It’s possible to explore the current contents of the Epstein files, and, honestly, I didn’t expect to stumble upon so much related to Arizona State University (ASU) during my search.
One significant reason for this connection is ASU’s Lawrence Krauss, who received a hefty salary to author a book purporting that the universe emerged from nothing.
Epstein’s philosophy is fundamentally flawed, starting with a false premise about God.
This assertion is an entire narrative. The obvious counter to his claim is, “How can something come from nothing?” To which he replies: “By ‘nothing,’ I mean quantum foam.” Well, that’s misleading; it’s not completely devoid of meaning. You’re referencing quantum foam.
Krauss seemed to have a close relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. In one exchange, he expressed, “As my friend Jeffrey, I love you deeply. I don’t think anyone cares for me like you do. I can’t truly convey how wonderful it is. Thank you. The cruise was a great reset.” Other discussions between them touch on topics like science and religion.
This dynamic piqued my interest. Reading Epstein’s thoughts on religion and viewing Steve Bannon’s interview on related subjects helped me form a clearer picture of Epstein’s worldview, which, frankly, is unsettling.
How do monsters find rest?
Each moral horror brings forth a pressing question: How can a moral monster coexist with themselves? Even if we focus solely on the overtly immoral actions documented, without diving into encrypted languages and hidden frameworks, how did Epstein find peace at night? What silenced his inner voice?
Various pieces come together. In his interactions and discussions at ASU, Epstein follows a familiar pattern I often observe among intellectuals: he escapes into the realm of abstraction. He discusses the evolution of ideas and cutting-edge research while overlooking specific individuals and moral ethics.
This abstraction serves as a shield for his self-image. He can present himself as a benevolent supporter of science, contributing to societal progress. However, this image starkly contrasts with the harm he caused to actual people.
Abstraction as moral numbness
This behavior aligns with Paul Johnson’s paper titled Intellectuals: Those who proclaim service to “humanity” often mistreat individuals in their proximity. Their grand assertions act as protective layers, severing morality from their rhetoric.
Consider professors advocating liberation yet imposing racial essentialism and ideological constraints via DEI programs. They convince themselves they’re supporting “marginalized communities,” even while undermining their colleagues and students.
Or think about a pop star who champions slogans like “No one is an illegal alien in stolen land.” Such moral displays occur at an abstract level, but carelessness reigns in real life.
Related: Why Christians Should Care About Politics
Epstein’s “unknown” God
Epstein goes a step further, trying to evade moral accountability on a metaphysical plane.
He argues that physicists once believed they could fully represent reality through mathematics. Now, he claims, it has become apparent that reality defies reason. Mathematics merely approximates an unknown limit, which some refer to as “God.”
But labeling God as unknowable renders Him irrelevant in our decision-making regarding life and ethics.
At a certain point, Epstein framed this in terms of gender differences. He suggests that men think through logic, whereas women access reality via intuition. The ultimate truth, he seems to imply, aligns with this “divine feminine.”
In Epstein’s perspective, humans resemble beasts, possessing just enough reasoning to justify their instincts.
Perhaps he thought he was tapping into a feminine aspect. But this perspective serves as a sort of metaphysical excuse. If reason fails, then standards do too.
The tension between reason and intuition isn’t new. Epstein simplifies the “why” down to one objective: to explain the universe through materialistic, mathematical causes. Even if that effort falls short, he doesn’t give up on reductionism. Instead, he dismisses reason.
As Francis Schaeffer noted, when autonomous reasoning collapses, thinkers tend to evade accountability. They retreat into irrationality, using intuition as a justification. Mystery becomes a free pass.
Religion as a psychological tool
In one discussion with Krauss, Epstein maintained that kindness is a form of religion, albeit not one rooted in the Bible.
Krauss identified with the New Atheists, who regard religion as an evolutionary remnant—possibly beneficial in earlier times but unnecessary for modern humans. After all, it’s said that modern man knows the universe can self-create from non-existence.
Epstein contested this view but ultimately reduced religion to a means of psychological control. He contended that religion pertains to our “inner world,” while science tackles the outer world. Ignoring our inner experiences is not an option; they’re crucial for achieving peace. Anxiety signals inner turmoil, and religion helps restore balance. For Epstein, that’s all religion is.
It’s not about worship, nor is it authentic repentance—it’s merely about peace.
It resembles New Age self-help wrapped in religious jargon.
A Nietzschean echo
When you piece together these fragments, a Nietzschean framework emerges.
Nietzsche highlighted the tension between the Apollonian, which seeks order and structure, and the Dionysian, which embraces ecstasy, pleasure, and liberation. Dionysian indulgence isn’t merely excess; it serves as a purging ritual, enabling individuals to return to daily life rejuvenated.
God’s moral law is etched within us. There’s no need to invoke “unknown limits” as an excuse, and accountability should not be negotiable.
Humans act as rationalizing beasts, and this reflects a modern pagan mindset—oscillating between order and chaos, calculation and indulgence, “science” by day and ritualized excess by night. Coupled with Epstein’s distrust of established truths and his reduction of religion to inner tranquility, a method of self-justification unfolds.
He’s also reportedly intrigued by longevity technology and unusual dietary practices. For him, death is the ultimate adversary, to be outwitted through science, mythical potions, or tech advancements.
RELATED: America’s Old Cult Trick: Sex, Salvation, and the Return of Polygamy
A troubling trend
Perhaps most unsettling is that these temptations are not isolated to Epstein.
Many fluctuate between ruthless logic and irrational pursuits. A lot of people perceive morality as a social construct and view religion merely as therapy. They often deploy abstractions to excuse actions that can’t withstand plain language.
This should lead to reflection rather than just outrage. Are we trapped in an Apollonian-Dionysian cycle, oscillating between self-justifying “reason” and self-justifying “liberation”?
The central falsehood
Epstein’s ideological foundation crumbles because it starts with a fundamental lie regarding God.
God doesn’t hide Himself; the Bible asserts that His power and nature are evident in creation. His moral code is ingrained in our hearts. There’s no need for excuses based on “unknown limits.”
The claim that reality is innately irrational is not a profound epiphany; it’s simply avoidance—an effort to keep matters uncomplicated.
That’s why Lawrence Krauss’ self-invented universe and Epstein’s notion of the Divine Feminine are in the same category—they are idols. They trade truth for something else, something that grants them permission.
Romans 1 summarizes Epstein’s life: a darkened heart, truth suppression, a swap of glory for self-justification, culminating in a descent into sexual depravity. The remedy isn’t to swing between cold rationality and ecstatic release; rather, the remedy is redemption. True healing lies in rekindling our relationship with God.
We need Christ to liberate us from both ancient and contemporary pagan dialectics—true life is found in knowing “you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3).
