It is extremely challenging at attempting to discern your meaning, many of your words and sentences are so convulted, your intent is difficult to interpret even with context. But I guess it is safe to assume the "god" you refer to isn't the Judeo-Christian god, Yahweh. (Though it is accepted literary canon that Yahweh, God of Abraham, of the Old Testament, is God the Creator, Father of Jesus)
I tell you what God has told me. I told you I am not a prophet. I know part of how an engine works but I do not know it all so does that mean I ramble? Knowing part of something does not negate not knowing all of something. To know all of God's plan would be presumptuous to say the least.
Often times, knowing only part of the picture is worse than knowing nothing at all. Hitler misappropriated various aspects of Nietzche's philosophical thought as a justification for genocide. Or to use your analogy, knowing only part of how an engine works, and not how it interacts with all the other parts, is worse than not knowing anything at all. Knowledge of one part leads to ASSUMPTIONS about its interactions with other components and by extension, ASSUMPTIONS about other parts as well. This leads to misinformation (which is worse than lack of information).
Do I know if God is talking to me or if its a surrogate like others? Does if matter? In the subject theory of truth the truth of the matter is not relative to this. I have had many conversations (in my sleep, interesting) with a being calling itself God. This being has told me that I should not worry about myself nor anyone else. I am not trying to convert anyone. I have subjected this being to many questions and in most cases, I did not like the answers but could not fault the logic.
This paragraph is especially unclear (subject theory of truth the truth of the matter is not relative to this?), but aside from that, the most important, constant aspect of "truth" is that it is consistent with itself, that its logic doesn't collapse upon itself. However, your logic (or rather the logic of "god") has been highly irratic, shifting your framework many many times. But now onto the so-called "logic" of "God."
i.e. if you are all powerful can you make a rock you cant lift. answer, I am the rock, I am not seperate from the Universe to stand outside to lift, I am the Universe.
This isn't even an answer, let alone an answer with logic. This is sophistry, misdirection, not addressing the paradox of omnipotence at all, merely making a metaphorical all is one, one is all reference. Also realize utilizing this "logic," a paradox, an inconsistency, occurs as, to paraphrase your god, "you are not outside of the universe to converse with" which evidently, you are doing (albeit, in a dream, but it doesn't make my arguement any less valid, as your dreams are part of the universe). Also, this directly refutes a prior statement of yours, saying that "God," can tweak the universe, suggesting that he has external control, which is highly inconsistent with the "answer" he gave you. Furthermore, it begs the question, how did he come into existence? Did he magically create himself? (And no, Cogito Ergo Sum doesn't work, as the logic of the statement is circular)
If reincarnation was real was are there more people around today? Answer, there are billions of worlds with beings and they go anywhere, including here.
Again, not a straight answer, more misdirection, more sophistry. The implied answer is however, there is a set, constant, amount of "soul" or "spirit" (again begging the question, where does it all come from?) which indicates, that all our "souls/spirits" have been around since the beginning of time, experiencing everything. However, why is there no recollection of these past experiences? If our "souls" are reset whenever we enter a new vessel, mooting your framework of experience. The framework you present (which is derived from your "experience" with God) is incompatible with this "God."
OK. Knowing that nothing can travel the speed of light how can these beings come here (in spirit, not aliens) answer. When a being is in pure spirit they are a part of God and since God is the Universe, they are connected to all things so travel as you know it doesn't not happen. (really didn't like that answer)
Cute, apparantly spirits (and souls?) have mass/energy and are affected by the laws of physics (and if so, why haven't spirit or soul particles or even traces of them been discovered yet? Plus if these spirits and souls are timeless and infinite, why does the amount of time to travel matter?) Again, this paragraph is highly unclear (travel as you know it doesn't not happen, what?) but this implies that all of us are in fact "part of God," which isn't really possible as the God you see is externalized (otherwise, how is interaction possible?).
Why so you allow Evil in the world. i.e. Hitler, Murder and such. Answer, there is no evil, only ignorance and that is not evil. Hitler, although he killed millions of people in the long run did not hurt anyone, all those people are living and will leave forever as we perceive it. The experience they had on this Earth, although bad, is something that will help define them and give them more.
Apparantly, evil doesn't exist, but it does? This answer given is just so bad it actually physically (and spiritually) hurts, as it directly contradicts itself. Evil doesn't exist, but a moral judgement that people's experiences can be bad does (again with the shifting framework), Good and Evil/Bad can exist in the Short-run, but don't in the long? Clearly, this logic fails miserably. The fact that the moral judgement of "bad" was passed on the experience by "God," moots the framework you presents.
Why are all versions of God? answer, you can view me like Music, as long as you experience and enjoy music you will understand it. A rose by any other name ... God in the past has given us these labels so we can understand him until we (another thing I dislike, reference to Jung LOL) are ready to grow beyond that point.
The implication here is that religions all around twisted this message to support their own political agenda (which I agree with), but this answer presupposes his existence, and really, can't be used as an ontological proof of God.
To sum it up, I don't give a rats azz what you think or not. I am not trying to convert anyone, just letting my voice find those that agree and disagree with it. You are on the same path as I, in an infinite amount of time, you can I will reach our destination, whether you believe it or me.
All your arguments presuppose the existence of the "spirit" or the "soul" as something external and outside of the body (and thereby, the universe), which again you yourself say its not. Apparant contradictions, and huge leaps of logic exist within your reasoning and "framework." Also, what happens if you're wrong? That your conversations with "God" turn out to be your brain's method of rationalizing and dealing with the fear of the unknown (what happens post-mortum, specifically), that our spirit and souls aren't timeless and universal, that in fact, the existential view of life is correct (or, at the very least, more accurate), that after death its merely just, as Porky pig put it best, "That's all Folks!"
I hope my ramblings help. LMAO
Yes, they helped alleviate my boredom, and realize, that I'm not trying to attack or insult you personally, I merely mean to emphasize lapses of logic to promote critical thinking and fight ignorance.
P.S. please try making your next posts more coherent, as I am limited by the medium of your words and cannot tell exactly what your thoughts are, and may be misrepresenting them.
.
