real or not?

Page 17 of 17 Previous  1 ... 10 ... 15, 16, 17

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: real or not?

Post by mac on Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:06 am

nick pettitt wrote:
mac wrote:
nick pettitt wrote:thanks Leslie..., interesting that White Feather says 'a facet of you comes here through a physical form many, many times' which suggests to me that it's only a part of us that's incarnated in physical matter and that the greater part of us is still in the spirit world. I guess because our consciousness has to work through a physical brain we can only understand things at a physical level and can't properly interpret what comes from the part of us that's in spirit. Maybe that part is what some people call the higher self... more food for thought...


I'm not convinced by this 'facet' argument which is said to suggest a 'remainder' of our total self remaining in the etheric.

As always we're left to struggle on with words which can imply many things but as we well know, the way words get used is highly imprecise. I'm always reluctant to pay too much heed to the detail of words, much more comfortable by their overall intent.


Magnus who speaks through medium Colin Fry has always been against the idea of reincarnation but he does say that an 'aspect' of a person can come back to the earth plane and attach to someone to learn from their earthly experiences. He also says that memories of previous lives when regressed are in fact the earthly lives of the attachment(s)


I know Colin. (aka Lincoln) I know Magnus. I don't understand any of what he's said (above) at all....

A so-called attachment as described makes no sense for me unless it's equivalent to 'over-shadowing'?

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: real or not?

Post by nick pettitt on Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:06 am

mac wrote:
nick pettitt wrote:
mac wrote:
nick pettitt wrote:thanks Leslie..., interesting that White Feather says 'a facet of you comes here through a physical form many, many times' which suggests to me that it's only a part of us that's incarnated in physical matter and that the greater part of us is still in the spirit world. I guess because our consciousness has to work through a physical brain we can only understand things at a physical level and can't properly interpret what comes from the part of us that's in spirit. Maybe that part is what some people call the higher self... more food for thought...


I'm not convinced by this 'facet' argument which is said to suggest a 'remainder' of our total self remaining in the etheric.

As always we're left to struggle on with words which can imply many things but as we well know, the way words get used is highly imprecise. I'm always reluctant to pay too much heed to the detail of words, much more comfortable by their overall intent.


Magnus who speaks through medium Colin Fry has always been against the idea of reincarnation but he does say that an 'aspect' of a person can come back to the earth plane and attach to someone to learn from their earthly experiences. He also says that memories of previous lives when regressed are in fact the earthly lives of the attachment(s)


I know Colin. (aka Lincoln) I know Magnus. I don't understand any of what he's said (above) at all....

A so-called attachment as described makes no sense for me unless it's equivalent to 'over-shadowing'?


It's nothing to do with overshadowing, the way he describes attachments is that they can subtly influence us with thoughts that we perceive as our own...

nick pettitt


Back to top Go down

Re: real or not?

Post by mac on Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:12 am

[quote="nick pettitt"][quote="mac"]
nick pettitt wrote:
mac wrote:
nick pettitt wrote:thanks Leslie..., interesting that White Feather says 'a facet of you comes here through a physical form many, many times' which suggests to me that it's only ...............against the idea of reincarnation but he does say that an 'aspect' of a person can come back to the earth plane and attach to someone to learn from their earthly experiences. He also says that memories of previous lives when regressed are in fact the earthly lives of the attachment(s)


I know Colin. (aka Lincoln) I know Magnus. I don't understand any of what he's said (above) at all....

A so-called attachment as described makes no sense for me unless it's equivalent to 'over-shadowing'?


It's nothing to do with overshadowing, the way he describes attachments is that they can subtly influence us with thoughts that we perceive as our own...


Then it makes no sense at all for me....

Nonetheless I have no doubts about reincarnation, I'm not a sceptic or debunker, but I remain unconvinced by any such arguments. I don't know if many see Magnus's guidance as authoritative but for me it doesn't resonate.

Whatever the situation I'm none too concerned as I'm comfortable enough with my own limited perception and I reckon that'll do nicely for me. I ain't here to teach or persuade others. sunny

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: real or not?

Post by KatyKing on Sat Mar 03, 2012 4:45 am

Excellent White Feather piece from Robert Goodwin in latest PN.

KatyKing


Back to top Go down

Page 17 of 17 Previous  1 ... 10 ... 15, 16, 17

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum