Elon Musk Tweets: “I’m ok with going to hell, if that is indeed my destination, since the vast majority of all humans ever born will be there.” What does this quip say about Elon’s actual belief system? Is this his conclusion, or just a current opinion — a rest stop on a longer journey toward truth?
Alfonzo Rachel and Bill Whittle create 100 new episodes of The Virtue Signal each year thanks to our Members. When you become a Member, you unlock exclusive features of our website which allow you to connect with other conservatives, and express your thoughts away from the toxic sewer of social media. Use the big green button above to join. If you’d like to give, without joining, use the big blue button to donate with credit card or PayPal. Thank you.
Listen to the Audio Version
38 replies on “Elon Goes to Hell: Billionaire Tweets Acceptance of His Infernal Destiny (Really, Mr. Musk?)”
Zoe. I don’t think telling any rich theist to burn themselves alive on a pyre of all their wealth is going to convince them, or anyone, else of hell. Maybe if you threw yourself on one and your damned spirit haunted them every night thereafter with a nightly, I told you so! Now that might be more convincing. You should do yourself a favor and go back to the drawing board for justifications on hell.
Now as for God not needing anything from us. You often tell us that the true Church is COMPRISED of the faithful, yet.. if it is a structure made of and by the faithful, doesn’t that require that the parts be made or formed to spec? Which requires our cooperation in conformity. If it’s all God, why would he need us to build and complete it?
You say that nothing was lacking, but Paul says otherwise in Colossians 1:24, or Jesus’ own warnings to some of the Churches in Revelation.
Bill says none of us agree on everything, but more than a billion Catholics around the world hold on to the same faith. Not all of them are banned from receiving Communion like Nancy Pelosi. Whom we are all still praying for.
Personally I think you are taking what Elon said far to seriously. My thoughts are he was being facetious. Someone said that he should die and go to hell for buying twitter. His response was that he wasn’t afraid of going to hell because there would be lots of people there he knew (paraphrasing because I don’t remember his exact wording). I’ve often said something like that under similar circumstances. It’s just a way of telling someone that their threat / wish is meaningless.
I also didn’t take it seriously. Really, a lot of atheists think that they aren’t too bad and that if a God really exists, he wouldn’t likely send THEM to hell. But if he did, wouldn’t that prove he wasn’t so loving after all. It’s really a cheap argument, since most people that think like this haven’t really spent too much time analyzing their life and impact on others, OR have been so put off by the poor example of others that they prefer a neutral space.
These are good souls that don’t take too much time or convincing to heal.
“The heavens declare God’s glory”
Yeah, I marvel too!
Know what else makes me marvel? Mathematics.
I watched a course (Great Courses/Teaching Company thing) by a guy who I think he was a mathematician, who also played the violin as his avocation. I was just awe struck as he explained how when a string is plucked, it vibrates in kind of a wave, and it creates undertones which harmonize because they occur in a mathematical sequence, essentially making a chord. In other words, there is a reason why certain notes sound pleasing, a mathematical reason, not just because I happen to like the way it sounds. What I find pleasing is more fact than opinion. I show my abysmal ignorance with that nearly incoherent explanation of what I really don’t understand. But it got me thinking about about mathematics.
Just about every material thing (and in truth I probably shouldn’t preface that with “just about…” But being a cosmological idiot, I like to hedge my bets,) can be defined mathematically. Weren’t there planets discovered because somebody did the math and said, “There has to be something there,” and went looking for it? Isn’t the reason that a comet’s return can be predicted because you can do the math? (And by you, I mean you, not me, because I can most certainly not do the math!)
Another thing about math it seems to me, is that it is. Math isn’t an invention. It’s a discovery. And it’s gobsmacking awesome!
And God is gobsmacking awesome! And God is. “I Am that I Am!”
And no, I don’t think math is the fourth person of the Trinity. Math is not God, I don’t worship it, but there are divine qualities to it; and I wonder, is mathematics a language of God?
Maybe you could do a show about mathematics.
I love you guys, all four of you. I pray for you often.
Maryanne, you are a wonderful person to pray for this group of guys and I figure that you probably pray for all the members who support this site as I try to remind myself to do as well. You make a very good point about just how awesome GOD really is. One day we will get to know him and see him face to face. Blessings to you
Paul, thank you for your kind words. It’s been a long time since anyone called me wonderful – and the truth is that I am not. But we have a wonderful, beautiful Savior, don’t we?
Personally, I couldn’t care less about Elon and his views of the afterlife. I’m sure he cares no more about my ideas regarding the same. No more than I would care what some Hollywood pretender thinks and I’m sure Elon feels the same about me and those Hollywood nincompoops. That’s not really the point though …
The point is that it’s no surprise at all when someone who is very smart and very successful (IOW very worldly) takes a very worldly view of eternity. We already know the type and frankly I don’t care. That’s between him and his Creator and I think he’s going to regret those words someday but I’m sure he doesn’t see things that way.
… and he’s right about one thing. He’s going to have a lot of company, fat lot of good that will do him.
Though none of that matters to me, what does matter is Elon Musk championing free speech. He can be on my side and still choose hell. Eat the meat and spit out the bone.
Thanks, Zo & Bill! Great discussion and just one of the many reasons why I subscribe to and support BillWhittle.com. Bill, your whole lineup is excellent. Keep up the great work!
Agreed, just thing we need more M2A’s…
I remember a passage in a book in the Tamuli series by David and Leigh Eddings (Probably “The Shining Ones” but might be bk 3) where some characters are talking to a few god characters and showing them a map to explain where they wanted to go, since the god-characters were a bit simple in some ways. One of the god-characters says “that is not this-place, this is this-place” and puts his hand into the ground. The dirt shifted and a miniature view of the continent appeared, and as one looked he could even see trees on the mountains and buildings where the cities were. That was knowing the world. Our maps and metaphors work at a high level, as Bill said, but the more detail you try to understand the more the metaphor breaks down.
I don’t remember what the topic was, but someone made the point that we have to keep in mind that certain things are metaphors and not to let our understanding of the metaphor prevent us from seeing the whole, real, picture.
To Zo – What is a day to God? I think you mean the Creation story to not be literal, 24 hour days, but why can’t they be? God understands everything he created in a full and complete way and it came into existance in an instant, at the Word. He doesn’t need eons or ages, later to be named “days” to manage evolution, to guide it or direct it as the Intelligent Designers wish to believe.
If that is what you are rejecting, and keep to the 6 24 hour days, then I’ve misunderstood you.
When Bill and Zo talk about the difference between knowing something and understanding something, they are essentially commenting on the difference between scientific laws and scientific theories.
Although many people incorrectly think that theories eventually become laws, that never happens. Laws and theories are fundamentally different things.
Essentially, we observe a pattern of behavior and a “Law” is a detailed description of that pattern – with no attempt to explain why. Meanwhile, “Theories” are attempts to explain why that observed pattern exists.
For example, way back in the late 1600’s, Newton formulated his Universal LAW of Gravitation – observing that the gravitational force between two massive objects is proportional the the product of the masses divided by the square of the distance between them. It is important to note that Newton’s Law doesn’t tell us ‘why’, it just tells us ‘what’. That’s why it is a Law.
About 250 years later, Einstein formulated his General THEORY of Relativity. In that theory, Einstein attempts to explain WHY gravity is what it is. Einstein’s theory is over a hundred years old and has never failed a single test. But it is still a theory and will always be a theory and we will continue to test it until it fails.
Anyway, I think that is the essence of what Bill and Zo were trying to say about “knowing” and “understanding”.
This is why the Right loses and loses and loses. We require our Heros to be perfect, and when they are, in Our Opinion, not perfect, we then jump on them. I see this with Trump bashing, I see this in this episode. Well, have your opinion, its a free country. But if you want the Right to win, then we all will have to develop tolerance and Acceptance of the imperfection of humans. So, I’m not cancelling my subscription to Bill Whittle.com. But I am sighing to see smart people derail themselves and the Right.
There are people who “require our Heros (sic) to be perfect”. Even worse are those people who think any criticism or disagreement with a public personality nominally on our side is “jumping on them”.
I see this with Trump bashing where if a person points out a single shortcoming of Donald Trump he gets dumped on as though he’d uttered the most foul of all possible blasphemies. Just for pointing out tactical and strategic mistakes of Donald Trump I’ve been “dumped on” bigtime here on this very site.
Not all disagreement or criticism is “dumping” on someone. It’s a vile form of virtue signalling to hold yourself forth as more righteous by reason of turning a blind eye to errors and mistakes. I watched the same video above that you purport to have viewed and I didn’t see anyone getting dumped on at all.
I therefore find your sighs to be misguided and inappropriate. You’re doing the very thing to Bill and Zo that you’re condemning. They didn’t do or say anything to merit that from you.
Well … maybe not yet. But you probably will. Because you’re going to find that making an oblique childish, thinly veiled threat like that doesn’t carry any weight around here. You’re welcome to stay, you’re welcome to state your opinions and the rest of us are welcome to remark on the validity of what you have to say. If you’re going to bring up “cancelling your subscription” over some slight that didn’t even occur then you may as well be gone because you’re not going to like it here very much at all.
But did you recommend that Donald Trump should jump into a fire made out his wealth to figure out what he needs to figure out?
If they don’t want thirs kind of reaction, maybe they should tone down the hyperbole, and not pass stupid ideas as if they were good ones.
What kind of stupid question is that? Did you see me say “Trump should jump into a fire made out of his wealth … blah, blah blah?” No? Then whatever could have prompted you to ask such a dumb question … ? Oh, wait a minute, I get it.
You can say stupid things in public but if Zo momentarily missteps with a poorly formulated, awkward joke then you’re OK and Zo is bad.
So you’re not above a little bit of dumping on the good guys yourself, huh Hugo ol’ buddy? I mean as long as no one calls you on it that is, ain’t that right? Because hey, you’re perfect, nicht wahr?
Grow a sense of humor, Hugo. Forgive a faux pas, overlook a mistake, and give people the benefit of the doubt now and then. You’re not immune from sticking your foot in your mouth yourself. Lighten up a little, you can’t be the world’s biggest grump perpetually. It makes you dyspeptic, ruins your complexion and you miss a lot of the fun in life so …
Take a day off.
I would agree with you if I didn’t actually think it wasn’t so much a joke. Not that zoe wants someone to jump into a fire, but that he might actually believe it’s a convincing argument. It deserves to be ridiculed.
You didn’t ask me if I thought what Zo said was a joke or anything of the sort. I do because of verbal and non-verbal cues. It’s a “joke” in the sense that it obviously was not a serious opinion of an action that Zo thought Elon Musk should execute for real.
Past that point humor is wholly subjective. I didn’t find it particularly funny but I’m not looking for reasons to ridicule Alfonzo Rachel either.
What Zo was using is called a “metaphor” —
Noun: metaphor
1. A figure of speech in which an expression is used to refer to something that it does not literally denote in order to suggest a similarity.
In this case the similarity between burning in hell and literally burning to death in a pile of one’s own cash.
It’s fairly clear that Zo* was not seriously intending that anyone should light a pile of money on fire and dive into it so they could burn to death.
Granted, it was an awkward and poorly formulated metaphor but this isn’t a scripted presentation so that kind of thing can happen to anyone. I doubt you could do it smoothly perfect every time and without coming across in a manner you did not intend on an occasion or two.
I know I couldn’t do any better myself.
… But that’s not what you asked and that’s not what I replied to. I replied that I had not said Donald Trump ought to blah blah blah because it was a stupid, awkward, poorly formulated question to ask me. I got your point, I got Zo’s point too. I was demonstrating that if a person wants to it’s not hard to find reasons to ridicule something another has said. I did this by ridiculing the stupid, awkward, poorly formulated thing you said. So …
I was saying take the beam out of your own eye before you worry about the splinter in someone else’s eye.
Being as you believe your “sins” are so immensely less than mine I’m sure you would want to follow that particular Biblical admonishment. We wouldn’t want to see your “sins” catching up to mine now would we?
Clearly all that went right over your head and hopefully now that you have compelled me to spell it out for you, you’ll get it.
As for this “guilt” stuff and your offer to compare sins to demonstrate your superior righteousness in your following comment … That seems more than a little disturbed to me. Maybe you should talk to someone about that. You haven’t tortured any small animals lately, have you?
*(Not “zoe”, his name is Alfonzo Rachel and he goes by “Zo” for short. “Zoe” is usually pronounced “Zoh-ee” and it’s a girls name. All names are proper nouns and should be capitalized. I don’t think this was a typo because it appears there might be something a bit Freudian going on with you here. Being as I note that your diction, punctuation, capitalization and grammar are sufficient to indicate you must know all this quite well. So I’m thinking that was intentional on some level conscious or not.)
Lol. Save the grammar corrections. Phonetically, it sounds like Zoe, so I’ll stick to Zoe, whatever you might think is a girl’s name or a boy’s, that’s subjective. It doesn’t matter.
