[Vision2020] Wayne, Ted, Eric, etc.
Tbertruss@aol.com
Tbertruss@aol.com
Sun, 30 May 2004 04:19:58 EDT
--part1_128.42cb7627.2deaf32e_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Keely Emerine Mix:
Wow! What a great name. I'm so plain: Ted.
My recent annoyance, such as it was, with Eric E., did not stem so much from
his association with Doug W., such as that is, as from Eric's statements
directly answering V2020 comments where I attempted to define a distinction between
"religion" and "spirituality" in the context of my spiritual life, and the
spiritual life of other kindred souls.
Although I did point out what I thought was a glaring contradiction in Eric's
comments about the mistake he claimed people might make of "lumping together"
certain gentlemen representing Christian groups in Moscow, when he also
described the "unity" these same gentlemen seek, Eric never responded, that I read
or recall, to my spotlighting of this alleged contradiction. Did I miss
something?
But he did launch a private email where he instructed me, yes, instructed me,
as in the master enlightening the acolyte, in the proper use of words
regarding "religion" and "spirituality," after I responded to a V2020 post by Melynda
on religions and worldviews. I won't post his private e-mail, a divine
dispensation from the superior wisdom of a saved soul.
Then he displayed the temerity to imply I was fooling people, the other lost
souls who call themselves "non-religious," yet chant their "mantras" and
worship their "priests."
Then he "vigorously backpedalled" from these comments, with hair splitting
evasions, it appeared.
Well, he can call me a fool if he wants, this I do not mind. Not that he
was, exactly. But I know very well I am a fool.
However, to suggest my spirituality is an attempt to fool anybody, or that I
belong to a group of people engaging in a naive rejection of organized
religion who are so pathetically lacking in critical self awareness to still chant
mantras and worship priests... As I pointed out in a reply to Eric, I thought he
was projecting his own ideology of religious social/political structures
oriented towards ritual and authority worship. This is most decidedly not my
approach to spirituality or my experience of the sacred.
So there you have it. Wilson is not the subject of my annoyance with Eric E.
Though if Eric's responses outlined above are puppet-like controlled by Doug
Wilson, then perhaps I have been duped into discussion with a proxy who does
not speak their own mind.
What a world of illusion we live in!
Ted Moffett
--part1_128.42cb7627.2deaf32e_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=
=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR>
Keely Emerine Mix:<BR>
<BR>
Wow! What a great name. I'm so plain: Ted.<BR>
<BR>
My recent annoyance, such as it was, with Eric E., did not stem so much from=
his association with Doug W., such as that is, as from Eric's statements di=
rectly answering V2020 comments where I attempted to define a distinction be=
tween "religion" and "spirituality" in the context of my spiritual life, and=
the spiritual life of other kindred souls.<BR>
<BR>
Although I did point out what I thought was a glaring contradiction in Eric'=
s comments about the mistake he claimed people might make of "lumping togeth=
er" certain gentlemen representing Christian groups in Moscow, when he also=20=
described the "unity" these same gentlemen seek, Eric never responded, that=20=
I read or recall, to my spotlighting of this alleged contradiction. Di=
d I miss something?<BR>
<BR>
But he did launch a private email where he instructed me, yes, instructed me=
, as in the master enlightening the acolyte, in the proper use of words rega=
rding "religion" and "spirituality," after I responded to a V2020 post by Me=
lynda on religions and worldviews. I won't post his private e-mail, a=20=
divine dispensation from the superior wisdom of a saved soul.<BR>
<BR>
Then he displayed the temerity to imply I was fooling people, the other lost=
souls who call themselves "non-religious," yet chant their "mantras" and wo=
rship their "priests."<BR>
<BR>
Then he "vigorously backpedalled" from these comments, with hair splitting e=
vasions, it appeared.<BR>
<BR>
Well, he can call me a fool if he wants, this I do not mind. Not that=20=
he was, exactly. But I know very well I am a fool. <BR>
<BR>
However, to suggest my spirituality is an attempt to fool anybody, or that I=
belong to a group of people engaging in a naive rejection of organized reli=
gion who are so pathetically lacking in critical self awareness to still cha=
nt mantras and worship priests... As I pointed out in a reply to Eric, I tho=
ught he was projecting his own ideology of religious social/political struct=
ures oriented towards ritual and authority worship. This is most decid=
edly not my approach to spirituality or my experience of the sacred.<BR>
<BR>
So there you have it. Wilson is not the subject of my annoyance with E=
ric E. Though if Eric's responses outlined above are puppet-like contr=
olled by Doug Wilson, then perhaps I have been duped into discussion with a=20=
proxy who does not speak their own mind.<BR>
<BR>
What a world of illusion we live in!<BR>
<BR>
Ted Moffett<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_128.42cb7627.2deaf32e_boundary--