The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything

[loveboof]

Bad grammar? You must be daft. Say what you will about me: call me a genius, say that I am freakishly intelligent, or what have you. Call me a malformed freak of nature with ungodly high IQ. But one thing that makes no sense whatsoever is to say that I have bad grammar.

"[L]eniency with the Catholic Church"? When did this occur? You cite that as an example of "many contradictions" I have supposedly engaged in, thereby demonstrating that you do not know what the word "contradiction" means.

In actual fact, I rebuke all the major churches in my article.

Your problem is apparently that you have not read far enough into my article, otherwise you ought to see how silly your above statements are.

Regarding academia, I respect and have learned from many genuine academicians. I never said nor implied that all of academia is corrupt. You're letting your feavered imagination run wild. Obviously you've never studied economics, and hence don't know what a tendecy is in the sense of incentive. It doesn't mean that all actors will choose that course, it merely means that there are benefits for doing so and costs for not doing so, and hence that the behavior so incentivized will become more prevalent, ceteris paribus.

We all make mistakes; nobody's perfect.

(I took the liberty of pointing out a few spelling mistakes too)

[GoddessAthena85]

I <3 this video it's worth the watch if you're a realist

[loveboof]

I <3 this video it's worth the watch if you're a realist

I quite enjoyed that! Thanks

[GoddessAthena85]

I quite enjoyed that! Thanks

thank you for watching.

[Jamie Michelle]

Part II
The section of Jamie’s paper that deals with the social, ethical, economic
and political implications of the Omega Point cosmology interprets the whole of human history as the act of a Christian God whose plan has been laid out in the Bible, the New Testament and the Book of Revelation in particular.

I have read Jamie’s paper, and I would like to say something positive about it, but the core arguments and the interpretation of secondary literature contain no merit. There is no original research in this paper, ...

Actually, most of my "Physics of God" article is original research, such as virtually all of the many congruities that I show between the New Testament and the Omega Point cosmology, such as on the asiety of God, and on the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology.

So you are here shown to be a liar. Obviously you feel the need to lie because your position is wrong. The thing which you should do is change your false position in order to make it conform to reality. That way you will no longer need to lie.

... there are numerous errors of fact, and distortions of historical truth, but above all, for someone who claims to be a Born Again Christian, there is an arrogance and disregard for non-Christian cultures that undermines a key value in Christianity to love one’s neighbour as oneself.

Your above claims are the logical fallacy of ipse dixit. Moreover, they are also false.

It would be a tedious exercise to go though the paper to point out all of its errors and distortions. I have also not responded to the earlier comments to the first paper now that it has been replaced.

1) Consider Jamie’s responses to matters of life and death:
The answer as to why anything exists as opposed to nothingness is that existence is mathematics, i.e., logic. Only this and nothing more. (p37-thirty-eight).

This explanation is then undermined completely by the numerous references that are made to the narrative of Jesus’s life in the Gospels, and her own insistence that only Christians whose belief and behaviour are pure and based on the teachings of Jesus can attain eternal life. No reference to mathematics at all.

Hi, Stavros. Your reading comprehension is extremely low, such as to be functionally illiterate. That the universe is mathematics is simply an unavoidable consequence of the Bekenstein Bound, which itself is required by the known laws of physics. And I even have an appendix on the Bekenstein Bound. So your above claim is not only nonsensical, but also nihil ad rem.

For that appendix, See App. A: "The Bekenstein Bound" 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), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysic...ryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://webcitation.org/6Abfap2bp

And now consider Jamie’s response to the hypothesis that there is no meaning to life:

If it could be definitely proved that God and eternal life do not exist, then the only rational course would be to commit suicide. The reason for this is because even if one is presently enjoying one’s life, tragedy and horrific pain can strike at almost any time, quite apart from how one lives one’s life. Since one can have no real control over whether one ends up in a situation of horrific pain, the only rational course if God and eternal life do not exist would be to commit a painless suicide. Since in such a hypothetical scenario one’s eternal death is certain anyway, one might as well get there in a manner which ensures the least pain. (p54).

