For fuck's sake, you're doing it again. I asked you to prove an assertion. After reading the first round of our correspondence in this thread, I see that I tried to keep on the freewill aspect of things. You will notice that you continuously brought it right out of context. What is the point of discussing law if it doesn't pertain to the question at hand? One fucking question that was answered pages back should not still be part and parcel of this rodeo.
I did not say that I would not have hypothetical conversations about god with you. I said I will not bandy hypotheticals with you anymore. You can take that to mean, "you are so scatterbrained and I am so tired of being preached to that I am giving up." I'm asking your opinion about things and trying to suss out what you think about freewill and heaven compared to what I think. The four or so pages of "you deserve punishment whether you believe in god or not" doesn't answer any of the questions I posed to you.
I did not say that I would not have hypothetical conversations about god with you. I said I will not bandy hypotheticals with you anymore. You can take that to mean, "you are so scatterbrained and I am so tired of being preached to that I am giving up." I'm asking your opinion about things and trying to suss out what you think about freewill and heaven compared to what I think. The four or so pages of "you deserve punishment whether you believe in god or not" doesn't answer any of the questions I posed to you.
