinity.
    They are not the same thing, but rather different triune aspects of the Cosmological Singularity. For much more on that, and the details on how Prof. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology uniquely conforms to, and precisely matches, the cosmology described in the New Testament, see my following article, which also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology:

    * James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .

    Muhammad was a warlord who converted people by force.

    This is simple ignorance. Muhammad for most of his life was an itinerant trader and agent for his first wife, the Merchant Khadija, before he turned to preaching. Muhammad resisted warfare until the last 10 years of his life, and even when waging war was a defence of the faith rather than the propagation of it-
    Permission to fight is given to those who are fought against because they have been wronged -truly Allah has the power to come to their support- those who were expelled from their homes without any right, merely for saying, 'Our Lord is Allah'.

    Muhammad was not a pacifist -his views on war, like his views on many things he took from Judaism- but sought in most cases to avoid violence not foment it. If his followers don't take Muhammad as their example, that is not news. ...
    See:

    * "Myth: Muhammad was Oppossed to Forced Conversions", TheReligionOfPeace.com (TROP), https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/p...onversion.aspx , https://webcitation.org/70qGLkmPQ .

    ... Few people who claim to follow the teachings of Jesus practice do so, if like George W. Bush did regime change in Iraq would never have happened.
    George W. Bush is an elite, dark occultist, not a Christian even in his own mind.

    It is true that the highest members of the globalist oligarchy are Satanists. On the one hand, elite Satanism is an intelligence operation run by the Western governments in order to compromise politicians, businessmen and others in important control-sectors of society, thus making them controllable due to the dirt held on them. On the other hand, for the true believers, it functions as a justification for their psychopathic actions, as elite Satanism is a form of spiritual Social Darwinism: the more ruthless and cruel they are the more evolved they are spiritually, since they have advanced beyond such weak notions as pity and empathy which are held by the common masses, i.e., nothing is morally out of bounds for them, and indeed to take pleasure another's suffering--particularly pain which oneself has deliberately inflicted--is evidence of one's more enlightened nature, since one has what it takes to rule and dominate others.

    For those who are interested in extensive scholarly documentation regarding elite Satanism and its practice by the globalist oligarchy, see under the heading "The New World Order: Government's Attempt at Autoapotheosis" on pp. 87-98 of my following article, being sure to read the footnotes, since much of the information on this is contained within said footnotes:

    James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), Sept. 10, 2012 (orig. pub. Dec. 19, 2011), 186 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, https://archive.org/download/ThePhys...ics-of-God.pdf , https://purl.org/redford/physics-of-god .

    See also my following article on the Jaynesian gods of old:

    * James Redford, "Societal Sadomasochism", Daily Anarchist Forum, May 29, 2018, https://megalodon.jp/2018-0610-0734-...p?topic=3289.0 , https://archive.is/QalJT , https://web.archive.org/web/20180609...p?topic=3289.0 .

    -Because there can be no compulsion in religion. Muhammad believed that one could only become a Muslim as an act of sincere faith, to choose Islam out of force is to create the kind of hypocrite who spreads division within the faith.
    See:

    * "Myth: Muhammad was Oppossed to Forced Conversions", TheReligionOfPeace.com (TROP), https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/p...onversion.aspx , https://webcitation.org/70qGLkmPQ .



    Boys will be girls.

    Author (under a nom de plume) of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Dec. 4, 2011, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 ; Theophysics, http://theophysics.host56.com .

  4. #14
    Senior Member Silver Poster buttslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,444

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    Thanks Jamie, my path to God came from drawing as a kid, 5th grade.
    The path was a laser beam to God, He was hiding behind a small coin with Roman buildings on it. I knew it was trouble, but what can you do?
    I've tried to find a picture of this, but so far nothing.
    I looked into the Omega Point Theory before, while you can't be more precise and more clear than Math, it was lost on me. There's no Accounting for God.


    World Class Asshole

  5. #15
    Veteran Poster Jamie Michelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    West-Coast Central Florida
    Posts
    715

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie Michelle View Post
    Not that Chomsky himself is guilty of state-worship in a number of areas, ...
    Pardon me. That should read "Note that Chomsky himself is guilty of state-worship in a number of areas, ...".



    Boys will be girls.