Suicide as an option for those who reject Christ the Saviour is to me a perversion of Christ’s message. Sadly, this intolerance of other people’s views is common among doctrinal Christians who in reality are unable to love their neighbour, regardless of what the neighbour thinks or believes –I can’t imagine a real Christian recommending suicide to their neighbour.

Again, Stavros, you're not comprehending what you're reading. It's long been known that if God and immortality do not exist then existence is dysteleological. I'm not the first to have pointed out this basic fact.

You're also putting words into my mouth that I never said. You obviously have a yen for lying and misrepresenting other poeple's views. This is because your position is false. If your position were correct, you would not feel the need to lie.

2) The negative view of the Christian Church is amplified through its association with government because all government is a wicked and violent conspiracy against Jesus:

"The negative view of the Christian Church"? In later posts you accuse me of being a papist apologist. Not only can you not comprehend my article, but you also can't remember your own postings.

Government is a massive death-cult which requires gargantuan levels of human sacrifice. The bloody human sacrifice is still regarded by mankind as the most sacred of ritual, instead of being viewed as the depraved and ghoulish institution it is. The human-sacrifice orgies in which throngs of lamentably deceived people kill and get killed so that a relative handful of the most rich and powerful can become even more rich and powerful are made holy by the secular priesthood of power which officiates the state’s bloodstained pantheon that sits atop a mountain of rotting human corpses. Truth is the most hated thing in the world (p 56).

There is no room here for political theory, no room for any sense of the way in which government has changed over time, no room for an argument about what the meaning of sacrifice might be, and, critically, why human societies and their governments have actually striven to avoid human sacrifice. Why for example, did Japan sue for peace in 1945 when the opportunity to slaughter another million was available?

Actually, that quote of me is based upon veridical political theory. 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. Reprinted in a collection of some of Rothbard's articles, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays (Washington, D.C.: Libertarian Review Press, 1974). http://www.mises.org/easaran/chap3.asp , http://www.mises.org/books/egalitarianism.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/5ve3r05ti

Murray N. Rothbard, "Defense Services on the Free Market", Chapter 1 from Power and Market: Government and the Economy (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; originally published 1970). http://www.webcitation.org/5ve3w5w9a , ftp://myebooks.dyndns.org/computers/...y%20(1970).pdf , http://flashmirrors.com/files/otempz...and-Market.pdf

Prof. Hans-Hermann Hoppe, "The Private Production of Defense", Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Winter 1998-1999), pp. 27-52. http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_2.pdf , http://www.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. http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/9_1/9_1_2.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/5ve485kNf

Prof. David D. Friedman, "Police, Courts, and Laws--On the Market", Chapter 29 from The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism (La Salle, Ill.: Open Court Publishing Co., 1989; originally published 1971). http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libert...hapter_29.html , http://www.webcitation.org/5ve4A6KFZ

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, N.Y.: New York University Press, 1998; originally published 1982). http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/ethics.asp , http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/5ve4GO9l5

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.: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1995). http://www.mises.org/esandtam.asp , http://mises.org/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, "Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics", in Mary Sennholz (editor), On Freedom and Free Enterprise: The Economics of Free Enterprise (Princeton, N.J.: D. Van Nostrand, 1956), pp. 224-262. Reprinted in Murray N. Rothbard, The Logic of Action One: Method, Money, and the Austrian School (London, U.K.: Edward Elgar, 1997), pp. 211-255. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/toward.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/5ve4WQnYm

Murray N. Rothbard, Man, Economy, and State (Auburn, Ala.: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, second edition, 2004; originally published 1962). http://www.mises.org/rothbard/mes.asp , http://www.mises.org/books/mespm.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/5v3cOaaAG

Murray N. Rothbard, Power and Market: Government and the Economy (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc., 1977; originally published 1970). http://www.webcitation.org/5ve3w5w9a , ftp://myebooks.dyndns.org/computers/...y%20(1970).pdf , http://flashmirrors.com/files/otempz...and-Market.pdf

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.: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, fifth edition, 2000; originally published 1963). http://www.mises.org/rothbard/agd.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/5v3cWFPsd

