To make things clear, I'll mean by God christians' God.

If God is a being that requires my devotion and belief more than being a 'good' person, then I cannot respect such a god. If that god values goodness, then I can respect such a god and I would see God as a friend. Regardless of the existence of God, I try to be a good person because that matters more to me than the belief in a god. I would rather do something purely out of my own desire to be good than with the bribe of eternal contentedness or the fear of eternal damnation.

"If God is a being that requires my devotion and belief more than being a 'good' person, then I cannot respect such a god." According to christians, God does want you to be a good person. He requires you in order to save humanity from evil. God is a love God, he doesn't want us to pray for him, but for yourself. By praying, we can communicate with God, ask for help and do you best. Humans can't do anything by themselves about evil, they need God's help.
"I would see God as a friend" : You can't say that, God is God, so God is much more than a friends, he's your creator. For example, you can't say your mother or your father is a friends, he (has to be) much more than that. God is not equal to you, he's much superior.
"I would rather do something purely out of my own desire to be good than with the bribe of eternal contentedness or the fear of eternal damnation." : I have to answer to that. Do you know what the "eternal damnation" is ? It is the lack of God. Someone'll have it if he refuses God's love and his help for ever. If you're good, continue to be so, it is exactly what he wants you to be.

Just to clarify, it is possible to prove God exists, but it is not possible to explain how He exists.

It isn't possible to prove God exists. Thsi debate won't come anywhere, because we can't prove anything about that. As je ne sais plus qui said, you cannot understand to believe, but you have to believe to understand.

If God created everything, then who created God?

ERR: Invalid. God lives forever and fromever, that's all. There's no origin to his life. He invented time, so you can't apply to him this notion.

This thought challenges the "someone created you" part of religion, because God would then have to have been created by someone higher and mightier, and then it chains on.

No, because of what I just said.

What if God created himself? Infinite chain broken. And never mind that it doesn't make sense, making sense was never a requirement..

God wasn't created.

Brings up the problem that in many religions there's a book that they believe is the truth...

It isn't a "book of the truth". It is a book the enables to understand many things.

I'm not one to believe it either, not until I see hard evidence.

Really? So you have to believe in very few things. And you're doing as Pierre did. But since you need to believe to get the hard evidence in you, you're on an impasse.

Evenso, if he would be real and such only put us here to believe in him and please him and doing bad will get us ending up in hell, then I can't help but not bring up much respect for such a god. (This probaly is a very sharp turn, but I can't think of another way to express it.)

See above in my message.

Yes. A command that compiles a part of Grammer code dynamically, and that does so that this part be compiled in the current context. For example : if a variable has a specific value, the code using it could be parsed as if it was a constant : some operations could be calculated before the parsing, and the code would be really fast in the context. It could be usefull when there's short loops (-> fast parsing) but with lots of iterations (-> lot of time preserved). Like in Java, but asking it manually.

But don't take consideration to this really hard point, it is much less important than the other ones.

It would actually still be fast since this is how Repeat loops are typically handled anyways. I am doing it this way because it will help to prevent stack overflow issues. Math might change, too, by the way. I am still working out how I want to efficiently handle math. I will probably attempt Order of Operations so you can do something like 3+6*(a+b⁴) like you would in BASIC.

Cool ! Will the app support variables' declaration with the type ? And what about local variables ? Will we be able to do recursive functions ?

I was thinking about this and I at first thought I might be able to make one app for the editor, and one app to run the program. However, I was going to add a lot more commands to Grammer 3, so the parser would still need 2-pages Then you would have a 2-page app for running Grammer programs and a 1-page app for editing them. Instead, I will try to make it just 1 app that is 2-pages.

Why not put the most needed functions in the 1-page app parser, and then put other functions into several appvars which would be used like the DLL ? Programs needing such a appvar would require it, and even though the user would use all the functions, the final size woudn't be 16 kilo bytes. Of course, updating would be more difficult... Finally, a 2-page app isn't so big when be think about Omnicalc and so. And the containing of an editor could appeal users of programs and give them curiosity to try to do something. Will you introduce hooks like the OS to customize the editor, like adding tutorials as you did ?

If the sprite is too big, I will have it display maybe a 16x16 portion and if the user wants to use edit it, a special editor will open.

It's not really a good idea to my mind, because we couldn't see the difference between pictures which don't have any pixel on on the board up left.
Will you add the support of tilemaps and an editor of tilemaps ? Will you add a basic pictures compression ? What about gray-scale sprites ?

That is a good idea. I will probably still stick menu options on the bottom row, though For example, 5 options for F1~F5:

Please don't, it is usefull the first 5 minutes, but then we know the keys and don't need their action's description to be shown anymore, and a line of code is removed.

I hope I actually finish it! I have been planning for over two years now, so hopefully you will get a chance to finally use it!

Yes, and I've been waiting for those two years ! And hope you'll finally do it ! 

NB : know that you're doing a 2-pages app, will you be able to add a command to parse pieces of code as someone proposed it ? But after having finally done this version 3 for sure.

What about adding structured variables and more, objects with methods like in Java ? Maybe I'm dreaming.

Yeah, I know all of that, and I have nothing against Grammer (also, if Grammer gets ported on the CSE before Axe, I'll use it instead ), I was just telling mdr1 that his arguments were not good.

Well, if you could answer to my last post, it would be really great !
My arguments are that Grammer's programs are really light, enough to make profitable the 16,384 bytes used by the application when we begin having enough programs, and that Axe's programs are faster. Which is wrong ?

Of course, since they are plain text that gets interpreted. Just try to compile a Grammer program in the ASM resulting of its interpretation and then we'll can talk.

Did you only read this post ? https://tiplanet.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=11837&start=10#p140313

Bien sûr que si que ça sert de comparer, on présente souvent la page d'application Grammer nécessaire pour exécuter des programmes Grammer comme un inconvénient, il est donc juste de montrer que les programmes sont d'un autre côté bien plus légers et qu'avec pas mal de programmes, la balance penche bien vite du bon côté.

Also, you destroyed nothing, we told you about Fusion.

Fusion or not, I replied that the program has a size 2.5 times bigger, not having taken into account the 200o routine. Here : https://tiplanet.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=11837&start=20#p140370

I destroyed this argument on TI-Planet's subject, Matrefeytontias.