Miriam,
Technically you're right. But Mostafa manages to get his digs in
regarding his feelings about all religions except his own, no matter
what rant he is on. It also annoys me that he posts his anti American
rants on this list. I doubt, from what he writes, that he ever reads
any of the articles, such as Chris Hedges.
While I feel that Mostafa is bright, he is so under the influence of
his own self importance that he is simply a parrot echoing the
mouthing's of the Ancients. For the most part I hold out hope for
Mankind, but what a sense of bleakness overcomes me to think of a
world filled with mindless people carrying their prayer rugs so they
can pray five times daily to a vacuum in the sky.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/13/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
A small correction? Mustafa discusses subjects other than religion. Usually,
what he does is to choose a topic which involves something that is going on
in the US, usually something that you and I would agree is rather awful, and
he writes about it. While I'm no defender of US policy, I do have a problem
with a citizen of another country whose participation on an email list or
lists composed predominantly of Americans, feels compelled to attack this
country and the religion of many of its citizens, in every post. He doesn't
write about the evil doers in the Middle East and certainly not about the
autocrat who leads his country. So basically, when Mustafa initiates a
discussion, his posts feel like attacks. I tried to say this gently, but
there is a communication difficulty due to language. If he mentioned that
our president has done a particular thing and asked what we thought and said
what he thought, that would feel more like a discussion.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 8:21 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Mostafa Al'mahdy <mostafa.almahdy@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Discussions about Religion
Well Roger, I was afraid you were having too good a time. Actually I don't
even know why I wrote what I did. Mostafa can decide what he wants to say.
But in a moment of annoyance,I felt moved to let him know how his rants
affect me.
I really don't want to sound as if I'm offering advice, since Mostafa has
made it quite clear that he has an agenda and will not be tricked into
discussing other topics. While I only express my own beliefs, and try not
to bully others, nonetheless, all the time and effort Mostafa tells us he
has invested in studying his religion, would, in my opinion, be better spent
studying most any social issue. It always amazes me regarding the time
Jeopardy spends on Mythology and the Ancient Gods. But there are people
who spend an entire career amerced in such nonsense. But it's their lives.
I spent ten years exploring Christianity. I spent another ten years
becoming a pretty decent bowler, carrying a 196 average at my peak. I've
spent the past
55 years laboring in the field of work with the blind. So, we each follow
our own interests. But you are correct in your use of the word "bullying".
I suspect that this is what caused me to call for an end to the nonsense.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/13/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl, I don't think you can count on his stopping. Mostafa is a
religious bully. He first came to my attention when he started
subscribing to email lists just so that he could collect email
addresses and make a personal mailing list from which he would not
remove anyone even though they demanded to be removed. That is
bullying. That is religious harassment. Over time his bullying has
taken on other characteristics, but he is still a religious bully. Now
that he has been bested in the application of logic to his rantings he
turns his bullying into name calling, insults and other personal
attacks. What he doesn't understand is that I am actually enjoying
that to some extent. He is validating my position while at the same
time he is sabotaging his own credibility. I don't usually experience
enjoyment when someone sabotages himself, but in this case he
continues to validate my own position by doing it. So how could I not
enjoy that? I just picture him in my mind with his face turning purple
with rage that I have defeated him in a contest of intellect and I
laugh at that. I would not expect him to join the ranks of the
reasonable and civil crowd though. But wouldn't it be really great if
he finally admitted that what he has been harassing people with is
indefensible and so give it up?
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It
may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our
preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/13/2019 11:10 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
Please! Stop!
This sort of post is pure Childishness, and serves only to sooth the
ruffled feathers of he who wrote it.
When I was a child I was taken to the Woodshed and soundly spanked
for not behaving. I decided to use "reason" with my children,
believing that spanking only proved that Might makes Right. My
children, traumatized by my lectures, decided to try "Time Outs"
where their children were sent to their rooms to "think" about their
misdeeds.
But Please, whatever method works, Please let's agree to disagree,
and go forward to discuss such things as respect, courteousness and
objectivity.