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), December 4, 2011 (originally published December 19, 2001), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 , http://theophysics.host56.com/anarchist-jesus.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw

And see 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), December 15, 2011, doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1972733 , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redfor...rtarianism.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/63xyCLjLm

Jamie has no interest in any faith other than Christianity, all other faiths are either dismissed as irrelevant, or in the case of Judaism, presented as essentially pagan religions that came ‘too soon’ for the truth of Christ, even though Christ was a Jew. This intolerance of other faiths is a denial of the Christian idea that one should love one’s neighbour as oneself, regardless of that person’s belief. It also trashes thousands of years of culture and civilisation which according to Jamie was created by the same God that created her. Not a democratic view of other cultures.

Again, Stavros, you're lying by putting words into my mouth that I never said. This is because your position is false. If your position were correct, you would not feel the need to lie.

The claim that:
Not only are all governments inherently terroristic, but they are by far the largest and most murderous terrorist organizations in existence. Just within the last century governments butchered over 200 million people, almost all of them innocent noncombatants (p65)...

Ignores the devastation caused by the Plague or ‘Black Death’ in Europe and Asia, by Influenza, Malaria, Measles and Smallpox and Meningitis all over the world; yet not only have flies, fleas and mosquitoes caused vast deaths, there is no discussion of the role played by nature in ‘God’s Plan’, perhaps because Jamie thinks it unimportant. It matters because Jamie believes in Intelligent Design, and should therefore at least offer an explanation for God’s role as the slayer of billions. Presumably nothing happens by accident –tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, epidemics: these must all be acts of God, for what else can they be in Jamie’s scheme of things?

Since when were diseases and natural disasters "terrorist organizations"? Your responses are schizophrenic and totally nihil ad rem. Although that's a consqeuence of not comprehending what you read, so instead you simply reply to bizarre phantasms of your own mind.

And I do address the problem of evil in Sec. 7.4.1: "The Problem of Evil" 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), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysic...ryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://webcitation.org/6Abfap2bp

3) An inability to analyse historical events.
Jamie gets even deeper into the mire when attempting to depict the duplicity of state terrorism using ‘false-flag’ operations to start wars –the Reichstag Fire (1933) and the attacks on German units on the Polish border in 1939; Pearl Harbour in 1941, and the Gulf of Tonkin incident in Vietnam in 1964. The problem with these accounts is that Jamie does not know how to analyse historical events. A common mistake made by high school students is to mistake an event for a cause –the false-flag events Jamie draws attention to may have been the events that sparked war, but the cause lay somewhere else –the need for the Nazi’s to eliminate opposition parties in the Reichstag; Germany’s belief that it could not survive unless it were the dominant state in Europe; the USA’s determination to prevent Communism from taking root in South-east Asia. FH Hinsley discussed the difference between ‘occasions’ and ‘causes’ in history in Power and the Pursuit of Peace (1961), and is still worth reading as a guide to historical methods.

You here admit that the US government did engage in the false-flag terrorism events that I detail in my "Physics of God" article, but your position is that wasn't the cause of the wars because there were underlying reasons why the US government staged said mendacious terrorist attacks.

You here again show your inability to comprehend what you read. My point in bringing up these government false-flag terrorist attacks is simply to show that governments engage in false-flag terrorist attacks, and in this I accomplished my goal. Your inability to comprehend what you read causes you to read into texts phantasms of your own mind, which you then proceed to attempt to rebut. Yet your rebuttals are nihil ad rem as they don't have anything to do with what I wrote.

The inability to understand historical events is evident in the depiction of secretive societies such as the Illuminati, the Freemasons and the Bilderberg Group as leading actors in the conspiracy of the Beast at war with Jesus. The ‘Rothschilds’ are trotted out as the manipulators of power behind the thrones, although Jamie claims

Again, you have an inability to comprehend what you read. I specifically reject the Illuminati as playing any role in the globalist oligarchy's self-termed New World Order world government, world religion and depopulation agenda. For that, see p. 94 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), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1974708 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysic...ryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://webcitation.org/6Abfap2bp

