Seeking the agents of God-Part One
by Albert 1

49368184
# 1. 5/3/10 4:18 PM by Jay - OR
Certainly you must know that I enjoy commenting on your columns. Primarily that is because you tend touch on subjects and ideas that, at least in theory, can be drilled right down to a choice of principles. More recently, though, when you pull that trigger the column appears like the pock marks of a shotgun blast, i.e., too many points to choose one for reaction. Now, I understand that they may tie together (at least in your mind, and fairly commonly in mine). Still a comprehensive response is daunting.

This is one.

Starting at the end: "Soul," and "eternal." I hope you can see how you may have confused me with prior columns.

First, is there only one, "universal" soul, and we each merely possess a part of it; or do we each have individual souls (if somehow connected with that universal entity--and notice the word "entity")?

Second, if we each have a soul (of our own, or at least distinguishable from each other), is it eternal as well?

Third, does not eternal mean both without beginning and without end?

Making a decision--even if little more than an assumption--on those issues seems necessary to me in order to address the rest of the assertions you are making.

Editor's Note: Those specifics you mentioned are interesting to me however I would challenge anyone to be able to prove any and all to be more than the speculative spirituality I originally began our dialog with years ago.

My approach has been to build a working hypothesis but must of all to leave all the details open to possible reinterpretation.

There are multiple logical constructs possible with very different base elements. Personally I feel that the ability for our finite minds with that divine connection to the infinite is key. Whatever we call it and whatever the details consist of we are Self-Aware of something greater than we can accurately communicate.

I do feel much of a dialog on this level falls short due to how accurately the specific words we are able to use represent what we are attempting to communicate.

I really dont see myself as making a lot of assertions beyond wanting to express the why of my thought processes. Expressing honest doubt is quite different than insisting on the details of a higher entity.

I have attempted to leave open many possible results or conclusions which will be based on personal experience and processing of what I'm aware of now.

Some of the results of plugging in actual discoveries that have been made in physics that I have recently learned of have supported what I have been taught concerning time and space.

I always prefer replacing solid fact with previous speculation when the opportunity presents.

For me to claim my paradigm to be true and unchangeable would be very presumptious and only demonstrate ignorance of much I know that exists. I do hope to continue learning so that more of that ignorance will be dispelled as it has continued to be in the past.




include comments