Carl Jarvis Happy to say that I'm still an Agnostic. And, if you
notice, when it comes to the aforementioned topic, I just don't care
anymore.
On 3/12/19, Mostafa Almahdy<mostafa.almahdy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Roger, you are basing your ratiocination on inconsequence. I urge
you to study proper syllogism. If something isn't empirically
proved, that shouldn't signify it doesn't exist. So for instance,
electrical energy is not visually visible to us. However, it is
perceived with other senses. If the light is turned on, it has to be
decisive sign for
currently incessant electrical transmittance. It flows through
cables and consequently, produces power. The denial of God is
essentially based on obstinance and doctrinal abnegation. Science
doesn't negate nor affirm the existence of God. But, studying
science with intellectual independence and faith in action
necessarily leads to this conviction. Your attempts to evade are
futile. The fact you are petulant is immensely demonstrable. Your
alleged claim of holding a Biology degree testifies to your stiff
state of nescience and repugnance. Frankly, you are detesting faith
and that's why you are exercising derision and bigotry toward its
followers. Scientific theories never call people to disbelieve. They
are faith haters who pervert them to venally reach up to that
incorrect conclusion. It is staggeringly inconsistent and
concurrently duplicitous to attribute science to Atheism. Atheism is
a psychologically developed delusional state. It is essentially
characterised with counterfeitly exculpating incredulity and
exalting philistinism. It thence eludes engaging in rational
scrutiny. In order for the deceitful portrayal to be amply
consummated, theology ought to be disparaged and violence has to be
falsely imputed to religion. This approach is plainly hostile and anti
religion anyway. I'd respect someone if he's to be rather transparent.
Don't claim it is science that has caused you to disbelieve. Be
truthful and say, well, I just hate religion and actually, couldn't
cope with its tenets, such as, the do's and don't's. You'd be more
respected that way. The prob, nonetheless, that faith is
misportrayed by them as a motive to get into a disgraceful state of
civil retardation. This is wholly declined. Roger funnily couldn't
until now, cite at least one reliable or even unreliable reference
concerning his alleged claims about the Koran and its authorship. He
furthermore accuses me of hypocrisy because I ask him for his never
rleased Biology degree and to cite any reference regarding his
claims about the Koran. Well, he couldn't do neither. Moreover, he
seems to have even misconstrued the term hypocrisy. The latter is
generically defined As counterfeit expression of concurrence that is
not endorsed by inward conviction. I am satisfied though that Roger
finally admitted that the existence of God is rationally potential.
Well, that's good and leastwise, a step forward even if it's minor
one. I'll continue to amend Roger's fallacious propositions until he
ultimately recognises and gives in to the vitally incontrovertible
truth. It is rendered as namely. Life has a purpose and people are
going to depart this world to an eternal one. Lastly, Atheism is
used by many in the Arab world as a manner to bootlick westerns, so
they may obtain a visa or be granted asylum. This act is indeed to
be considerably oleaginous and disingenuous. This is what I call,
the sale of the worthful for the worthless. People abandon Islam to
immigrate to western countries because they are culturally
manipulated. As for someone like me who is intellectually independent, I
don't need to defer to civil defeatism.
I learned this foreign language to be broadly communicative, not to
be ridden, owned and controlled by someone else.
On 3/12/19, Roger Loran Bailey<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote:
By the way, every time I type the name Mostafa my spell checker--
urges me to change it to Hemostat.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with.
It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want
to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/11/2019 4:20 PM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
Hey petulant senior, I decided not to pollute my ears with your
wretched terms. You're maliciously mischievous and your Atheistic
disposal are emphatically the clearest sign for your miserable loss.
You must fathom that I don't care about your opinion of me. I
don't believe in an invisible man in the sky. I don't personify the
divine.
This is what Christendom does. This is a vivid proof that reflects
your Christian scope of presuming the divine, despite your
disaffirmation or unprovably arrogating otherwise. I rather
believe in a unique Supreme Being. Allah glory be to Him has ultimate
omnipotence to providentially sustain and maintain creation. He
doesn't beget, nor He is begotten and no one is comparable to Him.