…the current head Rothschilds are Jewish by ancestry only, not by religion or culture: as given the pagan, neo-Egyptian occult symbolism of the Israeli Supreme Court building built by the Rothschilds the Rothschilds obviously hold Jewish religion and culture in contemptuous mockery (p91)

To confirm that the modern state of Israel is integral to the creation of the beast’s one world government, Jamie quotes Israel’s first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, but out of context in order to promote her point. Thus Jamie claims

David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, stated in a 1962 article for Look magazine that this court in Jerusalem would become “the Supreme Court of Mankind”…(p92)

In fact, in 1962 Ben-Gurion was responding to a common page-filler used by newspapers and journals, and asked to predict what the world would be like in 25 years time, the brief article is here;

"The image of the world in 1987 as traced in my imagination: the Cold War will be a thing of the past. Internal pressure of the constantly growing intelligentsia in Russia for more freedom and the pressure of the masses for raising their living standards may lead to a gradual democratization of the Soviet Union. On the other hand, the increasing influence of the workers and farmers, and rising political importance of men of science, may transform the United States into a welfare state with a planned economy. Western and Eastern Europe will become a federation of autonomous states having a Socialist and democratic regime. With the exception of the USSR as a federated Eurasian state, all other continents will become united in a world alliance, at whose disposal will be an international police force. All armies will be abolished, and there will be no more wars. In Jerusalem, the United Nations (a truly United Nations) will build a shrine of the Prophets to serve the federated union of all continents; this will be the scene of the Supreme Court of Mankind, to settle all controversies among the federated continents, as prophesied by Isaiah. Higher education will be the right of every person in the world. A pill to prevent pregnanacy will slow down the explosive natural increase in China and India. And by 1987, the average life-span of man will reach 100 years."
http://theinfounderground.com/forum/...hp?f=21&t=1641

Again, you have an inability to comprehend what you read, Stavros. Not only is my quote in-context and accurate, but I also link to the very image of the article that I cite so that anyone can read it for themselves. You don't say above that there was anything specifically wrong with my quote of Ben-Gurion, you simply say that what Ben-Gurion said doesn't really count because it was "page-filler". In other words, everything I said about Ben-Gurion is true and accurate, but I'm in the wrong because you somehow clairvoyantly know that Ben-Gurion didn't really mean it and hence that it shouldn't count.

4) Jamie attacks her Inspiration
On page 96 she writes:
The great tyrannies of the 20th century were first and foremost an attempt to abolish Christianity. The reason for this governmental antagonism against Christianity is the same reason this temperament is so prevalent in current academia. Both academia and the corporate media in our present day are grafted to the hip of the state, and the natural tendency of the state is to tolerate no God before it.

Does this also apply to Prof. Frank Tipler of Tulane University? Jamie’s paper is rooted in the belief that Tipler has proven the existence of God. But he has tenure on the hip of the Beast.

Again, Stavros, you have an inability to comprehend what you read. This causes you to fill in the blanks of your understanding with phantasms of your own mind. You repeatedly attribute to me positions that I have never taken nor ever even impied.

You remind me of what it's been like to attempt to have conversations with schizophrenic people. Your responses to my article are off the wall and nihil ad rem. For the most part they have nothing to do with anything I actually wrote, but are simply replies to your own imaginings. Even when you provide a direct quote of me you are unable to understand the quote you have provided and then proceed to just make up bizarre responses that have nothing to do with what I said.

I never said nor so much as even implied that all academics have completely absorbed the state's inculcation.

I could go on and on, but it just gets more embarrassing. Arguing in a footnote that Karl Marx did not invent the concepts of class and class struggle –something every sociology undergraduate has known for years, Jamie (n223, ninety-eigt) goes on to give ‘early examples’ of class struggle but they are all references to the books of the Bible, and I couldn’t find any that referred to class or class struggle.

