Re: Mind's Eye Instinct for survival

At least you have soul Al - perhaps in the Russian sense. RP is not
without in that sense either. It's hard to be inter-subjective about
god a a formulation though we seem to crave fellowship.

On 29 Nov, 23:05, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I doubt I am a great soul, though I have spent years contemplating the idea.
> Allan
>
> Matrix  **  th3 beginning light
> On Nov 29, 2012 9:11 PM, "RP Singh" <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Allan , carefully reading all the' trash' that you spew out makes me
> > wonder ...maybe you are the greatest soul wrapped in a human body.
>
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > My apologies RP,  due to what I consider trash I don't waste my time
> > > carefully reading what you write..
>
> > > Now I am wondering the origin of this vision..  ;o)  I am waiting to
> > read.
> > > Allan
>
> > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 5:11 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>         me (RP Singh change)    Post reply
>
> > >> 4/26/10
> > >> [Mind's Eye] Re: God and I
>
> > >> Consciousness has to do with the senses and the sense-objects. Sight,
> > >> hearing, etc. I see a door as grey in colour and at  a distance of 25
> > >> yards from me, does God see    it as grey in colour and at a distance.
> > >> No God is immanent in the door, he is the grey colour, he is the
> > >> door , he is the distance and he is me ,the observer. God is in
> > >> everything and is thus all-pervading , he is in every will and is
> > >> therefore  the real doer,  he is in all beings and non-beings and is
> > >> therefore omniscient.
>
> > >> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> gee I never read any thing by RP saying that God is the totality of
> > >>> every thing..
> > >>> Allan
>
> > >>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>>> Heh okay then, RP and myself share the belife that God is the totaliy
> > of
> > >>>> everything, although we differ on some things we can at least agree
> > on this.
>
> > >>>> We Sikhs would express it thusly: 'Ik onkar, sat naam'  losely
> > translated as
> > >>>> '1God, true name'.  Now True Name, what does that mean?  God's name
> > is true,
> > >>>> or truth?  Or perhaps that God is true/truth?
>
> > >>>> Personaly I would explain it this way.  Before the begining, there
> > was only
> > >>>> God, but God in spirt, God said (to steal form the Bible) 'Let there
> > >>>> be.....' and thus the creation was created.  Matter from the spirt of
> > God.
> > >>>> Thus the totality of the universe is God, the reality is God and the
> > truth
> > >>>> is God.  I heard it expressed just yesterday that God was Anaam
> > (Nameless)
> > >>>> and by atributing Naam to Godself the creation came into being.  Not
> > too far
> > >>>> removed from the Hindu concept of Om I suppose.
>
> > >>>> On Thursday, 29 November 2012 14:53:13 UTC, gabbydott wrote:
>
> > >>>>> I would know if it was different, if i understood what you meant,
> > Lee!
> > >>>>> Circling forwards in loops, arent we?
>
> > >>>>> Am 29.11.2012 15:02 schrieb "Lee Douglas" <leerev...@gmail.com>:
>
> > >>>> --
>
> > >>> --
> > >>>  (
> > >>>   )
> > >>> |_D Allan
>
> > >>> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
>
> > >>> I am a Natural Airgunner -
>
> > >>>  Full of Hot Air & Ready To Expel It Quickly.
>
> > >>> --
>
> > >> --
>
> > > --
> > >  (
> > >   )
> > > |_D Allan
>
> > > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
>
> > > I am a Natural Airgunner -
>
> > >  Full of Hot Air & Ready To Expel It Quickly.
>
> > > --
>
> > --

--