    Author (under a nom de plume) of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Dec. 4, 2011, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 ; Theophysics, http://theophysics.host56.com .

  6. #16
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,032

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    Mathematical proofs are neither true nor false: they are either valid or invalid. If a proof is valid, the veracity of the proven proposition is no more certain than are the initial assumptions and hypothesis upon which the proof draws its inferences.

    Hawking, Penrose and Geroch hypothesize (in addition to the postulates of General Relativity) a number of fairly ad hoc energy conditions. Moreover, the applicability of General Relativity has been called into question on both the galactic scale (hence the appearance of a number of modified theories of gravity) and the Planck scale (which may invalidate the aforementioned singularity theorems).

    The existence of an Omega Point requires faith in even more spurious assumptions: not every cosmology admits an Omega Point (the currently accepted models based on dark energy generally do not).

    By the way, mathematicians use a somewhat colloquial language when discussing singularities. To say “a singularity exists” is shorthand for "the spacetime manifold is geodesically incomplete"; there’s hole, there’s something missing. Were God a singularity he’d be missing.


    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

  7. #17
    Senior Member Silver Poster buttslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,444

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    The God Jesus found wasn't found with Cosmology, God is always directly in front of you.
    If I were serious about getting closer to God I'd find a Teacher to keep me in line.
    I think they have some in FetLife.


    World Class Asshole

  8. #18
    Senior Member Platinum Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    8,464

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    [QUOTE=Jamie Michelle;1845064]

    Socialism is defined as government ownership (whether de facto or de jure) over the means of production. Socialism is the most mass-murderous ideology to ever exist, both in its National Socialist (e.g., Nazi) and its International Socialist (i.e., Communist) varieties.


    --But Socialism as an idea brings people together so that the can share what they produce, and distribute the goods that they need. There is no inherent need for government in a socialist society, and indeed, many socialists based their ideas on a non-governmental form of order shaped by values and morals derived from the life of Jesus, or from secular-rationalist ideas of what a good society should be.

    The arguments about mass murder and the lamentable examples of the 20th century do not excuse the crimes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao, but if you are going to get trapped in a numbers game you could set the allegations of 20-30-40-50-60-70-80-90 million deaths of that trio against the 100 million first nations of the Americas slaughtered by Christianity and Capitalism between say 1500-1900 either directly through murder or through disease and starvation.

    Lastly, because this is a well-worn and tedious point, Marx envisaged Communism as the condition that would emerge after the class struggles of the socialist transition, and be a stateless society, just as Orwell pointed out that socialism brings people together on the basis of mutual co-operation for the benefit of all, and that to claim that forcing people to work at the point of a gun is socialism is plain daft.
    https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/...munist-regimes

    If God does not exist, then we can just solve the poor-people's problems by eating the poor.
    --As someone who argues that free markets are the solution, why do you invoke God at all in economic arguments? Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard, Hans Hoppe and the other libertarian economists you recruit for your arguments were all atheists and would either laugh out loud at the assumed connection between Jesus and capitalism or maybe wonder what you have been smoking. And look again at Rand, who argues with devastating simplicity that the solution to poverty is not to eat the poor, but to kill them. Is this not where libertarian ideas fall onto your doormat after travelling from Auschwitz via the Gulag Archipelago? Whether God exists or does not exist makes no difference to the poor, but you might want to be more critical of capitalism, which creates poverty, for the benefit of a few rich people.

    You're making an assumption which has never been proven. You're behaving extremely unscientifically.
    Yet on the contrary, miracles are perfectly allowed within standard physics. That is, via using baryon annihilation, and its inverse, by way of electroweak quantum tunneling (which is allowed in the Standard Model of particle physics, as baryon number minus lepton number, B - L, is conserved) caused via the Principle of Least Action by the physical requirement that the Omega Point final cosmological singularity exists. If the miracles of Jesus Christ were necessary in order for the universe to evolve into the Omega Point, and if the known laws of physics are correct, then the probability of those miracles occurring is certain.

    --Arguing that there is a scientific necessity in miracles in fact misses the crucial point: they could only have taken place because Jesus was the 'Son of God' or 'God made flesh' in other words, it is precisely because the miracles of Jesus are beyond scientific explanation that they are real to his believers. You are not behaving scientifically, because to do so would expose Jesus as a fraud. How many electrotweaks does it take to transform water in wine, to make the blind see, the dead to rise up and walk?

