Will I share Hell with Hitler when I die?

[FA_Q2]

Got any proof? A proper link maybe? Or is that too much to ask?

You need proof that beings that know and create were not a result of a special creative act of God?

you said "beings that know and create were predestined to exist." you have yet to show any concrete proof, just loads of clown fartsmoke.

lol, you need proof that beings that know and create were not a result of a special creative act of God?

I need proof for every single claim you make about god or the universe. Now you know.

You only have two choices. Either you believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes or you believe they arose through a special creative act of God. Which is it? I've got you trapped either way.

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

 

[ding]

You need proof that beings that know and create were not a result of a special creative act of God?

you said "beings that know and create were predestined to exist." you have yet to show any concrete proof, just loads of clown fartsmoke.

lol, you need proof that beings that know and create were not a result of a special creative act of God?

I need proof for every single claim you make about god or the universe. Now you know.

You only have two choices. Either you believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes or you believe they arose through a special creative act of God. Which is it? I've got you trapped either way.

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

 

[Mudda]

you said "beings that know and create were predestined to exist." you have yet to show any concrete proof, just loads of clown fartsmoke.

lol, you need proof that beings that know and create were not a result of a special creative act of God?

I need proof for every single claim you make about god or the universe. Now you know.

You only have two choices. Either you believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes or you believe they arose through a special creative act of God. Which is it? I've got you trapped either way.

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

That you're completely wrong and without proof, as per usual.

 

[ding]

lol, you need proof that beings that know and create were not a result of a special creative act of God?

I need proof for every single claim you make about god or the universe. Now you know.

You only have two choices. Either you believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes or you believe they arose through a special creative act of God. Which is it? I've got you trapped either way.

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

That you're completely wrong and without proof, as per usual.

Not unless you can tell me what the third option is, lol.

 

[Mudda]

I need proof for every single claim you make about god or the universe. Now you know.

You only have two choices. Either you believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes or you believe they arose through a special creative act of God. Which is it? I've got you trapped either way.

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

That you're completely wrong and without proof, as per usual.

Not unless you can tell me what the third option is, lol.

I just did. Try to keep up.

 

[ding]

You only have two choices. Either you believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes or you believe they arose through a special creative act of God. Which is it? I've got you trapped either way.

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

That you're completely wrong and without proof, as per usual.

Not unless you can tell me what the third option is, lol.

I just did. Try to keep up.

No, you didn't. To prove that I am wrong requires you to name a third option besides a creative act by God and the laws of nature (i.e. natural processes) which preordained beings that know and create. Saying I am wrong does not prove I am wrong. To do that requires you to list a third option for how beings that know and create arose.

Now do you understand?

 

[FA_Q2]

you said "beings that know and create were predestined to exist." you have yet to show any concrete proof, just loads of clown fartsmoke.

lol, you need proof that beings that know and create were not a result of a special creative act of God?

I need proof for every single claim you make about god or the universe. Now you know.

You only have two choices. Either you believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes or you believe they arose through a special creative act of God. Which is it? I've got you trapped either way.

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

"Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know."

That was the third option. Not believing in either supposition and, instead, not knowing.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

I do good, not because I'm worried about being judged, but because I care about what I think of me. I believe the Bible to be a work of fiction, created by the Aristocracy to control the Serfs. You don't want them giving up on life because they have no hope, instead you feed them false hope that they will be rewarded after they are dead.

So do I deserve to be in the same Hell as the guy who killed millions of Jews?

It's not about your works. God gives you a choice, you can separate yourself from him for eternity, or live with him for eternity.

 

[Mudda]

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

That you're completely wrong and without proof, as per usual.

Not unless you can tell me what the third option is, lol.

I just did. Try to keep up.

No, you didn't. To prove that I am wrong requires you to name a third option besides a creative act by God and the laws of nature (i.e. natural processes) which preordained beings that know and create. Saying I am wrong does not prove I am wrong. To do that requires you to list a third option for how beings that know and create arose.

Now do you understand?

So you want proof.

 

[ding]

lol, you need proof that beings that know and create were not a result of a special creative act of God?

I need proof for every single claim you make about god or the universe. Now you know.

You only have two choices. Either you believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes or you believe they arose through a special creative act of God. Which is it? I've got you trapped either way.

Well, no, those are not the only 2 options nor are they mutually exclusive. One can easily believe that both are true. Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know. That does not require any 'belief' at all - merely acceptance of current limitations.

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

"Conversely, and the stance that science actually takes, is that we simply do not know."

That was the third option. Not believing in either supposition and, instead, not knowing.

Do you don't believe that beings that know and create arose through natural processes?

“In my life as scientist I have come upon two major problems which, though rooted in science, though they would occur in this form only to a scientist, project beyond science, and are I think ultimately insoluble as science. That is hardly to be wondered at, since one involves consciousness and the other, cosmology.


The consciousness problem was hardly avoidable by one who has spent most of his life studying mechanisms of vision. We have learned a lot, we hope to learn much more; but none of it touches or even points, however tentatively, in the direction of what it means to see. Our observations in human eyes and nervous systems and in those of frogs are basically much alike. I know that I see; but does a frog see? It reacts to light; so do cameras, garage doors, any number of photoelectric devices. But does it see? Is it aware that it is reacting? There is nothing I can do as a scientist to answer that question, no way that I can identify either the presence or absence of consciousness. I believe consciousness to be a permanent condition that involves all sensation and perception. Consciousness seems to me to be wholly impervious to science.

The second problem involves the special properties of our universe. Life seems increasingly to be part of the order of nature. We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible...."
George Wald, 1984, “Life and Mind in the Universe”, International Journal of Quantum Chemistry: Quantum Biology Symposium 11, 1984: 1-15.

