i have never been able to communicate about 'it' in an articulate way,
because really it was neither a perception or an object and has no
association with physical life. neat stuff but totally undescribable
in human terms

On May 2, 12:03 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> In anything we  perceive, there are two parts; the object, and our perception 
> of the object. Spiritualism is no different. Of course you perceive 
> spiritualism as reality, but in understanding it, and communicating about it, 
> you are applying human concepts and traits to it. Do you understand what I 
> mean?
>
> Rain exists. The word rain, and the concept of wet, are human creations to 
> understand and express our reality of interacting with rain. This is what I 
> mean. If you treat all philosophies as attempts to explain wet, you gain a 
> greater understanding of Rain as a human experience, or human reality, if you 
> will.
>
>
>
> [ Attached Message ]From:e_space <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" 
> <[email protected]>Date:Sat, 2 May 2009 08:26:50 -0700 
> (PDT)Local:Sat, May 2 2009 11:26 amSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: The Wrong Way
>
> well...im not sure i agree with u that spirit is a human concept. i
> dont believe it is a concept at all. to me its a reality, as my spirit
> sought me out, i didnt go looking for it, although i put out the
> welcome mat for visitation after having a few feelings that i could
> not explain.
>
> i have never read the philosophy of others as i felt it could
> bastardize my own philisophical growth. im really quite ignorant to
> the writings of others as i have not read a book in 40 years if it
> didnt have big pictures. my spiritual experiences have left me less
> than thrilled with my base humanity. this sorta makes me a freak here
> on earth, something that can be a bit hard to deal with if i didnt
> have a rosey perspective of the future...
>
> On May 2, 10:55 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I think you may have missed Orn's point, E. Spiritualism is a human 
> > concept; humans have gender, and genderal trait constructs (all of dualism, 
> > for example), and thus in our search for and understanding of thing 
> > spiritual, genderal perception most certainly comes into play, if you are 
> > seeking a wholeness of understanding. If you've come to a place where you 
> > feel you don't need it, then wonderful! However, in exploring our own 
> > psyches, recognizing the genderal faces of God in the various philosophies 
> > gives us a path into recognizing our own male and female within. Even from 
> > a purely rationalist perspective, it's useful for analysis of our highly 
> > irrational subconscious.
>
> > [ Attached Message ]From:e_space <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" 
> > <[email protected]>Date:Sat, 2 May 2009 07:20:55 -0700 
> > (PDT)Local:Sat, May 2 2009 10:20 amSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: The Wrong Way
>
> > as it pertains to spiritualism or 'god', im not the slightest bit
> > convinced that gender has anything to do with it, in fact in my
> > experience it has no relevance...but thanks for your thoughts ;-^)
>
> > On May 2, 9:59 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > When the action of severity arises, it becomes clear that the area in
> > > discussion is ‘rules’…the notion of right/wrong. Such things are easy
> > > to apply when seen through the not too subtle eye of fundamentalism.
> > > Fundamentalism = fundamentalism. It is also easy to see how such an
> > > unexamined view can turn to fanaticism.
> > > Most spiritual paths would point out such basics. Neil does this on an
> > > ongoing basis!...at least how the world should be …
>
> > > When it comes to philosophy, many of the historical greats were only
> > > recorded by others. And, as to such explorations of things spiritual,
> > > to know which pesher system to use when there is a written record can
> > > become quite daunting.
>
> > > So, here we have the notion of conduct too…parental conduct, our own,
> > > group behavior, leadership behavior etc.  We all know the realm and
> > > most at the very least have opinions. It is the gold at the center of
> > > wise alchemical pesharim that is most difficult to find even though we
> > > are always admonished to do so.
>
> > > Some say the path to spiritual experience leads within…I wonder how
> > > else it could be? Also, most theologies say the same thing…including
> > > Christianity.
>
> > > Words of others and substance has been admonished whereas I find words
> > > to be wonderful mirrors. . . all the better to ‘Know thyself’ with.
>
> > > Also, the triune and a placement of JC as god has been addressed. From
> > > what I have learned about this ancient notion found within many
> > > philosophies non Christian too, it is a simple formula for the nature
> > > of reality. There exists the One, the original father. There exists
> > > the Mother…who reactively does an analysis and breaks the One into
> > > components. There also is the Son (other family members/genders are
> > > found within differing cultural iterations of the same theme too)…who
> > > in most cases represents divine nature..our nature included
> > > exemplifying how we too are and/or know  a part of the divine too. So,
> > > as this ancient cosmology…much older than JC points out, not only is
> > > the Son an aspect of the divine, the Son, represented by us all is
> > > too. No contradiction.
>
> > > On May 2, 5:35 am, e_space <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > it is not unfortunate at all...it doesnt matter to me what jesus
> > > > said...i dont consider jesus to be god...he said some neat stuff...so
> > > > did other people...but i would NEVER say to someone, 'noone shall come
> > > > to the father but through me'... i find that sorta arrogant, even if
> > > > it was true.
>
> > > > i do not associate religion with 'god', i associate it with man where
> > > > it belongs. as far as 'the spirituality of fundamental christianity'
> > > > is concerned, i am not even closely convinced that such an animal
> > > > exists...when u listen to a fundamentalist the last thing that comes
> > > > to mind is spirituality.