This is my belief in brief. Your refuge with incorrectly
considering my argument to be of circular reasoning is just a
foiled attempt to evade. Your inactive conscience is the primal
factor of this incessantly delusional state. Nonbelievers have
gone so broadly conjecturing the commence of the universe.
Nonetheless, they are inwardly aware of the divine existence. They
just prefer to interpret all models of taxonomic variance in
merely empirical manner. Even prominent English theoretical
physicist who devoted himself to fend for Atheism and died
recently, Stephen Hawking, circumstantially confessed on a
televised interview, that God may exist. But science can explain
everything without the need for a Creator, he added. So plainly,
science isn't a major barrier
to faith and vice versa. It has rather been flexed by some
to make it falsely incompatible with spiritual engagements.
Science doesn't negate the possibility of God. However, looking at
the perfectly structured and integrated universe has to logically
lead to this conclusion. Islam enjoins its followers to read and
ponder onto the signs of the heaven and within the broader figure
of the farther cosmos. Thence, I don't have any motive to even
think of potentially abandoning faith. My religion doesn't
prohibit the looking into the universe and the study of chiefly
temporal pertained scientific disciplines. Unlike the Church which
wholly precluded all sorts of scientific development in medieval
era, Islam bases its major tenets onto the divine injunction that
says, read in the name of thy Lord. In many verses, the Koran
praises science and those who belong to it. You have sarcastically
invited me to dispose faith and embrace your path.
I am seriously wondering, what for? Theology made me confident and
your lack of made you arrogant, ignorant and malcontented to say
the least. You now have to reconsider your unjustifiedly obstinate
temperament. Your objection to faith is of essentially
psychological trait. Otherwise, you would have leastwise looked at
the Koran or cited any relieble or unreliable reference for your
oddly unexplainable dissent to the Koran regarding science in its
various topics. Lastly, you're struck with immense sorrow, perhaps
because of your desolation, pathetic life or both and quite possibly,
even more.
I therefore strongly urge you to seek consulting a certified
psychotherapist. I detest to be inimical with some senior like you.
Your situation evokes pettiness. If you need help concerning your
psychologically awful status, I could refer you to someone who is
competent of aiding you properly. I absolutely view Atheism
because of mainly psychological traumas.
On 3/9/19, Roger Loran Bailey<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Well, here we have more childish name calling and insults. Okay,
I will try again. I respectfully and civilly ask you to provide
your refutation for my explanation of how your major argument for
an invisible man with magic powers who lives in the sky is
circular reasoning and is thereby a logical fallacy. If you
cannot do that, which I very strongly suspect, then I
respectfully ask you to revise your argument. If you cannot do
that either, which I also strongly suspect, then I respectfully
ask you to admit that you have been wrong and to come over to the
world of reason. What I fully expect, though, is that you will
spew more invective and insults. That, again, is just adding the
ad homenem logical fallacy to the circular reasoning logical
fallacy. But I keep giving you the chance to make yourself look
better. Every time, though, you throw another tantrum and make
yourself look even more ridiculous than you already have.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with.
It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It
may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true.
But our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/9/2019 1:14 PM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
To the Virginian archfiend, wrath and curse upon thee. I warned
you several times earlier, not to cross your boundries. I'm
exceedingly comported with civil people and immensely strident
with rude, yokelish and pretentious ones. You haven't exhibited
any sense of logic with the radically imbecilic gibberish you
ludicrously uttered.
It's you who's peculiarly pestilent, petulant, stupefied,
garbled, tomfool, daft, awless, cozened, anathemised, scurvy,
disheartened, infidel, nescient, noncivilised, tameable,
vicious, crocked, crooked, swinish, opprobrious and emphatically
dismantled. You're mentally mishandled and I'm going to show you
how to talk. What is an incapacitated idiotic senior like you
going to do? Even if I lived nearby your damnable residence
which I fortuitously don't, I would have never thought of
unwisely vitiating my cleansed spirit with your intemperately
contaminated figure. Your mind is miserably dazzled.
It's sufficient for me that you perhaps be shot at your piggy
head with a demented sniper in your gravely smutty neighborhood
and that's not improbable to occur in America. I'm here to just
destroy you mentally. I think I'm doing well. You are poorly
deluded with being counterfeitly prosperous. You knew this is
demonstratively fallacious.
I'm enormously halcyon with my faith and you're implausibly
deplorable with your lack of. What has your irreligion brought
to you so far but curse and blasphemy? You live insane and shall
die in vain. What has your nonsensical logic of seeing
everything merely material has presented to you? You've
foolishly chased illusion to bogusly perceive superior and has
commonly, miserably failed to attain. As I expected, you won't
ever release your alleged Biology certificate because it doesn't
exist and you won't cite one reliable or even unreliable
reference regarding what you claimed about the Koran and its
authorship because you are fibber and chiseler. If you don't
like theology, that doesn't exempt you from being respectful and
reliable which you aren't. You need to be properly disciplined.
I'm a teacher and it's part of my job to thoroughly discipline
misbehaving children.
If you were at my presence, I would have laid you carefully
confined on a submission table, took off your shoes and socks
and toughly caned you barefooted until you cryout, mercy, mercy,
in agony and regret.
This is the manner by which they used to discipline obstinate
children here in Egypt's rural regions. It's called corporal
punishment. It works well in disciplining misdemeaning children
and you're among them. Sometimes, aged individuals act like kids
and thence, they have
got to be treated accordingly. After this disciplinal act, you
should have known how to behave. Dissing someone disgraceful
like you is something its doers shouldn't be scolded. Go to hell
mr smart, curse and wrath upon thee.
On 3/9/19, Roger Loran Bailey<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Now we have a threat of unspecified violence, unspecified but
still violence. Mostafa, do you have any idea of how much
misery you will cause for yourself if you actually try to carry
this out? Is this really your idea of being civil? I can only
say that I have tried my best to be civil to you, but as soon
as I give you a logical argument that you cannot refute you
throw childish fits along with insults and threats. And then
you say that it is I who knows nothing of logic.
Is
this a case of that psychological term called projection? Come
on, Mostafa, you have taken it onto yourself to harass everyone
you can over the Internet with religion. Can't you take the
inevitable fight back?
Are you really so cowardly that you will run away making threats?
Why
can't you defend that which you do your best to force onto others?
Give
it some thought. If you can't defend it then just maybe it is
indefensible and just maybe you should give it up. You do
yourself no service by continually making a complete fool of
yourself and alienating people. And by the way, if anything
happens to me there is now a record of your threatening me.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple
with.
It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices.
It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be
true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/8/2019 8:21 AM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
Mariam, as long as you don't have precise stats, you are not
suppose to arbitrarily refer to them. Roger, you're not more
than an absurdly senior, eyeless Virginian imbecile. Someone
used my e-mail address to unsubscribe me from the list and I
felicitously have done so. I've left the list permenently.
Roger, you have proved to me, yourself and others that you are
completely unaware of logic, science, philosophy, religion and
even courtesy for that matter. Theology isn't infertile and
reality lies beyond mere philistinism. There is Allah, there
is heaven, there are daemons, you're among them, there is hell
and that's where you're damnably destined to dwell infinitely.
You are enwrapped in empirical presumptions and you are not
able to see beyond them.
It
isn't my prob that you are spiritually piteous. You're brought
to dispute for nothing but to be flamboyant. My retaliation
from you should extend beyond scandalising your woeful
nescience and insolence.
It proceeds to broadly exemplify your fallibility and absolute
lack of credibility. Just watch out for my immense strike that
is yet to come.
I am going to make you gravely suffer in this life and you
shall indeed be subjected to tremendously awful doom in the
hereafter.
On 3/8/19, Roger Loran Bailey<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Of course the discussions of religion here leads to something
positive.
It exposes religion for the complete bat shit wackiness that
it is.
And,
Mostafa, you help. You have yet to address my explanation of
how your major argument for religion was circular reasoning.
When instead of refuting my point you start the personal
attacks like you continue in this very message you validate
my position. You won't flat out admit that you cannot refute
me, but by engaging in ad homenem attacks you make it clear
that you have no refutation. Really, wouldn't you try to
refute me if you had a refutation? Face up to it, Mostafa, we
live in a real world. Whether we like it or not we are
embedded in reality.
There
are no gods. There are no allahs. There are no devils or demons.
There
is no heaven. There is no hell. There is only reality and
reality is enough. There is a lot more to learn about reality
than we have ever learned about it before. Learning about
reality is something that can be a lifetime pursuit. Studying
theology can be a lifetime pursuit too, but it is a sterile
one. It is just one made up story after another.
Theology is a terrible way to waste a life.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple
with.
It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately
want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's
true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/7/2019 9:09 PM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
I am now totally convinced that discussion about religion
here won't lead to anything positive. This is another good
reason that Miriam previously mentioned and thence, inspired
it into my head. I initially quitted bringing the subject
back because it isn't respected and often unhallowed by
certain irreligious individuals.
Whenever
it's
brought up, people are stirred to expose their conniptions.
Roger
in
particular, has designated incredible ignominy, nescience
and discourtesy to anything that is labeled with faith or
religious belief. This is truly unfair. It just demonstrates
how cretin Roger is. He showed us throughout the course of
my conversation with him, how dipstick and wanker he
miserably turned out to be. I am flabbergasted at this
senior and his incredible ability to be onomatopoetically
pretentious. Roger is simply a hapless, tedious old racist.
Roger doesn't fathom that faith and science harmoniously
parallelise because he despises religion beforehand. He
proved his detest to faith pertained matters as he
insistently derided the miraculously prophetic nocturnal
journey to the celestial realm.
He
may have sought refuge with this tactic to purposely
marginalise my status. He attempted to do so but he
fortunately couldn't. I am wholeheartedly stiff in my belief
and won't ever defer to Roger's predominantly repulsive
tendency. I determined to amply retaliate and strike this
daft senior with what he justly merits. I'm not incensed
because of his Atheistic perspective. I am rather indignant
at his wildly half-witted disposal and his repeatedly failed
attempts to pretend otherwise. He is mentally indisposed and
unjustifiedly imperious to proper knowledge. He has at least
committed five major offences during this tremendously
preposterous confabulation.
First
off, he doltishly admitted, that apart from certain
Christian preachings and the unknowledgeable sermoniser who
interpreted his
blindness as some form of God's wrath at his sinful state,
he
never
experienced any spiritual involvement. If we skeptically
entrusted
Roger's account on that regard, Christian preachers in the
States
are generically unreliable and incomparably, considered the
farthest from prestigious theological vocation. Thence,
their wordages are formally declined. Second, he admitted
that he kept a taped copy of the Koran but he never
attempted to play it and carelessly returned it to the
library of his local residence. This demonstrates his
prejudiced and cavalier inclination. Third, he on several
occasions, claimed to have a Biology degree but failed to
release this alleged certificate. Fourth, he claimed that
the Koran is inaccurate about black holes, giving no
evidence for that. He seemed to be indecisive but rather
despicable. When I sent him a video to counter his view on
this, he didn't even click on its link and came up with
obviously preconceived notion about its content. Fifth and
ultimately, he allegedly claimed that the Koran was authored
by prophet Muhammad but never cited either one reliable or
unreliable reference to verify his proposition. What is this
to be called rather than plainly disheartened and piteous
individual? Miriam, Carl and others are irreligious but not
brattish as Roger really is. I utterly discern the situation
concerning religion in the west. It isn't as crucial therein
as it is here in the Middle East. It portrays a substantial
portion of our culture, heritage and identity. Therefore,
the two are inseparable. The west has to respectfully
accommodate this condition and deal with us accordingly. I
knew what religion is in the west, I respect that in spite
of my own convictions. For instance, it doesn't organise
social life for many, except for inconsiderable group of
traditional Christians. This is called conservatism in western
cultural terminology. Basically, conservatism in western
culture
is
properly defined as a theological orientation that advocates
the preservation of the best in society and immensely
opposes secular views. Six years ago, I received a guest
from Britain. He used to be my English teacher at the
British Council. I didn't know anything about his personal
belief until we met here in Cairo's international airport.
