ACTUAL prophet of Jesus here

[mediamogul]

[quote='mediamogul' pid='263909' dateline='1333151193']
[quote='Telsa' pid='263908' dateline='1333150860']

I don't neccessarily think you are schizophrenic or psychotic, which refers to a specific cluster of symptoms outlined in the DSM-IV, I don't have enough info to make a diagnosis. A person can have false beliefs without being overtly delusional. Take white supremecists or folks who believe in new age medicine. This is the difference between mental illness and incorrect superstitious belief. I think you are correctly skeptical of other religions but like many theists you appear to have a blind spot for your own. Take that same skepticism and apply it to your own beliefs and it will yield similar results.

[quote='Telsa' pid='263908' dateline='1333150860']
Ok. A couple things. First, just about everyone here has said I'm schizo, with little cause.

Only a trained mental health professional can make that diagnosis. If you are experiencing symptoms of a disorder I suggest seeking help but that doesn't neccessarily sound like the case. I don't know because I don't have all the info.

Second, I HAVE applied skepticism to my religion--and I became an atheist. It was by continuing to seek greater Truth that led me to Buddhism. After I was Buddhist, God called me back to Him through coincidences and forced...well,more like invited--me to abandon my belief that there is no Greater Being. There was simply to much meaning in what was happening, be it the coincidences or the time constantly being the same or changing the second I got into the room. In all honesty, it would have required greater faith for me to remain atheist.

Question: When you were an "atheist" did you believe that god did not exist or did you believe that god existed and wasn't fit to be worshipped or wasn't good or something of the like?

You sound like you were a "foot in the door" atheist. As in, you still had one foot in the door of Christianity. Many atheists who reconvert are never really "atheists" in the sense that they lack belief in gods.

As atheists we have every religion making the exact same claims to personal experience proving not only god's existence but the validity of their particular flavor of religion. You don't believe that Islam or Hinduism are true, so therefore those experiences are not compelling to you despite they sound indentical to the claims you have made for your own flavor of religion. You accept your experience as being validating of you brand of religion but reject theirs as false experiences. Now if they have had false experiences and believed just the same as you do why is it that your experience couldn't have been false the same way you believe theirs was?

[Telsa]

[quote='NoMoreFaith' pid='263911' dateline='1333151605']
[quote='Telsa' pid='263908' dateline='1333150860']
[quote]The question is, why do you dismiss other religions beliefs that equal yours, and why it does not apply to you.
They are equally "sane" and "rational" as you.[/quote]

No their not. Hinduism is inferior to Buddhism, as darkness is inferior to light. Anyone who has compared the two will see this. Buddhism is inferior to Christianity, as logic is inferior to intuition. Other religious beliefs don't apply because I know mine are correct (yeah, I know, you just love hearing that ). The Bible says taste and see that the Lord is good. That's what I've done, and once done, its like knowing that clean water is superior to brackish water--all other religions fall into the categories atheists love to put them in.


[quote]The fact you came to skeptics is proof that you cannot be 100% sure that you experiencing reality. [/quote]
I came here to share my story, not seek help. The need you feel to liberate others from their beliefs is equal (well, probably not, but close) to the need I feel to liberate atheists from their disbelief.

[quote]Like my signature, self-authenticating private belief is useless, because its indistinguishable from the illusion of it. [/quote]

No. This assumes that a person cannot self-adjudicate between false and true perceptions. And the fact that you distinguish between illusion and the real thing testifies that there is a real thing--how can there be false perception if there is no true objectivity? The fact that there are deluded people doesn't preclude some from actually accessing the truth.

[KichigaiNeko]

Then why bother being here telsa?? No one cares here about you or your words.

[NoMoreFaith]

No their not. Hinduism is inferior to Buddhism, as darkness is inferior to light. Anyone who has compared the two will see this. Buddhism is inferior to Christianity, as logic is inferior to intuition.

Thats an assertion, not a logically backed up reason. Buddhists would not see it that way, and see yours as inferior. Assertion =/= Fact

Other religious beliefs don't apply because I know mine are correct (yeah, I know, you just love hearing that ).

Assertion No.2 without backup reasons. Are we going for a record.

No. This assumes that a person cannot self-adjudicate between false and true perceptions. And the fact that you distinguish between illusion and the real thing testifies that there is a real thing--how can there be false perception if there is no true objectivity? The fact that there are deluded people doesn't preclude some from actually accessing the truth.

Not internally. No they cannot. You only manage to adjudicate between false and real things externally through a system of extrapolation and guesswork in the subconcious. Your range of sense are quite limited.

Is a rainbow a real thing? No, its an illusion, but your mind cannot distinguish it as one, and perceives it as real. While you know through science it is not real, your mind does not let go of the illusion. Your argument that we can discern illusion from reality is false.

While the fact that some people are deluded, that is not a strong argument to simply assert "But I know I'm not". The only thing you have is private, self-authenticated conviction. That is all you have.

To claim otherwise is nothing but assertion. I'm sorry, I know these things may be important to you. but unfortunately you simply do not have the means to discern the difference between fact and fiction in this case.
In the absence of being able to discern the difference, the simplest, most elegant solution is that your proposals are far less likely than them being fact, even to yourself. Occams razor prevails.
Nothing I can say is likely to sway you in this, but understand, what comes out of your mouth, is not only indistinguishable from illusion in your mind, but indistiinguishable from delusion to outsiders.

So the question is; If you cannot discern the difference, and it is impossible for an outsider to discern the difference between truth and your delusion.
How can you possibly think you can convince anyone otherwise. We can assume we can add arrogant to deluded in this respect.

[Cinjin]

All I'm saying is Telsa,

You can't expect to tell a story like that (your OP) and get casual agreement from your listeners. Your beliefs would be absurd anywhere ... not just here. It's just not rational to expect that no one would mock you for claiming that you can speak to the cosmos and see messages in wall clocks.



I kinda hope that you come to realize this and stick around despite being called a schizo.