That's hardly surprising, Stavros, since you are unable to comprehend what you read. But it just so happens that I've written an article on this very subject. On the matter of politics in relation to Christianity, 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), December 4, 2011 (originally published December 19, 2001), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 , http://theophysics.host56.com/anarchist-jesus.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw

5) Beheading is the natural form of execution for the Beast One-World Government, but it will end in tears for the anti-Christ:
Of course, the heads of all the innocent people beheaded for their witness of Jesus Christ and their refusal to accept the Mark of the Beast, if they were to be cryogenically stored as part of the world government’s program into researching mind-uploading, would be nicely preserved and available for technological resurrection if the world government were deposed, as Revelation says it indeed will be. Such people—the meek—would reign on Earth and go on colonize space, never to die again. Their minds will be immortal minds with vastly more computational resources than current human minds, and hence they could create any reality they could conceive via computer simulation. That is, they would live in literal heaven, i.e., paradise (p106-107).

Destined for colonial rule, the world is not enough for superhumans. If there are ‘alien beings’ on the new planets the new superhumans colonise, will they be exterminated if they refuse to accept the message of Christ?

This is an excellent example of how you are unable to comprehend what you read, Stavros, whereupon you proceed to eject some some detritus of your mind in an attempt to fill in the blanks of your incomprehension.

My "Physics of God" article repeatedly addresses the issue of ethics. In regards to what is actually in my article on said topic, your above statement is utterly bizarre. But you're never one to let facts get in the way of spewing forth the phantasms of your own mind.

6) Are we really human, if we are evolving into computers? Last word to Jamie:

Left to their own devices, the Sun will eventually move off the main sequence (main sequence stars use hydrogen in their cores as their fuel by fusing it into helium via nuclear fusion) and become a red giant; in the process, in approximately 7.6 billion years from now the Earth will be engulfed by the Sun and incinerated. Although before this destruction can take place, the future immortal beings will dismantle the Earth and convert its mass into computing machines, upon which the Earth’s biosphere will be preserved through simulation. However, during the eventual collapse phase of the universe, the temperature of the universe will diverge to infinity. The matter of the universe will eventually become hot plasma. As the temperature continues to increase, it will subsequently become too hot for the atomic elements to exist, at which point information processing and storage will have to be encoded via traveling waves and standing waves, eventually using using elementary particles to directly compute on, with the universe itself acting as the container to enclose the waves. The matter which now makes up the Earth will eventually be ionized into plasma, but by then life will have gained control over all matter in the universe and converted it into superintelligent computers (p112).

For much more on the above, see my following article on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof of God's existence according to the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE):

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 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysic...ryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://webcitation.org/6Abfap2bp

[Jamie Michelle]

We all make mistakes; nobody's perfect. :)

(I took the liberty of pointing out a few spelling mistakes too)

There is no bad grammar in your example. But then, your posts are replete with horrendous grammar, so it's not as if you even know what good grammar is.

Because I'm not perfect, I do sometimes commit typos, as do even the best writers.

[trish]

Commit a typo, or make a typo?

[loveboof]

There is no bad grammar in your example. But then, your posts are replete with horrendous grammar, so it's not as if you even know what good grammar is.

Because I'm not perfect, I do sometimes commit typos, as do even the best writers.

Spelling 'fevered' with an A is not a typo. It is a mistake though, which was exactly what I said. We all make mistakes.

Therefore the observation that I have made mistakes is absurdly redundant in response to my comment.

(However, it is refreshing to hear you acknowledge that you are fallible. Who knew?! You are not always right after all...)

[Jamie Michelle]

I offer you your own texts:

Pope and Church Good
The originator of the Big Bang theory was Roman Catholic priest and physicist Prof. Georges Lemaître in 1927;56 and it was enthusiastically endorsed by Pope Pius XII in 1951, long before the scientific community finally came to accept it. Indeed, Lemaître relates that when he spoke with Albert Einstein regarding his Primaeval Atom Hypothesis, Einstein’s response to it was “Non, pas cela, cela suggère trop la création” (“No, not this—this too much suggests the creation”).
P29

Christian Religious Orders Good
It was the Christian religious orders which preserved and advanced European civilization through the tumultuous centuries of the Barbarian Invasions (ca. 300–900). With-out this salvatory and ameliorative role of the Christian church, there would be no Western civilization to speak of.
Note 72 p33-34

