Versus turns things against one another, thereby contradicting each things in-between stance within everything.
Inception and death aren't "things", but the momentum of motion for each matter within. While alive, one cannot perceive ones inception or ones death, hence being temporarily in-between an ongoing separation.
doesn't
Aka does nothing...ones artificial denial of everything natural doing each thing within.
One can only turn (versus/verto) within motion...does nothing contradicts that, hence ones mind turning in circles (logic), while eating itself (ouroboros).
You have chosen side
Choosing (life) a side (inception/death) ignores ones sight, hence the separation of all perceivable into each ones perception...a moving transfer; not a keeping hold of any side.
admit
Admit/admittere (to send), hence life being send from inception towards death...not a conflict of reason (admit vs deny) among beings.
Admit it. Admit it!!
Aka frequency of repetition to tempt free will of choice to bind itself by consenting to a suggestion. Without consenting to either side (admit or deny)...one remains free from one another.
How could free-will-of-choice dispel bondage like religion/religio - "to bind anew" without repeatedly choosing to resist the temptation of what others put together?
If being implies resistance (life) during velocity (inception towards death), then can one adapt to change without repeating?
keeps breaking
Which one...keep holding onto or breaking apart? Another contradiction out in the open for those with eyes to see. Why do I get the flack for describing that to others?
like religion/religio - "to bind anew" without repeatedly choosing to resist the temptation of what others put together?
CONTRADICTION FOR ALL WITH EYES TO SEE: "Repitition tempts people" "Free will of choice repeats choosing"
A) Repetition tempts one
B) Free will of choice repeats choosing
If being implies resistance (life) during velocity (inception towards death), then can one adapt to change without repeating?
So you admit that your word analysis binds you. ADMIT IT. ADMIT IT. ADMIT IT. ADMIT IT. ADMIT IT.
Which one...keep holding onto or breaking apart? Another contradiction out in the open for those with eyes to see.
Not "holding onto". This means that you analyzed the word "analysis" repeatedly.
Not a contradiction. You KEEP doing an ACTION. You are not keeping the thing that is broken apart. You are keeping the action, not the thing. The action is "breaking apart". The thing is broken but the action is kept.
The thing is ONLY being broken apart. Not any contradictions.
A.Free will of choice operates in between things, VS
B. it doesn't operate between those things at all.
You have chosen side a. Admit it. Admit it!!
Versus turns things against one another, thereby contradicting each things in-between stance within everything.
Inception and death aren't "things", but the momentum of motion for each matter within. While alive, one cannot perceive ones inception or ones death, hence being temporarily in-between an ongoing separation.
Aka does nothing...ones artificial denial of everything natural doing each thing within.
One can only turn (versus/verto) within motion...does nothing contradicts that, hence ones mind turning in circles (logic), while eating itself (ouroboros).
Choosing (life) a side (inception/death) ignores ones sight, hence the separation of all perceivable into each ones perception...a moving transfer; not a keeping hold of any side.
Admit/admittere (to send), hence life being send from inception towards death...not a conflict of reason (admit vs deny) among beings.
Aka frequency of repetition to tempt free will of choice to bind itself by consenting to a suggestion. Without consenting to either side (admit or deny)...one remains free from one another.
OHHHH. So THAT'S why u/free-will-of-choice keeps breaking down the meaning of "analysis" REPEATEDLY. u/free-will-of-choice IS at(TEMPT)ing to bind u/guywholikesdjtof2024 to a suggestion!!!!
How could free-will-of-choice dispel bondage like religion/religio - "to bind anew" without repeatedly choosing to resist the temptation of what others put together?
If being implies resistance (life) during velocity (inception towards death), then can one adapt to change without repeating?
Which one...keep holding onto or breaking apart? Another contradiction out in the open for those with eyes to see. Why do I get the flack for describing that to others?
The "one" u/free-will-of-choice is the one binding. u/free-will-of-choice can't dispel bondage until u/free-will-of-choice reason.
CONTRADICTION FOR ALL WITH EYES TO SEE: "Repitition tempts people" "Free will of choice repeats choosing"
A) Repetition tempts one
B) Free will of choice repeats choosing
So you admit that your word analysis binds you. ADMIT IT. ADMIT IT. ADMIT IT. ADMIT IT. ADMIT IT.
Not "holding onto". This means that you analyzed the word "analysis" repeatedly.
Not a contradiction. You KEEP doing an ACTION. You are not keeping the thing that is broken apart. You are keeping the action, not the thing. The action is "breaking apart". The thing is broken but the action is kept.
The thing is ONLY being broken apart. Not any contradictions.