We chatted at his arrival and he incidentally disclosed his
irreligious identity to me. He told me so in quite a jesting
manner.
I
slightly smiled, and had no problem with that what so ever
and invited him at my home for dinner next day. It was
Ramadan and the peak of Summer at that time. The man came to
my house approximately fifteen minutes before dusk. Although
the temperature was so hot, he politely refused to take even
one sip of water. Despite my insistence on him to leastwise
drink some water, he thanked me and said he would wait until
people break their fast, saying, it's soon anyway. He has
done so out of respect to the general atmosphere. People
loved him, we prayed in front of him, he never commented and
happily ate with us. He so much loved Egyptian desserts and
the dates I typically bring from Medina, called them so
delicious. Medina is the city that sites prophet Muhammad's
tomb, located in western region of modern Saudi Arabia.
I
didn't have another chance to see him again during his brief
visit because in Ramadan, I am usually occupied with
charitable affairs during daylight hours post to work and at
night, we are praying.
On
his departure's date eve, he called and unfeignedly thanked
me for the nice dinner and the truly beautiful experience. I
warmly paid him a heart-whole farewell on the phone and
apologised for not being able to come to the airport to see
him off. This is a decent model for someone who doesn't
believe in religion but still, so respectful. In order to be
respected, you have got to respect others, someone said.
Moreover,
this personal experience clearly demonstrates the plain
difference between the competently educated and otherwise.
The man obviously drinks but he never asked for this. He
honoured our sobriety, yet he knew it is motivated with
religious tenets. This also demonstrates the level of this
man's education and more importantly, his civility.
I'm
done.
On 3/7/19, Carl Jarvis<carjar82@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Some folks learn through other folks experiences. I happen
to be in that other group, the hands on guys. Well okay,
maybe not when it comes to certain things, like robbing a
bank or crawling down a long tunnel, but in my experience
it is better understood if I am totally submerged.
Hmm...this is getting me trapped, so I'm going to back out
and go sweep the kitchen and shake out the throw rugs, and
even run the vacuum.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/6/19, Roger Loran Bailey<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Well, I never had a dramatic journey from belief to
nonbelief either.
I
didn't even have an undramatic journey from belief to
nonbelief.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to
grapple with.
It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
prejudices.
It
may
not
be
consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But
our preferences do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/6/2019 1:19 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Carl,
So, what prompted me to say what I did was that you do,
periodically, make pronouncements about the foolishness
of belief in a personal deity.
And
sometimes, you make those comments in response to Mustafa
who, clearly, has a different view on the matter from
your's. I never had a religious education. My parents
were nominally Jewish, which meant that they celebrated
"the high holidays", and sort of celebrated Passover, but
not according to the whole tradition. So I never had a
dramatic journey from belief to non belief. Perhaps that
is why I don't feel the need to counter arguments for the
existence of God with arguments in opposition to the
existence of God. I did, as I've mentioned before, go
through a thought process, probably when I was in
college, when I formalized my own position on religion.
However, given my social work education which involved
courses on human behavior, I've never considered religion
to be the major cause of human dysfunction, just as I've
never considered our economic system to be the basic
cause of human dysfunction. Rather, I see both as
expressions of how people function. But it does seem to
me that institutions, once they have been formed, have a
life of their own.
A
government is not the same as the individuals who are
part of it.
Take
Obama out of the Presidency, and he won't be planning the
assassination of people every week.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl
Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2019 11:22 AM
To:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Discussions about Religion
Miriam wrote in part:
..."Carl may never stop wanting to make amends for having
been an Evangelical Christian in the past."
Sometimes, Miriam, I think that you have a Devilish sense
of humor.
When I was young, I proudly exclaimed to one and all that
I never spent time or energy regretting my past
activities...or lack thereof.
