When you have a huge amount of energy, you could create matter from it.
Matter creation happens as creation of particle-antiparticle pair when very high energy photon or other particle interact with matter.
Let's simplify things and say we have power to produce photons with energy of 2GeV. This is enough to create proton-antiproton and electron-positron pairs. Proton with electron is an hydrogen atom, Antiproton with positron is antihydrogen atom. Also, we could get neutron-antineutron pairs too, and create more complex atoms.
So, with enough energy we could produce useful atoms. Then we coud use it as classic fuel to fry eggs or combine it with another atoms, say oxygen and get water, or say carbon and get whole variety of hydrocarbons. Creating and combinng different atoms we could get any molecules of chemical substances we could wish. Combining molecules in certain order we get real things we need.
Well, to create things in that way we need enormous amount of energy. But that's not the problem, because for each particle we create, we get an antiparticle as byproduct. And combining antimatter with any matter we get annigilation that produce same enormous energy we spent to create matter we need.
The whole cycle of making goods from anything will look like
- energy -> matter + antimatter
- matter -> goods we need
- antimatter + anything ( garbage or, say, soil ) -> energy
here we need only to compensate energy losses, and resolving technical question of efficiency it could be relatively moderate amount.
If a person have a powerful energy source, then this person could have anything he need for life, regardless of environment, up to space and other planets.
Then, the whole concept of money, profit and so political and economic power, which are foundation of modern world become null and void. You don't need money if you could make anything you want by yourself. Moreover, you don't need government, economy, trade and all that stuff. You don't even need protection from any third-party, because nobody need to stole anything from you, and you could have enough firepower to stop some insane idiot who didn't yet get that it is a bad idea to attack a person who could have a power of a nuclear bomb in his pocket. So the question of mentally ill idiots who can't live without bothering others will resolve itself quickly.
Not hard to imagine that there is no place for modern elites in such world. They will become just regular people without any power and fame, because they have no any merits. And that is why elites afraid of any real techological progress, and trying hard to divert human ingenuity into different shitty directions posed as "progress" like "AI", EV, "green energy", economy, social networking and so on.
Destruction of modern clown world order should begin with development of personal independent power source with a power output up to few megawatt. This is the only way I see to defeat clown world order. Everything else will just end with nothing. Elites will easily direct any efforts to change something politically or economically into vapour, as they always do. Individual power source of high power will destroy the foundation of elite power over people.
And there is no any mention of money in that God ordnance.
I don't think that food from replicator will be popular. People will always prefer real food, grown by themselves. And replicator will allow to have all tech to do that with minimum efforts and maximum efficiency.
Globalist experimetns with artificial food failed miserably. People don't want food made from chemicals on factories even if they barely distinguishable from real ones. People need and want natural food. Most just have no spare time to grow it, so they have to buy it from BigAgro.
Because it is unnatural, just like artificial food.
That's the point of science and technology. You could separate good things from bad things and use only good ones.
Again, you for whatever reason accept "transhumanism" exactly like globohomos want it be accepted. They lie about everything, then why do you believe them that "transhumanism" thing is what they told you?
Transhumanism, apart from globohomo definition, in whole is changing human body in some way.
When you visit stomatologist to implant a tooth you lost, it is transhumanism. Is it inherently bad to have a tooth implant? I don't think so. What if you will be able just grow new tooth instead of lost one? Will it be against God ordnance or not?
It's strange for me to hear about some strict rules God once established and defined way of life of his creatures. Looks more like some talmudism or extreme islam, than Christianity.
God created us in His image and likeness. He even gave us free will, just like He have. And then you say that there is some predefined way of how and what we can do with material world. It completely contradicts with God's intentions to create beings in His image and likeness with free will. There is no any point to create beings with free will, and then limit them in using their free will.
Humans, being created in His image and likeness, and by the fact of such creation are obliged to study Universe and themselves to comprehend God's design, and use that knowledge on their will. The whole point of Christianity is to teach people to distinct good from evil and use their knowledge of Universe and themselves thoughtfully, that's all. But in your understanding of Christianity humans are limited to some exact and presribed path. That's nowhere near free will, and barely is Christianity.
It's not a technology or science that is good or evil. In whole technology and science is just a user manual for the material part of God's creation - Universe. And since it is endless, there is endless ways to do good and evil. It is only people who decide how to use it.
Come on, dude that's a red herring. Money's not the problem. Money is the solution to the problem of determining value of different goods and services. Man has to do work to sustain himself. If your system makes it so that man doesn't have to work to sustain himself, money or not, it's not how God ordained it and it's unnatural. It's a synthetic system created with the aid of technology.
Exactly, same as not having to work to sustain yourself. This is why it's a double standard.
Then people still have to work to produce food? How is that any different than today when agriculture is mechanized and so much easier than in the past?
No one will ask them. If food production and supply is controlled centrally you will eat whatever you're told to. The majority of people today eat completely fake processed garbage but they've come to believe it's food because of marketing and propaganda. Not only can people be deceived into eating garbage but they can also be forced into it.
You need a criteria for what's good to do so. What is it?
Because it's an ideology that traces back to the Enlightenment and I know what it is based on. It's a tradition and not something Klaus Schwab or the skittles jew Harari came up with during a WEF conference. I read a lot of old books and study the origin of ideas, that's how I know.
No, that's an oversimplification and reductionism. Not all technology equates to transhumanism. In fact as we read in the Bible, clothes were the first technology given to man after the fall (garments of skin). So just like money, technology is not bad in itself (unless you're a retarded Amish or a deranged luddite).
