Hi, I have the impression that everyone here is "from a different world"—you know, from different countries, with different education, ages, life situations, knowledge of CTMU, knowledge of the world, amount of free time that one can dedicate to learning CTMU, etc. I think that makes effective communication more difficult and hinders discussions about CTMU in here. That’s why I decided to look for "common ground" a bit blindly, so there would be something to build on. Also to satisfy my curiosity. ;) Since this is a group about CTMU, my first question is: who has read the entire ANKORT (CTMU: Another Kind of Reality Theory) by Chris Langan in the last two years?

We are looking to massively scale up the Academy over the next several months, and likely will have several massive new instructors teaching courses on our platform. Now is the most important time to shape the structure and content of the Academy. What can we do better?

Greetings and blessings to all! Below are four simple arguments which conclude that the Judeo-Christian God and the CTMU G.O.D. are not compatible. I'm looking for help in refuting any of the premises of these arguments along with any potential counterarguments that can be included in a paper on this topic. I should note, there are differences in how God is perceived from within the Jewish tradition and the Christian tradition. Even within the Christian tradition there are numerous theological, doctrinal, and practical differences, but in the sake of trying to be succinct, the comparison here is the Judeo-Christian God as even from within Judaism, that God does have a personal relationship with humans--to the point of even choosing the Israelites as his chosen people. That, plus many stories of his personal interaction with humanity abound in the Christian Old Testament or the Law & The Prophets for the Jews. That being said, for the sake of brevity, the comparison and argument is between the general concept of the Abrahamic, Judeo-Christian God versus the CTMU's G.O.D. Thank you in advance. The idea is to refute the arguments and prove that the two Gods are one and the same. Argument from Transcendence P1. The CTMU's God is inherent in the fabric of the universe and not distinct from it. P2. The Judeo-Christian God is distinct from the universe and transcends it. C. Therefore, the CTMU's God and the Judeo-Christian God cannot be the same. This argument highlights the fundamental difference between the CTMU's conception of God as the embodiment of the universe itself and the Judeo-Christian understanding of God as a transcendent Creator separate from His creation. The two premises are supported by evidence from Langan's writings and the Bible, respectively. The conclusion follows logically from the premises, demonstrating the irreconcilable nature of these two conceptions of God. Argument from Personal Relationship P1. The Judeo-Christian God is a personal being who desires a relationship with His creation.

Hello. I'm starting a WhatsApp group chat for Compatriot Academy. Please comment your number below so that I can add you. Thank you to all! Blessings, Tommy

We often worry about how to defend the truth. How can I convince my friends, those reading my Substack, and my teachers of the truth I know? This makes sense because being a proselytizer for the CTMU is the most important thing we can do to ensure we have a Human Singularity instead of its tech antithesis (G-d forbid). Yet, in a more profound, spiritual sense, the truth wins regardless, simply because it was spoken and recognized by *someone*. Someone capable of lifting their mind high enough to see over the indoctrination and disinformation that conceals a better world. As Soviet dissident and renowned truthteller Alexandr Solzhenitsyn said, “The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie. One word of truth outweighs the world.” Saint Augustine: “The Truth is like a Lion. You don’t have to defend it. Let it loose. It will defend itself.” Maimonides: “Truth does not become more true by virtue of the fact that the entire world agrees with it, nor less so even if the whole world disagrees with it.” How do you defend what you know to be true to your peers? Do you have to? Comment below →→