The truth here gabby is that this is a moderated group. It is not a democracy. You have never liked this truth.
And, the truth is that I have had issues with moderated groups over the years too so to some extent understand why it may not taste so good to you. The difference is that for this one little group which as you so rightly point out has long ago lost most of its active membership, the moderation is what kept it going as an active and vital group during its zenith. The truth is you and I differ on whether an email group should be moderated. I believe it should. The truth is that railing against the reality of moderation and continuing to post to and be a member of a moderated group is just not accepting reality. The truth is that your self-defined ‘open provocation’ is and always has been blatant trolling…something that this group has never accepted… something the group creators agreed to reject from the moment of Minds Eye’s conception. The truth is that you need only be ‘nervous’ if you want to continue to post here yet cannot adapt to and accept this simple reality. You have had this pointed out to you on more than one occasion by more than one moderator. You continue to ignore reality. Do so at your own peril. On Apr 23, 2:28 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > All right. Subtle trolling is a good definition for spinning. Agreed. > > Now as for my intension or the purpose of my last posting here: it was meant > to be an open provocation to get you out of your comfort zone. And it > worked. You responded. Too late for my personal taste, the group has almost > ceased to be. But then let's hope I am wrong. I'll ask you again, don't you > think it's time to follow the Dalai Lama's example and update the methods of > how leaders are elected and how their roles are defined? Are you the only > one left here to decide what is right and what is wrong? Are we dependent on > how nervous your fingers get over the ban button? What is the truth apart > from the make-belief that is being displayed here? > > On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 3:27 AM, ornamentalmind > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > ....subtle, yet trolling nonetheless. Cease. > > > On Apr 22, 1:58 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > (syncing to making flat assumptions:) Ah, so that's why God doesn't send > > ME > > > responses to my questions and I'll have to be forever afraid of God's > > next > > > fart that will blow me on the moderation list. > > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:05 PM, ornamentalmind < > > [email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > RP, thanks again for responding. > > > > > I'll assume that you don't believe that god thinks conceptually the > > > > way humans do, correct?...no thinking using words either, right? > > > > > On Apr 22, 7:07 am, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > God is aware in the sense that He is all or all emanates from Him and > > > > > thus automatically He knows everything and doesn't have to be aware > > of > > > > > things like us mortals. In my opinion , we should not conceive of Him > > > > > to be conscious in the way that we are because our consciousness > > > > > entails duality or is encompassed within borders. He is conscious in > > > > > us , acts in us but in His separate state He is oblivious of all as > > He > > > > > alone is and creation being changeable and subject to birth and death > > > > > is just an illusion. In my view that which is not permanent can be > > > > > called an illusion. > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 6:53 PM, ornamentalmind > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > RP, are you suggesting that god is not conscious at all?...that all > > > > > > god is/does etc. is unconscious? > > > > > > > In either case, are you using one of the more common notions of > > what > > > > > > conscious means…like being self aware and knowing what one is > > doing? > > > > > > > On Apr 22, 1:45 am, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> In my view , creation was not a conscious act of God , but rather > > the > > > > > >> universe emanated from the unconscious mind of God. He doesn't > > look at > > > > > >> us consciously , doesn't connect results with actions , rather > > > > > >> everything is happening according to laws which exist in His > > > > > >> unconscious mind. I don't think that any scripture can really lay > > down > > > > > >> definitions of good and bad with His authority , rather thinkers > > among > > > > > >> us can lay down rules which appear logical to them and accepted by > > us > > > > > >> as such. I don't believe in an after-life and consider this life > > > > > >> itself to be a spiritual experience. > > > > > > >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Chuck Bowling > > > > > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 3:55 AM, [email protected] > > > > > >> > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> >> Hey