Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: average joe who wrote (22671)	10/12/2005 1:25:11 PM
From: LLCF	Respond to of 28931

Exactly... and in that spirit I think we should move on and discuss 'god' vs 'no god'... or concept of god... or what we think those old 'anthropomophic gods' from the header should be replaced with. My point was never and isn't that any religion is worth bubkis, but was simply [trying to} giving a different perspective on the original teachers of those relgions from commentary I've read {by those have have supposedly reached higher levels of conciousness} which never deny's but affirms all those teachers to have probably been what is called 'avatars' by those traditions. So how about this: Since perception is dependent on/ limited by/ the context [emotions, etc] that arises from the conciousness of the observer, the motive of the observer automatically determines what is seen... so each person coming in contact with anything {including information} will see things differently. So how about this... if one transcends ones ego... what's left? Is he then the "eyes of god"??? DAK