Yep. This is looking more and more scripted by the day. They need right wingers locked in behind Trump. This nullifies conservatives as any real opposition going forward.
Aka I don't want to fake origin (perceivable); I just can't await outcome (suggested). Ones perception within all perceivable operates in the nude, clothing oneself with suggested tempts one to ignore that.
Naked implies need; cloth implies want. An off-spring enters naked, and no matter how much clothes an elder wears...nature is gonna take out the naked.
To discern implies perceiving differences, hence being cernere/separated (life) within align/line (inception towards death)...Jake Paul implies a suggested/suggesting idol tempting one to hold onto/consent with.
One wants to hold onto; one needs to let go. The former implies ignorance; the latter discernment. Any suggestion shaped within perceivable implies a graven idol.
One cannot shape within nature; only shift what nature already shaped.
God wants
God implies needed whole for each wanting partial within. Each partial needs to resist wanted temptation, hence needing to let go of wanting to hold onto...like for example the suggested word "God".
apparent enough
Enough implies "sufficient aka needed"; while apparent implies "coming into sight aka perceivable"....others utilizing the words "apparent enough" which implies a suggestion (want) tempting one to ignore perceivable (need) when consenting.
One has to discern self as coming (inception towards death) into being (life) to be able to further discern ones sight (perception) within all (perceivable).
to win
Aka towards overcoming conflict by defeating opposition. That implies suggested progressivism tempting one to seek outcomes, while ignoring to be within perceivable origin.
Ones position as form (life) within flow (inception towards death) isn't in op-position aka opposing the position of another, but oportune aka op (in front of) portus (habor) aka a vessel (matter) within harbor (momentum) of sea (motion).
Matter (choice) within momentum (balance) implies a safe harbor for response-ability (free will of choice), hence being enabled (momentum) to react (matter) to action (motion).
good beats evil
If one discerns self as being at (be-at) aka near a conflict of reason (good vs evil); then one strikes a beat aka beats on one another.
Nature doesn't strike beats...it moves all sound through each one instrument.
Yep. This is looking more and more scripted by the day. They need right wingers locked in behind Trump. This nullifies conservatives as any real opposition going forward.
a) To nullify implies one holding onto de-nial (Latin nihilo, nothing)
b) Nature doesn't conserve (preserve from loss)...it presents growth (life) into loss (inception towards death).
c) Ones consent to suggested conservatism tempts one to hold onto denial of all perceivable.
d) Going forwards (inception toward death) generates resistance (life)...going against opposition destroys resistance.
e) Real implies ones response (re) to all (al) perceivable...ignoring this by consenting to suggested establishes a conflict of reason (real vs fake).
Nature doesn't fake/feign/fold/falsify/counterfeit...RE (reaction) within AL (action) wields the free will of choice to fake it.
Sleight of hand... https://www.lyrics.com/lyric/35958053/Falco/Naked
Aka I don't want to fake origin (perceivable); I just can't await outcome (suggested). Ones perception within all perceivable operates in the nude, clothing oneself with suggested tempts one to ignore that.
Naked implies need; cloth implies want. An off-spring enters naked, and no matter how much clothes an elder wears...nature is gonna take out the naked.
OP have you tried turning to god?
Yes sir.
Which one?
The only one.
Aten? Ahura Mazda? Brahman?
I hope the face tattoos are enough of a hint about the judgement of Jake Paul. If that doesn't give you a clue, I can't help you.
To discern implies perceiving differences, hence being cernere/separated (life) within align/line (inception towards death)...Jake Paul implies a suggested/suggesting idol tempting one to hold onto/consent with.
One wants to hold onto; one needs to let go. The former implies ignorance; the latter discernment. Any suggestion shaped within perceivable implies a graven idol.
One cannot shape within nature; only shift what nature already shaped.
God implies needed whole for each wanting partial within. Each partial needs to resist wanted temptation, hence needing to let go of wanting to hold onto...like for example the suggested word "God".
Enough implies "sufficient aka needed"; while apparent implies "coming into sight aka perceivable"....others utilizing the words "apparent enough" which implies a suggestion (want) tempting one to ignore perceivable (need) when consenting.
One has to discern self as coming (inception towards death) into being (life) to be able to further discern ones sight (perception) within all (perceivable).
Aka towards overcoming conflict by defeating opposition. That implies suggested progressivism tempting one to seek outcomes, while ignoring to be within perceivable origin.
Ones position as form (life) within flow (inception towards death) isn't in op-position aka opposing the position of another, but oportune aka op (in front of) portus (habor) aka a vessel (matter) within harbor (momentum) of sea (motion).
Matter (choice) within momentum (balance) implies a safe harbor for response-ability (free will of choice), hence being enabled (momentum) to react (matter) to action (motion).
If one discerns self as being at (be-at) aka near a conflict of reason (good vs evil); then one strikes a beat aka beats on one another.
Nature doesn't strike beats...it moves all sound through each one instrument.
Who's suggesting "beats"?
"It doesn't matter who's wrong or right...just beat it"
Hebrew חָבַט (chabat) - "to beat off, beat out"
God is so great that he deflected a bullet from Trump and killed some random guy instead.
Praise the LAWD!
Religious people are so fucking funny.
This went right over your head.
kek
Nothing stranger than thinking rocks had sex and created life from nothing. That's much dumber.
Who believes such a ridiculous thing and why do you bring it up?
I'm talking about abiogenesis, but you had a hard time following that apparently.
Abiogenesis is nothing like what you wrote, demonstating your total ignorance once more.
Pathetic.
You're too slow or autistic to follow then.
You have no idea what you are talking about