    George W. Bush is an elite, dark occultist, not a Christian even in his own mind.
    --How do you know, did you ask him?

    It is true that the highest members of the globalist oligarchy are Satanists.
    --It is not true. And there is no evidence to show it, just as there is no such thing as Satan.


    1 out of 1 members liked this post.

  9. #19
    Veteran Poster Jamie Michelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    West-Coast Central Florida
    Posts
    715

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    Quote Originally Posted by buttslinger View Post
    Thanks Jamie, my path to God came from drawing as a kid, 5th grade.
    The path was a laser beam to God, He was hiding behind a small coin with Roman buildings on it. I knew it was trouble, but what can you do?
    I've tried to find a picture of this, but so far nothing.
    I looked into the Omega Point Theory before, while you can't be more precise and more clear than Math, it was lost on me. There's no Accounting for God.
    It sounds like an interesting picture, Buttslinger. I wouldn't mind seeing it if you ever come across it.


    1 out of 1 members liked this post.

    Boys will be girls.

    Author (under a nom de plume) of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Dec. 4, 2011, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 ; Theophysics, http://theophysics.host56.com .

  10. #20
    Veteran Poster Jamie Michelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    West-Coast Central Florida
    Posts
    715

    Default Re: Entheogenica Esoterica

    Quote Originally Posted by trish View Post
    Mathematical proofs are neither true nor false: they are either valid or invalid. If a proof is valid, the veracity of the proven proposition is no more certain than are the initial assumptions and hypothesis upon which the proof draws its inferences.

    Hawking, Penrose and Geroch hypothesize (in addition to the postulates of General Relativity) a number of fairly ad hoc energy conditions. Moreover, the applicability of General Relativity has been called into question on both the galactic scale (hence the appearance of a number of modified theories of gravity) and the Planck scale (which may invalidate the aforementioned singularity theorems).

    The existence of an Omega Point requires faith in even more spurious assumptions: not every cosmology admits an Omega Point (the currently accepted models based on dark energy generally do not).

    By the way, mathematicians use a somewhat colloquial language when discussing singularities. To say “a singularity exists” is shorthand for "the spacetime manifold is geodesically incomplete"; there’s hole, there’s something missing. Were God a singularity he’d be missing.
    A physical theorem is a physical theory, yet a mathematically-true one, given true premises. The field of physics does involve mathematical proofs of physical theories, i.e., physical theorems, such as the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems which proved that the Big Bang initial singularity necessarily exists per General Relativity and given attractive gravity. Likewise, the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory is a mathematical theorem if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are correct. General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have been confirmed by every experiment to date, and so the only way to avoid the Omega Point theory of quantum gravity is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, "one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem." (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)

    What the singularity means in this context is not a discontinuity--i.e., a hole--but rather where the output of the equations explode to literally infinity.

    Regarding the possibility that the energy condition of the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems won't hold at Planck scales: the cosmological singularity is actually more inevitable when Quantum Mechanics is taken into account. Due to Liouville's Theorem in complex analysis, it doesn't matter what form of physics one resorts to, as any physically-realistic cosmology (e.g., one capable of incorporating Quantum Mechanics, since the complex number field is intrinsic to the mathematical formulations of Quantum Mechanics) must begin at an initial singularity and end at a final singularity. (As Barrow and Tipler wrote, "Initial and final cosmological curvature singularities are required to avoid a universal action singularity." See John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, "Action principles in nature", Nature, Vol. 331, No. 6151 [Jan. 7, 1988], pp. 31-34; see also Frank J. Tipler, "The Structure of the Classical Cosmological Singularity", in Origin and Early History of the Universe: Proceedings of the 26th Liège International Astrophyscial Colloquium, July 1-4, 1986 [Cointe-Ougree, Belgium: Universite de Liege, Institut d'Astrophysique, 1987], pp. 339-359; "Discussion", pp. 360-361.)



    Boys will be girls.

    Author (under a nom de plume) of "Jesus Is an Anarchist", Dec. 4, 2011, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 ; Theophysics, http://theophysics.host56.com .

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •