Hey. I had a few interesting discussions last thread, so I f

>>17507009

>>17506969

please

File: HeisenbergnGod.jpg (38KB, 461x375px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 461x375px

Also, if you're interested in learning more or having a more personal chat, you can reach me at my email which is [email protected] or you can message me on Skype at xerisianx

>>17507021

It would seem that you are, albeit not mortal danger from what I can tell. You have the inverted 2 of swords. Generally this indicates break ups, divorces, deceit, double dealings, and other abuses of good faith.

>>17507037
thank you

>>17507037
thats not good but I guess it isn't horrible. Two of swords doesn't seem like a fierce horrifying danger.

>>17507066

Pretty much. And inverted it's even less. That's why I said it had more to do with deception than anything, it's not exactly the worst that could happen.

>>17507089
thanks again

>>17507009
Mobile-freindly link?

>>17507146

I think that's about it. No mobile version that I can find aside from apps.

>>17507155
I found it on peeky actually, and it looks kinda vauge? Not really anything solid there, more of a washbasin cult thing.

Could you give me a career reading while we talk about it?

M
Leo

>>17507166

>I found it on peeky actually, and it looks kinda vauge? Not really anything solid there

Because it's just an overview. It's not all of my beliefs, it's just a few that I picked and gave a general idea about. Hence why I gave an email and Skype so people who wanted to know more could ask. I'm looking for people who want to seek out god in the same way I do. Because as far as I can tell nobody else shares the same views I do, so I'm looking for those that do.


As for your career reading: You've got the inverted 5 of pentacles. So, this seems that there is either presently or to come in the future dissatisfaction. And pentacles typically deal with money and jobs. It's the "earth" sign, so to speak. And this tends to show that it's likely to be a long standing problem, so I don't see a very quick solution regarding your career or a change.

>>17507186

Okay, thank you.


I am of a very similar opi ion when it comes to my personal beliefs, but could you please explain how you came to these conclusions?

I will write down a list of mine if you are interested.

They are a bit more mainstream than yours, but they work for me. I actually came to my opinions on my own and then after learned that there was a small group of other people with very similar opinions on god.

f
will he respond to my message? what will he think of it?

>>17507204

Sure, a list of yours would be cool as well. And I came to mine on my own as well, but I can provide justification for them if you'd like. Or what led to me coming to these conclusions. Which ones did you want me to elaborate on? The major one that came to me on my own would be where god came from (man's sapience) and that god is only connected to humanity and isn't actually the creator of man, the universe, etc., but is rather a byproduct of us in many ways. And those are a little harder to explain since I can't really find any spiritual or religious beliefs that have any ideas similar to that. The closest I'd assume would be New Age belief systems, which tend to be passive and too wishy washy for my taste.

>>17507217

I tried making a notepad file, but I'm so tired so I'm gonna put up like three. I'll contact you over skype.

1. there is only one God of the Earth, but there are an infinite number of other gods across the vastness of space

2. Our God uses our planet as enertainment, and often challenges us and throws each other into conflict

3. Our God created mental illness to substantiate enertainment value; without lingering feelings of sadness and remorse we would be robotic and emotionless like animals.

4. As Asiimov dictated, the world goes through periods of purging and remission, creating new civilizations only to have them fall after a period of time due to our own thirst for conflict.

Tis probably looks pretty lopsided right now, but I will add on to it later. What timezone do you use?

I use EST

>>17507278

I use EST too. The odd ideas I see there are the concepts of god using the planet for entertainment, and god making mental illnesses. What people believe in that?

>>17507322
Sorry I haven't replied in forever, nodded off for a bit.

God making mental illnesses stems from God making the planet for his own entertainment, which is in some groups a very plausible theory. Nihilism wouldn't bat an eye to the idea, certainly.

every trip of motion and times illusion you start to be asleep and no one has the control over sleep programming be there is i and us have each other so it be some more lost words in alphabet order babylon risen the language to nothing except the truth to all system and all minds it blows you away and nothing can save us except our own have god have all reason to to not have so much cure but to have love and spread it with the souls in dead time dead space hope to rebuild the foundation to rebuilt the contribution the new life of light to more equal balance finding we go no were finding souls passing through the dead space of vortexed time going faster than light finding spirit is hard to get hold of but the voice and soul is very aware and has reason to talk to you to see the future but past

File: what.jpg (127KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 800x800px

>>17507510

>>17507581

I'm not that anon, but it is a form of abstract poetry.

>>17507504

Well, god being an ass at times certainly fits an idea of god to some degree, but I don't see god as a creator. It differs on only little things, but it's a pretty big variance.