A more appropriate definition would be changing man's nature according to a man made concept of what man should become. Notice that there's nothing inherently wrong in transcending human nature, because that's literally what Christianity is all about - becoming gods by theosis. The reason why transhumanism is satanic is because it seeks to do so without God - to make us gods on our own merit through our own reason and means. This is literally what Satan did when he rebelled and what he meant when he told Eve to eat the fruit of knowledge and to become like God (hence Apple's logo and Macintosh I costing $666).
Did God tell man "here, do whatever you feel like, man"? What kind of liberal theology is this? Of course God set rules to how we are supposed to live. He gave commandments and set up His Church to teach all the nations about how to live righteously. What does free will have to do with any of this?
It's absolutely bizarre to hear a Christian think God didn't set strict rules of conduct that set boundaries and limits our free will. Such limits were set even before the fall when God commanded not to eat from the trees of knowledge and life. Then came the Noahide laws, the Mosaic laws and finally, Christ - God in the flesh - came and gave His own teachings. Do you think God is an anarchist? I'm stunned dude, I can't go on even... Just go to Church and talk to a priest because you're very confused about the faith. Read the Church fathers. You're lucky you're in Russia too so it's easy to do so. I'm not saying this as an own but as a fellow Christian. We all need the Church, otherwise we get confused in our own interpretations.
Once was. Until usurers come. Then we have much more problems than money could ever solve. It's that case when solution turned to be much worse than problem itself.
Interesting how you take everything purely in some abstract way.
Replicator does not eliminate the need to work to sustain yourself. It just make things, nothing more. It will not use them for you. You could get a brick for free, but you will have to do something with it to make it part of building.
Statement that you don't need to work to earn money, does not mean you don't need to work at all.
The whole point is to exclude money with all problems they produce from society.
That's globohomo definition, limiting you to the mostly evil usage.
I would define it as a changing man's physical body for some purpose. Then, you have much more options, including good ones.
Look, BigPharma have a great power over people, because people sometimes get ill. Ilness is a malfunction of human body. If you use globohomo definition, then any attempt to really fix that body malfunction will look like something evil. And you stuck with endless mitigation of illness consequences, without actually fixing anything. That's exactly what BigPharma need to keep control over people.
If you deny globohomo definition, then you could fix an illness properly. Make so, that this illness would be impossible, do the same thing good engineer do to broken mechanism - replace/restore broken part such way, it will never broke again.
Is it "changingin man's nature"? Definitely. Is it inherently bad? I don't think so.
But you don't need to throw out God to "change man's nature". It's globohomos want you to throw out God and you believe them, stucking in the corner where "changing men's nature" could only be evil.
And you can't become god or even something close only 'changing men's nature". Because men's nature is not just physical body, it is much more.
No, He didn't. And He didn't say anything opposite. God told them - "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the Earth and subdue it.". That's all. That's not even a commandment, just "good luck" to beloved ones, before the start of endless and unpredictable journey of humanity.
Only when Jews separated themselves from all other people and turned to pure evil, resulting in disgust from any people they tried to live with, He gave them commandments in attempt to save them. This didn't work for long. Then God send His Son to them, in a last attempt to save them, and they just killed Christ.
God did that for Jews only. And only because and when Jews turned to pure evil.
For us, normal people, Christ show direction, in two simple sentences, not set the rules or whatever. He show us the way, and it's completely up to us how to walk it.
So what do you do when you need someone to build you a house using your free replicator bricks? You keep saying money won't be needed but how will people exchange services and what will incentivize people to do such work for others?
So you just glossed over the commandment God gave Adam and Eve - not to eat the fruit? Don't you understand that what happened in the Garden, that disobedience towards God, repeats throughout the whole Bible narrative and not only with the jews but before them and after them when Christ made a covenant with all people? Neither Adam, nor Noah or Abraham were jews. God had to flood the world because of how lawless and degenerate people have become - this was long before any jews. The tower of Babel wasn't built by jews. The Baal worshipping nations weren't jewsih (yes jews too worshipped Baal in the OT). Pagan Rome wasn't jewish. Yes jews killed Christ and that was done by divine providence so that all the nations can know Him and become the new Israel (yes, the Orthodox Church is the Heavenly Israel, not a damn socialist state in the Middle East filled with khazarians).
He literally said that the path is straight and narrow, meaning you can't wander off and do whatever you like. The way to truth and life is not a sandbox but a very strict and limiting path that few manage to follow. It takes a huge effort to be a Christian and Christ wants us to be able to let go of everything in this world and follow him to the path of self sacrifice, with our cross on our back.
You don't need anyone help to build a house from properly designed parts. And you have a lot of free time to do it by yourself.
Boredom will perfectly incentivize people.
That wasn't commandment. That was knowledge - "if you eat that fruit, you will become mortal". Humans did their choice, proving their free will.
I don't see that story that way.
And it didn't work.
Yes, but Jews was worse than all that. That's why God resorted to attempt to give them direct commandments.
Straight and narrow doesn't mean you can't choose how to walk it. And it does not mean this way is the only one.
Moreover, Jesus gave many opportinities for salvation. You could become a monk, or just be a honest peasant. Even if you are sinner, all your sins will be instantly forgiven if you sacrifice your life to protect your friends and beloved ones. And so on. That's not one way already. And all that ways goes in one direction.
And for each this way is his own. Not the only one, but many completely different way. If the way was one, then the Lives of the Saints would have been the same. But they are totally different.
As for suffering and all that stuff, Jesus only said that if you suffer, then your suffering will be rewarded with salvation. That does not mean that to reach salvation you have to suffer as much as you can. And that does not mean that if you will not suffer, you will not be able to be saved. Practically, you will somehow suffer in some circumstances on your lifepath, but this is in no way mandatory.