Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Tucker and Bret Weinstein Debate Evolution, God’s Existence
pawz
Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,051 
in Tug Tavern
Comments
An oldie but goodie.
A chemistry student was asked to explain if heaven or hell exists on a test...The question was: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?
Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.
One student, however, wrote the following:
First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So, we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today.
Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell.
With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added. This gives two possibilities.
So which is it?
If we accept the postulate given to me by Theresa during my freshman year that "It will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you," and we take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number two must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over.
The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Theresa kept shouting, "Oh my God."
Lol that's awesome!
I honestly don't see why people debate the existence of God or not. It's strictly game theory.
See above for the eternal effect on one's soul. There is absolutely no downside to believing in God long term. None.
Now, one can debate whether how one behaves on earth is a determinant on Judgement Day - but that requires an admission of God's existence.
Tugtards aren't REAL Christians though
Is anyone really?
Deep theological question.
Pascal's wager is the theological version of "I'm just here so I don't get fined."
It's a lousy reason to adopt a belief system.
I didn't say it was a reason to adopt a belief system.
I said it was stupid to argue the existence of God and there was no downside to it.
You can believe in whatever deity you'd like.
You can also hold no belief in any deity whatsoever.
You said there is no downside to belief and presented Pascal's wager. I disagree and think there is an inherent downside to adopting a belief simply to avoid punishment.
It is stupid to debate the existence or nonexistence of God. Agreed. It is inherently impossible to prove beliefs.
I’m agnostic. That means to me that I’m not sure because I’m analytical but I don’t disparage those who believe in a god.
Atheists are the worst. So certain on their own anti-religion and they just sound sad and stupid to me. Always with the anger, these people.
Now do communism or the green gaia religion. You believe in a unicorn economic system freed from the market place. St. Fow Chee ring a bell?
Atheists are bigger religious zealots than any evangelical I've ever met.
The Bible says shake the dust off your shoes and get on down the road if folks don't want to hear the Word.
Atheists are like a dog with a bone.
Or a vegan fleeing from a bone.
I agree that there are some atheists who are looking to advertise the fact at the drop of a hat. Richard Dawkins is virtually unreadable for me because of his need to tell me he's an atheist on every third page of his books. Like all zealots, such folks are tiresome at best.
But most atheists would simply say "Believe what you want; just don't ask me to subsidize your church." It's a very First Amendment position.
We agree on that. But that's not the position of American green gaia religionists or the dem commies.
Multiple Religions say i am going to hell anyway so f it... I'm enjoying my life, my sundays are for sleep and football... it's why I'm agnostic.
believe what you want. Keep it out of legislation and government. Should be simple but humanity never figured that part out.
Except for illegal immigration right?
your multi-thread meltdown over my opinion is hilarious.
Never mind of course that it has nothing to do with this thread which is about religion.
You brought up religion to call for illegal immigration
You own it
Sorry if your own opinions upset you
Lmao as usual Race can’t read. I just called you a fake Christian, not for immigration, just in general, because you are. And you’re still mad about it.
make another thread crying about that or whatever else I wrote that has your depends in a wad today.