>>17507009

Give me your views on sex, masturbation and ejaculation, OP.

>>17507009
>God is everywhere
>We cannot see god
God is darkness itself.

File: no-tree.jpg (125KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 960x960px

>>17512176

I never said god is everywhere or that we can't see god. God isn't everywhere, nor is god unknowable. I think that as our knowledge of the sciences and such expands god is very much knowable.

>>17507009
may I smite you with a blast of wizardry

>>17512176
The silence is sentient ;)

>>17512615
Nice ass though

>>17516115

Can always tell the n00bs by the way they post the logo from DOOM as if it's a spooky sigil.

>>17518615
And that quote is fake, and almost the complete opposite of what Aurelius wrote.

>>17518691
Quote is fake, but still valid,

>>17518692
No, it isn't.
It uses stoic terms for vague bullshit.

File: 1431966800739.gif (1MB, 300x282px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x282px

>>17518692
>Quote is fake, but still valid

Then you could attribute any quote to anyone.

>>17518693
>vague bullshit
Seems pretty coherent to me

>>17518697
Eh.
Eh.
Every time someone posts that picture, someone comes along to shit all over it, as if it is the single greatest affront to human decency ever posted on the internet.

>>17518693
Just to be clear, i'm saying it uses stoic terms to talk about vague bullshit, not that the stoic terms are bullshit.

>>17518699
>Seems pretty coherent to me
>divorced from it's underlying philosophy;
>non-defined vague virtue;
>non-defined vague good life;
>memories of your loved ones having any relevance if one believes virtue to be the first principle of life;

File: No_More_Raccoons_01.gif (490KB, 324x359px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 324x359px

>>17518699
>Every time someone posts that picture, someone comes along to shit all over it, as if it is the single greatest affront to human decency ever posted on the internet.

Now you're just making stuff up and sounding even more retarded.

>>17518714
Think of how many times you've seen factually incorrect images on 4chan. Think of how infrequently someone has actually bothered to correct them. Meanwhile, I have never seen that image posted without someone correcting it.

>>17518713
Yeah, the last part of it is dumb, I admit. Usually the version I see doesn't have that part.

But expecting the definition of virtue or a good life in a single short quote is ridiculous anyway.

>>17518728
>Yeah, the last part of it is dumb, I admit. Usually the version I see doesn't have that part.
So only 2/3rds of the quote is good.
>But expecting the definition of virtue or a good life in a single short quote is ridiculous anyway.
Which would be fine, if that quote was tied to an author, and not an anonymous vaguety masquerading as belonging to a roman emperor.
Look, you wanna go the virtue ethics route?
Fine. Find a real ancient greek author that wrote on the subject, or St. Ambrose of Milan, or Aquinas, or one of the aretaic turn authors, and find a relevant fragment from them.

>>17518728
>Meanwhile, I have never seen that image posted without someone correcting it.
Then stop posting a quote that you know to be fake. It's a shitty thing that tries to be deep.

>>17518750
I don't post it, specifically because I know it's incorrect, even if I do like it. It just mirrors something that I already believed, so I thought it was neat, even if it did turn out to be fake.

Not everything has to have every single answer. Incomplete doesn't necessitate invalid, as long as it's completed by something else.

Philosophy is a great tool, but masturbating over it isn't doing much for you.

love reading please? 16 male Virgo

File: shi she.jpg (632KB, 1280x1707px) Image search: [Google]

632KB, 1280x1707px

>>17512176
Herself. She has a cycle. All good religions accept this. All bad religions call this blasphemy.

>>17519046
Go improve yourself if you don't look good. Pluck your eyebrows just a little and get a nice shirt and decent fitting jeans for your body. Don't buy brand new it's bad karma. After you do this a prosperous idea will come to you.

>>17519317

>Herself. She has a cycle. All good religions accept this. All bad religions call this blasphemy.

What is that aside from word salad?

>Go improve yourself if you don't look good. Pluck your eyebrows just a little and get a nice shirt and decent fitting jeans for your body.

Good advice, but it's not what he asked. I'd do a reading for him like he asked, but he's probably banned for being 16 by now. That and a 16 year old kid knows jack shit about love anyway.

>Don't buy brand new it's bad karma.

That's absurd. If that was the case nobody would buy anything first. And if it's bad karma to buy new, how are you blameless for avoiding that and just buying it later? You'd both be profiting off the same thing, except you'd be the one trying to be sneaky and avoid karma. Is that not something that karma would punish you for if it even existed to begin with?

>After you do this a prosperous idea will come to you.

And that's just same vague and general "prophecy". It's about as meaningful as a fortune cookie and gives the kid no practical advice.