Re: Mind's Eye New Google Groups is Dumb,but this not the subject

I agree with your post, Molly. Thank you for this interpretation.

On Jul 6, 6:38 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That might be somewhat true of the fundamentalist interpretation of
> scripture.  At that level of our human development, we are looking to
> be led in fundamental ways, looking for answers outside ourselves, and
> they are provided.
>
> But the mystical interpretation of scripture is a very different
> read.  Scripture becomes a diagram for living, an owners manual of the
> internal workings of being.  Taken as metaphor and not historical
> fact, the bible opens ourselves to us.
>
> I see the Adam and Eve story as an explanation of your latest post,
> duality and the other side of it - the main characters - our male and
> female aspects - and, to complete the trinity - our aspect that
> separates (the serpent), creates right and wrong and all opposites -
> and brings us from the non dual to duality.
>
> Eastern philosophies correlate the serpent to kundalini - the polarity
> of our life force that runs through us in the subtle system of the
> chakras.  There is truth there.  This polarity is natural and
> essential to life.
>
> On Jul 6, 3:06 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I know the adam and eve thing,, a disobedience to God  dogma,,
> > Sorry Genesis is an interesting way of explaining creation to an ignorant
> > people  and in that it does a good job in doing..
>
> > I think it is one of those hypes to keep people in line an living in fear.
> > Allan
>
> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:35 PM, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I'm too hot to study. I might have something that would explain
> > > Original Sin- either the Summa or Divine Comedy (great notes in the
> > > Sayer's translation) but let me guess. I'd put my money on the
> > > disobedience of Eve and Adam and expulsion from Eden plus its curses
> > > which is not unlike Prometheus and Pandora myths and other creation
> > > myths. The pattern seems a separation from the creator which has to be
> > > repaired through religion/dogma and rituals. But is a baby is born in
> > > the state of sin by  the mere fact of it being human? Does science
> > > even promote this via genetics, psychology and other theories? Since
> > > religion has historically been a linch-pin of human society this
> > > theory would ensure a compliant or nervous group to govern either by
> > > tribal leaders, politicians or the military, wouldn't it? What do you
> > > think?
>
> > > On Jul 4, 3:46 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Interesting, I like the RV church ,,  but sorry no one has ever given
> > > that
> > > > answer .. To me it is a question they want to avoid.
> > > > It can be a reasonable examination ,  but the original sin leaves a lot
> > > of
> > > > question to it's origin.
>
> > > > At sometime it may have been understood but lost deep in chuch archives..
> > > > Allan
> > > >  On Jul 4, 2012 10:09 PM, "rigsy03" <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > The Roman Catholic sacrament of Baptism deals with the pre-existence
> > > > > of the soul as it is intended to cleanse the soul of Original Sin-
> > > > > which means the Church Fathers must have accepted the notion of the
> > > > > soul's pre-existence to begin with.
>
> > > > > On Jul 4, 8:07 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I am not sure how aggressive it is , the  concept has been floating
> > > > > around
> > > > > > for eons.. christianity does not want to deal with the concept of a
> > > soul
> > > > > > and its origin..  the preexistence of  soul is an idea they hide
> > > from.
>
> > > > > > the reality spirituality is a subject tip toe around and trying to
> > > use
> > > > > many
> > > > > > words and say little..
>
> > > > > > As I view it, (it has been a struggle for me to arrive at this view
> > > > > point.)
> > > > > > this reality is only a way station in a spiritual existence. This is
> > > not
> > > > > > the end stage. when we are born into this world our should give up
> > > their
> > > > > > knowledge and are in effect are saying that we know how to live in a
> > > > > > physical plain and raise ourselves to a higher spiritual level..  the
> > > > > > highest being a level of complete harmony with the Entirety. (or God
> > > if
> > > > > you
> > > > > > insist  but actually that is an incorrect concept.)
>
> > > > > > I believe the Tibetan Buddhist monks simply abandon the body to
> > > nature so
> > > > > > it can complete its cycle and return to earth.  It is the soul that
> > > is of
> > > > > > importance,   I really do not see much difference than the  the soul
> > > > > being
> > > > > > reborn as...
> > > > > > Allan
> > > > > > On Jul 4, 2012 10:38 AM, "Vam" <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > This is aggressive stuff, Allan !  Thank you.
>
> > > > > > > The hardest thing in context is that we believe we are the body,
> > > > > > > empirically. Hence, people find no one, no " I," no possibility of
> > > > > > > anything even remotely akin or connected to our self, before the
> > > body
> > > > > > > is born.
>
> > > > > > > Soul to such people is an obscure thing, conceptually and
> > > > > > > phenomenally. We therefore find the suggestion, of a soul before
> > > the
> > > > > > > child is born, fantastic. Ridiculous, in other
> > > > > > > words.
>
> > > > > > > On Jul 4, 11:06 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > What is so hard about seeing the possibility of the soul existing
> > > > > before
> > > > > > > > the child is born?
> > > > > > > > Allan- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > --
> >  (
> >   )
> > |_D Allan
>
> > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -