actually.. not anymore lol im writing an essay on berkeley and his idea of God, and leibniz and his idea of a collective, both theories that try to answer their ideas that theres no such things as matter, and the universe is all in the mind and ideas... i swear they drank a hell of a lot,
if God is magic, and magic is performed by someone, then there is someone greater than God! NUUUUUUUUU!!!! lol forget those two lines. i was in thinking mode for philosophy and thinking crap. lol
^ lol good one religiously speaking, certain deja vu like being at some place youve never been, was (is?) believed by having already been there in previous life times... but my friend had a deja vu where we were playing cards, and the exact hands were shown... that i dont know lol
holy shit. i just realized u had almost 4k posts wind. and u joined a month after me. how is that even possible.
like near death experiences deja vu is your brain tricking you... i don't want to go into detail but look it up... it was only recently that we are slowly figuring it out. Science slowly FTW!
when you state, "religiously speaking" -- can you be more direct in addressing what religion you are speaking from? since, not all religions have the same interpretation as you have so informally constructed. it just seems weird to read those words -- to me, it sounded like you are speaking for all religions. -blush
nooo... when i say religiously speaking it means that whatever i said falls under the topic of religion. it does not mean i speak for all religions. and previous lives, defined under reincarnation, belongs to buddhism, and buddhism belongs to the general topic of religion. therefore because my context was that of the general topic of religion, in no way am i wrong. it is logically correct. now if i had said, speaking in buddhism/christian/muslim/islam/whatnot terms, in THAT case i would mean one specific religion. on the other hand, i notice that you have quite a sensitive thing going on when theres something to be said that is untrue about your religion.. whats up with the defensive posture?
what i heard with deja vu is we sometimes dream dreams that show us what happens in our future, these dreams are supposedly the ones we don't remember when we wake up, and when it actually happens it brings back the memories of that dream and you start wondering were you seen it before. sounds like a reasonable explanation to me.
oh really? lol. -lol don't take it so personal, dann. it just sounded odd to me -- since i do believe i am a "religious" individual, but i do not believe in the existence of deja vu. so, i guess your explanation and definition does not include me. it just seems odd, that you are answering for a "general" topic of religion, but for this topic there is no "general" answer. so, if it was me, i would associate a religion to my answer -- or else the answer in itself could be taken otherwise. for example, if someone were to ask, "what is the afterlife?" by your example, i can answer: "religiously speaking, the afterlife is a place that God has created; the good will go to Heaven and the bad will be sent to Hell." (since, my associated religion is Christianity, and Christianity is in the general topic of religion. therefore, my context is written of the general topic, so my answer cannot be wrong. "it is logically correct".) of course, assuming that I do NOT need to explain myself -- and the reader(s) will automatically be able to reason themselves to this conclusion. but, hey. it's no big deal. you've explain yourself and i'm cool with it. and ps. i am sensitive when people states the Bible is untrue, not my religion.
now that means you are thinking philosophically like Descartes and not too religiously because Descartes thinks of god as the reason for everything so it's kinda like an inspiration. Religious individuals would worship god like a leader following the laws of God and such. Also you talk about needing interaction to be a leader...kings on their throne...god on their shrine...only different is king can make decisions in real time and god can make decisions based on what people perceive to be god's decisions i guess. other than that it's kinda the same, we can't really talk to the leaders of the world, can't give handshakes or direct opinions same as god only god is kinda lifeless (well religious individuals would surely have a different opinions on that. Also god is a leader because a leader is someone people turn to when they can't organize their own life or faith in a sufficient way and needs some symbol or individual to be the organizer and give direction. God and leaders are the ones that give direction, one uses their followers and a written code of god's law and one uses speech and also their own laws or the laws passed down from their ancestors. If you got confused basically i'm saying your way of thinking about god is definitely not uber religious, it's more philosophical , the uber religious ideals are the one i'm pretty much speaking against. also like what i said about no one can be hypocrite proof, when someone chooses one belief then they must reject at least one aspect of another belief therefore they have to be a hypocrite...well unless someone couldn't talk and or their minds have no ability to choose. i mean you can incorporate as much inspirations from other religions into your beliefs but still there are some aspects you must disagree on. like right now you are disagreeing about me insulting other religions and call me hypocritical in the process. well by calling me hypocritical, you have disagree with my ways and now i call you hypocritical because how you know my criticisms are wrong you have no way to prove it, just like i don't have a way to prove mines. to restate one of my earlier points: it takes a hypocrite to argue with an hypocrite. and yes adding on to the topic...this is going to be a neverending battle cause religious people are going to use religion and god as a reason for any argument, while people like me are going to use anything to disprove god as the reason...shoot if there was a "bible" for non-religious people i would just quote everything too lol...nah but i would be too lazy haha...
too much free time on my hands -lol you bet, work harder dann as for deja vu, there was an interesting article i read a while back saying that this "phenomenon" is based on the humans' subconscious mind "seeing" what it wants to see and subsequently living it out...
damn right god is magic cause i mean their name can appear anywhere, for proof, for faith, to take credit for all things that happen with no reason, if god is not magic i don't know what is lol....oh yea god can't be proven so oooh oooh it's magic....you know -sorc
lol of course im thinking philosophically lol i just finished writing a paper on the subject -lol anyways, with kings and presidents or prime ministers, they can be influenced... like with talking to MPs, or whatever counterparts.. with God you cannot.. meh.. doesnt matter anymore lol actually.. funny how i had to write an essay on the exact matter of beliefs lol some dude called Bertrand Russell did say something about the fact that in order to reject a belief, you must have another set of beliefs which are more plausible than the first... now it just boils down to what it means to be a hypocrite.. if it means accusing that one religion has no proofs to support, while his/her own does not have proof, then youre right on the money.. but if it means "a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives" then i think its a bit different...