Chuck, > > > > > > >> >> I guess it depends on what you belive God is. > > > > > > >> >> If you believe that God is the creator then everything has Gods > > > > hand > > > > > >> >> in it, if you further belive that God is omipitant then God > > you > > > > are > > > > > >> >> exactly the way that God has designed you to be. > > > > > > >> > I believe that god/goddess/gods etc. are icons. They are > > concepts > > > > that help > > > > > >> > people cope with their own frailties and inadequacies. Whether > > it be > > > > to > > > > > >> > blame bad things on, attribute good things to, or to provide us > > a > > > > path to > > > > > >> > continue our existence beyond the grave. > > > > > > >> >> If you are a gardner, and you splice together two differant > > plants > > > > to > > > > > >> >> gain a desird result, the plant does have a life of it's own, > > but > > > > > >> >> works in the way you have designd it to. So in a real way you > > are > > > > the > > > > > >> >> manipulator of that plants life, your hand is in all that it > > does, > > > > as > > > > > >> >> you have designed it. > > > > > > >> > Here I would say that the original design was altered. A much > > easier > > > > task > > > > > >> > than the original design. > > > > > > >> > As I may have mentioned in a previous post, I readily accept the > > > > possibility > > > > > >> > that some entity may have created this universe. And, I think > > that > > > > anything > > > > > >> > with that kind of power would probably appear to be omniscient > > to > > > > us. > > > > > >> > However, I also believe that it is VERY unlikely that any entity > > > > that could > > > > > >> > have created this reality would bare even the slightest > > resemblance > > > > to > > > > > >> > anything we describe as a god. > > > > > > >> > The reasoning for that seems fairly straightforward to me: > > > > > > >> > Most of the gods we have created seem to be pretty damn lame. I > > mean > > > > come > > > > > >> > on. You want me to kill a goat, sacrifice a virgin, or set fire > > to a > > > > wax > > > > > >> > stick in your honor. REALLY??? And you're going to send me to > > hell > > > > for > > > > > >> > eternity because I thought the neighbor's wife was a hot piece > > of > > > > tail? > > > > > >> > Jeesh. As gods go you suck dude. > > > > > > >> > Another thing. You would think that god would find a better way > > of > > > > > >> > correcting bad behavior than to fry people for an eternity. Even > > we > > > > lowly > > > > > >> > humans know that setting someone on fire is not the best way to > > > > convince 'em > > > > > >> > to mend their ways. > > > > > > >> > Lastly but not finally. If god created this reality then at a > > > > minimum he > > > > > >> > created one and possibly infinitely more universes. In this one > > > > there are an > > > > > >> > estimated 300 sextillion stars. That's > > > > 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars > > > > > >> > if you're looking for precision. You would think that with all > > that > > > > stuff > > > > > >> > floating around out there that he/she/it would have better > > things to > > > > do than > > > > > >> > make sure that little johnnies prayers are answered with a brand > > new > > > > bike on > > > > > >> > his birthday. > > > > > > >> > My guess is that any entity capable of creating all of this > > would > > > > see us as > > > > > >> > a minor infestation of germs at best. > > > > > > >> >> On Apr 20, 5:40 pm, Chuck Bowling < > > [email protected] > > > > > > >> >> wrote: > > > > > >> >> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:32 AM, RP Singh <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> >> > > Whatever work I do and the effort that I make , is it God > > doing > > > > it ? > > > > > >> >> > > No , I do it all , but It is God who gives me the strength > > to > > > > do it. > > > > > >> >> > > Without His strength even the resolve to do anything > > wouldn't > > > > come to > > > > > >> >> > > my mind. > > > > > > >> >> > Now when you say that God is giving you strength can you be > > more > > > > > >> >> > specific? > > > > > >> >> > Is he providing your mitochondria with more ADP or is he > > upping > > > > your > > > > > >> >> > serotonin or dopamine levels to give you a greater feeling of > > > > reward for > > > > > >> >> > your accomplishments? > > > > > > >> >> > And, if so, can you tell me exactly how he does that? I mean, > > is > > > > he > > > > > >> >> > causing > > > > > >> >> > re-uptake inhibition or is he actually producing a greater > > volume > > > > of > > > > > >> >> > chemical messengers at the synapse? > > > > > > >> >> > I guess if it's psychological strength it would have to be > > the > > > > latter. > > > > > >> >> > If it > > > > > >> >> > were greater physical strength then you'd probably be able to > > > > lift cars > > > > > >> >> > off > > > > > >> >> > the ground.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