 

[ding]

I don't think I said they were mutually exclusive. In fact, I have argued they are not. What's the third option?

That you're completely wrong and without proof, as per usual.

Not unless you can tell me what the third option is, lol.

I just did. Try to keep up.

No, you didn't. To prove that I am wrong requires you to name a third option besides a creative act by God and the laws of nature (i.e. natural processes) which preordained beings that know and create. Saying I am wrong does not prove I am wrong. To do that requires you to list a third option for how beings that know and create arose.

Now do you understand?

So you want proof.

At this point I'd just be happy if you told me what the third option was for how beings that know and create arose, lol?

1. Creative act of God
2. Natural processes
3. ???????

 

[Mudda]

That you're completely wrong and without proof, as per usual.

Not unless you can tell me what the third option is, lol.

I just did. Try to keep up.

No, you didn't. To prove that I am wrong requires you to name a third option besides a creative act by God and the laws of nature (i.e. natural processes) which preordained beings that know and create. Saying I am wrong does not prove I am wrong. To do that requires you to list a third option for how beings that know and create arose.

Now do you understand?

So you want proof.

At this point I'd just be happy if you told me what the third option was for how beings that know and create arose, lol?

1. Creative act of God
2. Natural processes
3. ???????

4. Creative act of the Great Spaghetti Monster
5. The devil did it.
6. We've always existed somewhere in some universe.
7. You're not an intellectual being.
8. Any other way imaginable.

 

[ding]

Not unless you can tell me what the third option is, lol.

I just did. Try to keep up.

No, you didn't. To prove that I am wrong requires you to name a third option besides a creative act by God and the laws of nature (i.e. natural processes) which preordained beings that know and create. Saying I am wrong does not prove I am wrong. To do that requires you to list a third option for how beings that know and create arose.

Now do you understand?

So you want proof.

At this point I'd just be happy if you told me what the third option was for how beings that know and create arose, lol?

1. Creative act of God
2. Natural processes
3. ???????

4. Creative act of the Great Spaghetti Monster
5. The devil did it.
6. We've always existed somewhere in some universe.
7. You're not an intellectual being.
8. Any other way imaginable.

Seems like given your responses, #7 might apply to you.

 

[Mudda]

I just did. Try to keep up.

No, you didn't. To prove that I am wrong requires you to name a third option besides a creative act by God and the laws of nature (i.e. natural processes) which preordained beings that know and create. Saying I am wrong does not prove I am wrong. To do that requires you to list a third option for how beings that know and create arose.

Now do you understand?

So you want proof.

At this point I'd just be happy if you told me what the third option was for how beings that know and create arose, lol?

1. Creative act of God
2. Natural processes
3. ???????

4. Creative act of the Great Spaghetti Monster
5. The devil did it.
6. We've always existed somewhere in some universe.
7. You're not an intellectual being.
8. Any other way imaginable.

Seems like given your responses, #7 might apply to you.

Lame. Clown.

 

[ding]

No, you didn't. To prove that I am wrong requires you to name a third option besides a creative act by God and the laws of nature (i.e. natural processes) which preordained beings that know and create. Saying I am wrong does not prove I am wrong. To do that requires you to list a third option for how beings that know and create arose.

Now do you understand?

So you want proof.

At this point I'd just be happy if you told me what the third option was for how beings that know and create arose, lol?

1. Creative act of God
2. Natural processes
3. ???????

4. Creative act of the Great Spaghetti Monster
5. The devil did it.
6. We've always existed somewhere in some universe.
7. You're not an intellectual being.
8. Any other way imaginable.

Seems like given your responses, #7 might apply to you.

Lame. Clown.

Koshergirl is offering you the position dog shit patrol with Old Fag and Faggity Pubite.

 

[Mudda]

So you want proof.

At this point I'd just be happy if you told me what the third option was for how beings that know and create arose, lol?

1. Creative act of God
2. Natural processes
3. ???????

4. Creative act of the Great Spaghetti Monster
5. The devil did it.
6. We've always existed somewhere in some universe.
7. You're not an intellectual being.
8. Any other way imaginable.

Seems like given your responses, #7 might apply to you.

Lame. Clown.

Koshergirl is offering you the position dog shit patrol with Old Fag and Faggity Pubite.

Go sober up.

 

[ding]

At this point I'd just be happy if you told me what the third option was for how beings that know and create arose, lol?

1. Creative act of God
2. Natural processes
3. ???????

4. Creative act of the Great Spaghetti Monster
5. The devil did it.
6. We've always existed somewhere in some universe.
7. You're not an intellectual being.
8. Any other way imaginable.

Seems like given your responses, #7 might apply to you.

Lame. Clown.

Koshergirl is offering you the position dog shit patrol with Old Fag and Faggity Pubite.

Go sober up.

I think you should take the offer. I hear that Old Fag and Faggity Pubite are good guys. You will enjoy being dog shit picker upper slaves with them.

 

[BreezeWood]

I do good, not because I'm worried about being judged, but because I care about what I think of me. I believe the Bible to be a work of fiction, created by the Aristocracy to control the Serfs. You don't want them giving up on life because they have no hope, instead you feed them false hope that they will be rewarded after they are dead.

So do I deserve to be in the same Hell as the guy who killed millions of Jews?

It's not about your works. God gives you a choice, you can separate yourself from him for eternity, or live with him for eternity.

.

It's not about your works. God gives you a choice, you can separate yourself from him for eternity, or live with him for eternity.

that is not correct, evil is not allowed to live for eternity as is their desire to do so - being a threat to the Everlasting, their spirits are destroyed when their physiology expires.

satan is dead.

there is choice but that has consequences for the wrong decision.