But I really do have some regrets. And I would undo some
hurts that my behavior caused others. And I would go
back, if I could, and do some of the things for which I
did not have the courage to do. But my many religious
experiences, like my many political experiences, and my
many love affairs(many of them imagined), all contributed
to who I am today.
My past is just that, My Past! And I make no judgements
on what or
how I behaved or thought. But there are things in my past
that
I
do
not talk about, but which are just as much a part of who
I am today, but of which I would strike from my Life's
Experiences. I still fight my own Goblins and Bogymen,
and would hang my head in shame if they were exposed.
And yet, as I say, they are also part of 83 plus
years of living and experiencing that has given me a
grand trip through life.
It's true that I become a bit rabid at times when on the
subject of religion. But religion is just one thread
woven into our human fabric.
But it is a thread that has strong influences on the
entire fabric of Life. After my days as a small child in
Sunday School, learning about Jesus, Santa Claus, the 3
Wise Men and a special woman who had God's baby, and the
tooth fairy, and the Easter Bunny, I left any doings with
religion until I married my first wife. I was 25, and
she was 22.
She
was
a
Christian, and insisted that I should attend church
services every Sunday, morning and evening, and midweek
Bible study.
I took this on in the same way I've taken on every new
facet of my life.
I began to explore and to question. At some point I
became certain that most people in our congregation were
only paying lip service, and were not true Believers. So
I decided to find out what Belief was all about.
I
was baptized, and gave myself over to Jesus Christ. I
accepted the existence of God, and the Holy Spirit. I
attended a "full gospel"
group,
and spoke in tongues and had visions.
It was an interesting time, with some unexplained
happenings.
But
I
never
found God. I did find many honest Believers who said
they had met God, but I also met many phonies and Users.
After nearly ten years, I came to understand that God was
a feeling. Those who gave themselves over to that
Feeling never questioned it, and believed it would carry
them to a higher place after their life on Earth. While
I totally respect those people who are "True Believers",
I could not resolve the many contradictions, let alone
the many versions that caused more strife in the world
than it resolved. As I questioned others, the answer was
the same, although expressed in many different ways. I
must "trust". I was told that God moves in mysterious
ways...I won't go into all the events that led up to my
leaving the Christian Faith, but suffice it to say that I
knew that I had to be true to myself. I could not simply
trust. And to try to sneak along on someone else's
trust, well that would never work.
But the entire experience was valuable. My wife and I
separated, not over religion, butt because she could not
adjust to living with a blind man.
While I was in Rehab, learning to go forward with my
life, she was alone, seeing her dreams shattered, and no
one was there to lead her through to the other side. We
did marriage counseling through a Christian Counselor.
Finally I moved out. Those were hard times,
leaving my daughter behind.
But my wife and I did come to resolve our personal hurt,
and stayed friends until her death many years later.
Christianity worked for my first wife. As she aged she
developed Diabetes, cancer, and congestive heart failure,
but her Faith never wavered.
How you, Miriam, or Roger or Mostafa deal with your Faith
has to be an individual, very personal matter. And
frankly, how I feel about it should not matter to anyone
else. But it is this willingness to trust in some
unknown Power, without question, that concerns me. Until
we can openly discuss and question why we behave the way
we do, and how our beliefs effect Life on Earth, we will
continue to make the same foolish mistakes over and over
until we are no more.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/5/19, Miriam Vieni<miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I would like to make a neutral observation. The
discussions regarding religion that have taken place
among Roger, Carl, and Mustafa, do not lead to mutual
understanding or resolution of issues.
Rather,
they
appear to be experienced by Mustafa as attacks upon a
central tenet of his life, an important part of his
identity, and thus, he attacks back. While Roger sees
these discussions as rational debate, and Carl sees them
as open discussion of personal views, Mustafa does not.
Mustafa is not going to stop believing in his faith.
Roger is not going to stop wanting to prove over and
over again that he is the more rational of the two and
that his position is correct. Carl may never stop
wanting to make amends for having been an Evangelical
Christian in the past.
Miriam
(Seeking knowledge is compulsory from cratle to grave because it is
a shoreless ocean.)
