do U have ANY idea how - ludicrous & asinine -
your - conflicting & contradicting - reply actually is -

given that U have reacted - responded - replied -
in such an - oppugnant & belligerent - manner -
to almost - EVERY - post I have - presented -

get a grip - AnneWimsey -
your wasting what little mental -
faculty & ability - U may have left -

save it for a therapist -
they will most likely give U -
some drugs to calm U down -

it certainly can be -
and as U have clearly recently demonstrated -
your inability to recognize and thus comprehend -
the English language - indicates your essential need -
for such medicine and perhaps some anti-depressants -

Best of Luck with your illness -
try to stay on schedule in taking your meds -
remember - just because U start to feel better -
doesnt mean - U can stop taking them -

Really !!! -

U can no longer complain about the punctuation -
so now U simply move on to claiming the words R -
too long or to big for your mind to - contemplate -

WOW !!!

I apologize - Mofo1953 - for the disparaging comments -
I was not aware that U had such a pronounced reading -
comprehension disability that seems to be plaguing U -

as such I will cease & desist -
from any further interactions -
as I do not wish to cause U any -
further mental anguish or despair -

again my apologies -
get well - Be well -
stay Safe - Happy & Healthy

Namaste - that which is - ENERGY -
being LOVE thru a human - LIFE form -

@KWAPELL7 boring.

well it seems as though we may actually -
be making some progress toward being -
able to - effectively - communicate -

Q # 1. "How does one chose to be what they are?

Answer :
One is Always - Choosing - Ones - path in LIFE -
every second of every day - U R both - Consciously -
and subconsciously - Choosing - Whom - U will express -
Ones Self - AS - U can be - naughty or nice - good or bad -
Happy or Sad - Loving or mad - here or there - right or wrong -

U chose - every step that U have taken - in LIFE -
and continue to take - in - Life - Where U R going -
and - Who - U R - going to - BE - when U get there -

the - Person that U R now - being -
is a direct result of the - Choices of -
Ones {Soul Spirit Being} - as - One Self -

Q # 2 - Energy being Eternal -

Answer - Energy has already - been proven -
established & confirmed - numerous times -
by numerous studies to be - indestructible -
it is - therefore in its very - Nature - Eternal -
Energy is Always Changing - yet - Never Ending -

Q # 3 - GOD is ALL things & No thing -

Answer - One must pay - close attention -
to the verbiage used in this - statement -
as - I did NOT - use the term - "nothing" -
I stated - GOD is All things & - NO - thing -
as in - GOD is Not merely - One - thing -

Q # 4 - how can LOVE be - ALL things -
when - hate - fear - anger - sadness -
also - Obviously - Plainly & profusely -
exist within & throughout - Life on Earth -

Answer - In order to - Know - Ones Self -
as - "this" - "that" - must also exist -

One cannot demonstrate Ones - LOVE -
in the absence of that which it is - NOT -

One cannot Go - Right if there is No - left -
One cannot BE - Right if there is NO - wrong -
One cannot BE - GOOD if there is NO - bad -

Q # 5 - LIFE is ALL things -
how then does - Life = death -

Answer - U R an - Eternal Being - Divinely being -
a - Magnificent yet mortal - human - form of LIFE -

yes - the - temporal & corporeal - human body -
that U currently inhabit animate direct & control -
will at some point in the future - cease to function -

the body is merely a vessel thru which - U as a Spirit -
have chosen - to express & experience - Ones Self thru -
while U R dwelling in a relative realm of - time & space -
in order to Know - Ones - {Self Soul Spirit} - as a Person -

thus U as an Eternal Being - Divinely - being human -
Never "die" - U simply return to the - state of Being -
from which U originated and your - physical body -
decomposes & returns whence it came - hence -
the saying - "ashes to ashes - & - dust to dust" -

so yes your - time in space - is - limited - {death}
yet your - Soul Spirit Being - is - Eternal - {LIFE}

btw - Thank U for responding -
with such - decency & decorum -

@KWAPELL7 Well, I like the step you took that people were asking for, myself included, so it wouldn't have been right for me to continue the way I was responding.