Church Not So Good
Unfortunately, the inversion of that organization popularly calling itself the Christian church occurred with the pagan Roman government’s takeover of said group under Constantine I, himself a lifelong pagan, bloodthirsty tyrant, and unrepentant murderer of his eldest son Crispus and his wife Fausta, to say nothing of all the plebeians he murdered. Since that time, the organizations commonly calling themselves “Christian” have been hostilely opposed to actually applying Jesus Christ’s teachings, since said teachings are incompatible with government and its frequent activities, e.g., taxes, war, the inversion of genuine moral understanding, the sowing of needless discord and strife among the populace (i.e., divide et impera), etc
P48-49

Churches Verily Not Good
However, in opposition to the Messiah’s teachings, all the governments of the world instill in their subjects fear and hatred of others, not only between the subjects of different governments but also among their own subjects. And regrettably, institutions calling themselves Christian churches often act as propaganda-founts of the government while vehemently rejecting Christ’s teachings, thereby worshiping the false god of government instead of worshiping God.
P55

Academics Persecute
Natural science as a discipline in the modern sense didn’t exist before the Scientific Revolution. The Scientific Revolution began with the publication of De revolutionibus orbium coelestium by clergyman Nicolaus Copernicus in 1543. Before then, what existed in the Western intellectual world (going all the way back to the ancient Greeks) was Aristotelianism, which maintained the verity of geocentrism predicated on philosophical premises. This lead to the persecution of Galileo Galilei, which was demanded by the Aristotelian academics of the time in order to protect their bailiwick; the pope and several of the churchmen were quite enthusiastic about Galileo’s observations confirming heliocentrism, but caved-in to the demands of the Aristotelian academics.
P33-34

Academics Grafted to the Hip of the State, therefore BAD
The great tyrannies of the 20th century were first and foremost an attempt to abolish Christianity. The reason for this governmental antagonism against Christianity is the same reason this temperament is so prevalent in current academia. Both academia and the corporate media in our present day are grafted to the hip of the state, and the natural tendency of the state is to tolerate no God before it.
P96

Hi, Stavros. You have an inability to comprehend what you read. This causes you to invoke phatasms of your own mind in order to fill in the blanks of your own lack of understanding.

My position, as is quite clear in my "Physics of God" article, is that individuals can be either good or bad, or mixtures of good or bad, depending on their own actions. Institutions can also be good or bad, or mixtures of good or bad. Some institutions are inherently evil, such as the ancient institutions of human sacrifice, slavery and government. Such institutions are evil by their very nature, and hence cannot be reformed; they can only be abolished.

In my aforesaid article, I also repeatedly make the distinction between what people call a thing as opposed to the actual thing itself. Just because people call themselves something does not mean that they are that something.

But such subtleties completely go over your head.

For more on the above, see my following article on physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point cosmology, which is a proof of God's existence according to the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics), and the Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity/Standard Model Theory of Everything (TOE):

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 , http://archive.org/details/ThePhysic...ryOfEverything , http://scribd.com/doc/79273334 , http://webcitation.org/6Abfap2bp

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), December 4, 2011 (originally published December 19, 2001), doi:10.2139/ssrn.1337761. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761 , http://theophysics.host56.com/anarchist-jesus.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/66AIz2rJw

And see 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), December 15, 2011, doi:10.2139/ssrn.1972733. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1972733 , http://theophysics.host56.com/Redfor...rtarianism.pdf , http://www.webcitation.org/63xyCLjLm

[Jamie Michelle]

Spelling 'fevered' with an A is not a typo. It is a mistake though, which was exactly what I said. We all make mistakes.

Therefore the observation that I have made mistakes is absurdly redundant in response to my comment.

There's a difference between making a typo and doing what you do. I have looked over your posting history and your grammar is consistently horrendous. This explains why you wrongly thought I made a mistake on grammar in the example that you gave, since you don't actually know what good grammar is.

As I indicated previously, I have genius-level writing skills. But that's because I have an IQ that is genius-level (according to the researchers at the University of Texas at Austin who conducted my IQ tests). That doesn't mean I never make mistakes in writing, but it does mean that my writing level is exceedingly high.