Torturing animals? Really?? I’m sorry but if you don’t make sense as to what you mean by this, you’re the one that needs to explain where exactly you got this idea. I love animals and have never been cruel to them. Even though I eat some of them, I do not consider this cruelty. Please don’t waste my time with desperate grasps of accusation. Since you made the accusation, please provide proof for it.
I didn’t make any accusation. I did what you did to me and asked a stupid, loaded, question. Turnabout is fair play. You’re kind of dense, aren’t you Hugo?
Now as for self righteous behavior and presuming myself morally superior. That argument was won before it started. I don’t have to go beyond the way you interact with people here, with so much bitterness and meanness, with enough venom to shame anyone’s mother.
You’re the equivalent of a school punk, an intellectual bully. Correcting people’s grammar or that their autocorrect gives them something other than what they intended –wow. You’re not so important that anyone should feel they have to proofread a response. Especially when the words could easily be guessed as to what was meant. Talk about self importance and self righteousness! Whew!
Unlike you, I actually try to bring others into a better version of themselves, and not after a good set of kicks. No one wants your help after talking to them like they’re inferior. Get over yourself and maybe it’s you that needs a break from all this. It’s obviously too important for you.
If you don’t like the way I address you, you bring it on yourself so you’ve no one else to blame. It’s pathetic and unmanly for you to whine about it like a little girl. Unmanly and pathetic accentuated sharply by that egotistic, egocentric creepy self-righteousness you’re so proud of.
I interact with quite a few people here on this site and very few of them merit the scorn from me that you and a couple others do … So they don’t get the kind of thing you’re complaining about from me either. That should be your first clue that maybe you deserve what you get from me.
If I were “the equivalent of a school punk” that would not be true and it most certainly is. I’m not universally unamicable, I’m selectively unfriendly. I select those whom I will not be nice to by their own actions so … What’s different is you and that’s what I’m punching back at.
You “deserve to be ridiculed” every bit as much as the ridicule you heaped on Zo and I have pointed out why that is true. You just can’t take your own medicine and that’s funny. I mean I’m laughing at your lack of self awareness kind of funny. You’re a galloping doofus and a magnificent hypocrite.
Of course you can’t see any of this and wouldn’t admit it if you could see it.
I’m not going to beat around the bush and pull punches, you’re an asshole and not a very bright one at that. You get the treatment from me that you set yourself up for. If that’s “intellectual bullying” then so be it and tough luck for you. Stop being an asshole and I’ll stop treating you like one.
I’m done with you now, this is all the pig wrestling I’m going to treat myself to this week. Say whatever you like, just know that I’ll neither read nor respond to it. Don’t flatter your ignoramus self that I’m “running away”, which is your typical stupid response when anyone says they’re done with your stupidity. I could go on a lot more but …
You’re boring me now and I have better things to do than put a dipstick on front street over and over again. Good bye, Hugo, ’til the next time you say something stupid to me and I call you on it … again.
At least you didn’t waste time with insults you pulled out of the ether this time. The reason I call you out on proof is it might greatly reduce your awful word count in including ridiculous and stupid things the reader must slog through because you’re in love with your own wit.
And imagine that! Looks like it is working. Abusing animals… f. Your psycho analysis is pathetic itself, and your ‘escape’ from whatever this is doesn’t bother me at all or amuse me. Using it as a shield while casting it as a stone at the same time does.
Your ‘selective’ targeting of folks to correct their grammar I find repugnant and you honestly waste time enough without any of my help, kid. Knock yourself out, but take a look in the mirror sometime after calling me a dick.
Now let’s bring this back to what this was about originally. You were defending an idiotic statement made by Zoe, (as if he couldn’t defend it himself) and were the first to bring up a justification for it with a, ‘well, what about you, have you never said anything you regret before?’ So you see, YOU were the one to bring up past character, when this had nothing to do with the past, but with what was being said now by a person that considers themselves teachers of virtue. That, in some parallel universe, it is considered a good practice of evangelization of atheists to burn them in a pyre of all their material possessions, and that this will prove that both God and hell exist to them…
If Zoe is supposed to be on our side, why does he speak like a flaming psychotic liberal? It was a dumb thing to say, and I wasn’t the only one to remark on it being so.
I don’t know if you are an actual personal friend of Zoe, but a good friend should not suffer the delusions of a friend. If so, then this idiot is in need of a better friend. Bias should have no seat in a forum about virtue, nor the violence of brutes.
Stop defending dumb ideas and be a true friend, if indeed you are his friend. Or will you also follow his manner in opposing everyone that doesn’t think as he does? Well, maybe that’s why you both have so many friends.
