Now, before we begin answering life’s toughest questions, let’s do a review of where we have gotten so far. This site and my first two books introduced you to that which the last generations have unwittingly hidden from you.
As I emphasized – yes, again – non-Jewish archaeology, non-Jewish science and the non-Jewish Law of Probability, non-Jewish historical documents, the unbroken chain back in thousands of families – proven by non-Jews, your DNA researched by non-Jews – all establish that you are a Jew and have been that for 3000 years.
You (or rather your great grandparents) followed identical practices for 3000 years and, significantly, the initiation of your religion was not a guilt-fest at a mountain with magic mushrooms, smoke machines, some mountebank and 600,000 extras in a desert outside Hollywood.
Exploring Disbelief Syndrome
We fully explored your ‘Disbelief Syndrome’, rationality, skepticism and the ‘super’-‘natural’.
You cannot believe because you personally did not witness Sinai or any modern apparition supporting it.
Fair enough – but no judge or jury has ever witnessed the murder they decide upon.
The testimony is sufficient to condemn or reprieve.
How? Why?
Because evidence beyond any reasonable doubt is decisive in the real world.
Evolution and Morality
In that real world, evolution has not one single piece of judicial evidence.
However, your clade believe it absolutely because it releases everyone from old fashioned morality.
Morality is great – provided it does not restrict your pleasures.
Darwin’s scribblings gave us all a wonderful excuse.
But what is stopping you believing all the irreproachable and inevitable evidence that I adduce?
We just explained: ‘Morality is great – provided it does not restrict your pleasures. Darwin’s scribblings gave us all a wonderful excuse.’
Therefore my scribblings are no good, nonsense, fantastic ravings, idiotic – all these are quotes from responses.
Responses and Reactions
Attacks on my low IQ, lack of academic prowess, lack of gifts and skills and obvious failures are too old, boring and true to worry me.
I used to crawl like any child – but backwards.
All reactions are good – because at least I raised the issue.
Morality in an Unfair World
But when we come to morality and our response to an ‘unfair’ world, we are really dealing with the nuts and bolts of your inner world.
Merely tightening your lips and saying, ‘When the going gets tough the tough get going’ does nothing logically.
It simply ignore the yawning gap – ‘Why?’
I have rejected ‘faith’ as in unquestioning acceptance of facts and a narrative.
However Real Judiasm still requires a very different but parallel supstill must resort to ‘faith’ – as in our ‘trust’ in the absolute ultimate wisdom of the proven Creator – as you may read later in the religious diatribe into which this is descending.
But unless you have read Book 1, Book 4 will be an even greater waste of your time.
The Need for Struggle
In Book 4 we explain that, given the court’s acceptance of the evidence adduced, we need the daily struggle to do good and to win our spiritual rewards.
This is the greatest ‘good’ – to earn something.
This need within us for a sense of accomplishment requires a world of ultimate tests and challenges in which to operate.
Our brilliant and inquisitive minds must constantly find new unknowns in a universe vast enough to give us a fair chance to acquire humility.
Again, without being too personal, remember you should not exist at all, never mind as a Jew.
In fact, none of us should – even non-Jews.
We know that the Law of Probability and every mathematical paradigm imaginable makes our existence absolutely impossible.
Like atheist Sir Roger Penrose et al, we must face the facts honestly.
Penrose’s Theory on the Universe
During the last decade, Penrose has developed a more nuanced theory that at the Big Bang there could be no matter because it initiated matter.
Without matter you cannot have ‘time’ because – yes, good old Albert – e = mc2.
Secondly, the universe will expand until finally all matter is spread out to an extent equalling non-matter.
Again, no matter ergo no time.
We describe the Talmud’s take on this and Nachmanides’ approach in Book Four.
So there was no ‘time’ and ultimately there will be no time.
Strangely the two states share that similarity.
Infinite expansion equals the initial ultimate density.
Thus the universe could have another Big Bang.
Thus ‘before’ the Big Bang there was an earlier one and before that …
In other words, we can invent a new type of time – Big Bang time.
And the 1st century Zohar describes 974 existences/worlds before this world.
We had Big Bang Time 2500 years ago.
Order at the Big Bang
Within all this, the notion is central that there must have been ultimate, unimaginably ordered ‘order’ just at the Big Bang.
This is again because of Einstein – as time advances so order decreases.
If we travel back things get tidier and tidier – an idea known to its posh friends as the Second Theory of Thermodynamics.
But Penrose is disarmingly modest and hesitant about all this and I mention it because he agrees that, in a sense, it only raises more questions.
This all requires astonishing order, timeless ‘time’, ultimate expansion, equal ultimate concentration and, above all, some initiation.
Again, we must be very careful not to mention the ‘G’ word.
Penrose on Impossibility
Let us also read again for ourselves Roger Penrose’s honest words which we met before on that same impossibility – the self-initiation of the world.
This renowned mathematician/physicist, who worked closely with Hawking, repeats that which is agreed by all leading minds: mathematically the odds against a universe by chance are too large to express.
Penrose writes:
‘One could not possibly even write the number down ……… it would be 1 followed by 10123 successive 0’s. Even if we were to write a 0 on each separate proton and on each separate neutron in the entire universe ………. we should fall far short of writing down the figure needed.’
This unknown ‘cosmological constant’ – 10 to the power of 123 – which is necessary for our impossible existence cannot be ‘accidental’.
Everything needs a natural law that allows it.
Yet, this very ‘law’ has only operated once – at that initiation – so it cannot be a ‘law’ but a one-off phenomenon – in other words – an impossibility.
The Impossibility of Chance
It is worth repeated the facts.
Imagine you toss a die one hundred times and each time it shows six.
The die has not been tampered with.
There is no trick.
The impossible is happening before your eyes.
This world’s spontaneous initiation is millions of times less likely.
Imagine tossing that die for your entire life and for all generations.
Describe the odds of this happening.
It is simply impossible.
Multi-Universe Theory
Now, if this chance had at least happened on a number of occasions, in a number of universes, then the odds grow slightly better.
The multi-universe theory envisages untold numbers of other universes of which ours is merely one, each with an ‘impossible’ planet with Life.
All that would change is that we could say that with even such minute odds, universes do produce a planet with spontaneous life.
But do not hold your breath till they find one.
If one little universe is mathematically impossible, I would have thought that a whole bunch of them would be a lot more impossible rather than less.
But then I am a faith-head blockhead and just don’t understand science.
Except for your author, no extra-terrestrial, never mind extra-universal, life has been discovered.
This theory screams of absolute desperation and complete lunacy yet just to avoid Intentional Design, never mind religion, it is very seriously and scientifically discussed with much wise nodding of balding heads.
This is pure faith in a fantastical, concocted myth.
Desperation in Atheism
It is not simply as unlikely as little green men, it is a specific, serious hope there truly are little green men – Life – on the non-existent ‘earths’ of these trillions of trillions of non-existent parallel universes.
OK, some of them may be blue.
You prefer red?
Then let them be red; some may be ‘new’ forms of life; some may be duck-billed politicians; some may be decent, honest politicians. (No way!!!!)
You simply couldn’t invent this – but they did.
Remember that the multi-universe concept is a figment of the imagination created to avoid the ‘tragedy’ of ignorance of our origins.
I think that ultimately atheists must indeed be men of deep faith.
Against this, the secular Jew is meant to find a structure for his existence and a meaning.
Morality in Stone Age Tribes
If you were in command of a group of islands – the Fig Leaf Islands – on which there lived a vibrant small tribe, the final remnant of untouched Stone Age Man, would you introduce a foreign, chronologically-inappropriate morality.
They after all are the non-mutant homo sapiens.
The purest Darwinians.
They survived, and, boy, are they fit.
They are Mother Nature’s true children.
But do they play nicely – or are they not savage and cruel beyond belief?
Interfering with Darwinian Logic
If your own morality is rooted in Darwin, dare you interfere in their pure lives and stop their logical but beast-like behaviours which are shared by every non-human on the planet?
Should you enforce post-Christian standards?
Are you morally justified in stopping them eating children?
Why stop them killing all weak or sick people?
Why prevent murder and theft if it enables the fittest to survive and the tribe thereby to survive?
Your morality would eventually lead to the extinction of that way of life.
Should they not rather be left pristine, untrammelled by senseless guilt?
Survival of the Fittest
Following pure Darwinian logic, today’s Stone Age Man’s remnants – the Andaman, Korowai, Urapmin, Kreen-Akrone, Sannimu, Suruwaha peoples, politicians, bankers, lawyers, corporate kings – should be allowed to keep following their Survival of the Fittest lores and customs.
Those who are cannibals, like the Urapmin, politicians, bankers and corporate leaders must be allowed to eat their victims or clients in peace.
Do not be disgusted; the Urapmin themselves (but not politicians, bankers and corporate leaders) have their own highest standards.
These are higher standards than yours are or mine – they will not eat food breathed on by a dog.
They would be disgusted and utterly sickened by any culture, like our own, allowing this.
Variations in Morality
Similarly, the Stone Age tribes’ variations on infanticide of deformed children, universal suicide at 30 years old, constant use of psychedelic drugs or tobacco by their very young children, eating of other tribes, hacking limbs off living animals and the murder of the sick – are perfectly moral in Darwinian terms.
Further, how illogical and senseless do our values seem to them?
Such peoples have been constantly dumbfounded and incredulous at the illogicality and irrelevance of our version of morality – when explained by missionaries or decent human beings.
There cannot be a moral imperative – beyond survival.
Do we have morality or mere pretentions?
Altruism and Evolution
As Darwin wrote pure altruism is wasteful, wrong and illogical.
Where is its evolutionary impetus?
The Stone Age tribes would laugh out loud.
The politicians, bankers and corporate leaders do laugh very loudly.
Mutual flea-picking and grooming are helpful.
But there must be limits.
Unnecessary altruism – ‘goodness’ – is wasteful and dangerous – ask any worker ant.
For the atheist, post-Christian morality thus is a dubious mutant engendered by over-extended behaviours.
St Charles Darwin laments that self-preserving reciprocated altruism in my tribe becomes a habit.
Then the human strangely starts being kind to others.
This is a threat to him.
This is seen only in Mankind, denatured by religion or other cerebral, culturally-induced imperatives – and in colony dwelling insects.
It erupts mainly in the religious.
They are evolution’s lost children, bedecked in their ceremonial vestments, struggling amongst the monstrous beasts of my Intrada to Book One.
Yet do you instinctively still want to hedge your bets and promote a similar morality on your enchanted Fig Leaf isles.
Ancient Morality and Judaism
These Stone Age tribes’ Law of the Jungle should make you think – because this was our moral imperative before the Torah.
Ancient cultures including Hammurabi had no concept of kindness to those outside the tribe unless there was an agenda – some symbiosis.
However, Judaism imposes its humanity to all humans and animals as a religious duty in a balanced world.
We cannot condone the survival of the fittest, the subjugation of the less fit, the perpetuation of advantaged oligarchies, the rule over the lower orders by an aristocracy of birth, money or intelligence or the annihilation of the weak or deformed – but all this only because we were created to follow the Torah.
If this imperative were to be removed, we can throw it all away and follow fashion.
It may be snowflake fashion or Nazi fashion.
The Need for Morality
We must remember the conundrums which the greatest minds have posited.
Remnant Stone Age tribes seem happy enough.
Do we really need morality or ‘civilization’?
Why this ‘thinking ape’?
Would he invent morality?
Why?
Mutation and Atheism
So mutation betrays the atheist.
It can give no one solace.
It seemed an excellent way out but is proven to be a blind alley.
Not only can the atheist not conjure up any true morality, he must retreat to a childfree world of distraction, entertainment, unintelligent, illogical self-justification – replacing everything with the veneer of political rectitude and do-gooding.
He must stay asleep and be Woke.
Darwin Exposed
Schmutation’s fall dispels Darwin’s evil little world of elitist self-congratulatory cannibalism – feasting on and scorning the lower orders, non-Caucasians, blacks, women – all classified as quasi-baboons.
We read his words.
Darwin is exposed as the ultimate naked ape.
All evolutionary ‘evidence’ is proven to be unacceptable for any judicial consideration.
Supposition and wishful thinking have created a world-mesmerising embrace.
Judaism vs. Atheism
We Jews have Sinai … not blind faith … but the atheist has only his own dark and narrow mind, yes, bursting with the bright lights of brazen self-justification.
How can anyone even contemplate evolution and atheism as proven?
Book Four, as mentioned, deals with the ultimate test of religion.
It reveals the ultimate source of the answers – the Talmud.
It side-steps nothing.
There is no question that you cannot ask.
Newton’s Acceptance of Judaism
Forgive my reminding you that Newton astonishingly, in thousands of documents written in his almost indecipherable code, enthusiastically accepted Judaism’s wisdom whilst rejecting Christianity and atheism.
May I repeat that yes, it seems impossible but – unbelievably – utterly logical Newton rejected faith and atheism but scrutinized and intellectually embraced Judaism.
He found Rabbinical tutors in Cambridge and became an avid student of the Talmud and a ‘clandestine Maimonidian mono-Deist’.
Are you cleverer than he was?
Newton’s Secret Writings
Consider his secret chest from 1727, and his innumerable hidden writings, specifically on this, deciphered and displayed by antisemitic Keynes in 1936 – 47.
Newton was the ultimately logical, intelligent and honest mind because he did not need to justify any personal behaviours.
He accepted Judaism in deadly secret.
He had at last found the logical answer to everything.
Consider him carefully.
He could have rejected religion so easily.
With respect, can you?
Leave a Reply