oh, god!

after a long period of dull inactivity and tons of debates with incredibly narrow minded people about god, religion, beliefs and (strangely) reality, i finally read something that got me thinking. nothing convincing enough to shake my (possibly irrational) steadfast belief in a single, benevolent god-figure. not even convincing enough to consider it a possibility. (btw, i still haven't figured why i believe in whatever i've chosen to believe in - it's just one of 'those things')

a bit of background first (hmm...i seem to be dragging a 'bit of background' into my posts quite often...wonder why :P) - i read this on the dilbert blog, a place renowned (in my eyes) for debate on things that make you go hmmm (i'm sure the shmoo's going **wheee** over my hmmms right now;)). anyway, so i was saying, the dilbert blog. damn cool place, that. oh wait, that's not what i was saying. i was saying that that's one of the places where god and reality and religion and belief systems get discussed quite often, usually with scott adams doing the equivalent of throwing a lighted match into pre-heated petrol and watching frenzied cognitive dissonants(?) jump into the fire :D. oh and bad analogies are also quite recurrent in the comment section of that blog too (i guess my reading has been teaching me stuff ;))

so much for background. i'm sure you've lost me by now, if you ever had me in the first place (no puns intended ;))

anyway...what stood out was this post that proves god exists. not that i need any proof, having already admitted that my beliefs already are irrational enough to be too hard to explain to any human being, including myself. apparently "some guy on the internet" prove that god exists. that's fine, because i dont really need pr...oh hell. i'm stuck in an infinite lopp here. lemme out!!!

ah...i'm out!!! so i wanted to say (but didn't end up saying) that his proof of god's existence was interesting, first of all because i haven't heard it before, and secondly because it's the only thing that i don't believe that i also don't think is stupid. yeah, i know what that means. i'm sorry folks, but if you ever tried arguing with me about god's existence and i just sat smugly or replied in linguistic monosyllables (yeah...hmmm...i know...hmmm...true...hmmm...what you say...hmm), i was probably thinking you are either stupid or incredibly narrow minded. don't take it personally. being broad minded is probably a bad thing anyway :D

anyway, if you aren't bored enough by now, i quote the blog verbatim:

1. It is impossible for one person to see reality through the eyes of another.


2. By definition, a reality you can't enter via any form of transportation is another dimension.


3. You comprise 100% of your dimension, because no one else can share exactly your perception.


4. If you are the entire universe within your dimension, you are God by definition, since you are everything within your own dimension.

the best part of this theory is that it fits perfectly with my theory of everything (as does every other cool theory :P), other than the fact that what's called 'god' in this theory is called 'anything' in mine :D

anyway, after a very long ramble, i've finally forgotten what i wanted to say.

oh, i didn't (**damn!!!**). read the post. and the comments. and...hmmm...no...i won't say the other thing i wanted to. just read it. you might spot it anyway.