Proofs are here and there, it depends upon whether you will except them or reject. It's the matter of personal expirience.
2008/1/10, curtisdeltablues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Don't tell me that you expecting scientific proof for existence of > > Transcendental realty or God? > > I would be interested to hear what you consider proof from any angle > of a your preferred version of God's existence. Or is it all a matter > of faith? I am always fascinated by how people construct this belief > if you wouldn't mind sharing your POV. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com <FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com>, > "Zoran Krneta" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > But you must be… because seems that you don't believe in idea of unity! > > > > Any theory which aims to give explanation of everything, has to > correlate > > everything with everything. That's the reason why scientists believe > in the > > idea of unity and finally in idea of unity of consequences and matter. > > > > Statement like:"…we're not interested in what a newspaper or > magazine says, > > after all this is the 21st century: we're just interested in papers > > presented in respected, peer-reviewed journals…." does not sound very > > intelligent looking from the spiritual side. > > > > Don't tell me that you expecting scientific proof for existence of > > Transcendental realty or God? > > > > > > 2008/1/10, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > On Jan 10, 2008, at 7:46 AM, Zoran Krneta wrote: > > > > > > Are you proponent of Madhavacharya dualism? > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