1. For the sake of argument, since it is likely I will not be able to convince you we do not have free will, I will discuss under the assumption that we do. So it's it your contention that anything not specifically chosen by the individual is not part of who they are? One does not choose where they were born, the financial situation they were born into, their family, the color of their skin, the predominate thoughts on religion (among many other things) of the people around them when they are young and learning the most they will ever learn, and these things most definitely shape your worldview and who you become through no fault or choice of your own. Furthermore, while we may agree to disagree about whether conscious choices are a matter of free will, I don't think we can regarding subconscious ones. Thus, you cannot be 'that which you have chosen to be' unless that which you have not chosen is not part of what you are.

2. I probably should have spent a little more time here. My contention is that if the "indestructible energy" reaches universe-wide thermodynamic equilibrium (which is theorized based off the laws of thermodynamics that you are using to support your claim) there will be no way for it to change or do any work ever again. How can something be all powerful if it loses all of its power and can never regain it? Similarly, what does it even mean to say "all-knowing" when exactly 0% of that knowledge can be conveyed or used in any way ever?

3. So this would be an example of intentionally difficult language that creates a divide between you and your reader. Furthermore, it is complicated by the fact that you fail to use commonly agreed-upon linguistic tools, thus, one cannot know without asking if "no thing" means "not one particular thing" or "nothing" with yet another unnecessary space. Regardless, it is superfluous language. If your goal is really to get people to understand what you are trying to say, you shouldn't be doing things that necessarily and exclusively run counter to that.

4. I have argued that very thing elsewhere on this website, most specifically against someone's contention that god cannot be benevolent and all powerful because if he were, he wouldn't have allowed suffering. All suffering is felt in contrast to other states. If you eliminate the "worst" thing, a new worst thing will take its place until you have nothing left to eliminate. The problem with your statement is that if love were it's own antonym, it would be able to exist without a counterpart. That simply does not make sense.

5. This is where the burden of proof falls on you. Assertive claims about the existence of a soul/spirit/being that carries on eternally need to be supported, and you have not done this.

@JeffMurray Well done Jeff, respect, you sure are a trying, but sometimes you have to ask yourself if all the hard work is going to get you anywhere.

@Fernapple I knew his claim that no one could refute him was baseless. I made the assertion that if he wrote normally, maybe someone could try. He made an attempt by removing all punctuation. I felt it was my duty to do the same. I believe I have successfully proved his postulate has flaws.

@JeffMurray Indeed you have, but I do not think he is listening.

@Fernapple It appears not. Maybe once he realized I proved his theory wrong he lost interest.

@JeffMurray - No Jeff - I never made such statement -
nor do I concur with such - or your elaboration there-upon -
"So it's it your contention that anything not specifically chosen by the individual is not part of who they are? "

Thus, you cannot be 'that which you have chosen to be' unless that which you have not chosen is not part of what you are.

Answer - I disagree with the conclusion stated there-in -

One cannot - BE - anything -
if there is - Not - a - contextual field -
or in our (Earths) case a - "Unified Field" -
already in place - such as - Time & space -
which allows One a - conceptual & relative -
experience of Knowing Ones Self as - This or that -
thus One cannot Know UP if there is No Down ...

just as One cannot - Know - Ones Self - experientially -
if there is nothing & No One to contrast - Who U R - being -

@JeffMurray - my response to # 2 -

as to your statements regarding - Energy -

"How can something be all powerful if it loses all of its power and can never regain it"
"there will be no way for it to change or do any work ever again"

Answer - that is not how Energy works - (read the latest on string & field theory) -

Answer I have - Never stated - nor - articulated - in ANY way or time -
that I AM using such laws nor theory of thermodynamic equilibrium -
to support or substantiate my postulate - nor - do I concur with your -
assessment &/or determination - nor your stated - explication there-of -

the fact that U R attempting to - form or establish a conclusion and -
to describe define & discern the postulate - using different parameters -
principles & theories - other than those as stated in the postulate itself -
indicates & intimates that U R attempting to - dilute the - process of analysis -
by using your own variables/theories to alter or put in place of - what was -
clearly articulated - defined & described - in the postulate -

as such I AM unable to accept this as a - legitimate rebuttal -

@JeffMurray - my response to # 3 -

"So this would be an example of intentionally difficult language that creates a divide between you and your reader. Furthermore, it is complicated by the fact that you fail to use commonly agreed-upon linguistic tools, thus, one cannot know without asking if "no thing" means "not one particular thing" or "nothing" with yet another unnecessary space. Regardless, it is superfluous language. If your goal is really to get people to understand what you are trying to say, you shouldn't be doing things that necessarily and exclusively run counter to that."

Answer - I agree - at least in part -
from - "your" perspective - U R - mostly correct -
yours is the "normal" or - culturally & socially - acceptable -
way - manner & form - which we have been - trained & instructed -
told to - pressured & coerced - to express the - "Individual" that U R -

such manner of depersonalized - expression -
thru - indoctrination - coercion & subjugation -
to inculcate & thus instill - whats acceptable -
is to create a populace full of robots/zombies -

it is akin to - brainwashing - and its inevitable result -
(if not subverted by those such as myself & others) -
would have EVERY Person on the planet speaking -
& writing in the same - manner way shape & form -

and in so doing & being - U fit nicely into - Their - box -
with all the other - "normal" - people - each expressing -
as they have been - told & instructed - to so - Do & BE -

I have no desire nor interest in - conforming nor acquiescing -
to - ANY - other - persons - cultures - societies - nor - Nations -
demands of specific boundaries & limitations of - Self expression -

U might make note - this countries constitution -
includes the rights of - Self expression & Free Speech -

however as by now I AM - sure - that U R - Consciously Aware -
that We (i.e. - U & I ) - do NOT see Life thru the same - lens/perspective -

as such my response is - as I have stated MANY times -

the - way manner shape & form in which - I Choose -
to write - express & expound - My thoughts & ideas -
perceptions & observations - is - Uniquely My Own -
which is - as - it should BE - One - Self - expression -

@JeffMurray - my reply to # 4 & 5 -

4 - "The problem with your statement is that if love were it's own antonym, it would be able to exist without a counterpart. That simply does not make sense."

Answer - Love is NOT its own "antonym"
and again - I Never proclaimed it to so Be -

5 - "This is where the burden of proof falls on you. Assertive claims about the existence of a soul/spirit/being that carries on eternally need to be supported, and you have not done this"

Answer - the holes in your rebuttals R as numerous as my hyphens -
U have yet to - factually & accurately - confute ANY part of the postulate -
making your own assertions and claiming they R mine - will not work -

@KWAPELL7

1. That doesn't change anything. Either context exists for one to be what they chose to be or it does not. In either case, if you are only what you choose to be, it still means that you are not that which you do not choose. If that is not the case, it means that you may be that which you do not choose, invalidating your initial claim: "I am that which I have so chosen to be."

2. Then you need to explain specifically what you mean by:

   energy being infinite
   energy composes and comprises all of life
   it is thus and therefore omniscient and omnipotent
   as it is omnipresent and eternal in its very nature
   indestructible - it is - therefore in its very - Nature - Eternal -
   Energy is Always Changing - yet - Never Ending

This seems to be a reference to the laws of thermodynamics, but even is it's not, the burden is still on you to support your assertive claims. My major points of contention here would be:
2a. How can energy be all powerful at universal heat death?
2b. How can energy be always changing at universal heat death?

3. That's fine. Write however you want, but if you refuse to use common language, you forfeit the right to claim people can't understand or refute your claims. It's akin to me saying, "jshyxjdj djjsbsux ukfkdnd hdhkcbd jdj dbnd jfjfres osndjkcj fjdh tcjchd hdjc I fj" and anyone unable to understand or refute that claim is X, Y, and/or Z.

Love is NOT its own "antonym"
and again - I Never proclaimed it to so Be

Of course you did. You said:

love is all things

Since hate is a thing, and love is all things, one of the things love is, is hate. Ergo, love is, at least in part, its own antonym.

5. And this is the point my regret sets in.
   I have clearly REfuted (not confuted) your claims, but your failure to adhere to common language and definitions allows you to pretend as though I haven't. I knew this was going to happen, too. Either way, for anyone that may have given your posts even another moment of contemplation, I likely will have spared them from such a fate if they have read this exchange, and for this, I suppose, I can take a small comfort in what was an otherwise aggravating and futile endeavor.