Fuck your false accusations and groundless assertions that to see shills try to divide us by religion is somehow magically equivalent to being guilty of wanting to force 'christian communism' on everyone else.
YOUR imaginary 'lord' satan was always dead, the lies are the only mechanism to repeat that demonic message.
Fuck YOUR 'one size fits all' ideology that God's creation is inherently divisive.
844-721-7237 #9991787
I get a "Access Code not recognized" message
Demon
You just posted a claim to a religious truth, that the human mind is characteristically unfit to know any religious truth, which is itself a claim about the truth of religion.
Demon
Demon
>35,000 different denominations of "Christianity" exist because the men who created them couldn't agree on the definitions of "right and wrong". Because the idea of "right & wrong" is purely Satanic.-
Hahahahahahahaha you dumbass you just posted an argument presented as 'right' against anon's post you present as 'wrong'. By your own shit self contradictory 'logic', you're pushing satanic code
Internal logic breakdown, satanic panic in plain sight.
Saved this internal logic breakdown post from demented demonic shills trying to divide us by religion.
Self refutes itself by declaring its own statements of what's 'right and wrong' as themselves 'satanic'.
Game over
Game over
Demon
Satanic panic breakdown
Demon panic
India already cured covid with Ivermectin doses.
Trump put that gnome on live TV for months precisely so that he can be used later on to awaken, not of his choice, kek.
You're missing what you yourself are tacitly professing.
Your 'positive' claims about what is, what 'only' is, that what you perceive by senses in this waking life is the 'only' existence, ALSO has a burden of proof.
The notion that a 'negative cannot be proven' is a misunderstanding of what proving a positive entails.
If I prove that the 'only' money in my pocket is a $20 bill, then contrary to your approach I have indeed ALSO 'proved a negative', namely that there is NOT a nickel in my pocket.
Proving a positive carries with it a proof of a negative.
You have claimed without evidence that what you perceive through your senses on Earth during your waking life is EVERYTHING.
YOU are in fact trying to convince anons of a 'negative', that 'heaven does not exist'.
Your logic is all twisted and contorted by a PHILOSOPHICAL view derived from the ramblings of lunatics like Auguste Compte.
I cannot prove to you that heaven exists, but that doesn't mean heaven doesn't exist, no more than you being unable to prove you love someone, somehow implies that your love does not exist, or that you being unable to prove your own unique experience, somehow proved you're not having any experience at all.
Since Godel we know with the rigor of mathematical certainty that there exists truths about highly complex systems that cannot be proved 'within' those systems but can be known/experienced as true by the higher 'meta-system' layer that is the human observer/subject.
Read that sentence again.
Then read it again.
There exists KNOWABLE truths about a highly complex system that CANNOT be proved from within the system.
Read that shortened sentence, same idea, said a little differently, again.
We can know truths about complex systems that CANNOT be proved by the systems.
What you are writing are pre-1931 aphorisms.
It's 2021.
There is NO excuse for your ignorance other than your own choices.
You're speaking in a way where you are putting showing the basis of your claims is a FAITH in the narratives of what you have heard thus far in your life on what constitutes knowledge and truth.
kek, prosecutors angry that their own M.O. is being used against them.
kek, how did this information from the prosecutors even get to The Hill if the prosecutors weren't already 'trying the case using the media'.
Dumbasses.
Yet these assholes don't use the same logic for HCQ or Ivermectin.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Whoever is giving him legal advice are idiots.
The first amendment is a constraint put on the government, to not infringe upon the citizenry's free speech.
No private companies are 'bound' by what in fact binds the state.
Having said that, Section 230 should be repealed from Twitter because by virtue of their activity, they are NOT merely publishers but discretionary platforms.