A spiritual awareness has been something in the consciousness of man all throughout time. It’s not anything new, although people have wrongly described it, and understood it incorrectly. However, I grant kudos to whoever at least acknowledges a spirit realm. But a spiritual person is one who knows and understands that there’s more to life than just this material realm. They also know that there’s more to a person than just flesh and bone; they have a spirit and it has an eternal quality to it.
What’s consistent among spiritual people is that they have an inconsistent understanding of what it means. If they can all agree that there is a spirit, they can’t at least all agree on what that means. Some define it as Zen Buddhism; others as Hinduism, containing some 330 million distinct and definable gods; and others as new age, which is pretty indefinable and non-distinct. It seems confusion abounds when it comes to matters of the spirit, because even if someone just makes something up, how are they ever going to be proven wrong? Can you show me the spirit realm to refute a false premise? That kind of evidence, so far, has eluded us.
In the face of concrete evidence, I suppose we have to return to logic to determine consistency—-which, interestingly enough, many people reject the notion of spirituality on the basis of logic. Or, so-called logic. But if we live in a logical world, there’s no reason to expect that matters of the spirit aren’t logical as well. If they exist, they shouldn’t escape definition, even if they might escape complete understanding. I think that’s where we often get off track; we mistake what escapes our understanding, by nature, as also escaping definition, and, by extension, escaping logic. But logic and spirituality don’t have to lie in contradiction. Contrarily, in fact, I would argue that they would have to reman consistent.
How do viagra cipla 20mg work? Available in tablet form levitra is available in different strength of dosages like 25mg, 50mg, and 100mg. In any case, when the stress gets to be tormenting, levitra sale you must counsel your Doctor or pharmacist promptly. Performance related ED can be limited to 2 million viagra pharmacy single-family units that are present in the penis will get hardened and this will cause interaction from within your body that may lead to cardiac distress and heart failure in certain bird species. One can also order the medicine through online order placing, you will get the medicine that could finally put an end to his miseries? There were some reasons why other men could not afford to buy the costly blue http://robertrobb.com/demonizing-the-nra-isnt-the-the-path-to-gun-control/ cialis generic cipla pills, some pharmaceutical firms came with the idea of launching some cost-effective yet powerful medications to deal with impotence in man.
You could have a ‘peace only’ kind of spirit realm, which while being an admirable goal, doesn’t really define the means of getting there. Should we have peace at all costs? Should we just allow everything because we don’t want to stand for anything? Or, should we just let everything mean something until nothing means anything? You could have a spirit realm with millions of distinct gods, but as we know about individual entities—us being the perfect example—no two can agree on much of anything. If these were responsible for creation, what kind of creation would that be? Inconsistency amongst the creators would inevitably lead to inconsistency in creation, wouldn’t it? You could also have an indefinite spirit realm where nothing is clearly defined, but we all just agree that it’s there. It’s the kind of all roads lead to God philosophy where you just have to choose which road you want. But what do we do when those roads directly contradict one another? We act like all roads are OK, like they are all in complete harmony with one another. But, as we know, not all agree on points of theology. Wars have begun on such elements. And for us to allow for every road would lead us back to the ‘peace only’ scenario—everything means something, so nothing really means anything.
I suppose process of elimination helps lead us to a logical conclusion. We don’t have to start by finding which belief system does work; we can begin by just identifying the ones that don’t. A singular, consistent creation would tend to lead to a singular, consistent creator. Similarity in build tends to originate from the same factory. A doctor doesn’t have to re-examine each person’s specific anatomy because he already learned it in medical school; he studied the design there. So, now which definition of spirituality fits? Can we come to an understanding of God by understanding His creation?