As for my own personal guilt, I really don’t know where to go with that. I’m 38 at the moment. If I’m caught saying things like that, I would genuinely be disappointed with my trajectory. But, by all means, point out what was so stupid in what I’ve said and I’ll make a brief attempt to defend again or admit that I’ve crossed that bridge and how.
What do you want, a list of my sins? Are we speaking about where we are currently, the men we have been for a day, the last week, or the last decade? Tell me, so we can weigh each other’s hearts and see if you’re right in calling me out.
I promise it will be a more painful experience for you than it will for me, and not just in my own eyes. Why not, may God also bear witness.
telling Elon to burn his money is STUPID even as a joke
people that have abortions are guilty of murder BUT if they want to END THEIR gene pool and someone is willing to pay for it then let GOD judge. I do have a problem for OTHER people children but if you want to pay for other peoples children then it is on you.
I’m sorry but that doesn’t make a lot of sense. Probably because you tried typing it on a phone or tablet and what you typed isn’t precisely what you were thinking.
You say abortion is murder. I got that part. Murder is murder, it is the taking of an innocent life by unjust means. Self defense, combat in war, execution for capital crimes etc. are examples of killing but not murder.
So are you trying to say that it’s OK for people to murder their own children — or anyone else for that matter because if they’ll kill their own kids they’ll kill anyone under the right circumstances — because God will judge them for it? Just so you won’t have to “pay for other people’s children”? I just want to be sure I’m understanding what you’re thinking.
Because if that’s what you’re saying it’s pretty dastardly. If murder is OK, because God will judge the murderer and you don’t want to pay for the existence of the murdered … That’s pretty much the same ideology that Socialism/Communism has used to kill a couple hundred million people. Without the God part of course but “taking the Lord’s Name in vain” means doing evil in the name of God so …
I’m hoping I misunderstood your rather cryptic post.
While Mr. Musk is a brilliant human, this “I don’t mind going to Hell” statement reveals a large hole in his knowledge base. The “I’ll pay for my employees to go out of state for an abortion” piles on confirmation of this statement, further revealing the obvious implication that he hasn’t really thought about what Bill refers to as the “Why” of our existence. (Not that the “How” is all that explainable scientifically.)
To be fair I have not seen Elon specifically say anything on abortion. Tesla, the company, is offering that to employees, but that does not mean that Elon was in charge of that policy, Elon has the controlling interest in Tesla but he does not control it outright, I do not see that policy at SpaceX which he does control outright. Then there is the pile of personal statements that Elon has made about population decline and how that is a huge problem, so he made be default liberal “pro-choice”, but I doubt he is what is today considered pro-abortion.
While watching this episode, it reminded me of an old joke that I’ll try to recall as best I can:
A group of Scientists were convinced that they finally reached the point where they could do as well as God in creating a man, so they challenged God to a contest to see if they could succeed. God accepted their challenge and when the time arrived where they were getting started, they began gathering dirt. God then asked, what do you think you’re doing? One of the Scientists replied, we’re gathering what we need to get started! God then said, “make your own dirt”.
I’ve always loved this joke, because it perfectly frames the debate about God vs man as the creator. Thanks for posting it (:
Good joke. But I beat you to it in older comments. Twice. (can’t remember where, but still appreciated the comment, since if you didn’t see it, others would be in the same boat.) It bears repeating, so good for you!
That’s okay, because it is a joke worth repeating again, and again.
Freaking Awesome Episode! As a thoroughly impressed and delighted parakeet, I thank you both for this most excellent ride! I want also to thank you for bringing Zo into the mix. My vocabulary is truly insufficient, but I do so thank you for expanding my universe (:
ps: I always forward these, every one of them, to my sister. I haven’t technically “shared” them, but they don’t stay in my computer (except for the ones I put in my “keepers” folder).
I’m not the least bit worried about Hell either, but for a completely different reason. The God-man, King Jesus, died in my place and paid the ENTIRE penalty for ALL of my sins. He promised me (and everybody else who accepts His free gift) that I’ll be with HIM in Heaven for eternity. PTL!!
I dunno. Could’ve been a statement of humility, too. None of us is perfect, we’re all flawed, few of us deserve to go there. Just a thought.
Perhaps, but consider, if you will, the hubris required to think that Hell (as described in the Bible) is survivable.
However, Zo commented on such hubris at length.
Well, I’ve never been a literalist, so that doesn’t really bother me. I understand others are … your mileage may vary.