Phil
God said the following to me: “I am the Love Everlasting. Whatever men say about me with their minds is vapor. I cannot be known by the mind, but only by the heart. Stop dividing the world between theists and atheists, and start dividing it rightly, as I do. There are those who love and those who don’t. Those who love, they are my disciples.”
Be brutally frank. Am I, in your opinion, delusional?
That depends on what your definition of “am” is. 
Speaking only as and for myself, not representing anyone else or any philosophy or worldview other than Phil-ism: I believe that the paragraph you describe above did, in fact, appear to you, as a voice in your ear or words in your mind. I do not doubt at all that it occurred to you after deep meditation or prayer on what you encountered at the SD and particularly in Gaudere. Only you can know what you really experienced. If speculating, I would say that, following a difficult internal dialogue (or monologue, however you care to describe it) with your conscience on what you believed to be the nature of theists and atheists, you came to an answer which satisfied not only your personal ethics, but the facts as you were encountering them. If you choose to call that conscience “God,” that doesn’t matter to me, as long as the answer you come up with is not hateful and exclusionary. That has no bearing, AFAIC, on whether any gods actually exist. What matters is the answer’s effect on how you treat people.
So, in short, I’m hedging. I believe that you you believe in a being that does not exist. And, contrarywise, you believe that I don’t believe in a being that does. One of us is wrong.
**
Maybe one did! There are people who are quite delusional about other people, entities and what have you, and they can have quite a profound effect on the people who are delusional.
I’m afraid you have not answered my thoughts at all. You already spoke of the impact, and I said that with the proper psychotherapy, you would be healed of this delusion.
I also asked what the difference is between the person who is religious and swears God talks to them, the person who says that God told them to kill, the person who has friends that nobody else can see but ho are able to function in society, and the person who is always talking to various entities that are unable to be proven that they exist?
Yer pal,
Satan
[sub]I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Four months, six days, 12 hours, 43 minutes and 13 seconds.
5141 cigarettes not smoked, saving $642.65.
Life saved: 2 weeks, 3 days, 20 hours, 25 minutes.[/sub]
"Satan is not an unattractive person."-Drain Bead
[sub]Thanks for the ringing endorsement, honey![/sub]
Thanks, Phil.
I agree with you that, whatever their source, revelations that cause us to make peace with one another, and love and respect one another, are good things. You are also correct that one of us is right and the other wrong. I can only hope that, if I am right about nothing else, I am right about this. Because if I am, then you and I will still know one another long after the wave field has either collapsed or dissapated.
And that would be yet another good thing.
I worked for 8 years with persons suffering from various severe mental illnesses. Imaginary beings most definately do impact people’s lives–in most profound ways.
Secondly, FoG, what do you think people of other religions are doing? Do you think that they see no impact of their god in their lives, yet chose to follow he/she/it anyway just for the fun of it? Is Satan tricking these people, leading them to be kinder, more loving and all around better people so that in the end he can say “ha ha I fooled you!” (I can’t tell you how concerned I am that you’re going to say you agree with that). When the devout Hindu prays to be a better servant to his brothers and succeeds in doing so, and then thanks his god for giving him that strength, what do you think is going on there?
And there are Christians that have converted to Islam…it’s meaningless.
I think were all open to the possibility of a lot of things.
I was a bible-toting, church-goer in college, but “backslid” when reason started to creep into the picture, and I felt nothing. As FoG implied, God was talking to me, but it was my fault that the transmission wasn’t complete.
I am determined to punch holes in a steel girder with my finger. Does that mean I can do it? No. We’re punching holes because they can be punched…easily!
Yeah, ignorant, and without the ability to reason.
BTW, I have no problem with Christ, and his teachings, but I just can’t swallow that fire-and-brimstone, streets-paved-with-gold, God v Satan stuff.
As though reason were not a house of cards, resting on a foundation of tautology. There is such a fine line between ignorant and arrogant.
Lib, if you’re implying I crossed into the latter, you got me. It’s not my style, and I apologize. But, FoG’s circumlocutions are maddening! Fred Astaire would be proud of the way FoG danced around that matt-has-no-job situation. If he “misinterpreted” God on that, how many other things has he misunderstood? How can he make a decision with God’s help if he’s not ever sure he heard the advice correctly? This is the stuff that gets me so damned rankled.
Welcome to SDMB, SeatTime.
FriendofGod:
Right. I also said that there are damned few people that I have encountered who actually do so. Reading comprehension is your friend. Hell, just reading what others post can be your friend.
After watching you attempt to explain how God can make everyone’s life better, particularly the debacle that was your attempt at prophecy, I’m just as glad that I’ve never gotten a direct transmission. Hell, I already have too many instances of confusion in my life, the last thing I need is this deity of yours screwing up my synapses, too.
The more that you post, the more I’m inclined to agree with slythe, and think that you simply want an audience. The fact that your audience is composed of people who don’t believe is gravy. I notice, too, that you’ve not posted to anything other than this particular topic in quite some time. Once again leading me to believe that you just want a group of folk to read your take on your religion, and hopefully you’ll find someone who will join your side and vindicate you. In short, this seems to be the equivalent of masturbation for you.
Waste
Flick Lives!
FoG, you seem to not have read your own scripture. Your bible clearly states that if someone makes even one false prophecy, he is a false prophet, inspired by Satan, whom YHWH will strike dead. So I don’t think God is impressed with your excuses about how you and your buddies get it right “the vast majority of the time.”
As for the Psychic Friends Network doing the work of Satan, well… we all know how to identify false prophets. (See above.)
-Ben
Thank you SeatTime, I’ve been trying to get that out but hadn’t been able to phrase it so succinctly.
Libertarian:
May I ask you a question? This isn’t an attack on you, but I’m wondering, I’ve noticed your posting style tends to be a little cryptic. Do you intentionally do this, or am I missing something?
FoG:
I’ve decided to make this my last address to you directly at least on this topic anyway. It’s becoming clear that you’re not really “listening” to what I’m saying but merely gleaning details, which you can address scripturally or philosophically. Neither of these things is reaching me. I’ve tried to explain it to you before, and now am only reiterating to get it across.
I WAS ONCE AN ORDAINED MINISTER, I’M A COLLEGE AND SEMINARY GRADUATE. (excuse me for shouting folks :o ) In short, I know the scripture and am pretty well versed in the philosophic arguments regarding religion and the Bible. I was trying to get you to understand that for me this is almost the opposite of your post. I once believed and no longer can.
For what it’s worth, I have enjoyed reading some of these posts and your comments to them.
Peace
I am not intentionally cryptic, but you are not necessarily missing anything. Perhaps you’ve drawn a false dilemma.
Lib, you know I love ya, dude. And sure, maybe you don’t mean your posts to be cryptic. But the fact that more than one person has brought this to your attention might make you look at your posts a bit more carefully.
Now that you should NOT be cryptic, but your explanations when accussed of this that border on the flabbergasted dictate to me that you are not really seeing how you are coming off to people here.
Because many of your one-sentence hit-and-run posts are QUITE cryptic, IMHO.
Yer pal,
Satan
[sub]I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Four months, six days, 21 hours, 7 minutes and 18 seconds.
5155 cigarettes not smoked, saving $644.40.
Life saved: 2 weeks, 3 days, 21 hours, 35 minutes.[/sub]
"Satan is not an unattractive person."-Drain Bead
[sub]Thanks for the ringing endorsement, honey![/sub]
Thank you, Satan. Yes, I’m certainly feeling the heat over this matter.
I think I do understand what people mean, but I don’t think I can change my ways. I remember once when Gaudere and, who was it, RT, I think, wanted me to change. I tried. I failed. I guess I just have to say things the way I feel them. Over time, they will usually come together in focus. I wish I had Poly’s clarity, but alas I have my own stepping stone make a point slowly style. I wish my posts were like Tris’s, delicate crystals of winter’s first snow, wafting on a gentle breeze, lifting the spirits on a dreary day. My posts? They just sorta roll down the lane like bowling balls.
I greatly appreciate people like you who grant me license to use my hyperbole and metaphor. I don’t know how I could ever make a point without it, unless we held our debates using abstract symobology rather than the English language. If nothing else, I seem to possess a memorable style. People seem effortlessly to identify my posts whether I login as Edlyn here by mistake, or even on other boards. Gaudere recognized me at Atheists for Jesus, where I used the handle “LOC”!
{Intended solely as a joke among friends}
Well, you could always start a thread called “The Ethics of Cryptic Posting” or “Ask the Intuitive Stylist”!!
:: flees ::
Libertarian: *My posts? They just sorta roll down the lane like bowling balls. *
Well, why not, Lib? All we ask is that if they seem to us to vanish into the gutter of meaninglessness, you should bowl us a few more in the hope of striking some of the pins of comprehension. 
If you reject reason, why are you debating? And for that matter, with what?
Just as a friendly warning, if you say “very well, thank you” I’m going to have to groan in horrible pain.
And I think there’s a bit of a difference between “requiring certain assumptions” and being a “house of cards.” At least unless you can come up with something that requires no assumptions at all. But that’s just quibbling.
I’m not sure there is a line between ignorant and arrogant. They’re seperate concepts.
Of course, you could say the same about genius and madness, so, never mind.
As I’m all four, I should have realized that earlier . . .
–
“It’s very easy to criticize.”
“Fun, too.”
I don’t “reject” reason. I merely recognize the tautological nature of every epistemology, including reason. Don’t you?
Sure. Why not. But that’s not the same as dissmissing them in a belittling fasion.
It’s not a perticulularly useful observation, though. Because pretty much by definition it allows you no way to proceed, either in debate, or in real life.
Unless you have to reassess your entire mindset on a radical level, which is fairly uncommon unless you’re a big fan of mind altering drugs. It has intellectual value, of the “doubt everything” nature, but it’s not relavant here.
“I don’t accept your arguement. Your reasoning is built on a tautology, that of reason itself.”
“So’s yours.”
“Glad that we got this settled. Let’s go get some nachos.”
Assuming they accept the existance of nachos, which is defined on several tautologies, involving perception, language, weither other people perceve nachos, and so on. Douglas Adams loves pointing this out.
If you don’t agree to accept reason, at least theoretically, we can’t have an argument, or much of a discussion, for that matter. And if you do, it’s a non-sequiter, and an irritating one, to bring it up in the middle of a discussion.
–
Damn, I could use some nachos right now.