"...spirit complex, though apparent rather than real...having existed potentially"

[anagogy]

Where in the material does it say that 1 = 1? One could equal two and The Law of One could be The Law of Two.

This doesn't even make sense to me. I have no idea what you're saying.

It's also kind of silly considering that you just berated me earlier for "making inferences" not directly stated in the material. And now you seem to be saying something along the lines of "read between the lines" which is the exact opposite.

This is not about the material's content itself anymore. It's about what the material directly says through the English language and its use of it. Edit: It's about using the proper, agreed definitions of the words at hand. We either say Ra is competent and use words as they are intended or is speaking in mystic garble that can be interpreted every which way.

Oh, right, because no definition is ever stretched beyond its normal dictionary definition in channeled material. Nope. Never at all.

Puh-leez.

There are only so many ways to define "Thought" and to define it beyond the confines of the mind is to pretty much take the standard English vocabulary and say it no longer applies. We might as well all talk in word salad indian virtue guinea pig is alive intelligence....

Really? So how does Ra's use of the word "density" line up with the dictionary definition?

Or how about Ra's use of the word "galaxy".

Or how about Ra's use of the word "mind".

Or Ra's use of the word "spirit".

Go ahead, read the dictionary definition. It doesn't match up.

Geez, I guess you must be challenging Ra's ability to use language.

Adonai, you seem much more interested in being right, semantically, than finding out what is actually true.