>
> > > > if my words are capable of turning some off religion then their belief
> > > > isnt very strong...on the other hand, since my negative slant on
> > > > religion is accompanied by my joy of spiritual awareness, i really
> > > > dont think i will be doing that much damage...maybe some good huh?
>
> > > > On May 2, 7:52 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > I don't envy your up bringing and unfortunately  what you experienced 
> > > > > is
> > > > > from the lack of knowledge  of what Jesus  taught and the  problem  
> > > > > that is
> > > > > inherit to the trinitarian belief system where they make Jesus a God.
>
> > > > > I have to laugh E  when  you say your father never sinned, because in 
> > > > > his
> > > > > eyes he probably never did disobey the rules  and regulations. But  
> > > > > there in
> > > > > lies the problem as I see it "sin" within christianity  is what 
> > > > > separates us
> > > > > from God ..  but now i want you to think about something. It would be 
> > > > > a very
> > > > > serious "sin" if your actions or teachings separate someone from 
> > > > > God.. very
> > > > > serious indeed .
>
> > > > > If I had to survive on the spirituality of fundamentalist 
> > > > > christianity I
> > > > > would have either died or wandered away long ago.  In one of my 
> > > > > experiences
> > > > > years ago it was said "If you think you know it all there is more."  
> > > > > That
> > > > > has proven to be very true for me.
> > > > > Allan
>
> > > > > On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 10:45 AM, e_space <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > i was born the son of a very strict preacher man. my whole life was
> > > > > > spent in church, even home life resembled church with daily bible
> > > > > > reading, prayers, etc. i actually called my father 'god on earth'
> > > > > > because i never saw him do anything that even closely resembled a 
> > > > > > sin,
> > > > > > other than the harsh treatment we got for doing something wrong, but
> > > > > > that was the english way, spare the rod, spoil the child.
>
> > > > > > i saw a lot of hypocritical activity in the church and found no
> > > > > > comfort in the words of the bible. i rebelled. what i learned was 
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > the 'path' to spiritual experience leads within. everything of any
> > > > > > importance on the spiritual side happened for me just before sleep
> > > > > > with eyes closed. of course, it takes a desire for this 
> > > > > > communication
> > > > > > and i was constantly putting out the welcome mat for this activity.
>
> > > > > > people can look for the 'truth', answers to their religious or
> > > > > > spiritual questions, etc by reading or listening to the words of
> > > > > > others, where they will find nothing of substance from what i have
> > > > > > experienced. i think we all have a spirit, its just a matter of
> > > > > > digging the diamond out of the rough and starting to polish 
> > > > > > it...just
> > > > > > my opinion here...
>
> > > > > > On May 2, 5:04 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > Well Saul of tarsus (Paul is not an apostle as in the original 
> > > > > > > sense as
> > > > > > > having been with Jesus and knew him before his death.  If Saul is 
> > > > > > > an
> > > > > > apostle
> > > > > > > then so am I by the same right and I can assure you that I am not 
> > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > apostle. You are right unfortunately the teachings of 
> > > > > > > christianity are
> > > > > > > heavily based on the writings of  Saul.
>
> > > > > > > It is sad the distortion of what Jesus had to say, but at least 
> > > > > > > some of
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > has been recorded. Even if it is not accurate and  distorted by 
> > > > > > > time and
> > > > > > > transulation there comes many ideas that can be put to practical 
> > > > > > > use in
> > > > > > > developing some kind of spiritual life.
>
> > > > > > > My own view of Jesus (which is evolving) is that he is the Abbot 
> > > > > > > of his
> > > > > > > teachings and a small group of followers. widely spread out and 
> > > > > > > often
> > > > > > > unknown to other followers. It is meditation and thought about 
> > > > > > > what I
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > read that become the guiding principles.
>
> > > > > > > It has not been an easy life, but it is one that I am very proud 
> > > > > > > of.
> > > > > > Often
> > > > > > > times I come up against teachings of the past that are difficult 
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > understand,  yet though I feel that they must be discarded It can 
> > > > > > > not be
> > > > > > > done lightly. I know what Rosey is going through as Though I have 
> > > > > > > been
> > > > > > > chasing my beliefs longer than she has been alive.  It is very 
> > > > > > > nice to
> > > > > > know
> > > > > > > other are walking the path of searching..
>
> > > > > > > My wife calls and I need to leave.
> > > > > > > Allan
>
> > > > > > > On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 4:52 AM, Chris Jenkins <
> > > > > > [email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I've found that most modern Christians draw the vast majority 
> > > > > > > > of their
> > > > > > > > ideology from Paul, one of the worst apostles on whom to build 
> > > > > > > > a gospel
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > love and forgiveness, with a dash of Mosaic Law whenever it 
> > > > > > > > suits their
> > > > > > > > political desires. Your approach to Gospel works well enough 
> > > > > > > > for me.
>
> > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > > > > > > From: Tinker <[email protected]>
> > > > > > > > To: "\"Minds Eye\""
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to