0d71167c   
   XPost: alt.religion.druid, alt.paranormal, sci.skeptic   
   XPost: alt.divination, misc.legal   
   From: Richard.Silk@Juno.Com   
      
   Hey David, some info for you here:   
      
   Sorry if the attributions get a bit muddled, but I'm using copy/paste to put   
   another of your replies into this one:   
      
   "David Dalton"  wrote    
   > On Jun 2, 2024, Richard Carl Silk wrote    
   >> Dude, normal people simply refer to that as "having an opinion."   
      
   > No, it is a special ability, which I divine that Jung also had.   
      
   So first off, here's simply a suggestion, and it has to do with the "color" (or   
   "flavor," "tone," "nature") of the word(s) being used:   
      
   The word that *most* people use in the context of your above sentence is   
   "intuit" (although not too many people have adequate grammar skills to do so.)   
   Example: [No, it's intuition, which I intuit that Jung also had.]   
      
   The nature of this suggestion flows as follows:  Try using the word "intuit"   
   (or   
   "intuition") rather than "divine" for a period of time, say, a good month, to   
   see if any of the responses you get happen to change in nature (mainly from   
   less   
   of ridicule, to more that of having an interest in your opinion(s.))   
      
   Usage of the word "divine" automatically puts people into woo-woo mode, and   
   that   
   is *far* less serious than being simply interested, having one's interest   
   piqued.   
      
   Also, if you actually wish to put yourself "on par" with Jung, may I suggest   
   aiming for a doctorate in either psychology, philosophy, or possibly both?   
      
   Using the word "divine" (as in giving yourself any "divine" attribution)   
   belongs   
   to the realm of those who may actually perform divine healing, or prophecy (not   
   of the future, but of the here and now, with people you meet on the street,   
   whom   
   you've never met in person.  Take for example, the discussion Jesus has with   
   the   
   Samarian woman at the well.)   
      
   Speaking of Jesus (see also:  DiscussingJesus.quora.com , as well as   
   TinyURL.com/IntroToTheAdvocate ) He teaches (as recorded in John 5:31-) "If I   
   bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true."  Learning to speak of oneself   
   in the third person (objectively) takes a bit of practice, but with serious,   
   personal attention, may be learned within a period of a few weeks.  After all,   
   with one's whole life (actually, eternity for some) ahead of you, why wait to   
   start practicing??  The reward comes in learning to "speak truly" rather than   
   "falsely."   
      
   DD:>> > Using my special abilities determination ability, I have divined that   
   Donald Trump has dream interpretation ability (for his own dreams and the   
   dreams   
   of others).   
      
   (That's where the comment:> Dude, normal people simply refer to that as "having   
   an opinion." < comes in.  Trump is a unique figure in world history.  IF one   
   were so inclined, it *is* possible to find reference to him in the Book of the   
   Revelation of Saint John, possibly also in the Book of Daniel.  But I'll leave   
   that for the reader to do his or her own homework.)   
      
   Other post content:>   
      
   >> Well, if you consider that people such as Rama, Krishna, Jacob, Moses,   
   >> Buddha, Amergin, Quetzalcoatl, Jesus, Taliesin, and the Havamal composer   
   have   
   >> existed in the past, you can't rule out the slim possibility that I am   
   >> similar to them, though in my case my primary siddhi is matchmaking. (All of   
   >> them has and I have the special abilities determination ability.)   
      
   From the context clue, it appears that the word "siddhi" is akin to "talent,"   
   or   
   even "personal talent."  While there may be a relatively "balancing" effect   
   possible in some Hindu/Buddhist ideology, it *all* distills down to:   
   [0 = 0]   
   which, although a logically TRUE equivalence, grammatically says:   
   "All lies are truly lies."   
      
   To start on the path to advancement, study the Words of Jesus, which is helped   
   tremendously by obtaining a "Red Letter Edition" of the New Testament, where   
   His   
   words are "written in red."  Another great resources is at biblehub.com where   
   the *interlinear* (Greek original) text may be studied and *personally*   
   intuited   
   as one begins reading His words for help in establishing a *perfect*   
   (sovereign)   
   standard, by which all other input may be evaluated (for veracity / fallacy.)   
      
   >> Also I can't be said to be delusional since I won't believe for sure that my   
   >> stuff is working without evidence."   
      
   There's some positive as well as negative that may be said for that position.   
   Rather than using [your] "stuff" as an objective, having Jesus as one's   
   objective provides a "higher fulcrum" with which to balance / measure / observe   
   / analyze any two sides.  For a real eye-opener as to the contrast He provides,   
   feel free to check out this *brief* allegory at:   
   tinyurl.com/itta/TCoU and feel free to reply here in this newsgroup.   
      
   >> The last time I had blind belief in perineum click divination led to my last   
   >> mental health ward hospitalization, which ended in early July of 1996."   
      
   Ah!  I *knew* I remembered you from *somewhere.*   
      
   Here's what's up with that (from an objective perspective):  Let's say you   
   experienced something unusual (a "click," in this case) and sincerely sought to   
   understand what it was you experienced.  Let's say (for the sake of argument)   
   that you formed an hypothesis, which led to some unusual mental as well as   
   physical consequences.   
      
   So whether you came to any conclusive evidence regarding the hypothesis *or   
   not!* - the event itself (the "cause") led you to where you are now (the   
   "consequence" of the action / cause.)  In such a scenario, what happened (the   
   "click") may be considered as neither "good" nor "evil," but merely a "cause"   
   that had an "effect" which led you to the "present."   
      
   I dunno 'bout you, but personally, I think it's "good to be alive in the   
   present."   
      
   Keeping that thought in mind, here's a "mantra" you may find helpful:   
      
   "I AM / NOW / One *is* the *consequence* of *all* past, *and* the *cause* of   
   *all* future."  (I find this especially helpful in focusing one's own "karmic   
   balance/wheel" as it were.)   
      
   >> And currently my mood, energy, sleep, and relations with other people   
   offline   
   >> are very good, but I continue to be eccentric online.   
      
   Understood.  I also use my offline activity to "sharpen" my personal   
   interactions *offline* with respect to decision making, and the gate-keeping of   
   what I seek to bring into my physical ("real") life or to pass, so as to let   
   whatever temptation there may be to "pass me by."   
      
   So here's the challenge for you (should you decide to accept it):  Let your   
   *online* persona reveal your personal beliefs, and let your personal beliefs   
   reveal your true self when in the "real world."  And yes, the online self may   
   feel like a "safer environment" in which to sharpen one's beliefs.  It's a tad   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)